.

'ALESHIRE&
1
J
WYNDERLLP
ATTORNEYS AT LAW

. '
I

'
PROPOSAL TO PROVIDE CITY
, I ATTORNEY LEGAL SERVICES
J

Carmel-by-the-Sea

!
J

'
1
Submitted March 10,2017

William W. Wynder, Esq.

.J
I & Roy C. Santos, Esq .

.j

J
J
 ALESHIRE& William W. Wynder
wwynder@awattorneys.com
2361 Rosecrans Ave., Suite 475
El Segundo, CA 90245

l WYNDERLLP
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
(310) 527-6667 p (31 0) 52J.6660
F (31 0) 53z.7395

ORANGE COUNTY I LOS ANGELES I RIVERSIDE I CENTRAL VALLEY AWATTORNEYS.COM

March 9, 2017

Mr. Chip Rerig,

l City Administrator
City of Carmel-by-the-Sea
City Hall
l Carmel-by-the-Sea, California 93921
j

Subject: Proposal to Provide City Attorney Services; RFP No. 16-17-11

Dear Mr. Rerig:

As perhaps the fastest growing municipal law firm in California, Aleshire & Wynder,
LLP ("A&W") is pleased to submit the attached proposal in response to your RFP No. 16-17-11.

We are proposing a two-attorney team to serve as your primary legal counsel (with
additional specialists as needed). William W. "Bill" Wynder, one of the two named partners of
the firm, is proposed to serve as your City Attorney (and primary contact with the City). Roy C.
Santos, an associate of the firm, is proposed to serve as your Assistant City Attorney.
Combined, we have almost 40 years of legal expertise in representing public agencies in
California.

.i A&W originated as an Irvine-based partnership formed in early 2003 to be a full-service

public agency law firm. We have experienced great success, even thru the "Great Recession;"
growing from 10 attorneys to 40, growing from one office in Irvine, to a second in Los Angeles
. J in 2006, expanding to Riverside in 2012 and to Fresno in 2013. We now have more public
lawyers than all but three municipal law firms and a legal capability exceeding all but the largest
cities in the State.

What is attached is the detailed content of each element of our proposal. For ease a
i reference, we include a table of contents that will hopefully allow a "user friendly" access on
I
CJ your part and on the part of your City Council to each element of the proposal. Should you have
questions or concerns, I can be contacted directly on my cell phone at 714.313.7366.
I

J Very truly yours,

j
William W. Wynder
ofALESHIRE & WYNDER, LLP

I
CJ
09999.0016/357111.1

i
~
--1

I
c 1
I
TABLE OF CONTENTS

~,

A. INTRODUCTION TO THE FIRM- MANAGEMENT STRUCTURE ............................. !

c l 1. Philosophy Of The Firm - Why You Should Hire Us ............................................. !
i
2. Mission Statement. ................................................................................................... 1
B. QUALIFICATIONS OF THE FIRM ................................................................................... 2
l
'
c. INTRODUCTION TO THE TEAM ................................................................................... .3
1. City Attorney - William Wynder ............................................................................ .4
2. Assistant City Attorney- Roy C. Santos ................................................................. S
3. Deputy, Personnel- Mily Huntley .......................................................................... 6
4. Deputy, Police/Risk Management- Glen E. Tucker ............................................... 6
5. Deputy, Public Finance- Anita Luck ...................................................................... 7
D. WORKING RELATIONSHIPS .......................................................................................... 7
E. MALPRACTICE ................................................................................................................. 8
F. OFFICE HOURS AND LOCATION(S) ............................................................................. 8
G. TIMELINESS AND RESPONSE TIMEFRAMES ............................................................. 8
H. COMPENSATION AND REIMBURSEMENT ................................................................. 9
1. Fee Proposa1 ............................................................................................................. 9
2. General Services .................................................................................................... 10
3. Special Services or "Extraordinary Services" ........................................................ 10
4. Reimbursement And Travel ................................................................................... 11
5. Training .................................................................................................................. ll
I. REFERENCES .................................................................................................................. 12
William W. Wynder ........................................................................................................... l2

I Roy Santos ......................................................................................................................... 13

1. Public Agency Clients ............................................................................................ 14
J. RESUMES ......................................................................................................................... l5
William W. Wynder ........................................................................................................... 15

J Roy C. Santos ..................................................................................................................... 16

Mily C. Huntley ................................................................................................................. 17
I Glen E. Tucker ................................................................................................................... 18
J Anita Luck ......................................................................................................................... 19

J K. Attorney Qualifications Chart ............................................................................................ 20

09999c0016/357111.1 I
!

.J
 PROPOSAL To PROVIDE CITY ATTORNEY SERVICES

A. INTRODUCTION TO THE FIRM -MANAGEMENT STRUCTURE

1. Philosophy Of The Firm- Why You Should Hire Us

A number of our attorneys have over 20 or even 30 years of public service, and
- 1 collectively our attorneys have worked for a majority of the major municipal law firms in
i
! Southern California. Individually and collectively, we love public service. We enjoy the
complexity and variety of issues, including unique areas of law such as land use, constitutional,
employment, and environmental law. We also enjoy the dynamic of the political process and
working with elected officials and professional staff who are similarly motivated to serve the
public. Above all, we have a deep appreciation for democratic values and processes at the local
l level.

In our years with other firms we came to conclude that none of them had the same vision
we did concerning how to provide legal services to municipalities at a reasonable cost. We found
that some small law firms had only one or two experienced practitioners without a group of
specialists who were able to handle the wide variety of their clients' legal needs. We also found
that the larger firms had high quality personnel and excellent specialists, but their increasing cost
structures forced them to push their rates up to unsustainable levels, or to represent private
developer clients whose interests were adverse to cities.

