Nuance Communications, Inc.

Transcription

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
6.
COMPANY BACKGROUND AND REFERENCES ....................................................................................................... 1
6.1
Primary Contractor Information ........................................................................................................................ 1
Burke Background and History, and Why Burke is Qualified to be San Clemente’s City
Attorney ............................................................................................................................................................................... 2
Litigation .............................................................................................................................................................................. 5
Labor and Employment .................................................................................................................................................. 5
Resumes of Key Staff ........................................................................................................................................................ 5
6.2 City Attorney Resume ............................................................................................................................................... 6
Proposed City Attorney - Ruben Duran .......................................................................................................... 6
Proposed Assistant City Attorney – Stephen A. McEwen ......................................................................... 9
6.1
Subcontractor Information ................................................................................................................................. 9
6.2
References ............................................................................................................................................................. 10
CONCLUSION .......................................................................................................................................................................... 11
ATTACHMENT A – PROFESSIONAL SUMMARIES ....................................................................................................... A-1
ATTACHMENT B – REQUIRED FORMS ............................................................................................................................B-1
COST PROPOSAL ............................................................................................................ submitted under separate cover
Proposal to Provide City Attorney
Services to the City of San Clemente
Page i
COMPANY BACKGROUND AND REFERENCES
6.1
Primary Contractor Information
Type of Entity
California Limited Liability Partnership
Firm Offices
Los Angeles
444 South Flower Street, Suite 2400
Los Angeles, California 90071
Tel: 213.236.0600 | Fax: 213.236.2700
San Francisco
101 Howard Street, Suite 400
San Francisco, California 94105-6125
Tel: 415.655.8100 | Fax: 415.655.8099
Inland Empire
1600 Iowa Avenue, Suite 250
Riverside, California 92507-7426
Tel: 951.788.0100 |Fax: 951.788.5785
Silicon Valley
1503 Grant Road, Suite 200
Mountain View, California 94040-3270
Tel: 650.327.2672 | Fax: 650.688.8333
Oakland
1901 Harrison Street, Suite 900
Oakland, California 94612-3501
Tel: 510.273.8780 | Fax: 510.839.9104
San Rafael
181 Third Street, Suite 225
San Rafael, California 94901
Tel: 415.755.2600 | Fax: 415.482.7542
Orange County
1851 East First Street, Suite 1550
Santa Ana, California 92705
Tel: 949.863.3363 | Fax: 949.863.3350
Ventura County
2310 East Ponderosa Drive, Suite 25
Camarillo, California 93010
Tel: 805.987.3468 | Fax: 805.482.9834
Palm Desert
73-929 Larrea Street, Suite 4A
Palm Desert, CA 92260
Tel: 760.776.5600 | Fax: 760.776.5602
Number of Employees
103 Attorneys
80 Staff
Local Office Address
Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP
Tel: 949.863.3363 | Fax: 949.863.3350
Name, Address, Telephone Number, and
Email Address of the Proposer’s Point of
Contact
Ruben Duran, Partner
Tel: 949.863.3363 | Fax: 949.863.3350
[email protected]
Page 1
Burke Background and History, and Why Burke is Qualified to be San Clemente’s City
Attorney
The City of San Clemente and the law firm of Burke, Williams an d Sorensen are contemporaries,
sharing many important traits and values in common. Each was born in the late 1920’s and
each has spent the better part of nine decades growing into a leader among its peers. The
City, a beautiful, well-run community of homes and businesses, proud of its reputation as a
fiscally sound and responsible provider of municipal services; and Burke, a talented group of
professionals dedicated to the highest standards of legal practice and client service.
Working primarily from our Orange County office just 29 miles from City Hall, Burke is fully
prepared to offer California’s “Spanish Village by the Sea” the full range of legal services and
representation to ensure that the City Council’s goals and policy direction are carried out with
City staff in the most legally sound and defensible way possible. Your proposed City Attorney,
Ruben Duran, is committed to making San Clemente his highest professional priority, and he
will use his many years of experience and the skills and expertis e of his colleagues in the firm to
become a trusted and valued member of the City’s team.
Like the City, Mr. Duran and Burke value excellence and passionate public service. Like the
City, Burke’s professionals and support staff work hard every day to earn and maintain a
reputation for solid, ethical, cost-effective public service. Like the City, Burke relies on its proud
history and present-day talent to chart a course for a bright future.
Founded in 1927, Burke is one of a select number of private law firms to have originated the
specialized practice of public law in California. As an early leader in municipal law, Burke
helped develop the contracting model which many public agencies continue to employ. One
of our founding partners, Louis Burke, helpe d form the municipal law department of the
League of California Cities and was one of two Burke partners to serve as California Supreme
Court Justices. We are proud to maintain one of the leading public law practices in the state
and take great satisfaction from successes we have achieved for our public clients.
Burke is a midsized law firm serving a variety of public and private clients throughout
California. We offer the services of 103 attorneys and 80 management and support staff
distributed in nine regional offices in California. Providing a full range of legal, advisory,
transactional and litigation services, the firm’s practice is organized into six major practice
groups:

