This is an archive of a past election.
See http://www.smartvoter.org/ca/alm/ for current information.
LWV League of Women Voters of California Education Fund If you appreciate our service to voters, please consider helping us with a donation.
Smart Voter
Alameda County, CA November 15, 2011 Election
Measure H
Appointed or Elected City Attorney
City of Oakland

Charter Amendment - Majority Approval Required

Fail: 13287 / 26.8% Yes votes ...... 36365 / 73.2% No votes

See Also: Index of all Measures

Information shown below: Summary | Fiscal Impact | Official Information | Impartial Analysis | Arguments | Full Text

Shall the Oakland City Charter be amended to return the City Attorney to an appointed position?

Summary Prepared by Special Outside City Counsel:
This measure would change the Oakland City Charter to make the City Attorney an appointed position instead of an elected position, by amending Article IV, Sections 401(1) and 401(2) and deleting Article IV, Sections 401(3) (4), and (5). The City Council would have the sole discretion to appoint and remove the City Attorney and to set the City Attorney's salary.

A"YES"VOTE on this measure supports the Charter Amendment that would allow the City Council to appoint and remove the City Attorney.

A"NO" VOTE on this measure supports retention of the current Charter provision, which requires the election of the City Attorney.

Dennis J. Herra Special Outside City Counsel

Fiscal Impact from City Auditor:
Measure H allows the City of Oakland's City Council to appoint a City Attorney. Since 2001, the City Attorney has been an elected position with four year terms. Prior to 2001 the City Charter provided that the City Council or the Mayor had the authority to appoint a City Attorney.

Further, Measure H eliminates the provision in the City Charter that defines the formula to calculate the City Attorney's salary and instead allows the City Council to determine the salary. Currently, Charter provision 401(1) provides that the City Attorney's salary "shall be not less than 70% nor more than 90% of the average salaries of the City Attorneys of California cities within the three immediate higher and the three immediate lower cities in population to Oakland."

Financial Impact

There are three main costs that should be considered as it relates to fiscal impact for Measure H. These are as follows:

  • The City Attorney's salary would no longer be set according to current Charter provision 401(1). Instead, other factors such as market rate may need to be considered when determining a salary. The difference in salary between an appointed versus elected City Attorney is not anticipated to be significant.

  • Recruitment costs associated with appointing a qualified City Attorney may need to be considered and is estimated to be approximately $30,000.

  • Special election costs would not be incurred. The Cost of a special election ranges from approximately $812,000 to $1.5 million. Polling place elections range in cost, from $6, to $8 per registered voter, whereas mail-in ballot elections range in cost from $4 to $5 per registered voter. However, it should be noted that the electorate may be voting on more than one issue or elected office during any electron, therefore spreading the cost across all the issues and elected offices on the ballot.

We relied on the best data available at this time; however, actual results may vary from staff estimates.

s/COURTNEY A. RUBY, CPA, CFE
City Auditor

Official Sources of Information

Impartial Analysis from Special Outside City Counsel
Currently the City Charter provides that City Attorney is an elected position with a four-year term of office. If the Office of City Attorney becomes vacant, the City Council must fill the vacancy by appointing a new City Attorney or calling a special election to fill the vacancy for the remaining term of office.

The City Charter includes salary guidelines for the City Council to use in setting the City Attorney's salary. Under these guidelines, the City Attorney's salary must be between 70% and 90% of the average salaries of City Attorneys in California cities with populations similar in size to Oakland's population. The Charter prohibits the City Council from reducing the City Attorney's salary during the City Attorney's term of office except as part of a general salary reduction for all City officers and employees.

Under the City Charter, the City Attorney serves as a legal advisor to the Mayor, City Council and each City department, agency, board and commission. The City Attorney drafts all ordinances, resolutions, contracts and other legal documents for the City Council. The City Attorney also acts as legal representative for the City in lawsuits. The City Attorney may file lawsuits on the City's behalf, subject to the City Council's approval, or when the City Council directs the City Attorney to do so.