At A&W we have been successful in balancing these issues. We have established a clear
set of goals. We carefully seek out and hire high quality attorneys who enjoy what we do. And
with a great appreciation that our clients are stewards of public tax dollars, we pay careful
attention to the economics of our practice so that we can provide excellent services at a
reasonable cost.

l We have even found that our approach can be superior to an in-house operation where
specialized services are contracted out. We have priced our services so that our general services
are price-competitive with in-house services, and due to volume, we can price our specialized
services below what most outside firms charge for such services. Thus, we have replaced in-
house operations, reduced overall legal costs and increased accountability.

_j
I 2. Mission Statement

Our mission is to deliver to our clients the following (our seven critical values):
_j
I. Expertise: We are public law specialists, and our expertise encompasses virtually
all areas of law that may be presented to a public agency. For example, we have handled all the
legal affairs for full-service cities with their own police and fire departments, their own risk
J management and code enforcement, and with an airport, convention center, wastewater treatment
plant, cogeneration plant, and 36-hole golf course facilities.
I'
j
c
2. Accountability: Accountability means not only achieving a good result, but
doing so at a reasonable cost to the client. A case or transaction must be evaluated early. The
determination must be made if a litigation matter is winnable and at what cost. If a lawsuit must
be settled, then it should be settled early. If the client determines to "litigate," then we accept
responsibility to make sure our advice is clear and strategies are cost effective. Our clients have

09999.0016/357111.1 -1-

.J
 PROPOSAL TO PROVIDE CITY ATTORNEY SERVICES

rarely been surprised by the outcome of a lawsuit or outcome of a negotiation, either by the
results or the cost. In short, accountability requires management.

3. Cost Control: Cost control requires clear mechanisms for rece1vmg and
reporting on assignments, supervising the attorney work to prevent excessive time, using
paralegals on appropriate assignments, and cost recovery from developers whenever possible.
Another even more important measure is preventive counseling: identifYing issues which need to
be remedied before they tum into litigation, and handling disputes so they are resolved early and
by informal means.

4. Focus and Timeliness: We are not a large bureaucracy. Our attorneys enjoy a
collaborative working relationship with each other and with the clients of the Firm. Each client
is vital to us; we focus on their needs and no one gets "lost in the shuffle." We believe that, as a
medium size law firm, we can offer focus in lieu of bureaucracy, timeliness rather than delay,
and a consistent "team" of known attorneys rather than just a group of researchers.

5. Creativity: Focus makes us results-oriented. We view our legal services to be a

part of a problem-solving team. As members of that team, it is our obligation to be creative and
help find winning solutions, not simply give reasons why something can't be done.

6. Integrity and Impartiality: As participants in the democratic process and as

"officers of the court," we play a critical role in protecting the integrity of governmental decision
making. In many ways city/agency counsel acts as "umpire." The attorney must remain
independent, while at the same time being sensitive to the political process but not controlled by
it. The attorney must also make sure that the organization's procedures are fair for all.

7. Commitment: We are passionate about the practice of public law, and

committed to working as a member of the management team that assists elected and appointed
.!
officials in meeting the needs of each community. To demonstrate our commitment to our public
clients, we do not represent private clients in litigation against municipalities. We have no
divided loyalty.

Our commitment to the City organization is demonstrated by our ability to function as a

j part of the City team. This is done by being responsive to staff deadlines, being creative and
helpful, by anticipating difficulties and problems and being a "counselor," by not being
defensive and seeking to shift blame, by being honest and demonstrating integrity. Our
commitment to community is shown by taking an interest in the community, by being a
. J
participant in events and activities. We believe commitment, in all its varied forms, to be the
most critical element of our success.

B. QUALIFICATIONS OF THE FIRM

The Firm's public law practice includes all of the principal areas of public agency and
municipal law: contracts, planning and land use, Proposition 218 rate setting, law enforcement,
labor and personnel, utility issues, recycled water, water rights, LAFCO, public works and
! construction law including bidding, property acquisitions including condemnation,
.J
environmental review and compliance, hazardous waste, solid waste, franchises, elections, public
records, public meetings, conflicts of interest, parliamentary procedures, tort claims and
i
.I
09999.0016/357111.1 -2-
c I

PROPOSAL To PROVIDE CITY ATTORNEY SERVICES

insurance defense, special districts, annexations, ground water sustainability, constitutional law
including civil rights, public finance, and related areas oflaw.

In order to provide the full range of services needed by municipalities, we have organized
our practice into the following areas:

Public Law Real Property Acquisition and Disposition

Litigation including Appeals Law Enforcement and Nuisance Abatement
Labor and Employment Civil Rights and First Amendment
1I Land Use and Zoning Successor Agency and Housing
Conflicts of Interest and Elections Rent Control
Contracts and Public Construction Public Finance
Environmental and Taxies Condemnation
Franchising and Telecommunications Water Law
Police, Fire, Tort Claims and Mining
Governmental Immunity

We have attorneys specializing in all of the above practice areas.

We have been able to handle all civil rights cases for our public agency clients; personnel
issues for all our clients; labor negotiations; general plan revision programs; subdivision legal
issues; conflict of interest questions including interfacing with the FPPC; all public record
requests; adoption of city charters; franchising programs and utility undergrounding; all
condemnation cases for site assembly for redevelopment and housing projects; negotiation of
purchase, redevelopment and development agreements with developers; impact fee ordinances;
assessment districts and other public fmancing as well as municipal finance and Proposition 26
and 218 issues; cable television franchise ordinances; endangered species questions; CEQA
litigation; environmental cleanup and mining reclamation plans; trash contract renewals and AB
939 issues; construction contract disputes and litigation; community choice energy aggregation;
and similar matters.