Public Law

Labor & Employment

Education

Litigation

Construction

Real Estate & Business
Our Public Law Group represents over 200 public entities as city attorney, general counsel, or
special counsel throughout the state, and provides all advisory, transactional, and litigation
services required by cities. As the professional biographies provided below will demonstrate,
our attorneys have distinguished themselves in every major field of public law, including :
Page 2

Brown Act Issues

Public Works Issues

Public Records Act Issues

Trial & Appellate Litigation

Conflicts of Interest

Labor Negotiations

Medical Marijuana Dispensaries

Personnel Matters

Election Contests, Recalls & Initiatives

Police & Civil Rights Issues

First Amendment Issues

Code Enforcement & Receivership

Land Use

Tort Liability

CEQA & Endangered Species & MSHCP

Annexations

Successor Agency Issues

Telecommunications

Affordable Housing

Franchises & Utilities

Water & Water Quality

Public Transactions

Massage Parlors

Mobilehome Park Regulations & Rent
Control

Adult Businesses
Burke’s attorneys currently serve as City Attorney for the following 17 California cities.
Ci ty
Cit y o f Al h a mb ra
Cit y o f At as c ad er o
Cit y o f B u el l t o n
Cit y o f C al i st o ga
Cit y o f Ca m aril l o
Cit y o f He m et
Cit y o f In d u st ry
To w n o f Mo ra g a
Cit y o f P a ci fi ca
Cit y o f P ie d mo nt
Cit y o f R o hn ert P ar k
Cit y o f R ol l in g Hil l s Es t ate s
Cit y o f R os e me ad
Cit y o f Sa nt a Cl a rit a
Cit y o f St . Hel e na
Cit y o f Te mpl e Cit y
Cit y o f Wil do m ar
Con tract
Star ted
1980
2007
1991
2010
1980
1998
1998
2010
2010
2010
2010
1979
2007
1987
2010
2008
2008
Type of Work
City
City
City
City
City
City
City
City
City
City
City
City
City
City
City
City
City
Atto rn ey
Atto rn ey
Atto rn ey
Atto rn ey
Atto rn ey
Atto rn ey
Atto rn ey
Atto rn ey
Atto rn ey
Atto rn ey
Atto rn ey
Atto rn ey
Atto rn ey
Atto rn ey
Atto rn ey
Atto rn ey
Atto rn ey
Over our many decades of experience in public law, we have addressed virtually every need
and circumstance confronted by a local government entity in California. Burke has earned an
excellent reputation as one of the leading public ag ency legal services firms in the state. In
addition to providing legal advice, we try to anticipate your needs in a proactive fashion. We
Page 3
are prepared to work collaboratively with the City to find creative, cost -effective ways to meet
the City’s needs for legal services.
In particular, our practice involves advising clients on compl ying with the Brown Act,
transparency laws (Public Records Act, Political Reform Act), and conflicts of interest
regulations (FPPC regs., Gov’t. Code § 1090, common law). Burke’s attorneys have experience
in all aspects of these laws, including litigation.
We regularly work closely with staff in the preparation of agendas and agenda packets,
including reviewing agenda descriptions for open and closed session items and preparing and
reviewing agenda reports prepared by staff. We routinely participate in Council meetings and
have substantial experience in advising public clients on meeting procedures. Our team
members frequently conduct trainings and workshops on public agency ethics (AB 1234), the
Brown Act and the Public Records Act, and have published in these areas.
As City Attorney, we will draw upon this vast public law expertise. We anticipate that the
representation will involve advising the City about the preparation of agendas and agenda
documents (staff reports, resolutions, administrative items, etc.), attending public meetings and
closed sessions to ensure compliance with Brown Act and due process requirements, and
preparing legal memos, contracts, and reports, as may be necessary.
In addition, our team has experience in all aspects of land development, including advising
through the master planning process, environmental review under the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), land use processing, as well as property acquisition and
disposition.
Burke’s real estate attorneys have prepared and negotiated disposition
agreements ranging from complex purchase and sale and development agreements to
standard form easement agreements. Our team has also assisted agencies in the planning,
approval and implementation of public projects, including park and trail projects. As part of
this assistance, Burke’s attorneys have helped guide our clients in the land use entitlement
process in order to secure use, encroachment, and building permits as well as regulatory
approvals from public agencies with jurisdiction over public projects.
Once a public project has been approved, our team advises in the preparation, review,
