Councilmember Gilmore acted as Mayor, seeking legal counsel, prior to becoming Mayor?

“In mid-December, Mayor Gilmore became aware of the possibility of potential litigation against the city and she did contact meyers nave at that time.” – Attorney Edward Kreisberg, meyers nave.

(Source: 12/21/2010 Regular Meeting of the Alameda Council Video at 1:36:17 [hour:minute:second])

Ms. Gilmore did not become mayor until the evening of December 21, 2010.  That’s not mid-December by any definition.  So that’s interesting. And it’s interesting that prior to taking her seat as mayor, she anticipated her actions as Mayor would be disruptive and justify lawsuits against the city.  Was her discussion, acting as mayor prior to being mayor, with meyers nave legal?

Readers: what are your thoughts on this?

To comment, don’t be fooled by the wordpress login (new account) page that makes it look like you have to start your own blog; you don’t.  When you land on this page:  https://en.wordpress.com/signup/, just to the right of the box that allows you to add a blog name, look for the words in blue that say ” sign up for just a username”, click on that and  you’ll be provided with a login-only account, no blog necessary.


About Denise Lai

Alive. Swim (fly is the best). Walking with my dog (weims are the best). Life is good. Would prefer people understood negative externalities and prevented themselves from creating them. Feeling the love anyway. View all posts by Denise Lai

5 responses to “What?

  • Denise Lai

    This is as good a place/time as any to mention this: in the last regular city council meeting, it was refreshing to see Vice Mayor Bonta presiding with no chewing gum in his mouth and announcing the name of each council member before s/he spoke. But last night’s meeting confirms that Mayor Gilmore still hasn’t gotten the memo: instead of tilting your head and pointing with your finger at a councilmember who’s asked to speak, please properly recognize each council member by stating his/her name!

  • AlamedaPost

    For the City to retain legal counsel, the entire Counsel has to vote to approve, not just one member. How New Mayor Gilmore knew in advance that she would need Meyers Nave’s services requires belief in ESP.

  • Denise Lai

    Later in that same meeting video, Kreisberg refers to a vote by the city council to retain meyers nave. Know anything about that?

  • AlamedaPost

    Nope, no one does.

  • City Attorney suggests we sue the city. « Raising Hell For Good

    […] really REALLY interesting, and in light of my post yesterday, City Attorney Mooney writes “The Council voted at the beginning of the closed session to […]

%d bloggers like this: