Would I have got profit by going to law school?
By Gail Paparian
For the Record Gazette
Yup ... I shoulda gone
to law school. Back when I was a kid, I yearned to be a lawyer. I craved to
overturn social and environmental injustice. I itched to beat the bad guys
and send them away forever. Today, it's kind of hard to tell the good guys
from the bad without a scorecard, and even then it is difficult.
I have a friend who keeps an attorney on retainer. One day I needed some
legal advice, so I asked him the name of the firm. “Dewey,
Cheatem and Howe,” he told me. I never asked
this friend for a legal recommendation again!
About thirty-five years ago, my eldest stepson was attending law school. He
was bright-eyed and enthusiastic and wanted to save the world. He would
visit his father and me and proclaim with enthusiasm, “The law can work for
you,” as he would charge off to right a wrong or chase an ambulance. I
really can't remember which one!
I see him every once in a while on the L.A. news. Judging by his $3,000 and
up suits, the practice of law must be going well for him. I sense that he
has kept his billing clock in good working order.
The other night, I was watching the Banning City Council meeting. Several
council members pulled items from the “consent agenda.” The consent agenda
to me is where things are run through in a hurry and out of the scrutiny of
the public. Sometimes council members pull the items for further explanation
or to express their pleasure or displeasure; depending upon the subject
matter.
This evening, Councilmember Botts pulled a consent item. He explained that
he looked at the warrants in each agenda packet. (I don't believe the public
gets to see these, even though we help finance them). He explained that many
of them are usual and sometimes just plain boring. Warrants are the monies
paid out.
For quite some time, he
mentioned, he had been noting the high fees of the city's firm of attorneys:
Burke, Williams and Sorensen. The billing was for $197,000. No, said City
Treasurer Dr. John McQuown, that $197,000 wasn't an annual bill ... it was
for a month!
Hello ....
this is Banning, not Beverly Hills. Our main
thoroughfare is Ramsey Street not Rodeo Drive. Yet our attorneys' billing
rate multiplies out $2,364,000 a year! I have also repeatedly heard that the
city's barristers bill is about $1.3 million
annually, which isn't chump change either.
What's going on in Banning that requires millions
of dollars of legal advice annually? Is pressure being put on these folks to
put billing over the client's interest? I know of city employees who shudder
at the thought of the attorneys getting involved as the clock will tick and
months will go by without a product coming forth.
A couple of years ago, I served on the Arts in
Public Places committee to see how to bring this successful program to
Banning. The committee received little or no enthusiasm from a former staff
person.
We toured the wonderful Palm Desert program and
became really enthusiastic. We asked the employee to only get us
“bullet-proof” ordinances from other cities - bullet-proof in that they had
withstood legal challenges and succeeded. We thought we would be safe with
any of these model ordinances. It was not to be.
Once sent into the vast void of
attorneydom, five or so months went by and the
bullet-proof ordinance had been altered to a boiler-plate-type-thing that a
novice could download from the Internet and had nothing to do with what we
submitted. I wonder how much the fee was ...
Some members of that council had no idea what Art
in Public Places really was or would try to accomplish. Instead of putting
the fees on the developers, which EVERY other city had done; this council
wanted to “seed it” with $300,000 of general fund money. Oh my! It died a
quiet death. I wonder what happened to that money.
Speaking of money... The council had previously
approved $97,000 to Godbe Research to poll
Banning residents to see how we wanted to tax ourselves. That was just for
the questions. They came to the council meeting asking for another $47,000
to do the “education” phase of the campaign. The council is taking it under
advisement.
The reason residents are being polled is because
Banning's finance director Bonnie Johnson has
said if we didn't get more revenue in, our reserves would be compromised and
we could be swimming in a sea of red ink.
I wonder whether the same due diligence is being
exercised to see whether the city's expenditures are as fiscally responsible
as they can be? Before we get taxed, are there any cuts that can be made?
Gee, I wonder where we could start.
This November, three council member's terms come
to an end. They are Barbara Hanna, John Machisic and Brenda Salas. I have
heard that Hanna and Machisic are running again. What I haven't heard is -
is anybody in the community going to step up to the plate and run for
office.
I have also heard that once again a petition is
circulating to divide the small city of Banning into districts. I believe
their intent is that only one person could run from each district. That
would probably be fine if there were qualified and desirous candidates
running from each district. Instead, I believe the reason for this
ill-conceived venture is to silence Sun Lakes into one district. This was
promoted last time by Bill Franklin and Debbie Franklin.
I think this is as terrible an idea as it was when
it was first floated. I cannot think of anything that would divide the
community more. Instead of trying to silence Sun Lakers; why not use them as
a shining example of voter participation and voter turnout.
Use Sun Lakes as a stellar
example of encouraging voter turnout in every quadrant of the city.
If you want to have the power, register voters, then educate them,
then have them vote. If you don't like who is in
office - and that's from the local to state and federal levels - there's a
real simple solution: VOTE THEM OUT!
I cannot image that I will find myself in any
legal jeopardy because I have brought up points that are public knowledge
and should concern the citizens of Banning. If I do, dear readers and
friends, I will let you know how and where I mount my legal defense fund.
Something to ponder: I wonder what attorneys were
doing with their billing clocks when we went into daylight savings time last
Sunday. If one wound the clock forward (spring back), then realized they had
made a mistake (and fell forward); would this neutralize any billing?
Should one have an answer, I promise to publish it
in the future.
Gail and her husband Bill Paparian created a
service called Writing Solutions in 1996. Gail has also written for a number
of local and national magazines and newspapers over the years.
Currently, she provides public relations
consulting services for the Banning Unified School District. She can be
reached at
info@WritingSolutions.com.
Print this story