We have special expertise in a number of practice areas critical to public agencies. With
respect to the "bread and butter" of public law practice, such as the Brown Act, Public Records
Act, Roberts Rules of Order, planning and land use, labor and employment, contracts and so
. J
forth, a majority of our attorneys commonly deal with these issues. However, we also have
specialization in the practice areas discussed in this section. Our belief is that each attorney must
develop a subject matter specialty in one or more areas.

c. INTRODUCTION TO THE TEAM

l The full team we propose consists of the following attorneys:

City Attorney .................................................................... William W. "Bill" Wynder

Assistant City Attorney .................................................... Roy C. Santos
Personnel ............................................................................ Mily Huntley
Litigation/Risk Management ........................................... Glen E. Tucker
Public Finance Counsel .................................................... Anita Luck

i
~J
09999.0016/357111.1 -3-
~l
'
PROPOSAL To PROVIDE CITY ATTORNEY SERVICES

All of the foregoing attorneys, and indeed all of the attorneys at the Firm, are properly
licensed to practice law in California. This team of public law professionals combines for over
I 00 years of experience and expertise in virtually every facet of municipal and redevelopment
l law. None of the attorneys has ever had a malpractice claim or been subject to a State Bar
complaint.
. l
We propose a team approach to providing the City's legal services. The City Attorney
will be fully involved in all matters but an assistant is also delegated to be principally involved
so that the client can always get a prompt definitive opinion. There are also specialists in areas
such as personnel and conflicts of interest who can directly address issues.

Moreover, the information requested by the RFP is detailed in the Table of Attorney
Qualifications attached hereto. We also have specialists in CEQA, condemnation,
telecommunications, and other areas which are shown in the Sununary of Qualifications in
. l se~tion IV below. We believe our "team" approach will assure the City that A& W can provide
j the full array oflegal services that you may require.

1. City Attorney - William Wynder

Mr. Wynder has specialized in the field of public law, public sector litigation and
constitutional torts, and labor and employment law for over 35 years. He recently returned to
full-time legal practice as a named partner of the Firm after completing a two-year
sabbatical.' He has served as City Attorney for the cities of Carson (II years) and Lawndale
(13 years), both located in Los Angeles County, Cypress (over 16 years), located in Orange
County, and as Assistant City Attorney for the cities of Signal Hill and Irwindale, located in
Los Angeles County, and the resort community of Palm Springs, located in Riverside County.
Bill has also served as General Counsel to the Palmdale Water District, located in northeastern
Los Angeles County, the Rossmoor Community Services District (I 0 years) located in
northwest Orange County. He has served as counsel to the Carson Mobilehome Park Rent
Review Board and the Palm Springs Rent Review Commission.

In addition to his City Attorney and General Counsel expertise, Bill has an active
litigation practice. While on sabbatical, he briefly returned to Southern California to argue an
i
I appeal involving the forced conversion of a Mobilehome Park in the City of Carson. This
dispute, spanning almost 13 years, and two trips to the Court of Appeals, involved an attempt
by this park owner to avoid the protections of the Carson Rent Control ordinance. In response
to Bill's arguments, the California Court of Appeals, in a published opinion reported at Carson
Harbor Village v. City of Carson (2015) 239 Cal.App.4th 56, acknowledged the error of its
prior opinion and ruled in favor of the City.

* While on sabbatical, Mr. Wynder served as Director of Historic Kirtland Visitors' Center, and related
sites, for The Chnrch of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. This 50 acre complex, located in Northeastern Ohio,
hosts some 75,000 visitors annually. There, Mr. Wynder supervised a staff of 50 docents in publically exhibiting
a "restored" Village of Kirtland, and he coordinated with the work of forensic archeologists, archivists, and site
restoration specialists in the Church's on-going historic site acquisition, provenance, and preservation activities in
this frontier community built in the 1830s.

09999.0016/357ll L1 -4-
I
. J
 PROPOSAL TO PROVIDE CITY ATTORNEY SERVICES

Mr. Wynder has extensive appellate experience and has acted as counsel in more than a
dozen published state and federal appellate decisions, including: 218 Properties, LLC v. City of
1 Carson (2014) 226 Cal.App.4th 182; Colony Cove Properties, LLC v. City of Carson (2013)
220 Cal.App.4th 840; Pacific Palisades Bowl Mobile Estates, LLC v. City of Los Angeles
(2012) 55 Cal.4th 783 (as amicus curiae); Colony Cove Properties, LLC v. City of Carson (9th
'l Cir. 2011) 640 F.3d 948; Colony Cove Properties, LLC v. City of Carson (2010) 187
' Cal.App.4th 1487; ElDorado Palm Springs, Ltd. v. City of Palm Springs, 96 Cal.App.4th 1153
(2002).

In Carson Redevelopment Agency v. Padilla (2006) 140 Cal.App.4th 1323, Mr. Wynder
succeeded in expanding the protections afforded taxpayers and every public agency in
California under Government Code 1090 (one of the State's important conflict of interest
statutes). Mr. Wynder protected the independence of local administrative agencies in Carson
Gardens, LLC v. City of Carson (2006) 135 Cal.App.4th 856. In two other important cases
affecting local governments in California, he succeeded in: (1) defending the authority of a
City Council to remove from office an elected City Clerk due to his lack of residency within
the city (Nicolopolus v. City of Lawndale (2001) 91 Cal.App.4th 221), and (2) persuading the
Court of Appeals that cities do not owe a "special duty" to warn visitors to their public parks of
the possible presence of gang members (Munoz v. City of Carson, Second Appellate District
(2013) Case No. B-237951). The national implications of the latter case were considered in a
January, 2014, issue of "Parks & Recreation" (www.nrna.org) in an article entitled, "Website
Invitation to 'Dangerous Park."')

Mr. Wynder is a 1978 cum laude graduate ofPepperdine University School of Law. He
served as Editor-in-Chief of the Pepperdine Law Review, and earned the "Best Advocate"
award in its prestigious Vincent S. Dalsimer Moot Court Competition. Following graduation,
he clerked for the Honorable Harry Phillips (dec.), Chief Judge of the Sixth Circuit of the
United States Court of Appeals. Mr. Wynder began his career in 1979 with the international
law firm of Latham & Watkins. He later joined the firm of Rutan & Tucker to work on the six-
year dispute between the City of Anaheim, the then-California Angels, and the then-Los
:
- j Angeles Rams over the rights and obligations of the parties in Anaheim Stadium. (See, Golden
West Baseball Co. v. City ofAnaheim (1994) 25 Cal.App.4th 11.)
1
I
.I 2. Assistant City Attorney- Roy C. Santos

Roy C. Santos is an Associate located in the Fresno office and is a member of the firm's
j Litigation, Public Safety, Code Enforcement and Labor and Employment Practice Groups. His
legal expertise is focused on all aspects of representing public agencies, including matters
involving land use, code enforcement, writ of mandate actions, habeas petitions, eminent
J domain, unlawful detainer, PBOR, FBOR, Pitchess, employment law, civil rights and the
Government Tort Claims Act.

