City Attorney Jeff Taraday of Lighthouse Law Group

The Edmonds City Council Tuesday night began the process of reviewing the performance of its contracted city attorney, Lighthouse Law Group.

Councilmember Tom Mesaros, who has been leading the review, noted that the effort was unique compared to other performance reviews the city does. For starters, the exercise is conducted publicly (as opposed to a private personnel review) due to the contractural relationship between Lighthouse and the city. And since the review is done only when the firm’s four-year contract is up for renewal, Lighthouse isn’t receiving regular feedback at other times about its performance. Finally, Mesaros noted that the firm reports to the City Council as a body, meaning there is no one individual assigned as a point of contact to troubleshoot issues that arise.

The evaluation summary document shared with the council Tuesday night included preliminary ratings, using a scale of 1 to 7, from councilmembers, the mayor and city staff. Mesaros noted that most of the scores rating Lighthouse’s performance were above average, “with only one or two that were below 4. In general, a positive response,” he said.

However, three of the 13 people responding the survey did not fill it out correctly, in some cases answering the questions with a yes or no rather than a numerical rating. As a result of this, Mesaros agreed to go back to two of those three respondents (the third was anonymous) and ask them to redo their surveys to comply with the instructions. Including those additional numerical responses may change the overall ratings, he noted.

When the Lighthouse Law Group first signed a four-year contract with the City of Edmonds in 2011, it agreed to provide city attorney services for a flat rate of $32,000 per month, with no adjustments for additional work. That was in contrast to the former city attorney Ogden Murphy Wallace, which charged a monthly retainer of $37,000 plus additional billing for litigation.

In 2015, Lighthouse asked for a 28% fee increase — to $41,000 monthly starting in 2015, with 4% increases each year for 2016, 2017 and 2018. For its next four-year contract, Lighthouse has proposed a flat fee of $47,964 per month or $575,538 per year.

Given an opportunity to respond to the review process so far, Lighthouse Law Group attorney Jeff Taraday called it “frustrating” to have feedback provided only when the firm’s contract is up for renewal, suggesting it would be more productive to establish more frequent reviews. Taraday also noted that two of the city’s former department directors — Carrie Hite and Mary Ann Hardie — did not submit feedback as part of the review. That’s “particularly significant,” Taraday said, because issues in those two directors’ departments — Parks and Recreation and Human Resources, respectively — were major components of Lighthouse’s workload during the review period.

Taraday noted that the firm’s scores were lower “in the area of timeliness,”  adding that one of the factors influencing the firm’s response time is available “resource” — or financial compensation from the city. During the firm’s latest annual report to the city, when the total number of hours Lighthouse worked was divided by the city fees it receives, it came out to $141 an hour, “which by any legal standard is a screaming deal for the city,” he said.

“We’re working really, really hard for the City of Edmonds right now,” Taraday added, “and if we aren’t turning things around fast enough then we should have a conversation about resource.”

Acknowledging Taraday’s concern about the directors’ responses that are lacking, Mesaros said he would attempt to secure reviews from Hite and Hardie, in addition to requesting methodology corrections from the two individuals mentioned earlier. The hope is to have that additional information available by next week’s council meeting for further discussion, he said.

Also on Tuesday night, the council heard a report from members of the Edmonds Planning Board, who attended to share information on their activities and future work. The all-volunteer, seven-member board advises the city in regional and local planning, and assists in the development of the comprehensive plan and zoning ordinances. The board also advises the mayor and city council on the acquisition and development of all city parks and recreation facilities.

A major topic of conversation between the two groups was related to the possible role that detached accessory dwelling units could play in addressing housing affordability by allowing residents to “age in place” in their homes. An accessory dwelling unit is a separate living space on the same property as an existing home. Those that are attached to an existing house (like a mother-in-law apartment) are allowed in Edmonds, while those that are detached from the home (such as a separate cottage) are not.

While councilmembers indicated they would like to eventually have the planning board take a closer look at detached accessory dwelling units, they would prefer that the newly formed Edmonds Citizens Housing Commission — which has its first meeting this Thursday, Sept. 26 —  first weigh in on the topic.

— By Teresa Wippel