Laserfiche WebLink
Legal Services Analysis and Report City of San Leandro <br />February 2013 Municipal Resource Group <br /> <br /> <br /> 31 <br />Option 2: Implement an In‐House City Attorney Office: <br /> An in‐house City Attorney office would have the following attributes: <br /> City would select all of the attorneys and staff assigned to the City Attorney office. <br /> The City Attorney and all staff would be integrated into the City’s daily operations. <br /> Annual operating costs would likely exceed contract City Attorney costs. <br /> Additional costs would be incurred for start‐up expenses, support services (human <br />resources, accounting, payroll, information technology, etc.) and legacy costs, such <br />as pension and OPEB costs. <br /> There would be transition impacts, including the loss of the Meyers Nave <br />institutional knowledge and replacement of another key member of the executive <br />management team. <br /> City Attorney office services would be defined by the skill sets and experience of in‐ <br />house staff. <br /> Additional specialized services would continue to be provided by outside counsel. <br /> <br />Option 3: Issue a Request for Proposals for City Attorney Services <br /> The City has the option of requesting proposals for City Attorney services from law <br />firms. This option would have the following attributes: <br /> Costs will be incurred in preparing, issuing and evaluating proposals for services. <br /> City Attorney contract costs will be unknown until a new contract is executed. <br /> There will be transition impacts, similar to instituting an in‐house City Attorney <br />office, including the loss of institutional knowledge and replacement of another key <br />member of the management team. <br /> <br />