Defiant Carmel council gives city attorney a five-year contract despite protests.

City Council consent agendas are usually mundane lists of non-controversial and routine city business, but the employment contract for Carmel City Attorney Glen Mozingo on the Monday, Aug. 6 Carmel City Council consent agenda proved to be a lightning rod for controversy.

So much so, that as soon as the meeting agenda was published on Friday afternoon, Aug. 3, calls from residents started coming into former mayor Sue McCloud, she told the council on Aug. 6. They continued all weekend, even coming on Monday morning before she got out of bed.

The reason for all the buzz: The new contract guarantees Mozingo—who was hired a little over a year ago—five years and $30,000 a month, or $360,000 a year, to cover legal services by him and other lawyers he engages to represent Carmel for a total of 154 hours per month. (Additional hours will cost $275 an hour.) And it would take four of the five City Council members to cancel with 90-days notice. Mozingo may also cancel with the same notice.

“The majority of four votes, that’s almost a guarantee that will never happen,” McCloud said. “That’s a stumbling block.”

As Mozingo sat and watched the discussion from the council dais, McCloud and other residents urged the council to move the matter to a regular agenda at a future meeting, but Mayor Steve Dallas refused to do so. 

One reason some residents asked the council to delay approving the contract is a pending lawsuit brought by journalist Royal Calkins against the city. Calkins sued over Mozingo’s refusal to hand over documents he showed to the council on June 4, claiming the documents—which purportedly back up claims about Mozingo's credentials and resume—are exempt from a Public Records Act request.

The case is scheduled for a hearing in Monterey County Superior Court on Sept. 7.

(The Weekly requested the same records under the California Public Records Act and was denied twice.)

Councilmember Bobby Richards said he could not support the contract that would cost the city nearly $2 million over the five years, and urged the council to instead hire a full-time employee. (That's despite benefit and pension costs.) 

Dallas and three other councilmembers—Carolyn Hardy, Jan Reimers and Carrie Theis—were defensive and defiant against the public's complaints.

“It’s important to keep in mind the city attorney does not work for the public, the city attorney works for the City Council,” Hardy declared as she explained how she and Reimers created the new contract.

Defending their process, the two councilmembers said they consulted with an outside attorney from Los Gatos and used the Pacific Grove city attorney contract as a template, which also pays $30,000 a month to David Laredo and his law firm.

They also made the case that the long-term contract will save the city money because it locks Mozingo into a $195-an-hour rate for regular work, and $275 for extraordinary services that include things like appearing in court and writing complex legal documents.

After hearing a litany of public complaints, Hardy—who is up for re-election this November, along with Theis and Dallas—chided both residents and the media.

“Sometimes what we find sitting up here is that the public generally wants to throw every possible roadblock in [our] way from us doing a good job,” Hardy said.

Theis also chastised Mozingo's critics.

“Mr. Mozingo, from my point of view, is doing a great job,” she said, adding that if anyone worked with him as closely as she did they would come to the same conclusion: “Get to know him, give him a call.”

That remark drew a few low laughs from the audience.

A frustrated Dallas told residents, “If you can’t think positive please don’t think.

"It’s so frustrating, we’re only trying to do good.”

The council voted 4-1 to approve the contract, with a retroactive start date of July 1. Richards was the lone “no” vote.