The City Council’s Ordinance Committee will consider a proposal Tuesday night by Council President Aidee Nieves and freshman co-sponsor Tyler Mack calling for separate legal and budget guidance for the City Council as well as bolstering legislative staff.
Support on the council exists for the measure, the larger questions center on the number of staffers required, cost factor and logistics for hiring counsel. For background see here.
Agenda item:
Proposed Amendments to the Municipal Code of Ordinances, Chapter 2.06 – Common Council, amend to add New Section(s): 2.06.080 – Legislative Aides for City Council; 2.06.090 – Legislative and Legal Counsel to the City Council and 2.06.100 – Budget Director for City Council.
Excerpt from proposal:
Legislative and Legal Counsel to the City Council.
(A) The Council shall appropriate sufficient funds to hire an attorney, or outside counsel, to advise members of the City Council on city matters when requested pursuant to this section. Such hiring or retention may be on an as-needed basis or otherwise, depending on the needs of the council.
(B) A request by resolution can be made for such outside counsel at any time for any reason on any issue or issues related to city matters when in the opinion of any 11 members of the council, it is necessary for the city council to obtain legal advice outside the city attorney’s office. The resolution to obtain additional counsel shall contain the name of the attorney or law firm to be retained and the issue or issues to be addressed, and such counsel shall be selected as follows:
(a) Once the council has determined that outside counsel is necessary, the council shall solicit applications or recommendations with consideration to the appropriateness of the proposed attorney’s qualifications, estimated fees, and other such considerations. This solicitation or application process will be made public in advance, and the council’s discussion and voting on the selection of the attorney(s) shall be done on the record during regular council meeting(s).
(C) The hiring of outside counsel pursuant to this section is not subject to the approval of the mayor or city attorney.
(D) The City Council hereby determines that it may be necessary for the Council to obtain legal advice on a wide range of topics in addition to the advice of the City Attorney and hereby authorizes as follows:
(a) The President of the Council is authorized to appoint, subject to the approval of the majority of Council, an attorney to serve as Legislative and Legal Advisor to the City Council.
(b) Such attorney shall serve as an “at will” employee of the City Council, shall be a member of the bar of the State in good standing for a period of not less than ten (10) years at the time of appointment, and have been engaged in the practice of law as his or her principal occupation for not less than five (5) years immediately preceding appointment. Compensation and benefits, job duties, and other terms and conditions of employment shall be determined by the Council President, consistent with the provisions of B(a) above. The appointee shall be subject to removal by a vote of 15 members of the Council.
(c) Such attorney shall not be a relative of any member of City Council. A relative, for these purposes, is an individual who is related to the public official as father, mother, son, daughter, brother, sister, uncle, aunt, first cousin, nephew, niece, husband, wife, father-in-law, mother-in-law, son-in-law, daughter-in-law, brother-in-law, sister-in-law, stepfather, stepmother, stepson, stepdaughter, stepbrother, stepsister, half brother, or half sister.
(d) Such attorney, and any relative of such attorney, shall not have held any position, paid or volunteer, with the City of Bridgeport within the previous 5 years prior to appointment.
(e) Such attorney shall not be a member of the Democratic Town Committee, Republican Town Committee, or any Town Committees yet formed.
2.06.100 – Budget Director for City Council.
(A) The council shall appropriate sufficient funds to hire a Budget Director to advise members of the City Council on budgetary matters.
(B) The Budget Director shall be selected as follows:
(a) City Council shall hire and retain a Budget Director who will be assigned to serve the Council. The Budget Director serves at the pleasure of, and whose duties shall be prescribed by, the City Council. Such Budget Director shall be an Unclassified Employee.
(b) The President of the Council is authorized to appoint, subject to the approval of the majority of Council, a Budget Director to serve the City Council.
(c) The Council shall solicit applications or recommendations with consideration to the appropriateness of the proposed Budget Director’s qualifications, estimated fees, and other such considerations. This solicitation or application process will be made public in advance, and the council’s discussion and voting on the selection of the Budget Director shall be done on the record during regular council meeting(s).
(d) Such Budget Director shall serve as an “at will” employee of the City Council. Compensation and benefits, job duties, and other terms and conditions of employment shall be determined by the City Council. The appointee shall be subject to removal by a vote of 15 members of the Council.
(C) Council members shall not appoint nor recommend for appointment any relative to be an employee of City Council. A relative, for these purposes, is an individual who is related to the public official as father, mother, son, daughter, brother, sister, uncle, aunt, first cousin, nephew, niece, husband, wife, father-in-law, mother-in-law, son-in-law, daughter-in-law, brother-in-law, sister-in-law, stepfather, stepmother, stepson, stepdaughter, stepbrother, stepsister, half brother, or half sister. (see https://ethics.house.gov/staff-rights-and-duties/nepotism)
(D) Council members shall not appoint nor recommend for appointment any member of the Democratic Town Committee, Republican Town Committee, or any Town Committees yet formed to be an employee of the City Council.
This meeting will be conducted by Zoom/Teleconference. at 6 p.m. The public may listen by calling the following conference line and then entering the conference code: Dial-in Number#: (929) 436-2866 Meeting ID#: 984 964 381
Usurping the power of the Mayor, City Attorney, Budget Director and the City Charter, all because (GenLater) has a hair across it’s Ass? …….Only in Bridgeport
It should be amusing to see how the City Attorney office will educate the city council members on the subject of legal counsel, responsibility for the budget process and how they can have support staff.
(Hint: It’s in the City Charter)
Why no mention of the Ethics Commission in all of this discussion about untainted, independent, professional capability in moving City Council business?
Indeed, the Ethics Commission has been “decommissioned” nearly out of even its “paper” existence, post-Fabrizi Administration, but a Bridgeport voter-resident’s confidence in the City Council/Bridgeport City Government could only be bolstered in the knowledge of a functional Ethics Commission helping to oversee the creation and staffing of a professional administrative arm of the City Council — especially with so much newfound “professional power” being prescribed for the CC president, et al., by virtue of this proposed creation of a Council brain-trust…
I commend the Council President, and others involved for this Ordinance. I don’t want to be a douting Thomas, but this is quite a task to accomplish. It could happen if enough Council members support it. That would involve the will to ignore outside influence to kill it, and that will happen! Just one example: One of the council members from the 132nd district is involved in a relationship with the Mayor’s aide. They live together as partners in a relationship. The Councilman I’m referring to would be hard pressed to vote against his partner’s boss. I’m not criticizing or judging the union, they’re both nice guys, but it will interfere with an objective decision. Kudo’s to the Council President, keep trying.
Honey, it’s good that you are back with your wisdom and knowledge of the past and it’s sad that the current members don’t reach out or search to see certain things don’t work, how are going to made changes when you don’t know what happened in the past. If any of these CC members want to keep their positions or they think that they want to run for a higher office they know that they can’t go against Mario Testa and Joe Ganmand nobody wants to run in a primary to keep their position because as soon they challenge anything Mario and Joe wants then their political future is dead.