Safford Council deadlocks on motion to advertise for city attorney

By Jon Johnson
Assistant Editor
Published on Wednesday, October 28, 2009 10:15 AM MST

It has been nearly 1-1/2 years since Phoenix attorney William J. Sims III was appointed as Safford's interim city attorney, and at least three Safford City Council members want to keep the status quo.

At its Monday meeting, all council members in attendance said they would like to have a full-time in-house city attorney, but Mayor Ron Green, Vice Mayor Jason Kouts and Councilor Ken Malloque voted against starting the process to begin the search for one. Councilors Richard Ortega, Jason Foutz and Danny Smith voted in favor of beginning the search, but with Councilor Jerry Hancock absent from the meeting the motion died in a 3-3 deadlock.

In addition to serving almost exclusively telephonically as Safford's interim city attorney, Sims is a partner in the Phoenix law firm of Moyes, Sellers and Sims, serves as the full-time town attorney for Camp Verde and consults for about 30 other municipalities and townships.

Councilor Malloque said while he would like to have an in-house city attorney, the city cannot afford one.

"It would be really nice to have a full-time city attorney here," Malloque said.

Malloque said it would be foolish, however, of the city to hire an attorney after laying off 11 employees. He then directed a legal question to City Manager David Kincaid to see if it would be OK for him to talk about previous city attorneys’ salaries.

Malloque argued that by utilizing Sims, the city has saved money on its attorney's fees. He said previous City Attorney Garn Emery was paid a yearly salary of $97,420 (Emery also served as the city prosecutor), and Safford's last city attorney, Johnny Guthrie, had an annual salary of $115,000 while the city paid Sims $30,000 in consulting fees during Guthrie's employment.

As Safford's interim city attorney, Sims has charged the city $72,259.50 for legal work for the past 12 months, according to Malloque. Sims told the Courier he charges the city $190 per hour for his services. That means he has put in an average of less than 7-1/2 hours per week as Safford's interim city attorney for the past 12 months.

Malloque said he believed, with expenses including office, secretary and other legal expenses, it would cost the city an extra $280,000 per year to have a full-time in-house attorney.

Safford's previous city attorney's office at 702 Eighth St. remains unused, however. Electricity and telephones are still charged because Victim's Witness uses the building, and Guthrie's legal secretary is stilll on the payroll but has been reassigned to Planning and Zoning since January. The city purchased the building from Irval Mortensen in July 2007 with the intention of housing its city attorney and made numerous renovations to accommodate the building for its use.

Councilor Smith argued that municipalities smaller than Safford, such as Thatcher and Pima, don't seem to have a problem having a local city attorney. In fact, Safford's prosecutor, Wyatt J. Palmer, serves as the prosecutor and town attorney for Pima.

In Pima, Palmer is paid $1,500 per month for performing both positions and is not given an office or a secretary. That means the town of Pima pays Palmer $18,000 per year for all of its town attorney and town prosecutor needs. Palmer is present at nearly every Pima Town meeting.

Safford pays Palmer a yearly salary of $72,000 for his prosecutorial work with the stipulation he provides all of his overhead expenses, including office space, telephones, secretarial services and transportation.

In Thatcher, Town Attorney Dudley Welker is paid by the hour and is not given a staff or office, according to Thatcher Town Manager Terry Hinton. Welker is paid $150 per hour and puts in about three hours of work per month, Hinton said. Thatcher holds one meeting per month, and Hinton said Welker attends that meeting and usually has to do about one hour of research. Using those figures, Thatcher spends approximately $5,400 per year on its town attorney. Thatcher also pays its town prosecutor, Matt Clifford, $150 per hour.

Green expressed his displeasure with Safford's previous two city attorneys and said they didn't work for the him or the council but only the city manager.

Former City Manager Huey Long praised Sims for his punctuality when he was appointed the interim city attorney for the first time. Long went on to describe Sims as probably the best city attorney he has ever worked with.

At Monday's council meeting, members of the council had nothing but praise for Sims' performance, but those who voted to begin searching for a permanent attorney said it was necessary to have an attorney with them to advise the council as they hear and discuss topics.

Green then insisted the council had changed Sims' title from interim to permanent city attorney.

"We have hired Mr. Sims as our official attorney," Green said. "Originally it was interim, but at one point we made that official. . . It was voted on at a council meeting to make him our official city attorney. We can research that, but I'm sure that's the case."

Councilors Smith and Ortega disagreed with the mayor's statement, and Sims told the Courier he was not aware if that was correct and would have to check with the city's clerk, Georgia Luster. Sims later told the Courier that Luster could not locate any city minutes where his interim status was changed.

Councilor Ortega countered Malloque's salary argument and said while the salary may be initially more, having an attorney who is physically at the council meetings and work sessions would save the city much more money in the long run because it would avoid costly lawsuits and litigation.