Prior to joining A&W, Mr. Santos served as the City Attorney for Firebaugh, and as a
Deputy City Attorney for the cities of Coalinga, Clovis, Fowler, Reedley, Sanger, Parlier, and
Lemoore. He served as Deputy County Counsel for the County of Madera where he was the
J lead attorney responsible for litigation, code enforcement, Public Records Act requests, habeas
petitions and all legal matters relating to the Madera County Sheriffs Office, Department of

09999.0016/357111.1 -5-
 PROPOSAL To PROVIDE CITY ATTORNEY SERVICES

Corrections, Department of Probation and Animal Services. As a City Attorney and Deputy
City Attorney, Mr. Santos was the lead attorney responsible for code enforcement, subpoenas,
Public Records Act requests and writ petitions. Additionally, Mr. Santos was responsible for
the day to day advisory and transactional legal services of each city.

c l Mr. Santos' career and educational opportunities have provided him with a diversity of
i
valuable legal experience. He began his legal career in 200 I as a litigation paralegal for one of
the premier intellectual property and antitrust law firms on the west coast. Mr. Santos
continued his work as a paralegal while attending law school at the University of San
Francisco. After taking the bar in 2008, he was hired by that firm as a contract attorney to
work on a multi-million dollar carbon fiber antitrust law suit.

Mr. Santos has extensive experience managing all aspects of a case, from its inception
through trial. As part of his trial practice, Mr. Santos has defended and conducted depositions,
l prepared and argued pre-trial and post-trial motions and conducted negotiations, mediations
i
and arbitrations. He has also conducted bench and jury trials in both state and federal courts. In
addition to his trial practice, Mr. Santos has experience litigating numerous appeals, including
successfully advocating on behalf of his clients before the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals and
the California Court of Appeal, Fifth Appellate District.

Mr. Santos has also co-authored an article published in the ADC Defense Comment,
entitled "Qualified Immunity - Immunity with a Catch", that focused on immunity in federal
civil rights lawsuits, with regards to police officers' and their conduct.

3. Deputy, Personnel- Mily Huntley

Mily Huntley is a Senior Litigation Associate in the Los Angeles office. She specializes
in litigation, risk management, law enforcement and employment law. Her experience in
litigation includes the management of cases from inception through trial and/or resolution
through mediation and settlement in matters involving municipal tort liability, employment
. J
' litigation, civil rights, excessive force, and police search and seizure.

4. Deputy, Police/Risk Management - Glen E. Tucker

J
Glen E. Tucker is a Senior Partner in the Los Angeles Office. His practice includes
counseling, advising, and training various police departments and their officials on such varying
j subjects as police policy development, police policy field application, and departmental training
of officers and police administrators in litigation avoidance and police defense strategies. He is
an experienced litigator of such issues as excessive force, false arrest or imprisonment, federal
civil rights litigation, and police search and seizure issues.

Mr. Tucker's primary practice area focus has been on the defense of public entities,
J particularly police officers and their departments, in civil rights litigation. For over 20 years Mr.
Tucker served as special litigation counsel for the City of Palm Springs Risk Management
Department, litigating police cases and general liability matters. Mr. Tucker also handles cases
I
as a board-approved litigation counsel for the California Joint Powers Insurance Authority
J (CJPIA) and Public Entity Risk Management Authority (PERMA).

J
09999.0016/357111.1 -6-
- !
PROPOSAL TO PROVIDE CITY ATTORNEY SERVICES

.!
Mr. Tucker's practice includes the composition of police policy manuals and the analysis
of existing manuals for his client police departments. This function is then illustrated and
1 presented in roll-call sessions with police officers and police administrators.

5. Deputy, Public Finance -Anita Luck

l Anita Luck is a Partner with the Firm specializing in municipal finance law in addition to
I
her general municipal law, land use and successor agency to redevelopment law practice. Ms.
Luck advises public agencies on the formation of special districts, assessment districts, and
l community facilities districts, the adoption of special taxes, assessments, development fees and
other innovative fees to assist cities in financing projects. Ms. Luck was involved in forming one
of the first community facilities districts to finance ongoing hazardous site maintenance on an
old landfill being developed in the City of Carson. Ms. Luck is knowledgeable on election
issues, issues relating to Proposition 218 and Proposition 26. Ms. Luck has participated in bond
financings for assessment districts and community facilities districts.

D. WORKING RELATIONSHIPS

The City Attorney's client is the City itself, but he or she is appointed by and works at the
pleasure of the City Council. In most cities the only other city employee in this category is the
City Administrator. Each of these employees has an independent responsibility to the City
Council. The basic duty is to implement the policy directives of the Council as a whole and to
keep the Council informed as to the things the Council would expect to know.

All Council members must be treated with equal respect and responsiveness,
- j
notwithstanding their sometimes differing goals and objectives. The City Attorney should be
well briefed on the goals and programs of the City. Communication from the City Attorney to
the City Council must always be clear, direct, succinct and honest.

Although the City Attorney is employed by the Council, in our experience, except in the
case of extremely active Council members, there is generally little day-to-day contact with
Council members outside of Council meetings. The implementation of Council policy takes
place through the City Administrator/City Attorney relationship. The City Attorney is a
cooperative member of the management team and provides the necessary legal expertise to
implement the goals and policies of the City, as approved and directed by the City Council.
I
I
Our practice is to provide legal opinions that are based solely on the merits of the issue
. J
presented without regard to the impact that such legal advice may have on any particular agenda.
By giving independent advice, and staying outside the political fray, we have found that our
integrity can become an important source of guidance in difficult situations.