The City Charter requires the City Attorney to be a citizen of the United States who lives in Oakland and has been eligible to register to vote in Oakland for at least 30 days before the election. The City Charter also requires the City Attorney to be licensed to practice law in California while holding office and for at least 10 years before becoming City Attorney,

This measure would amend the City Charter to provide that the City Attorney would be appointed by the City Council, instead of being elected by the City's voters for a four-year term. The City Council could remove the City Attorney from office at any time. If the City Council members are evenly divided on a vote to appoint or remove the City Attorney, then the Mayor would cast the deciding vote.

The measure would eliminate the guidelines for setting the City Attorney's salary and allow the City Council to set the City Attorney's salary as it chooses. The measure would also delete Charter sections that relate to selecting and removing an elected City Attorney because those provisions would no longer be relevant. The measure would not change the City Attorney's duties or the qualifications for a person to hold the Office of City Attorney.

Dennis J. Herra Special Outside City Counsel

  Nonpartisan Information

League of Women Voters

Events

League of Women Voters Presentation of Pros & Cons of the Ballot Measures

  • Date: Friday, October 21, 2011
    Time: 10 - 11 AM
    Place: Lincoln Court
    Corner of Lincoln Avenue & MacArthur Blvd.
  • Date: Monday, October 24
    Time: 9:30 - 10:30 AM
    Place: Downtown Oakland Senior Center
    200 Grand Avenue
  • Date: Thursday, October 27
    Time: 7:30 - 8:45 PM
    Place: Rockridge Branch Library
    5766 College Avenue, upstairs meeting room
    elevator access
League Pros & Cons Presentation in Spanish
  • Date: Wednesday, October 26
    Time:11 AM - Noon
    Place: Fruitvale-San Antonio Senior Center
    3301 East 12th Street, Suite 201
News and Analysis

Oakland Tribune

This election is archived. Any links to sources outside of Smart Voter may no longer be active. No further links will be added to this page.
Links to sources outside of Smart Voter are provided for information only and do not imply endorsement.

Arguments For Measure H Arguments Against Measure H
The City of Oakland deserves to be represented by a professional attorney whose focus is entirely on the job.

Running in a citywide election requires raising big money, and often making promises to big money interests. Being a good lawyer requires a different set of skills. A good lawyer for the City should be hired for the same reasons any business or non-profit hires legal counsel based on professional qualifications. The best lawyers are not likely to even choose to run, knowing they will have to raise at least $300,000 to do so.

Do you want a city attorney focused on fundraising or providing sound legal advice?

The facts show that elected city attorneys routinely use the position to run for higher office, like the four city attorneys in Los Angeles from 1973-2009. The current elected City Attorney in SF is running for mayor. Oakland's only elected city attorney ran for State Assembly while he was serving as city attorney.

Do you want a city attorney focused on the next elected seat or providing sound legal advice?

Only 2.5% of CA cities have elected attorneys. Albany had an elected attorney and just returned to an appointed attorney system. Oakland is not the only city re-thinking this issue.

Oakland needs unbiased legal advice from a lawyer who is not worried about re-election or the next elected step up. The potential conflict of interest inherent in an attorney who will seek re-election undermines the attorney/client relationship. The City should be represented by an attorney of the highest professional qualifications. Legal advice should be based on law, not politics.

Let's take personal political goals out of legal advice. Vote Yes on Measure H.

Naomi B. Schiff
Harold R. Mayberry - Senior Pastor
Emilene J (Emmy) Fearn
Ming Ho
Patricia Kernighan - Oakland City Councilmember

Rebuttal to Arguments For
A majority of City Council members want to take away your right to elect the City Attorney, allegedly because elections cost money and elected officials sometimes run for other offices.

That's an argument against democracy. Historically, we know that when voting rights are taken away, the consequences are always negative.

The Council says it will do a better job of picking a City Attorney than voters will because their selection won't be political. Actually, as the Oakland Tribune put it in an editorial against this measure, if anything the City Attorney would be even more subject to the whims of the highly political Council members, who would hire and have the power to fire the City Attorney.

The Council asserts that few cities elect City Attorneys, and that therefore Oakland should follow suit. This is misleading. In any larger cities voters elect the City Attorney to provide a key check on the power of City Council. Moreover, Oakland should never limit itself to policies that a majority of other cities have enacted.