According to Kincaid, Safford has a separate attorney for its water litigation with Thatcher, a separate attorney for its litigation concerning the demolition of the tent house that was located in Colonial Village #4 and a separate attorney to handle any litigation concerning its electricity issues. He said the city's insurance company is paying for separate attorneys for the city and Green in a $4.3 million lawsuit filed against them by Van Talley and to handle the $10.2 million notice of claim and possible lawsuit by Exeter President John Wilmot.

Talley's complaint contends Green used his position to thwart a 27-acre $100 million planned development named Safford Commerce Park. The alleged impropriety occurred mostly during the time Sims served as the city's interim attorney between Emery's departure to become the deputy city attorney for Glendale and the hiring of Guthrie.

Recently, two local long-standing business owners that have supported the city in various ways, including economically, felt slighted by the council for its actions that could have been avoided had an attorney been present at a work session or council meeting, according to Ortega.

Print this story Email this story Post A Comment

Comments

23 comment(s)

donna the spelling bee wrote on Nov 2, 2009 10:55 AM:

" donna ? did u do to school @ safford or did u learn to spell from your mother?? "

cowboysgirl wrote on Nov 2, 2009 7:59 AM:

" What are the "job quaifications" of the newly hired attorney??? Oh I know....HS Diploma, DUI conviction, Must lie @ 35 wpm, be an active "Grey Goose Bowler" and lastly...a RELATIVE in need of a JOB!!!!! Interviews to start....as soon as we find the MAYOR....KIM, (of Kim's window tenting)....can we borrow your server to find him for us??? APPLICANTS....go to the library on 8th and 8th on Monday Nov. 9th @ 7pm. Please remember to bring proof of "QUALIFICATIONS" otherwise you'll be booted off the AGENDA and rescheduled after your court hearing for the DUI...(needed to be considered for the job!!!!!!!) "

Other Cities wrote on Oct 30, 2009 2:16 PM:

" City or Towns with sitting Attorneys you ask?

Of course ALL the Big Boys do, but did you know these smaller ones do as well:

Benson, Bisbee, Eagar, Globe, Miami, Payson, Pinetop-Lakeside, Snowflake, St. Johns, Surprise, Thatcher, Tombstone, Willcox, Winslow. "

Dead Weight wrote on Oct 30, 2009 1:50 PM:

" Donna, good theory. However, the underworked are close friends of Mayor Green. A grants coordinator who hasn't secured a single grant (for the City of Safford) despite stimulus money being available everywhere - a building inspector who actions seem to favor the Mayor's preferred contractors - a manager (hand-picked by Ron Green) whose indiscretions seem to get documented each week - you get the picture. Change will have to start at the top - at the hand of the voters. But hurry before more stooges are hired (like a new golf pro for example). "

donna wrote on Oct 30, 2009 12:59 PM:

" so my thoughts are you should clwean up all the people who are overpayed and underworked----stating at the top I am also thinking that whatever attorney gave you the advise to keep your city manager after his DUI should be gone, unless of course that was out mayor and counsels choice and then they should be gone- "

Well wrote on Oct 30, 2009 12:57 PM:

" Most do, including the towns of Thatcher and Pima. And what a coincidence, they don't have all sorts of litigation against them, wonder why? "

Eagle Eye wrote on Oct 30, 2009 8:43 AM:

" What do other cities do? Do they have sitting legal council? "

My Opinion wrote on Oct 29, 2009 6:21 PM:

" To: Jessup and The Truth,
You are 100 % accurate in your comments! But, remember one thing, What Goes Around Comes Around! "

Colonel Nathan Jessup wrote on Oct 29, 2009 12:43 PM:

" Malloque can't handle the truth !

Unless of course the Mayor tells him it's okay. "

The Truth wrote on Oct 28, 2009 9:04 PM:

" Malloque's misinformed scare tactic was made because he and Green don't want an attorney in town lookin over what they are doing and telling them the are acting illegally. That is what happened to the last two in-house attorneys and that is why Green didn't like them, because they had the city's best interest in mind and not Green's. Face it, Green is out to screw over anyone who is not in his circle of influence. He is so improper with his politics the FBI has been investigating him. "

Actually wrote on Oct 28, 2009 8:36 PM:

" What I find baffling is Malloque pulling a scare tactic number out of the air without not only having proof of cost, but actually lying to the public because the city already has an office and such. Didn't they pay $300,000 or something like that for the building. Seems to be a big expenditure to not use it for what they intended. On a side note, why would the city attorney need all his/her overhead paid for if the city doesn't do the same for the city prosecutor? Answer the city does not have to do that. "

To Baffled wrote on Oct 28, 2009 5:29 PM:

" Please don't tell our law secratary that she does not still work for the City of Safford every day. She may get nervous about her job. She is doing a fine job. Baffled ...maybe you should now what you are talking about "

To Baffled aka Misinformed wrote on Oct 28, 2009 4:43 PM:

