7.3. SR 12-18-2006 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

December 13,2006 Dear Mayor and Council Members, In the spring of 2006, a committee was formed to look at the future of the City Prosecutor Department. I was on the committee. The issue became whether to continue with me as the in-house prosecutor, or to contract with a law firm who could provide those services. I was assured by you that my job performance is not at issue. Rather, the issue is that the city needs to find the most cost-effective way to pay for these services. The city requested proposals for legal services. Two law firms submitted bids. I would be a part of one of those law firms. Last Thursday, Lori Johnson told me that the committee would be recommending that the city contract for its prosecution services with the other law firm. I was really taken aback by this as it seems to be a departure from what has been communicated to me throughout this process. I'd like to share with you some of my thoughts. Five years ago, I left a stable position at the Sherburne County Attorney's office to become the Elk River City Prosecutor. I was told the long-term plan was to have an in- house legal department that would include the civil work. I was excited about starting this new department and have been fully committed to its development. With Elk River having its own prosecutor, fme revenues were projected to go up because the city would get a higher percentage of the fine money. After the first year, the fine revenues were approximately $100,000 short of what was projected. This was a gross miscalculation. It had nothing to do with the prosecution of the cases, or some other unforeseen change in circumstances. Subsequently, judges have been imposing lower fmes because of increased surcharges and fees. This has impacted fine revenues. It became clear that this position was created based on flawed information. The financial viability and where this position fit into the city's organizational structure, had either not been thought through or was not understood. Where the city prosecutor fit into the organizational structure of city government has been an ongoing issue. Initially I reported to Pat Klaers, the city administrator. When he left, the city looked again at its organizational structure. I received an e-mail from Chief Beahen, proposing that I be aligned below and answer to him. According to his e-mail, the council thought this made sense. One council member felt this would be a conflict of interest. A prosecutor represents society as a whole, and in my case, the citizens of Elk River. A prosecutor works with law enforcement, while maintaining independent judgment. This is not discretionary, it's mandated by the Minnesota Rules of Professional Conduct (rule 3.8 and rule 5.4). This issue was resolved at a council work session.