Eleven years ago, Oakland residents voted to elect their City Attorney in one of the highest turnout elections ever held. This year, explaining why she supports Measure J, one Councilmember argued that voters didn't know what they were doing. This kind of arrogance is leading the Council to take away your right to vote for City Attorney.

The Tribune concluded by arguing that voters should not tolerate this naked power grab. We agree. Vote NO on Measure H.

Joe Tuman - Professor, SFSU
Robert L. Jackson - Bishop, Acts Full Gospel Church
Salvador Garcia III - Firefighter/Paramedic‐ Oakland Resident
Joe DeCredico - Architect & Planner
Ronile Lahti - Piedmont Avenue Neighborhood Activist

The Oakland City Council majority wants to take away your right to vote. Oakland residents currently elect the Oakland City Attorney. This measure, placed on the ballot by the City Council, would eliminate that right and give permanent appointment power to City Council.

Elected City Attorneys are common in big California cities, including Los Angeles. Half of the largest cities in California elect, not appoint, their City Attorney.

City Council wants to appoint the City Attorney to ensure it has control. If Council has the right to hire and fire the City Attorney, Oakland's top lawyer becomes beholden to a few elected insiders, not Oakland residents.

The Oakland City Attorney's job is to provide high quality, independent legal advice to City Council, the Mayor and each department within the City Administration. The City Attorney is also charged with ensuring that the laws City Council passes protect our constitutional rights and are legally sound.

An appointed City Attorney is loyal to those who make the appointment, no one else. An appointed City Attorney will not prevent scandal or lawlessness. Indeed, the appointed City Attorney of the City of Bell, California did little to prevent city officials there from paying themselves exorbitant salaries and betraying the public trust.

An appointed City Attorney will not rigorously scrutinize Council's actions and provide independent legal advice to the entire city government. A City Attorney elected by the people will.

Don't be fooled. This is not a good government measure; it is a City Council power play. If this measure passes you lose your right to elect our City Attorney and City Council gets exactly what it desires: an appointed City Attorney that will bend to its will.

Protect your right to vote. Say no to this City Council power play. No on Measure H

Joe Tuman - Professor, SFSU
Josie Camacho - Executive Secretary + Treasurer, Alameda Labor Council
Jane Brunner - Oakland City Councilmember
Walter Miles - Chair, Market Street Corridor Neighborhood Association
Ignacio De La Fuente - President Pro Tem of the City Council

Rebuttal to Arguments Against
The opponents of Measure I would have you believe that they want to take the politics out of the position of City Attorney. The truth is just the opposite.

The signers of the argument against Measure I include two of Oakland's most powerful Politicians--both past Presidents of the Council--one of whom has already announced that she is running for City Attorney.

Why do these career politicians want to keep the City Attorney an elected position? Because winning elections is what they are good at!

Oakland would be better served by selecting its lawyer based on who has the best legal credentials. You deserve to have a professional vetting process for the best legal advisor the City can get. If Measure H passes, Council will lead a transparent search process for an excellent City Attorney with the appropriate qualifications.

The problem with using an election to fill this professional position is that 95% of the best attorneys in Oakland won't enter the competition! You, the voters, won't get the best pool to select from, because most good candidates are deterred by the prospect of raising huge sums of money and taking six months of their life to campaign.

Let's ensure that the council, mayor, city staff, and ultimately you, get the best skilled legal services available, not the politician who can raise the most money to win an election campaign.

Oakland's City Attorney should be the best attorney, not the best politician. Yes on Measure H.

Nancy Nadel - City Councilmember
Judith Cox
Corinne Jan

Full Text of Measure H
WHEREAS, City Charter Article IV Section 401 (1) created an elected City Attorney position that had been previously an appointed position; and

WHEREAS, the purpose of this resolution is to return that position to an appointed position; and

WHEREAS, 97.5% of California cities appoint their City Attorneys and only 2.5% have elected City Attorneys1; and

WHEREAS, the responsibility of a City Attorney is to serve as counsel to the City Council, Mayor, and each department of the City, and to render legal advice; and

WHEREAS, the City Attorney is not the lawyer for the general public or any individual or group within the City2; and

WHEREAS, the ability of a client, namely the City acting through its elected legislature, to hire and fire its legal counsel is critical to a proper attorney-client relationship; and

