The meeting began at 6 pm, so I missed the first interview. From what I could gather it was a Seattle law firm that was offering services at $204 per hour. The mayor and Council Member Hedrick were absent. Council Member Alberston was sitting in the mayor's chair.
Mr. David Britain was interviewed shortly after I arrived. There was no information available to the public, so I hope I heard his name and am spelling it correctly. Mr. Britain lives in Ruston and is apparently offering to work for a monthly flat fee of $3,167 (I think, based on comments from council members).
Council Member Huson began the questions by noting the problems in the past with different interpretations by MRSC (see links) and the town attorney. Mr. Britain noted that different opinions are good guidance, but it is not binding like case law.
Huson also complained about what he felt was a lack of communication in the past. Britain said he could copy the council on any communication he had with the mayor. He also noted it was best to be honest and not try to make up an answer if he didn't have one. He would endeavor to research agenda items before each meeting, but there would be times when he would need to do further research before giving an opinion.
Albertson explained the difference (as he saw it) between a "town attorney", which the mayor is authorized to appoint, and a "contract for legal services", which the council has sole authority over (in his opinion). He warned Britain that the mayor may cause trouble because the council is contracting with him without the mayor's input or approval. Because the mayor was not attendance at the meeting, Alberston said he was "boycotting". If the mayor chose a different town attorney, the council would control the contract with that person and would set their pay (which would be considerably less than what they would pay the person they chose).
Council Member Hunt felt that Britain living in Ruston was a plus. Britain noted that he has a vested interest in the town's future and he cares about the community. Even though he may have opinions as a resident, his job would be to advise on policy only.
Council Member Stebner asked if the mayor or council had higher authority. Britain said that each branch of government (legislative and executive) had different functions, but no one branch was "higher" than the other.
After Britain was dismissed, the council decided to make their decision in open session rather than convene an executive session (so they could remove the public from the room). After some discussion, the council voted unanimously (of those present) to enter into a contract with Mr. Britain subject to terms that would be acceptable to both parties.
Huson wanted the contract put on the agenda for discussion next Monday. He felt it was important to spell out the time commitment, cost and termination process. Hunt had several sample contracts from other municipalities, along with one from Ruston, that she will scan and email out. Stebner wanted to review them before Friday so they could ask the current town attorney for advice before her services end at the close of business Friday.
The meeting ended about 7 pm.
Karen
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
9 comments:
Was this a study session or a regular council meeting? How can they take action without public notification? I apologize for my questions if they are out of line. I honestly feel I was more informed with the previous administration.
Are they able to legally "ram(the)rod" as they see fit without our mayor present? How does Albertson rate the mayors seat when he is an appointee not even elected? Just wondering....
Whiney wayne really verified why his surname should be spelled STUPIDNER last night! a) AGAIN trying to seek 'higher power' for the council...re-take 8th grade civics in summer school! b) yep, you should always check with the current lawyer about the new lawyer!!!
Oh, that noise you hear when whiney wayne or dandy dan are pro tems is real former Mayors turning over in thier graves.
Hummmm, looks like the new cost for legal advice is about twice what it was a year or so ago, kinda like gasoline prices. Makes sence thou, very simular exhaust.
I hope the results are twice as good, you are going to need it.
Porkchop
FAR TO MANY AMERICAN FAMILIES HAVE ALLOWED (and some even encouraged)THIER CHILDREN TO GO TO LAW SHCOOL
In response to the first comment, this was a special meeting so the council could take action. There is supposed to be 24 hour notice given, I think by posting it in front of town hall. And they can take action even if the mayor is absent. This is more a showdown of who has more power over hiring town employees - it will be interesting to see how/if the mayor responds.
And Alberston has full authority in his seat regardless of if he was elected or not. We don't have an chance to change things until the next election in 2009...
Observing how the Mayor has managed personnel issues surrounding the Chief of Police and his blind neglect for Huitt Zollars thievery can you honestly say he is the person to hire & fire?
If you talk with any town employees - have they received proper direction from their manager - the Mayor? Have they received annual performance reviews?
The Mayor is failing miserably in his day to day duties as the manager of Ruston but he is too arrogant to delegate any of his duties to current or former council members.
Anyone who has had any dealings with our Mayor knows he cannot be trusted - he has a serious issue with the truth. If you haven't experienced - just wait - you will.
Your postings are bias with regard to our current council. You argue the council's objective is to merge with Tacoma while you are turning a blind eye to the fact that the Mayor is spending our way to Tacoma. How often have you seen him act without spending on legal consultation? He is a lawyer with no legal expertise or any legal experience which makes him double trouble. He is always going to spend on legal because he has no experience to fall back on. If he were a businessman, or good manager, he would understand that he has finite resources at his disposal and he better manage his legal resources if he wants to stay in business. You would think a bona fide attorney could guide us better than feeding his brethren our tax dollars.
Through the Mayors mismanagement we will be Tacoma and that is what he wants. After his term is up he believes no one is capable of running the town but him - so he wants us to become Tacoma.
Wake up - the fox is already in the hen house - and believe it or not - it's not the council but the mayor you better watch out for.
Interesting comment. I have to admit I'm not a major fan of Transue's approach to issues. But the primary thing I see right now is that he is willing to work with the council and compromise when needed. Those attempts to compromise have been met with criticism, anger and stomped on.
I don't think there is some grand conspiracy by either the council or mayor to turn over Ruston to Tacoma. I am concerned it will happen by neglect or that we will give too much of our heart and soul away that it happens naturally. All our elected leaders need to be careful - much more careful than they are right now.
Anonymous hit the nail on the head. Look how many employees and contract staff the mayor's gone through. Look how he is arrogant to the public and his employees. And he spends without regard for the fiscal impact. And now he's learned from the council spoiled child act, he doesn't show up to the meeting. I think they should all quit.
UPCOMING FEATURE:
SHOWDOWN AT THE RUSTON CORRAL
featuring the HOT SHOTS and the NOT SO HOT SHOTS.
For the rest of us, remember those school drills: DUCK AND COVER.
Do you think the Mayor will ever show up at a meeting again? Does it really matter anymore.The Town is going broke by the hour.Perhaps they can hire hospice to comfort us to the end.The problem is the Council and Mayor are the only ones
that think we'er dying.Hang in there Ruston.You've made it through worse times.
Post a Comment