Editor, Ceres Courier,

I am writing out of concern for a structural conflict of interest that exists when a city contracts with a law firm for legal advice. As a former city attorney for Redwood City, Pleasanton, San Mateo, and Brentwood, I am familiar with duties and obligations of an attorney providing legal advice to a city. I believe that there is inherent conflict of interest when a law firm advises a city and then represents the city in subsequent litigation resulting from the advice. The law firm should not benefit from representing the city in litigation for not resolving the matter before litigation is filed or benefitting from bad advice. If the contract city attorney provides incorrect or questionable legal advice, there may be little incentive to settle the matter before litigation. This turns legal guidance into more billable hours.

Conflict of interest laws are only the minimum standards to which public servants are required to comply. The highest standard of ethical conduct should be the only acceptable duty of a city attorney. If a contract city attorney submits an invoice for services, it is likely only the city attorney reviews it. Does an outside professional review it? Was the original contract for legal services submitted for review by another attorney? Does the city council seek a second opinion after litigation is filed?

Public ethical standards are set of core values that are not defined or enforced by laws. They are expectations imposed by the citizens of their public servants and go above the requirements of the law and act in the manner that is in the best interests of the city. There should be wall between the legal advice and any subsequent litigation at a minimum.

For example, in the City of Patterson where I reside, a contract city attorney from the firm White Brenner LLP serves as legal counsel and represents Patterson in every litigation filed against the city in the last ten years. Recently White Brenner’s September 2025 invoice was submitted to Patterson City Council in an amount more than $285,000 or about $10,000 per day. It should be noted that its annual billing for a city of approximately 25,000 people was over $1 million.

There is an easy solution. A city who is spending over $1 million annually should hire as a city employee a lawyer who is dedicated exclusively to advising the City and protects the city’s interests. There would be no question of conflict of interest.

The city with a contract city attorney such as your city deserved a better system to provide legal advice and a public servant that works for them and not for increased billable hours.

Dennis Beougher

LETTERS POLICY: Letters will be considered for publication but must be signed and include an address and phone number. Letters should be 250 words or less and be void of libel. Email to jeffb@cerescourier.com.