Wherever possible, our advice includes a discussion of a range of options available to the
l City Council, together with our evaluation of the strengths and weaknesses of each of the options
.J
presented. Where a Council struggles for consensus and our legal analysis of the legal options
will present a possible basis for consensus, we have so advised the Council; when invited, we
J like to find solutions which result in consensus building.

_]

09999.0016/357111.1 -7-
I
~J
~l

PROPOSAL To PROVIDE CITY ATTORNEY SERVICES

E. MALPRACTICE

~l
All of the foregoing attorneys, and indeed all of the attorneys at the Firm, are properly
I
licensed to practice law in California. None of our attorneys has ever had a malpractice claim or
been subject to a State Bar discipline or complaint.

F. OFFICE HOURS AND LOCATION(S)

The Firm has four offices as noted below. The Firm's Central Valley & El Segundo
offices will take the lead in providing legal services to the City. As the Firm has a fully
integrated, document management, email and phone system, all of the our attorneys are readily
available in any of our office locations, and we will provide the City with the appropriately
qualified attorney for the legal task at hand regardless of office location.

Our normal Firm office hours are 8:30 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. Monday through Friday. As a
general rule there are attorneys in the office from 7:30 a.m. until at least 6:30 p.m. most days.
When our clients' needs dictate it, we work weekends. Meeting the clients' needs is our
principal goal.

Main Office Los Angeles Central Valley Inland Empire

18881 Von Karman Ave. 2361 Rosecrans Ave. 2125 Kern Street, 3880 Lemon Street,
Suite 1700 Suite 475 Suite 307 Suite 520
Irvine, CA 92612 E1 Segundo, CA 90245 Fresno, CA 93 721 Riverside, CA 92501
(949) 223-1170 (310) 527-6660 (559) 445-1580 (951) 241-7338

G. TIMELINESS AND RESPONSE TIMEFRAMES

Our practice is to respond to inquiries and requests for opinions within the times specified
by the City Council or staff. Telephone calls from Councilmembers or the City Manager should
be returned immediately but at least the same half-day, and those from Department Heads should
!

J be returned in the same day. Given the varied complexity oflegal questions confronting the City
and the relative importance of the particular issue to the City, it is difficult to establish a standard
time for written memoranda but our general standard is to respond within two weeks unless other
J deadlines are specified.

We work as quickly and thoroughly as necessary to respond to the needs of the City
within the timeframes demanded. Often, staff or agenda deadlines will create the need to
respond within hours or days, and we accept the need to respond immediately when needed.
However, this may cause other assignments to be bumped. Flexibility is critical with the
ultimate priority set by the City Manager.

i Response time is one of our strengths. In order to maintain high quality and timeliness of
~j service, we are careful to make sure that no one attorney has so many city client assignments that
it interferes with giving prompt attention to any one client. Each client must be treated as
number one. As such, we have carefully selected the proposed team of attorneys. One of the
practices we have found useful is to have a primary backup attorney who focuses on the City and

J
09999.0016/357111.1 -8-
 PROPOSAL To PROVIDE CITY ATTORNEY SERVICES

gains sufficient experience that they are able to promptly respond to issues without direct
supervision by the City Attorney .
. !
In addition, because we have an aggregation of specialists with a high degree of
expertise, it is often possible to obtain answers without the necessity for extensive research.
Attorneys who practice exclusively in a field such as personnel or environmental law for a
number of years often address similar issues over and over again. Generally, they are intimately
familiar with statutes and case law which deal with their area of expertise.

All the firms responding to this RFP will say they have adequate systems to assume
responsiveness. How do you assure this? We suggest that the best measure is the satisfaction of
our existing clients with our responsiveness: day-in day-out, large projects and small, making
agenda deadlines, handling litigation. The fact that we have represented two cities for over 35
years (Lawndale and Signal Hill) should be testimony to this, but if this is not sufficient, we
suggest that you talk to these cities and our other clients directly.

H. COMPENSATION AND REIMBURSEMENT

A& W generally charges fees on an hourly basis for all time actually expended on behalf
of a client, usually in a "blended rate" formula that provides a deep discount of our hourly rates
because of the potential volume of work. These rates are typically discounted further for an
agreed-upon number of hours per month of basic "general counsel" services. This extra discount
for a fixed number of hours substitutes for a fixed retainer, without the risks that the City will be
overcharged when a minimal number of hours is required or that the Firm will be under-
compensated when there is a demand for services beyond the expected level.

1. Fee Proposal

Services Hourly Rate

General Services 1st year (1 ' 1 60 hours) $165/per hour for I st year
General Services 2n" year (1st 40 hours) $175/per hour after 1' 1 year
Remaining General Services $185/per hour I st year then $195
Risk Management/Code Enforcement $185/per hour
Special Services (Partners) $245/per hour
Special Services (Associates) $205/per hour
Public Finance $300/ per hour
j Paralegals & Law Clerks $105/per hour 1'1 year then $115
Document Clerks $50/per hour 1" year then $60
Reimbursable Legal Fees (paid by 3rd $275/per hour
j party)

This proposed fee structure would remain in effect until July 1, 2019 and thereafter until
amended by the City Council.

___ j

09999.0016/357111.1 -9-

.I
 PROPOSAL To PROVIDE CITY ATTORNEY SERVICES
c l

! 2. General Services

With respect to "general counsel" or "basic" legal services, we propose discounting the
first 60 hours per month of legal services by charging a blended rate of $165 per hour for such
services, which means the hourly rate would be the same irrespective of the attorney performing
' 1 the services. For hours of general legal services rendered above 60 hours per month, we would
bill the City at the blended rate of $185 per hour during the first year.

c l We are giving a high number of discounted hours in the first year of an engagement
i
because our experience is that extra time is spent in the transition year. We propose that in the
second year of an engagement the discounted hours are reduced from 60 hours to 40 and the rate
goes from $165 to $175. Hours about 40 in the second year for general services go from $185 to
$195.