counseling, and negotiation of consultant, professional service and public works contract
documents, including scopes of work, bid forms, and contract procedures. Burke’s attorneys
have experience in handling all aspects of bid protests and award disputes involving iss ues of
responsiveness, responsibility, mistake, subcontractor listing requirements, and other related
issues, in the event issues arise in the public contracting process.
Burke also provides assistance in the management of public resources. We have prepar ed
rental, use, license, and other agreements to allow the use of public facilities and regularly
advise clients on the risks and liabilities associated with the use of public property. We also
have substantial experience preparing instructor agreements, waivers, and other agreements
associated with public programs and advise on labor and employment issues.
When it comes time to increase or impose new fees, assessments, or taxes, our team will guide
the City through each step of the process. Our team has e xperience preparing staff reports,
resolutions, ballot questions, and impartial analyses, as well as drafting public notices and
supervising protest hearings. We will work closely with municipal finance experts to accurately
calculate rates and prepare defensible engineer’s reports.
Page 4
Litigation
To the extent possible, Burke’s attorneys make an effort to avoid litigation by taking
preventative measures. However, litigation cannot be avoided in all instances. Having both
public law and litigation acumen “under one roof” affords Burke the opportunity to tailor its
litigation services to meet the particular needs of its public agency clients and promotes more
effective litigation management.
Burke provides a full range of tort liability, employment, environ mental, land use, eminent
domain, condemnation, municipal finance, writ of mandate, and complex litigation services.
Our attorneys regularly counsel and defend public agencies in a variety of litigation matters at
all phases, including law and motion, trial, and appeal. We are experienced in state court and
federal court, at both the trial, appellate, and Supreme Court levels.
Burke prides itself as being the firm of choice for clients facing challenging lawsuits and
administrative hearings. We have a strong, proven track record in winning cases. We
successfully handle jury trials, court trials, administrative hearings, arbitrations, mediations, and
appeals in federal court, state court, and before public agencies. We have a number of lawyers
who also have extensive appellate experience in the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, California
Supreme Court, and State Courts of Appeal. Whenever a case goes to trial, we draw upon our
deep talent pool to prepare the best possible case. We train our attorneys on cutting edge
litigation practices, the practical realities of litigation, and legal developments.
Burke attorneys take proactive roles in handling claims, including training staff on legal
updates and methods to avoid future litigation, early evaluation of lawsuits to assess liability
exposure and/or settlement opportunities, and review of past resolved claims (if requested) to
assess how to reduce future liability. We also believe in keeping risk management up to date
on the status of litigation and in providing early advice on whether settlement is advisable. If a
matter should be settled, then that decision should be reached as soon as possible before
thousands of dollars have been spent in legal defense costs. Recognizing that sometimes
settlement is the best option for the client, we have also negotiated agreements that have
resolved lawsuits without the need for trial.
Labor and Employment
Burke’s Labor and Employment Practice Group consists of 30 attorneys specializing in
employment consultation services, investigations, employment litigation, and labor relations.
Burke’s labor and employment attorneys regularly advise public and private entities on
employment law issues, participate in personnel investigations, and provide training and
resource materials to ensure compliance with statutory mandates. Because of our public law
expertise, we are familiar with the unique procedural rights that apply to investigations
involving public employees. Our team is ready, willing, and able to take on emplo yment
matters with a short lead time.
Resumes of Key Staff
While Mr. Duran will be the primary point of contact for the City, and many of the City’s
questions can be handled in short order directly by Mr. Duran or by his Assistant City Attorney,
Stephen A. McEwen, we have assembled the following team of lead special counsel attorneys
should the City of San Clemente require specific expertise in the noted legal areas:
Page 5

