HomeMy WebLinkAbout35- City Attorney's Office 1'Y OF SAN BERN " RDINO - REQUEST FNR COUNCIL ACTION
City Attorney' s Office Subject: Request to Restore Funding for City
Attorney Investigator Positions to City Attorney's
wept: CITY AZTOR EY Budget for FY 1994-95 and Re-set "Bottom Line" For
Date: May 4 , 1995 City Attorney's Budget for FY 1995-96
Synopsis of Previous Council action:
See attached Staff Report
r1mI!, r^
!',id. 9t'
Recommended motion:
1) That the Director of Finance be instructed to restore $128 ,800 to the
budget of the City Attorney' s Office for FY 1994-95 in order to comply with
the court order directed to the Common Council in San Bernardino Superior
Court Case No. SCV 13711 (copy of the Order attached) .
2) That the Director of Finance be instructed to re-set the "bottom line"
for the budget of the City Attorney' s Office for FY 1995-96 at $1 ,753 , 500.
Signature
Contact person: Richard J. Morillo Phone: 5355
Supporting data attached: Ward:
FUNDING REQUIREMENTS: Amount:
Source: (Acct. No.)
(Acct. Description)
Finance:
Council Notes:
_J
7=-0262 Agenda Item No. 5
rY OF SAN BERN '' RDINO - REQUEST F^R COUNCIL ACTION
STAFF REPORT
On June 15, 1995, the Mayor and Council conducted a hearing on
the then proposed budget for FY 1994-95. At that meeting, the
Council voted to cut positions from the City Attorney' s staff,
including two City Attorney Investigators. On June 24, 1995, the
Mayor and Council adopted the 1994-95 budget, incorporating the
previously directed staff cuts. At that meeting, it received a
memorandum from the Director of Finance indicating that the salary
and benefits for the two investigators for FY 1994-95 would have
been $128,800. A copy of that memorandum is attached hereto.
The elimination of the two investigator positions was
challenged in a writ of mandate proceeding entitled Scott v. Common
Council, Case No. SCV 13711 . On August 17, 1994, judgment was
entered in favor of the petitioners directing that the two
positions be restored to the City Attorney's Office along with the
"funding therefor. " Copies of the court's judgment and writ are
attached hereto.
Although the two investigators have continued to be employed
and have been paid, funding for the two positions was never
restored to the budget of the City Attorney' s Office. Not only
does this defy the order of the court, it has led to the City
Attorney' s Office being shortchanged in the setting of its "bottom
line" figure for the 1995-96 budget. Attached is a memorandum from
the Finance Director which calculated the "bottom line" for the
City Attorney' s Office at $1, 624, 700. Had the order of the court
been obeyed, the correct figure would be $1, 753, 500.
To remedy this situation, the City Attorney's Office proposes
that the Director of Finance be instructed to restore $128, 800 to
the budget for the City Attorney's Office for FY 1994-95, and that
the Director of Finance be directed to re-set the "bottom line"
amount for the City Attorney's budget for FY 1995-96 at $1, 753, 500.
75-0264
. ;.,Zr- '4EMO RAN DUM
77'.'ANCE DEPARTMENT
:'O: Shauna Marx , -_t, •-kdmirristrator
_ 1
FROM: Barbara Director{
SUBJECT . F'Z
�un im Pennen, City Attorney;
Fred - -= ,__� . - -=y Administrator
Based on direct : _ - - _ --Z--on Council at the June 15th budget
telow.ee*_ ing , --ty Attorney' s budget as indicated
?rel. �inarY Revised
FY 1994-95 Change
Personee : per . : =__ :? , 300 1 , 028 , 700 (274 , 100)
^.ater_a _s /C-era : : .5 ' 00 271, 400 - 0 t n
Contracts / :nter7.2 : Ser•: 213 , 600 218 , 600 - 0 -
Cap_tal Cutlay 50 000 60, 000 0
Total Expend .t,.:res 1 , 852 , 800 1, 578, 700 <274 , 100)
,ttached is a iet3. : listing of the positions deleted from the City
Attorney ' s budget . The dollars deleted include salary and
benefits . All cf the deleted positions are currently vacant except
the two Investigators . If the two Investigators are terminated,
the City Attorney' s budget will incur approximately $5,000 of
expenses fir payment of accrual balances.
At this time , none of the dollars deleted from the Personnel
Services category have been added back into the City Attorney's
budget in the outside Counsel line item since this was not included
in the Council ' s direction at the June 15th meeting.
Please het me know if you have any questions or require any further
information .
r
i
CITY ATTORNEY 9 93- PRELIM RE . ISED FY 94-95 DOLLARS
94 1994-95 994-95 CHANGES DEED
Admin Oper. Supv-Atty _
Sr. Asst City Atty 2
Legal Sec I
Legal Sec II 1 <1> 34 , 500
Legal Sec Trainee
Paralegal I o <1> 29, 400
City Attorney = 1 1
City Attorney Invest = 2 0 <2>
Sr . Dep City Attorney _ 1 128, 800
1
Dep City Attorney IV 2 1 <1>
Dep City Attorney II: 1 81, 400
1
Dep City Attorney II
Executive Secretary
TOTAL _ � 19 14 <5> $274 , 100
CITY ATTORNEY DEPT TOTAL 18 19 14 <S>
1ILAW OFFICES OF GARZA & REYES
Florentino irza, Esq.
2 State Bar 4,27297
.,D„
290 No. Street, Suite 9Q1 S°`� ?`';'= :Ci:'i7 C;F;,
3 P. 0. Box 1601
San Bernardino, CA 92402-1601 AUGr68jca4
4
Telephone: ( 909 )888-1733
Att. zeys for Petitioners
6 Uepury
7
3
9 SUPERIOR CCURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
10 FOR THE COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO
11
JUANITA SCOTT, PhD; ) Case No. 13711
12 BENJAMIN GONZALES, San )
Bernardino Chief of Police )
13 ( Ret. ) ; WARREN COCKE, San )
Bernardino Chief of Police )
14 ( Ret. ) , and HON. EVLYN )
WILCOX, former Mayor of the )
15 City of San Bernardino, ) JUDGMENT FOR PETITIONERS
16 Petitioners, )
17 vs. )
18 COMMON COUNCIL OF THE )
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, and )
19 DOES 1 through 20, Inclusive, )
20 Respondents. )
21
This cause came on regularly for hearing before this court
22
231 on August 8, 1994, before the Honorable Duane M. Lloyd, Judge of
the Superior Court, pursuant to the verified petition of JUANITA
24 SCOTT, BENJAMIN GONZALES, WARREN COCKS and EVLYN WILCOX. An
25
alternative writ of mandate issued herein on July 8, 1994, and was
261 served on respondent.
2�,i I Florentino Garza, of the Law Offices of Garza & Reyes,
281
1
i
li appeared for petitioners, and Charles R. Green, of Sabo & Green,
2, appeared ' respondent.
3 The cause was heard and documentary evidence was received.
4 The cause having been argued and submitted for decision, the
a court being fully advised, a statement of decision not having been
6 requested, and the court having directed that judgment and a
7 peremptory writ of mandate should issue in the cause;
8 IT IS ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED
9 1 . That a Peremptory Writ of Mandate issue under the seal
10 of this Court commanding the COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN
11 BERNARDINO, Respondent in this action, to reinstate to the Office
12 of the City Attorney the two City Attorney Investigator positions
13 and funding therefor, deleted by Resolution No. 94-163.
1.1 2. That petitioners JUANITA SCOTT, BENJAMIN GONZALES,
15 WARREN COCKE and EVLYN WILCOX have and recover from respondent
16 COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO costs and
li
disbursements herein.
18 3. That should any appeal be taken from- this judgment, it
191 shall not operate as a stay of execution hereolk
201 DATED: AUG 0 8 1994
21
G AiNE All. LLOYD
JUDGE OF THE SUPERIOR COURT
919!
231
24 i�
I
251
I
26
i
271
23i
i
i 2
PROOF OF SERVICE
21 CASE NO. SCv 2 11
i
3
STATE OF C
4I ALirORNIA
51 COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO
6 I am employed in the County of San Bernardino, State of
7 California. am over the age of 18 years and not a party to the
8 within action; my business address is 290 North "D" Street, Suite
9 901, San Bernardino, California 92401.
