Claremont COURIER/Friday, June 14, 2013

[Editors note: The following letter was sent to the Claremont City Council, with a copy forwarded for publication. KD]

Conflict with citys law firm

Dear City Council members: Your list of future council agenda items includes the contract with Best Best and Krieger for legal services. For many years, it has troubled me that the city attorneys law firm may also represent the city in litigation. This creates a conflict of interest. Our city attorney should be advising you how to minimize litigation and also whether to accept the recommendations of its litigators. Litigators have a reputation for promoting further litigation instead of settlement, and mediation can be preferable to litigation despite being less lucrative for attorneys. In addition, by not having a contract with one law firm for legal services, you can engage the most expert law firm for the topic when you are required to litigate. A city attorney should give independent advice, which is at least awkward if his or her own firm is competing to be selected, and which is not possible at all if the firm has a monopoly. Any conflict of interest should be eliminated. I hope that you will do this when the legal services contract is up for renewal.

Meanwhile, I request that you publish a breakdown of our citys expenses during the current legal services contract period before you calendar its renewal. We should know how much is paid to whom for what.
Bob Gerecke Claremont

READERS COMMENTS

Invalidating whats valid

Dear Editor: Are you kidding me? Is our legislature really that clueless? We want to give valid IDs to illegals and felons who are breaking our laws by being here to begin with. We want to thereby grant them immediate access to all sorts of social services that most of them dont pay into (no taxes withheld from under the table workers). Lets look at some of the drawbacks. (1) Birth certificates and proof of residency are required to obtain these documents. These can be created by hundreds of counterfeiters who are currently supplying them to anyone with the price to pay. (2) These documents can be obtained under any name the perpetrator of this crime chooses, thereby allowing for multiple IDs for criminals and terrorists who

wish to remain anonymous. (3) Once obtained, the holder of these documents can roam freely throughout our country and never fear that they will be jailed or deported. This will allow criminals and terrorists free rein to destroy any building, installation or group that they have targeted because, if stopped, they will have valid ID. (4) This law will make the term valid ID meaningless and once again this state will be the laughing stock of the country and the world.
Hayden Lening Claremont

Drop the personal attacks

Dear Editor: May I express my gratitude for Ellen Taylors unstinting and generous service to the community of Claremont. Without her diligent and yes, unbiased information, we would be hard-pressed to analyze, cogitate upon and resolve many political issues. As a registered Republican, I am grateful for people such as Ms. Taylor, who are devoted to the concept of community service. I do rely on her analysis and perspective as a community leader to provide information and balanced evaluation to the political conversation. I am so sorry to see a letter to the editor turn into a personal attack, and I must say that as a fellow property owner I absolutely agree with Ms. Taylors response to the Girl Scouts incident (and havent we heard enough ignorant opinions about this topic?). The Girl Scouts who wanted to sell cookies could have

benefited from a lesson in civics as they went to city hall and obtained a permit for their sales; instead the Girl Scouts were thrust into a situation where they learned nothing and probably felt bad. We are not all privileged enough to own property, but any property owner knows that liability starts whenever anyone sets foot upon their property If the Girl Scouts had been allowed to commence selling cookies upon private property, any one of their customers could hold the property owner liable for any small infraction, real or imagined. Ms. Taylor was right to defend her property. Unfortunately, most insurance companies require police reports or other official documents to back up property owners claims or information. Ms. Taylor was right to call the police to document the situation. This is the bizarre nature of the legal climate; most grown adults understand this. I used to be a Girl Scout in this community and I have raised 4 children in Claremont. I know personally that the atmosphere within this community strives to be forward-thinking and positive toward youth. Please drop this inane personal attack and stick to serious issues.
Carla Johnson Claremont READERS COMMENTS Please send readers comments via email to editor@claremont-courier.com or by mail or hand-delivery to 1420 N. Claremont Blvd. Ste. 205B, Claremont, CA 91711. The deadline for submission is Tuesday at 5 p.m. The COURIER cannot guarantee publication of every letter. Letters are the opinion of the writer, not a reflection of the COURIER. We reserve the right to edit letters. Letters should not exceed 250 words.