Council moves to amend ordinance limiting law director's litigation authority after heated debate

Councilors debated proposed changes to Ordinance 26-12, which would limit the law director's ability to initiate litigation, arbitration or dispute resolution without council approval when the action falls outside a fixed-fee schedule.

A council member recited the draft language and said the two added paragraphs would require council approval of litigation expenditures except in a mayor-certified emergency. Other council members and the law director raised concerns that the draft could prevent the law director from doing duties mandated by the city charter or state law. One councilor asked for an explicit carve-out that the ordinance "shall not apply if such action by the law director is required or permitted by charter or state law." The committee voted to amend the draft to add that exception and to send the revised language back for review by the law director and council leadership.

Members cited past controversy when outside counsel was hired without clear council approval; supporters said the ordinance aimed to create checks and avoid surprise litigation expenditures, while opponents warned against placing the city at legal risk if the law director cannot act when legally required.

The committee did not finalize the ordinance; the item was tabled for further drafting and review with the requested exception language included.