10 On August , 1994 , I served by facsimile and by mail the
11 foregoing documents described as JUDGMENT FOR PETITIONERS and
12 PEREMPTORY WRIT OF MANDATE on the interested parties in this action
13 by placing a true copy thereof enclosed in a sealed envelope
14 addressed as follows:
15 CHARLES R. GREEN, ESQ.
16 SABO & GREEN
23801 Calabasas Road, Suite 2039
l., . Calabasas, California 91302
181 I caused such envelope with
p postage thereon fully prepaid to
19i be placed in the United States mail at San Bernardino, California.
20 I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State
21i of California that the above is true and correct.
22 ,
C'
23i
1
2411 EDNA ANDERSON
25 1 l
i I
26 �
27 4
281 I
i
LAW OFFICES OF GARZA & REYES '
2 FLORENTINO ;ARZA, ESQ.
STATE BAR j. 027297
3i 290 North „D" Street, Suite''.901
Post Office Box 1601
4 San Bernardino , California 92402-1601
5 (9 0 9) 888-1733 San Bernardino County Cleric
i I
Attorney for Petitioners AUG 1 7
`
7
Deputy
8
9 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
10 FOR THE COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO !�
I
11 JUANITA SCOTT, PhD;
BENJAMIN GONZALES , San ) CASE NO. SCV 13711
12 Bernardino Chief of Police )
13 (Ret. ) ; WARREN COCKE, San j
Bernardino Chief of Police ) PEREKPTORY WRIT OF
14 (Ret. ) , and HON. EVLYN ) Zt71NDATE
WILCOX, former Mayor of the )
15 City of San Bernardino, )
16 Petitioners, j
17 vs. )
18 COMMON COUNCIL OF THE ) !
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, and ) M
19 DOES 1 through 20, Inclusive, )
20 Respondents. )
21 TO: RESPONDENT, THE C0104ON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO:
22 WHEREAS petitioners served and filed herein their duly
23 verified petition for a writ of mandate, an alternative writ of
24 mandate issued herein on July 8, 1994, and a hearing was held
25 herein on August 8 , 1994;
26
WHEREAS it appears to this court that you have abused your
27 discretion and failed to perform a legal duty mandated by law by
28 your actions to eliminate all of the City Attorney Investigator
Fi:FMnORY WRlf OF MANDATE !
City
2 Attorney;
'�R� a ase of it appears that this is
3 public interest and i
of significant public benefit
pursuant to Code of C�vit Procedu e f
4 Section 1021. 5 ; and
5 WHEREAS it further appears that Petitioners
6 JUANITA SCOTT,
BENJAMIN GONZALES, WARREN COCKE and HON.
7 EVLYN WILCOX have no
8
plain, speedy, or adequate remedy in the ordinary course of law;
THEREFORE,
you, THE COMMON COUNCIL O! THE CITY 01 SAN
9 BERNARDINO, are hereby commanded forthwith to reinstate to the
e
Office of the City Attorney the two City Attorney Investigator !
11 positions and funding therefor.
12 BY ORDER OF THIS COURT.
13
14 DATED: August 1994 t
15 ��., • CLERK SUPERIOR COURT
16
17 �' r `- \ t { .0
18 •. s
•y 1 a A
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
PPAEWT0Ry WRn'OF NAMAn 2
. 1
i
290 No. "D" Street, Ste. 901, San Bernardino, CA 92402-1601
•rrohdr son
NflNt MAMI.lr COUNT.J1A7fClrfl OMTf1 A WWAr-X C"T #unr
w0 POST OssiG ur0 lTW4IT A�l33
XPERIOR CMW OF THE STATE OF CALZFOjtIA C e n t r::l D i::t::-t
FOR THE COUNrY OF SAN BERiARDI\t0 San Bernardino County C1-.rk
r��,Nrrr,s, rlTirlON143i
JUMITA SC=, etc. , et a.i AUG 1 7 1994
.frINOANr 3i 111s/OMOfht,g �A,/�� �
CQ[41 N COUACIL OF THE C.-,--.v. :)F SM 3ER-jARUINO, et al
PROOF OF PERSONAL SERVICE CAM wwx —.
S"' 13711
Hearing: Oat@
Time
Dept.
