Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Legal Services topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Carter Lake council splits over hiring city attorney, votes to issue RFP and retain current counsel

Carter Lake City Council · January 20, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Council members debated appointing a new city attorney versus issuing a public RFP. Concerns about potential conflicts of interest and firm size were raised. The council voted to issue an RFP (including the named attorney as an applicant) and to retain the current city attorney, David, until a replacement is selected.

The Carter Lake City Council debated replacing its city attorney and voted to issue a public request for proposals for legal services while retaining the current attorney on an interim basis.

Councilmember Jason proposed appointing an attorney named Clint as city attorney; other members raised concerns about potential conflicts because Clint had previously given legal advice to a council member and because of the attorney—lient relationship issues. "If somebody has represented a member of the council personally recently ... you have a confidentiality issue and you have a disclosure issue," the sitting city attorney David explained during the discussion.

Several council members said they preferred a smaller, lower-cost firm or sole practitioner rather than a large firm and noted the city had previously struggled to attract applicants to RFPs. After discussion, a motion to put out an RFP for city attorney services (with Clint among those to be considered) was made and carried by roll call. The council also voted to continue contracting with David until a new city attorney is appointed so the city would not be without counsel during the procurement.

Council members asked staff to contact known interested attorneys and to include the position in a public RFP process. The transcript records concerns about conflicts of interest in hiring an attorney who had provided advice to a council member and questions about the timing of an appointment in the middle of the year. The council recorded roll-call votes on the motions to issue the RFP and on the interim retention of the current attorney.