3. Special Services or "Extraordinary Services"

With respect to or "special" or extraordinary legal services, again, we generally include as

specialized services everything specified in the RFP including:

(a) Litigation and litigation support on behalf of the City and its related entities
including the Successor Agency;
(b) All matters involving the Successor Agency or any housing agency including
audits, ROPS statements, meet and conferring with DOF, legal challenges,
disposition of property and all other matters;
(c) All legal work concerning property acquisitions, condemnation, forfeiture and
foreclosure, easements, covenants and restrictions and other related matters;
(d) Support enforcement of City codes, zoning regulations and building standards
through administrative, quasi -judicial and judicial actions;
(e) Public finance matters including assessment districts, bond financing and other
similar maters;
I (f) Personnel and disciplinary matters and labor relations matters, including advising
on discipline, representation at hearings, revising personnel rules, negotiating and
drafting MOUs, advising on litigation, impasse procedures and related matters;
(g) Franchising operations, public utility representation and related matters where
legal services can be charged to the entity; and
(h) Cost reimbursement from developers for specialized services.
,J
I
For specialized services, we would generally charge such services at $205 per hour for
associates and $245 for partoers, with the following caveats:

(a) For risk management matters and code enforcement where outside counsel rates
are generally lower than standard litigation, we would charge $185 per hour;
J'
(b) For public finance, we have an hourly or contingent fee option discussed below;
and
(c) For our legal services to be reimbursed by a third party, our rate is $275 per hour.

We emphasize that the foregoing is a proposal, and we would be happy to discuss alternate
arrangements.

09999.0016/357111.1 -10-
 PROPOSAL To PROVIDE CITY ATTORNEY SERVICES

4. Reimbursement And Travel

Ordinarily, we do not charge travel time to and from City Hall for Council meetings or to
conduct office hours (when requested). Carmel-by-the-Sea presents unique travel requirements
to the Firm. We note you have one regularly scheduled City Council meeting a month. We have
< 1 also observed that the City holds a fair number of special City Council meetings in addition to
your regular monthly meeting, although we do not have a clear indication of the frequency of
these special meetings on an armualized basis.

We further understand that Closed Sessions, when needed, are held the day before the
regular City Council meeting and following what we understand are "tours of inspection." If it
is anticipated that we would be personally present at any Closed Session and every City Council
meeting, that would mean a minimum of two (2) trips a month to City Hall (once for Closed
Session and again for City Council meeting) .
. I
i For the first year of our engagement, we are willing to follow our customary practice of
not charging for travel time or travel expense to and from City Hall. In year two of the contract,
we would not charge travel time or travel expense for attendance at the regular monthly City
Council meeting. Other travel to and from City Hall would be bill and reimbursed to the Firm.

The Firm may also incur various other costs and expenses in performing legal services.
These costs and expenses are separately billed to the client and include fees fixed by law or
assessed by public agencies, litigation costs including deposition, reporter fees, and transcript
fees, long distance telephone calls, messenger and other delivery fees, postage, photocopying
(charge of twenty cents ($.20) per page) and other reproduction costs, staff overtime when
necessitated and authorized by the client, and computer-assisted research fees when authorized
by the client, all based on the actual and reasonable cost (mileage, reproduction and other costs
are periodically adjusted in accordance with the Firm's actual costs).

Travel costs including mileage (current IRS rate), parking, airfare, lodging, meals, and
incidentals are charged in connection with administrative or judicial proceedings. Travel time
may also be charged in connection with such administrative or judicial proceedings. In addition,
the client will be responsible for paying the fees of consultants and other outside experts who are
retained after consultation with the client.

I
5. Training
.J
We propose to charge our normal rates for any City requested training activities, but have
I
often worked out a reduced fixed fee for such training as AB-1234 compliance. Often we have
.J prepared materials and do not need to charge for the preparation of any requested training .

Ill
cJ
Ill
j Ill
I Ill
j
09999.0016/3571!1.1 -11-

J
 PROPOSAL To PROVIDE CITY ATTORNEY SERVICES

cl I. REFERENCES

WILLIAM W.WYNDER
. .

cl Mr. Peter Grant, City Manager Mr. Doug Danes,

CITY OF CYPRESS Director of Public Works & Community
(714) 229-6688 Development,
Qgrant@cyJ2ress.ca.org CITY OF CYPRESS
(714) 229-6744
ddancs@cYJ2ress.ca.org

Mr. Doug Bailey, Mayor Albert Robles, Esq.,

Former Mayor, City of Cypress CITY OF CARSON
RBC WEALTH MANAGEMENT (562) 234--070
(562) 799-7574 aro bleslalcarson.ca. us
doug.bailey@rbc.com

Mariellen Y arc, Councilmember Mr. David Biggs, City Manager

CITY OF CYPRESS CITY OF HERCULES
(714) 813-7970 Former Carson City Manager
myarcialcYJ2ress.ca.org (310) 350-4432
dbiggs@ci.hercules.ca.us

I
.~
Mr. Dennis D. LaMoreaux
General Manager
PALMDALE WATER DISTRICT
(661) 947-4111
dlamoreaux@Qalmdalewater.org

i
. I

09999.0016/357111.1 -12-
 PROPOSAL TO PROVIDE CITY ATTORNEY SERVICES

ROY SANTOS

c 1 Ben Gallegos, City Manager John Holt, Assistant City Manager

City of Firebaugh City of Clovis
(559) 659-2043 (559) 324-2060
bgallegos@ci.firebaugh.ca.us johnb@ci.clovis.ca. us

Michael Salvador, Chief of Police Steven Adams, City Manager

Coalinga Police Department King City
(559) 935-2313 (831)385-3281
msalvador@coalinga.com sadamslalkingcity.com

'
-]

09999.0016/357111.1 -13-
l' PROPOSAL TO PROVIDE CITY ATTORNEY SERVICES

1. Public Agency Clients

~1
I

c 1

l
''