I served a copy of the following documents
PEMM TORY WRIT OF %%.'VD=
Person served (name): q v� � e
e` � ` C-4` Q Y
By personally delivering copes to the person served, as follows:
1 ) Date August 10, 1994 (2) Time 0 A''u'
3► Address 300 No. "D" Street, San Bernardino, CA
At the time of service I was at least 18 years of age and not a party to this cause.
declare under penalty of penury that the foregoing is tru correct and that this declaration is executed
on date) August 10, 1994 , at (place) San duo► Califarnia
Larry Malmtierg yve of Onnr NOM0 SWfe
I
1 '
•C1S Code
IL 3-a2o@IO21 PROOF OF PERSONAL SERVICE
nerS
t a pain AOO'O i eftrtt C T on ryK�y c ,,, u •
SSUP 2 OR COURT OF HE STAKE 0 Cnri' OR'A
COUNTY OF SAN BEP .RDZNO
351 North Arrowhead Avenue �J - -Bernardino oictr.ct
San Bernardino, CA 92415 County Clerk
AIAAT'08,2. ,,1.0"J1,s1 AUG 1 7 1994
JUANITA SCOTT, PhD, et al .
JtrtwO�wri• •tSrOr.06 rr,3, ey Anvlgr�
COMMON COUNCIL OF THE ':'^Y CF SAN BERNARDINO, et al.
PROOF OF PERSONAL SERVICE c.sr�uwu
SCV 13711
Meaning: Date
row
Dept.
I served a copy of the following documents
PEREMPTORY WRIT OF MANDATE
Person served (name):
F .J . CL'RLIN,
By personally delivering copies to the person served, as follows:
1 Date Aucust 13 , 1994 121 Time
31 Address 300 North "D" Street. San Bernardinn, CA
At the time of service I was at least 18 years of age and not a party to this cause.
declare under penalty of penury that the foregoing is true and correct and that*"declaration is executed
on date) August 15 , 1994 , at (place)
L ar r —
rvpe or onnt Nemo
I
Acls coif.
372041021
pnOOF OF PERSONAL SERVICE
�� er�r ion
1
• � 1 .
.••vwr.w++ Petitioners pi
S ON COt�T OF
HE ST:9r O'F nff?ORIVJ A Tw" au
COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO =D - Cantrcl Cis.::�t
351 North Arrowhead Avenue
San Bernardino, CA 92415 San Bernardino County Clerk
tir,►OMf, .,r,r,or1J%.S1 o AUG 1 71994
JUANITA SCOTT, PhD, et al . A
711gh0arf. �lf►OtiOftir,f, B `7r/���.v�� W
COMMON COUNCIL OF THE C�T'_' SAN BERNARDINO, et al, eputy
I
PROOF OF PERSONAL SERVICE CAM
SCV 13711
Heanng: oats
rye
. oeoc
I served a copy of the following documents
PEREMPTORY WRIT OF MANDATE
Person served (name):
VALERIE POPE-LUDLAM
By personally delivering copes to the person served, as follows:
i t ► Oate August 15 , 1994 (2) Tim •B�
I 13► Address 300 North "D" Street, San Barnardinin, rk
1
At the time of service ► was at least IS years of age and not a party to this cause.
1 declare under penalty of penury that the foregoing is true and correct and that this declaration is executed
on tdate► August 15 , 1994 at Iplace►
r t%.Aa.kLm.
� T�p� a innr N
ACS C069
3320e,021 PROOF Of pERSONAL SERVICS
.34 ,1747 70+
.' rrr
s0 COUP RT O) °A�"'""•c ' ' •
STA�E O� �iP�o`�r A T�.T•' 'n �
COUNTY OF SAN BER1 - DINO
351 North Arrowhead Avenue - -� - C:r.>•�I "'
San Bernardino-, CA 92415 an Bernaruino Counti %"!:rk
rurrrWr,s,gTlf,oftMfl
JUANITA SCOTT, PhD, et al . 4w,�0247 AUG 1 1 1994
7!rlr,0•wr's, �ISIOMO�hrs COMMON COUNCIL OF THE `ITy DF SAN g$Rj�j
ARDINO, et al.
PROOF OF PERSONAL SERVICE
SCV 13711
Hearing: Date
roe
OWL
I served a copy of the following documents
PEREMPTORY WRIT OF MANDATE
Person served (name):
RALPH HERNAT;DEZ .
By personally delivering copies to the person served, as follows:
1 I Date August 15 , 1994 121 Tire
3) Address 300 ;North "D" Street. San Bernardine, CA
At the time of service I was at least 18 years of age and not a party to this cause.
