What is Good for Gander is not Good for the Goose

Tuesday, March 01, 2005
Los Angeles faces legal bills in grand jury probe of city hall
Some city officials begin the reimbursement process for attorney fees they were charged for being witnesses in a corruption case.
By David Zahniser

http://www.dailybreeze.com/news/articles/1318422.html

When lowly City employees are subject to investigation and personnel actions as a consequence of their actions, the City Attorney’s Office does not provide legal representation. They pay for their own representation. However, when managers go awry it seems they have access to not only City attorneys but contracted $500 an hour attorneys. Is there something wrong with that?

If the City Attorney’s office can see the conflict of interest in representing them themselves, why can’t they see the conflict in providing the offenders with representation? It seems clear in each of the city’s confidential settlement that City employees obtained and paid for their own attorneys.

So why is the city footing the bill for Board members and city managers that are involved in alleged scandalous behavior? It is not good for the city. And the practice works to encourage conflicting interests and behavior and actions which are contrary to the city’s best interest.