WHEREAS, the Ethical Principles for City Attorneys adopted by the City Attorneys Department of the League of California Cities states that "the city attorney should provide legal advice that avoids the appearance that the advice is based on political alignment or partisanship", and

WHEREAS, the City Attorney should be able to assist a client in choosing wisely from a range of lawful discretionary actions and must not be influenced by personal interest in the political or other external consequences of any such decision, and the City Attorney's advice must be perceived as being free of these influences; and

WHEREAS, selecting a City Attorney through an electoral rather than an appointive process creates a significant potential for such conflicts and perceptions of conflict; and

WHEREAS, an elected City Attorney chooses his or her own boundaries, and can become involved with various aspects of any issue, ranging from legal to policy to politics, which impacts the ability of the client to distinguish between legal, policy and political advice; and

WHEREAS, City Charter Article IV Sections 401 (3), (4) and (5) all relate to that position as an elected position; and therefore, be it

RESOLVED: That the City Council of the City of Oakland does hereby submit to the voters at the next special or general municipal election, that City Charter Article IV Sections 401(3), (4) and (5) be put forward for elimination; and be it

FURTHER RESOLVED, That City Charter Article IV, Sections 401(1), and 401(2) be amended as follows:

Section 401(1). City Attorney. The City Attorney shall be nominated and elected in the same manner and at the same election as the Councilmember at large appointed by the City Council and serve at the sole discretion of the City Council. If the Councilmembers are evenly divided, the Mayor shall have a vote pursuant to Section 200 of this Charter. The City Attorney shall receive the salary set by the Council, which shall be not less than 70% nor more than 90% of the average salaries of City Attorneys of California cities within th3 three immediate higher and the three immediate lower cities in population to Oakland and may not be reduced during the City Attorney's term of office, except as part of a general reduction of salaries of all officers and employees in the same amount or proportion.

Section 401(2). Qualifications, the City Attorney. No person shall be eligible for or continue to hold the Office of City Attorney either by election or appointment, unless he or she is a citizen of the United States, a qualified elector and resident for at least 30 days of the City or a territory lawfully annexed or consolidated, licensed to practice law in all courts of the State of California and so licensed for at least ten years preceding his or her selection.

Section 401(3). Term of Office, the City Attorney. The City Attorney shall be elected to a term of four years beginning at 11:00 a.m. on the Monday following January 1 following his or her election.

Section 401(4). Vacancy, Filling of. Upon the declaration of vacancy in the Office of the City Attorney, the Office of the City Attorney shall be filled by appointment by the majority vote of the members of the Council; provided, that if the Council shall fail to fill a vacancy by appointment within sixty days after such office shall become vacant, the City Council shall cause an election to be held to fill such vacancy pursuant to the manner and method as provided for in Article II, Section 205 of the Charter. An appointment or the person elected to the Office of City Attorney for the balance of an unexpired term shall hold office until the next general election for the Office of the City Attorney.

Section 401(5). Vacancy, What Constitutes. The Office of City Attorney shall be declared vacant by the Council when the person elected or appointed thereto fails to qualify within ton days after his or her term is to begin, dies, resigns, ceases to be a resident of the City or absents himself or herself continuously from the City for a period of more than thirty days without permission from the Council, absents himself or herself from any ten consecutive regular meetings except on account of own illness or when absent from the City by permission of the Council, is convicted of a felony, is judicially determined to be an incompetent, is permanently so disabled as to be unable to perform the duties of his or her office, forfeits his or her office under any provision of this Charter, or is removed from office by judicial procedure. A finding of disability shall require the affirmative vote of at least six members of the Council after considering competent medical evidence bearing on the physical or mental capabilities of the City Attorney.

1 California League of Cities website accessed June 9, 2011: http://www.cities.org

2 This perspective is reflected in the Mode City Charter of the National Civic League Section 4.03b.


Alameda Home Page || Statewide Links || About Smart Voter || Feedback
Created: January 20, 2012 12:13 PST
Smart Voter <http://www.smartvoter.org/>
Copyright © League of Women Voters of California Education Fund   http://cavotes.org
The League of Women Voters neither supports nor opposes candidates for public office or political parties.