I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct and that fts declaration is executed
on idate► August 15 , 1994 , at (place) A r inn ju
LA r r til a. w Vt r
T,,pe of A+n♦Nand
•MIS Coa
3720e1021
pROGf OF PERSONAL SERVICE
W r
• I
•Traw�"O" Petitioners
gN MOP Oe O JNORY "OF T` 00 URT H0 w SwT A E 'O'r �I F pIA"""
!" J
COUNTY OF SAN BERNA.RDINO � -
351 North Arrowhead Avenue Sa Bernard:no Catum,y -k
San Bernardino, CA 92415 '
�•wr,'..,,
041,710440,si AUG 1 7 1994
JUANITA SCOTT, PhD, a*_ al .
JHlMO•MT L 4YOw0trns, ey
0@ u
p tY
COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, et al.
PROOF OF PERSONAL SERVICE c.st
SCV 13711
Hearing: Date
Time
Oept.
1 served a copy of the following documents
PEREMPTORY WRIT OF MANDATE
Person served (name):
EDWARD V. NEGRETE
By personally delivering copes to the person served, as follows:
(1 ) Date August 15 , 1994 (2) Time L"Cl
(3) Address 300 North "D" Street. San Bernardino- rA
At the time of service I was at least 18 years of age and not a party to this cause.
declare under penalty of penury that the foregoing is true and correct and that this declaration is executed
on (date) August 15 , 1994 , at (place)
4/ I-r r
rvoo of Pnnt Nome
i►CiS Cody
3320e1021
PROOF OF PERSONAL SERVICE
I04 ,stet )or
- l
- a
C I T Y F S A N B E R N A R D I N O
INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM
FINANCE DEPARTMENT 1
TO: Department Heads/Managers
FROM: Barbara Pachon, Finance Director �1t
DATE: March 15, 1995
SUBJECT: Fiscal Year 1995-96 Budget Preparation
COPIES: Shauna Clark, City Administrator
Fred Wilson, Assistant City Administrator
It is that time of year again to begin the budget process for the
next fiscal year. This memorandum is designed to provide you with
direction and guidelines for this process. In order to keep it as
simple as possible, we will be following a process and format that
is similar to last year. ..ny changes that have been made for the
1995-96 year, are detailed below (so make sure you read on) .
Attachment 1 is a listing of Department's bottom line budget
amount. These total amounts are your FY 1994-95 budgets plus
adjustments for MO increases, Charter 186, transfers, merit
increases, a estimated PERS rate changes. You will have
discretion in--how this money is budgeted in line items but you must
stay within this--bottom line.
Attachment 2 is the personnel figures for each
Finance has computed. These figures include all projected regular
salary costs as well as benefits. The personnel figures have only
been adjusted to reflect scheduled step increases for employees.
Only those positions that are currently authorized in the budget
may be included in your 1995-96 budget submittals. The figures
provided to you include all of these positions, whether they are
currently filled or vacant. If you have questions or disagree with
our figures, please call Anne in Payroll. Finance will enter these
salary and benefit figures into the budget system for all
Departments.
If your Department has any type of special pay, you must budget
this yourself. Also overtime and part-time wages must be budgeted
by each Department. Attachment 3 is a report of al. ted
special pays for Departments that have NOT been included in n�the
personnel figures in Attachment 2.
Attachment 4 , is another copy of the instructions on how to use the
computerized budget system for your easy reference. If you have
problems or questions on how to use this system, please call MIS
for assistance. Once you enter a line item budget figure into the
system, you will automatically be requested to enter the budget
FY 95-96 Budget
Page 2
justification detail. Budget justification detail should include
the type of items being budgeted in the account, quantities, and
individual amounts. A justification must be entered for every
material and operation, services, capital, debt service, and
credit/billable accounts. The justifications should be as short
and concise as possible but yet provide enough information so
readers know what is included in the budget figure.
Attachment 5, is a Capital Outlay Request Form. This form should
be filled out for every capital outlay that is being requested in
your budget. This is the only form that is required to be filled
out for capital requests and the dollar sum of all the forms
submitted should be the same figure that is listed in your budget.
An item is considered to be capital if the unit cost is more than
$500 (excluding taxes and shipping) and has a life greater than
three years. Any item that does not meet this definition should
not be budgeted in capital but rather materials and supplies.