'l

J
J
J
09999.0016/357111.1 -14-
J
.. 1
PROPOSAL To PROVIDE CITY ATTORNEY SERVICES

J. RESUMES

. l WILLIAMW. WYNDER

.. l Admissions State Bar of California, 1978. Bar No. 84753

I U.S. Supreme Court
United States Tax Court
1 U.S. Court of Appeals, Sixth & Ninth Circuits
U.S. District Courts, Central & Eastern Districts ofCa1ifornia

l Legal Expertise Contracts & Public Works Elections

Labor & Employment Land Use & Zoning
Litigation Public Agency Organization
Risk Management & Torts
Mobilehome Parks & Rent Control

Education JD, Pepperdine University, School of Law 1978

Cum laude; Editor in Chief, Law Review
BS, University of Utah, Magna cum laude 1975

Offices City Attorney/General Counsel

City of Carson (2003- 2014)
City of Cypress (1997- 2014)
City of Lawndale (1994- 2007)
City of Palm Springs (Chief Litigation City (1990-2005)
1I Attorney)
.I Rossmoor Community County Services District (1992 - 2003)
Palmdale Water District (2013 -2015)
Assistant City Attorney
j City of Irwindale (1990 -1999)
City of Signal Hill (1990 - 1999)
i
J Employment Equity Partner, Aleshire & Wynder, LLP (2003 -present)
Partner, Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP (200 1 - 2003)
Partner, Rutan & Tucker, LLP (1986- 2001)
Associate, Latham & Watkins, LLP (1979 -1985)
Law Clerk, Honorable Harry Phillips (1978 -1979)
I
. J
Professional Associations and Presentations
Orange County Bar Association, Labor Law & Litigation Sections

09999.0016/357111.1 -15-
 PROPOSAL To PROVIDE CITY ATTORNEY SERVICES

! '

ROY C. SANTOS

cl
Admissions California, 2008
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California
l U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California

c 1 Legal Exnertise Litigation Labor & Employment

Public Safety Risk Management & Torts
Local Government Medical/Recreational
Marijuana
Code Enforcement

Education
JD, University of San Francisco School of Law 2008
BA, University of California, Davis 200 I

Emnloyment
Associate, Aleshire & Wynder, LLP 2016
. 1
'
Associate, Lozano Smith, LLP 2014-2016
Associate, Weakley & Arendt, LLP 2009-2014
Black Letter Discovery 2008-2009
Law Student Assistant, USF Intellectual Property 2008
Clinic
Law Clerk, Office of the District Attorney San 2007-2008
'
I Francisco
. J Litigation Paralegal, Townsend, Townsend, & 2001-2006
Crew,LLP

J Professional Associations
Fresno Bar Association
] Federal Bar Association
J La Raza Lawyers, Central Valley Chapter
I

i
,J

09999.0016/357111.1 -16-
'
J
 PROPOSAL To PROVIDE CITY ATTORNEY SERVICES

l
MILY C. HUNTLEY

Admissions State of California, 2004

U.S. District Court, Central and Northern Districts
U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit

Legal Expertise Personnel Litigation

Education Risk Management & Torts
Law Enforcement

Education JD, Pepperdine University School of Law 2004

BS, Cornell University 1998

Employment Sr. Associate, Aleshire & Wynder, LLP (2010- present)

Research Attorney, Superior Court of California, 2009-2010
County of Los Angeles
Associate, Fagen, Friedman & Fulfrost, LLP 2007-2008
Associate, Gibeaut, Mahan & Briscoe 2004-2007

Professional Associations and Presentations

I Black Women Lawyers Association of Los Angeles

j Langston Bar Association
Beverly Hills Bar Association

Foreign Language
Spanish

.J

_I

J
'j
J
I
_I
09999.0016/357111.1 -17-
' l
!

PROPOSAL To PROVIDE CITY ATTORNEY SERVICES

GLEN E. TUCKER

Admissions
State Bar of California, 1972. Bar No. 54 709
, I
U.S. District Court, Central District of California, 1972
U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit, 1989
' l
U.S. Supreme Court, 1993

Legal Expertise
.I Litigation
Public Safety
i Risk Management/Torts

Education
JD, Southwestern University School of Law 1972
BA, Loyola Marymount, Los Angeles 1966
California Secondary Life Teaching Credential 1968

Employment
Aleshire & Wynder, LLP (2003 -present)
Law Offices of Glen E. Tucker (1992- 2003)
Clausen, Harris, and Campbell, Los Angeles (1983 -1991)

Professional
Associations P.O.S.T. (Peace Officer Standards and Training) Certified Instructor
(2001 -present)
Instructor El Camino College, Torrance, California (1973 -1981)
Arbitrator, Los Angeles Superior Court and Riverside Superior Court
'J
Hearing Officer, City of Newport Beach
Judge Pro-Tem, Los Angeles Superior Court
City of Manhattan Beach Zoning Commission
Manhattan Beach Little League President
Los Angeles County Bar Association (1972- present)

' J

'J
!
I

.J
09999.0016/35711 u -18-
I

J
 PROPOSAL To PROVIDE CITY ATTORNEY SERVICES

ANITA LUCK

c l

Admissions
State of California, 1998. Bar No. 198634
1 U.S. District Court, Central District of California

-, Legal Exl!ertise
Municipal Finance* Contracts & Public Works
I Elections Economic Development
Housing Ethics & Open Government
Public Agency Organization Land Use I Zoning
Proposition 218
Water/Wastewater
I
I
I

Education
JD, Loyola Law School 1998
BA, University of CA, Santa Barbara 1990

Eml!loyment
Partner, Aleshire & Wynder, LLP (2008 -present)
Associate, Kutak Rock, LLP, Pasadena (1999- 2002)
Extern, United States District Court (1998)

Offices Assistant City Attorney

City of Perris (2005- 2014)

