Our lame duck city attorney who resigned last week has truly left the track after losing all her wheels. With four minutes to spare before the 24-hour Brown Act deadline for noticing an agenda item, she (through contract Assistant City Attorney Heather McLaughlin), placed the following resolution on tomorrow night’s City Council agenda:

RESOLUTION NO. XX-21
RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RICHMOND, CALIFORNIA,
CONDEMNING CERTAIN INTERNET POSTINGS BY MAYOR TOM BUTT

WHEREAS, elected City leaders need to conduct themselves with dignity, fairness, and a sense of propriety, and responsibility; and

WHEREAS, Tom Butt, the Mayor of the City of Richmond, operates a personal website located at www.tombutt.com, and he, among other things, makes statements on this website
through an “e-forum”; and

WHEREAS, the postings made on the www.tombutt.com e-forum on July 25, 2021 (titled “Auditing the City of Richmond”), July 31, 2021 (titled “Baxter Creek Park An Example of City Priorities”), and on August 7, 2021 (titled “The Richmond Greenway – From Showcase to Shabby”) [any others?] and emails by Mayor Butt containing substantially the same statements (collectively referred to as the “Postings”) contain statements about, among other things, Laura Snideman’s job performance; and

WHEREAS, the Postings were not made on behalf of the City of Richmond or authorized by the City Council of the City of Richmond; and

WHEREAS, the statements made in the Postings about Laura Snideman’s job performance do not reflect the views of a majority of the City Council of the City of Richmond.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Richmond renounces and condemns the statements made in the Postings about Laura Snideman’s
job performance.

I certify that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted by the Council of the City of Richmond at a special meeting thereof held November 9, 2021, by the following vote:

This is particularly disturbing because of the potential chilling effect it has on the 1st Amendment right of a city council member to criticize a city manager. The City Council, does not have to adopt a resolution to declare what each E-FORUM posting already includes:

When opinions and views expressed, without other attribution, in TOM BUTT E-FORUM, they are those of Tom Butt and do not reflect official views or positions of the City of Richmond or the Richmond City Council unless otherwise noted

If my City Council colleagues disagree with me, they are welcome to use their own 1st Amendment rights to register and explain their disagreement, but to use their power as city council members to shut down my 1st Amendment rights is downright scary.

City Attorney Teresa Stricker has ticked her lunacy up another notch by ordering me to “cease and desist” in my duty to the residents of Richmond. Tonight, she emailed me the following:

Mayor,

You may be aware of your son Daniel’s email to me of November 5, 2021, which is copied below for your convenience.  In that email, Daniel mistakenly asserts that I have been communicating with you in your “individual capacity and as a private citizen” and all of his subsequent assertions follow from that mistaken premise.

Please be advised that my communications to you relating to your public disclosure of confidential information –  information that you possess solely by virtue of your status as the elected Mayor of Richmond –  are in your official capacity as Mayor.  My communications, written in my capacity as City Attorney, the City’s chief legal advisor under the City Charter, are intended to remind you — a City officer — of your fiduciary obligations to the City that arise from the oath of office you took when you were elected to your office.  During my remaining time in this office, I fully intend to communicate directly with you in your official capacity as Mayor, notwithstanding the baseless threats implied in Daniel’s email.

The rule that Daniel cites simply does not apply to a city attorney’s communications to members of the city council regarding city business.  Be assured that if I ever have a need to communicate with you in your personal capacity, I will gladly do so through Daniel, as he requests.  

Teresa

Daniel’s email was as follows:

Ms. Stricker,

As I’m sure you understand from his June 23, 2021 email to you, my office represents Tom Butt in his individual capacity and as a private citizen, with respect to several adversarial positions and legal threats made against him by the City of Richmond, and under color of law.  I am sure you are also familiar with Rule 4.2 of the State Bar’s Rules of Professional Conduct, which prohibits direct communication with a represented party on any matter within the scope of that representation.

It has recently come to my attention that you have, on behalf of the City of Richmond, made a formal cease and desist demand directed at my client, demanding my client cease private activity that is specifically protected by Article I, Section 2 of the California Constitution and the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.  It is my understanding that you directly communicated same to my client. 

Without comment on the potential conflict of interest this creates for your office, or whether you are authorized by your client in the first place to make such a demand, the purpose of this communication is to formally and strenuously remind you of your ethical obligations under the California Rules of Professional Conduct, and request that any further adversarial demands or other communications from your office, which communications make any legal threats or demands against my client in his personal capacity, and for exercise of his constitutionally protected rights, be directed directly to my office.

Yours,

Daniel Butt

The city attorney has a contorted perception of who she represents and what the loyalties are of elected City Council members. Her client is the City of Richmond, not the City Council and not any individual City Council member. My duty is to the people of Richmond, the majority of which elected me – not the city manager and not the city attorney.

I will not be deterred or intimidated by other City Council members, the city manager, or the city attorney, who apparently do not like what I have to say.