Attachment 6 are the two travel authority forms that have been uses
in the past and we will continue to use them this year. A separate
Travel Authority & Expense Request form should be filled out for
each trip/conference/convention for which costs are expected to be
over $100. Only one Summary of Travel Request form must be filled
out for each Division, which consolidates all the Travel Authority
& Expense Request forms data.
Attachment 7 is the Grant Programs form. This is the same form
that has be used in prior years and is used by Finance to help
track various grants awarded to the City.
Attachment 8 is a Program Change Request form. This form should be
filled out separately and the figures should NOT be included as
part of your budget submission. This form is to be used to propose
adding new programs, personnel, etc. If any of these requests are
approved in the budget process, Finance will add the approved
amounts to your budgets.
Attachment 9 is a copy of the proposed budget calendar. May 29th
is the target date to distribute the Preliminary Bud et and June
30th is the target to adopt the final budget.
for the individual Department meetings, vhicW""uj , "to
held after May 1st, will be provided at a latarucS�� 1$6
Attachment 10 is a sample format which is to be used to submit your
recommendations if your Department had to be cut 4%. Attachment 1
indicates the dollar amounts for a 4% cut for each Department..
Below each proposed cut, provide a summary of the impact to the
Department if this cut is actually done. The 44 budget cuts are to
be submitted along with your regular budget.
FY 95-96 Budget
Page 3
Attachment 11, is a list of account numbers that are to be used by
Departments. These are the same account numbers that we converted
to during the Finance conversion process. If you have any problems
or questions about the listing or about preparing your Department
budget, please refer to Attachment 12 , which indicates the Finance
Staff assigned to your Department. Of course, you may call me if
you have a question or problem that you feel should be brought to
my attention directly.
Attachment 13, is an expenditure worksheet for your Department.
This report is the same report that has been sent in prior years.
This report shows prior year data in the new account structure. It
is hoped this information will be useful to you in preparing your
FY 1995-96 budget.
As a final note, please round ALL your budget figures to the `
nearest $loo. All the internal service fund charges will be
provided to you by April 12th. When you submit your budgets to me,
please provide three (3) copies. Please note that Department
revenue projections are due into Finance on April 17th. You may
use the same format that you have used in past years. The only
revenue information that is required to be submitted is a more
current estimate for FY 1994-95 and a projection for FY 1995-96.
Please let me know if you have any questions or problems regarding
your budgets.
)EPT/DIVISION BUDGET ADJUST BUDGET- 4% CUT ATTACHMENT 1
-------
--------- -------
FY ADMINISTRATOR 540,1 36,200 576,700 23, 1Uu
'TV ATTORNEY 1,578,7A@ - 46,00 J,624,700 65,000.i
CITY CLERK 797,200 227,600 1 ,024,800 41 ,000
CITY TREASURER 19,400 11000 20,400 0
CIVIL SERVICE 316,500 7,400 323,900 13,000
COMMON COUNCIL 348,000 8,700 356,700 14,300
FACILITIES 3,330,900 131 , 100 3,462,000 138,500
FINANCE 1 ,268,500 (2,500) 1 ,266,000 50,600
FIRE 14, 120,000 298,600 14,418,600 576,800
GENERAL GOVERNMENT 3, 129,200 (1 ,010,800) 2, 118,400 84,700
MAYOR 611 ,500 ^3,000 634,500 25,400
PARKS & REC 5,224,300 45, 100 5,269,400 210,800
PERSONNEL 375,900 14,700 390,600 15,600
PLANNING/BUILDING 2,702, 100 77,900 2,780,000 111 ,200
POLICE 29,369,900 1 ,616,500 30,986,400 1 ,239,500
PUBLIC SERVICE 4,311 ,800 16,900 4,328,700 173, 100
PUBLIC WORKS 2,745,500 151 ,500 2,897,000 115,900
--------- --------- --------- ---------
TOTAL GENERAL FD 70,789,900 1 ,688,900 72,478,800 2,898,500
ANIMAL CONTROL 880,200 31 ,000 911 ,200 36,400
CABLE TELEVISION 433,400 12,400 445,800 17,800
CEMETERY 248,600 9,300 257,900 10,300
LIABILITY INS 2,551 ,000 5,700 2,556,700 102,300
LIBRARY 2,916,600 44,800 2,961 ,400 118,500
MIS/COMM SHOP 1 ,066,900 152,800 1 ,219,700 48,800
MOTOR POOL 3,751 ,500 71 ,500 3,823,000 152,900