" Baffled, you are completely wrong. Linda Welker had nothing to do with the attorney's office. Garn Emery's secretary, who then became Johnny Guthrie's secretary most certainly IS still employed at the City and was shuffled around for awhile until a makeshift position opened for her. Jon Johnson's reporting is exactly what you asked for, True Facts. "

Well wrote on Oct 28, 2009 4:36 PM:

" A lease purchase is better than a lease because the city would have owned it in the end. It would have significantly lowered the immediate cost by spreading it out over many years. Compare it to purchasing a home. Do you have $200,000 to pay up front or do you finance it and pay over time? I don't know too many people that have the money to pay it up front, just like the city doesn't have $4 million to pay for a new police station up front. Say isn't that about how much were going to have topayTalley.GoodgoingGreen! "

My Two Cents wrote on Oct 28, 2009 4:34 PM:

" Yeah, it would have been a lease-purchase for a new police department that is badly needed. Everyone agrees on that, even the know-nothing mayor! Do you know the square footage of what was proposed? Do you know what the needs of the police department and evidence keeping regulations are? No, you know nothing. Say, are you the mayor or one of his cronies? The fact is Green screwed Safford just like he always does and for some reason a large number of the electorate just take it. I, for one, am fed up. Down with the mayor and hiscouncilslugs! "

Real Truth wrote on Oct 28, 2009 3:49 PM:

" To Half truth- the agreement would have been a lease purchase. The building was expensive and not necessary; the city did not even need all the space. Even if it were just a lease, which it was not, the city could not afford to lease a building that large. "

Half truth wrote on Oct 28, 2009 3:34 PM:

" To A Citizen:
The city would not have owned the development. It would have been leasing one building. You are trying to put out bad info to skew the story. Nice try but no dice "

boffo the mayor wrote on Oct 28, 2009 2:03 PM:

" Malloque, here's a thought ... dismiss Howe, retire Waite and Knight and use half the savings to hire a city attorney and the other half to replace Howe.

Just a suggestion of course... "

a citizen wrote on Oct 28, 2009 1:35 PM:

" It is a good thing Green did THWART the $100 million dollar planned development that was pushed thru by Talley who was set to make a pretty penny off the development. Where would the City be trying to pay for that $100 million dollar debt. Talley was looking out for no one but himself!!! "

Spot-On wrote on Oct 28, 2009 12:23 PM:

" Good work. You nailed it on the head, Jon Johnson. "

Common Sense wrote on Oct 28, 2009 11:40 AM:

" You get what you pay for. Mr. Sims is professional and competent or else he would be unemployed. Because he deals exclusively with city government law from several cities he can be more efficient at the daily tasks and will have greater knowledge of the law based on the extra exposure. I'm not convinced Safford is getting its money's worth out of their city prosecutor and I believe Pima shares the same fate. "

Baffled wrote on Oct 28, 2009 11:28 AM:

" Mr. Guthrie's secretary? There hasn't been a legal secretary in the City or in the "empty building" since Linda Welker left, Jon. How long has that been? I would agree that VW could be relocated and the building rented out or utilized in some other way until the economic situation turns around. But Please Do A Better Job at Getting your FACTS straight. That is the problem with the Courier-- it has become speculative reporting! I see as much incorrect print as true facts in what is being called reporting. "

LegalWise wrote on Oct 28, 2009 11:28 AM:

" An in-house attorney is necessary for this City and they are making a big mistake. This attorney is only working 7 hours a week right now because he is only needed 7 hours a week. What happens when he has to give his full attention to our city and he charges $200 an hour + expenses, ie; travel, staff, filings, etc. This is going to bite the City on the behind when something happens and they will be scrambling to find an attorney at the last minute costing us more money in the long run. Shocking bad decision. "

WRITE A COMMENT

READER COMMENTS
* Be respectful of others, the writer and the subjects in the story.

* Be relevant. Keep your comments pertinent to the story that is being discussed.

Comment posters are responsible for the opinions they express and the accuracy of the information they provide. We urge comment writers to treat this as a public forum where manners matter. We encourage a collegial, non-insulting tone. All reader comments must be approved by our staff before posting to the Web site. Be aware, in accordance with the Communications Decency Act and provisions upheld in judicial appeal, that you are responsible for comments posted on this Web site. The Eastern Arizona Courier is not liable for messages from third parties. IP addresses can be subpoenaed and your identity established by individuals who have been hurt by your comments.

DO NOT POST:
* Potentially libelous statements or damaging innuendo.
* Obscene, explicit, or racist language.
* Personal attacks, insults or threats.
* The use of another person's real name to disguise your identity: You can be prosecuted for identity theft.
* Comments unrelated to the story.

Opinions, advice and all other information expressed in www.eacourier.com reader comments represent the individual's own views and not those of the Eastern Arizona Courier. The Courier does not endorse and is not responsible for statements, advice or opinions offered by anyone other than Eastern Arizona Courier spokespersons.

Thank you for your comments!