Professional Associations
National Association of Bond Lawyers
Committee on Special Taxes, Assessments and other Financing
Facilities
1
.J
Presentations Proposition 218 Rate Conference (January 2015)
California Special Districts' Association Conference -Navigating IRS
and State Controller and SEC Audits/Investigations (September
2015)

J
09999.0016/357111.1 -19-

J
L _____ _ L_ '-
[_ ____ - ~- L---- L .. _, __ _j ~j j _j _j

PROPOSAL To PROVIDE CITY ATTORNEY SERVICES

K. Attorney Qualifications Chart

JD 1975 UCLA Law School Bell('!!-) Lawndale ('78-83)

David J. Aleshire MA 1976 UCLA, Urban Planning 40 Signal Hill ('85- ) Signal Hill ('78-85)
BA 1972 Stanford University, Phi Beta Kappa Banning ('08-15) Irvine ('86-89)
Rancho Palos Verdes Cl5-) Cerritos ('78-85)
Suisun City ('09-11) Norwalk ('78-85)
Irwindale ('96-03, '06-07) San Dimas ('78-85)
Lawndale ('83-95)
Palm Springs ('90-05)
Perris ('00-02)

JD 1978 University of Southern California Menifee ('12-14) Fontana ('92-97) Los Osos CSD ('05-08)
Julie Biggs MSEd 1970 University of Southern California 38 Colton ('93-97) Corona ('92-97) Tri-City Healthcare District ('09-10)
MA 1969 University of Southern California Hemet ('98-06) Glendora ('98-00) Jurupa CSD ('07-11)
BA 1966 University of Southern California, cum laude Laguna Woods ('98-06) City of Elk Grove ('06-10)
Goleta ('02-08) City ofOjai ('08-10)
Banning ('04-08)

Rancho Palos Verdes ('15-)

09999.0016/357111.1 -20-
L __ L. L__ L__ -~J .~ J _j

PROPOSAL To PROVIDE CITY ATTORNEY SERVICES

Eric Dunn JD

BA 1989

Carson ('03-10)
StThomas Moore Law Honor Society 21
Cal State University, Northridge,
BA 1992 Rialto ('14-) Irwindale ('96-03) Orange County Council ofGov'ts ('01-)
Dean's List
Lynwood ('08-'14) Irvine ('97-01)

JD 2003 Carson ('15-)

Elena Gerli

JD 2000 Boston College Irwindale (' 14- ) Community Dev Comm LA County
Adrian Guerra
BS 1996 University of Southern California 16 La Canada-Flintridge ('01-) Housing Authority LA County ('01-'09)
magna cum laude Cerritos ('01-14)
San Dimas ('01-)
Huntington Park ('0 1-03)

Citv Prosecutor
City ofLompoc

09999.0016/357111.1 -21-
:~-~ L __ -~ ~

PROPOSAL To PROVIDE CITY ATTORNEY SERVICES

1993 University of Southern California 20 Palm Springs ('03-05) Lawndale Housing Authority ('07-)
cum laude Special Counsel: Newport Beach ('07- )

(Banning ('15-)

Rialto
Cerritos (' 14- ) ('10-12)
BA 2002 UCLA, Phi Beta Kappa, magna cum laude Irwindale ('09-14) Deputv City Prosecutor:
Yucca Valley ('09-14) Cypress ('07-14)
Lynwood ('09-14) Lynwood ('09-'14)

JD 1998 Loyola Law School Perris ('05-14)

Anita Luck

JD 2007 University of Southern California 9 Fillmore ('14-)

JeffMalawy
BA 2004 University ofCA, Berkeley Hesperia (' I 0- )
BS 2004 University ofCA, Berkeley Lompoc(' 14-)

JD 2014 UCLA
Joshua Min 2

Carson(' 15-)
Chris Neumeyer

09999.0016/357111.1 -22-
 -'--
____ ___) J

PROPOSAL To PROVIDE CITY ATTORNEY SERVICES

JD 1980 Loyola Law School Lompoc ('09-) Baldwin Park ('03-07) Special Counsel:
Joseph Pannone 36
AmJur Award 1979 Morro Bay (' 14- ) Bellflower ('03-07) Culver City ('90-91; 92-)
BA 1976 Loyola Marymount Bellflower ('08-15) Culver City ('80-86) Santa Maria (' 12- )
Baldwin Park ('08-13) Mammoth Lakes ('07-12)
Palos Verdes ('08-1 0)
So. Pasadena ('98-03)
Culver City ('86-90; '91-

29

JD 2000 Loyola Law School, St Thomas More Law Bell ('12-'15), Carson ('11- Chief Litigator, Signal Hill Eminent
16 Carson(' 14-)
Honor Society, Order ofthe Coif, cum laude 14) Domain
Carson Rent Control, Review Indian Springs Mobile Home Park ('06-)
BA 1997 UCLA, With Honors and Great Distinction Board ('06- ), Signal Hill Palisades Bowl Mobile Home Park ('09-
('10-'11) )
City of Chino
Spec Litigation Counsel, Palm Desert

09999.0016/35711l.l -23-
~
L_ L_~ '---~ ___ __) _j __j

PROPOSAL To PROVIDE CITY ATTORNEY SERVICES

Community Dev Comm LA County

JD 2000 University of Southern California 16 Cypress (20 14- ) Suisun City ('09-11)
Anthony Taylor
Moot Court Honors Suisun City (20 II- )
BA 1997 University of Southern California Banning (2015-16)
summa cum laude
Class Valedictorian, School of

Brian Wright- JD 2014

magna cum laude
Bushman
MA 2010 University of Notre Dame
Cal State Polytechnic Univ, San Luis Obispo
BA 2008

m 10"70
Carson ('03-14) Rossmoor CSD ('92-03)
William Wynder
v-raauacea cum tauae Cypress ('97-14) Palmdale Water District ('13-'15)
Editor in Chief Pepperdine Law Review Lawndale ('94-07)
Best Advocate Dalsimer Moot Court

Nick Yeager JD 2015 University of CA, Irvine

BA 2011

09999~0016/357lll.l -24-