TELEPHONE 614,700 6,500 621 ,200 24,800
WORKERS COMP 2,008,200 5,900 2,014,100 80,600
--------- --------- --------- ---------
TOTAL OTHER FDS 14,471 , !CO 339,900 14,811 ,00- 592,400
GRAND TOTAL ALL 85,261 ,000 2,028,800 87,289,800 3,490,900
MAY 10 195 09:55AM P'2
i-SABO & GREI'*-VT
A PROP6><YfoNAI. vORPORATION
A37KXt1%aT,;AT LAW
239o1 CAL.ABASAS ROAD sw( "3&3-It 73
9LJTPH 2039 ��3i3�n
C SA%cAL1po%tN1A 91302-1595 AX(909)381-0IN
7t
(ale)704.0195
FAX(819)704-4729
May 10, 1995
;Barbara Pachon
:Director of Finance
'City of San Bernardino
'300 North "D" Street
'San Bernardino, California 92418
RQ; ;to Scott PhD, at al, y. Common Council of th,eCity
of' San Bernardino, etc. . gt al. , San Bernardino County
superior Court Case No. SCV13711; our File SBE00128
!Dear Ns. Pachon:
This letter is in response to our telephone conversation
! of yesterday and your subsequent telecopied request that I review
'the issue of the effect of the judgment in the above-referenced
;matter on certain budget issues.
It is clear in reviewing the transcripts of the two
hearings held before Judge Lloyd in this matter that the gist of
, his reasoning was that the budget action by the Common Council
, resulted in the elimination of the City Attorney' s investigative
ability, which the Court found to be in excess of the Common
Council's authority. For example,. the Court indicated during the
;hearing of July 8, 1994, that the Common Council has the
legislative right to set the budget (Reporter' s Transcript. pg.s 7
and 8) but felt that the total elimination of the inveL.:igator
, positions eliminated or severely curtailed a mandatory duty on the
, part of the City Attorney (Reporter's Transcript, pg. 12) . In the
hearing of August 8, 1994, the attorney for the Petitioners
acknowledged the right of the Common Council to set the budget when
he said: ". . .we do not in any manner challenge the right of the
; city Council (sic) to perform its budgetary powers and to use
whatever resources, that financially are available to it to operate
the many functions of our city. "
The specific language of the ,judgment orders the issuance
of a writ of mandate commanding the Common Council to reinstate to
the Office of the City Attorney the two investigator positions, and
the funding therefor, which wero deleted by Resolution No. 94-163 .
The Court does not attempt to deal with any other issue of the
' budget other than the restoration of the City Attorney's ability to
perform his investigatory function.
r '
s MAY 10 '95 09:55AM P.3
I
;Barbara Pachon
;May 10, 1995
Page 2
i
It is my belief that the Common Council remains free to
iexercise its legislative discretion in the setting of the budget,
;including the budget for the City Attorney. Its powers are
circumscribed only to the extent that it cannot, under the terms of
;the Judgment, totally eliminate the City Attorney's ability to
;undertake investigations by eliminating those two positions. The
Common Council may make such other changes to the City Attorney's
budget as it, in the exercise of its legislative discretion, deems
?necessary and appropriate.
As I understand the facts, the two investigators have
; been continuously employed by the City since the issuance of the
' thudgment. If that is correct, then the City is in compliance with
e terms of the judgment.
As you know, the judgment in this case is on appeal. I
; believe that there remains a substantial chance that the Court of
Appeal will overturn Judge Lloyd' s ruling. Until that time,
' however, the Common Council is bound thereby. You should also be
aware that the Petitioners in this case may seek additional orders,
or interpretation of the existing judgment, in the event that they
feel that the Common Council has acted in any way that is
inconsistent with the Court's orders. In that event, of course,
' the Court will inform both asides as to the meaning of the prior
; judgment. The opinion stated herein is a good faith interpretation
of the Court's rulings to date, but I cannot guarantee that the
tCourt will concur.
If I can provide any further information, or otherwise be
Iof assistance in this matter, please let me know.
Very truly yours,
SABO & GREEN,
A Pr fessiona1 Corporation
Charles R. Green
' CRG:lw
ss�o�oiuvr�uo
VIA PAXtR avt.RMAM