Mark Mulkerin and Ron Frank for litigation matters

Kelly Trainer and Daphne Anneet for labor and employment matters

Sue Bloch for redevelopment dissolution and real estate matters

Jim Wulfsberg for public contracts and public construction

Anna Shimko for environmental and natural resources issues
6.2 City Attorney Resume
P r op os ed C it y A t t o rn ey - R u b en D u r an
Mr. Duran is a 1998 graduate of Hastings College of the law.
After completing his
undergraduate studies at UC San Diego, he was a Coro Fellow in Public Affairs prior to
attending law school. Coro is a national, non-profit, non-partisan public affairs training
organization that awards annual fellowships on a highly competitive national basis. Ruben
currently serves as the President of the City Attorneys Association of Los Angeles County and is
member of the Los Angeles County Bar Association. He has served on the League of California
Cities Municipal Law Handbook Editorial Committee and as a trainer at the League’s Mayors’
and Councilmembers’ Academy. He regularly provides statewide training on local government
essentials, including ethics and conflicts of interest, open government and transparency and
meeting management and parliamentary procedure. Most recently, he was a contributing
author and editor of the League of California Cities publication Practicing Ethics , a legal guide
for public agency attorneys. He is currently serving as an editor of the chapter on Elections for
the Municipal Law Handbook.
Ruben started his career as a municipal law attorney right out of law school, working as a
deputy city attorney for the City of Hayward. Wi th the goal of returning to Southern California,
Ruben left the city to enter the private practice, where he has worked serving primarily public
agency clients since 2000.
As an associate, and later as a partner, at some of the largest municipal law firm s in California,
Ruben served as contract deputy and assistant city attorney at several Southern California
cities, including Beverly Hills, Barstow, Monrovia, La Habra Heights, and La Puente. From 2006
until 2012, and while at his previous firm, Ruben wa s the City Attorney and
Redevelopment/Successor Agency General Counsel for the City of Desert Hot Springs in the
Coachella Valley. In that capacity, Ruben performed and oversaw all of the legal services for
the City and Redevelopment Agency, attending cit y council and executive staff meetings and
serving as a daily resource for the City Council, the city manager, department heads, and staff.
The City was at the tail end of a growth phase and Ruben dealt with interesting and complex
development and planning and land use issues, in addition to the typical personnel, public
works, and finance issues faced by most cities.
Since joining Burke in 2012, Ruben has maintained his municipal and public law focus, working
with the cities of Alhambra, Rosemead, Santa Clarita, Calistoga, and Rohnert Park on general
public law issues, as well as serving as special counsel to the City of Long Beach on elections
law matters, the City of Downey on real estate and economic development matters, and the
South Coast AQMD, L.A. Care Health Plan, the Inland Empire Health Plan, and the Oxnard
Harbor District on complex transactions, conflicts of interest, and governmental transparency
issues, as well as legislative drafting at the local and state levels. Ruben has also developed an
Page 6
expertise in the area of federal New Markets Tax Credits, and has successfully closed deals to
fund a health and wellness center in Desert Hot Springs and port improvement projects at the
Port of Hueneme.
As a City Attorney, Ruben has skillfully assisted his clients in managing and transitioning
through significant challenges, be they personnel related (such as the high -level personnel
investigations and key recruitments and hires of department heads and city managers) or high profile litigation. At the same time, Ruben understands the importance of ensuring that the
daily tasks of municipalities be supported by competent, agile, and timely legal advice as
requested by the client. He has the general experience of a battle -tested city attorney.
As the former City Attorney for the City of Desert Hot Springs, Mr. Duran oversaw all of the
City’s litigation. This included successful litigation against a neighboring jurisdiction on an
anti-SLAPP issue, a final resolution by settlement of a long -pending dispute with a former high
level employee for an amount considerably less than demanded, land use litigation, employee
whistleblower and discrimination cases, personal injury and wrongful death cases, and public
works performance bond litigation. Through all of these matters, Ruben worked closely and
cooperatively with the City’s staff and insurance carriers.
Mr. Duran strongly believes that an effective and successful City Attorney must know his or her
way around a courtroom, and must be able to confidently and s uccinctly advise the City
Council in closed session on litigation matters. It is for that reason that, early in his career,
Ruben sought out and was given assignments that required him to do the actual day -to-day
work of defending a case on behalf of a city, from written discovery to depositions, and from
law and motion practice to mediation, settlement conferences , and trial.
Ruben also oversaw several land use and employment cases for the City of Desert Hot Springs.
These cases involved issues such as wrongful termination, whistleblowing, discrimination, and
harassment. In addition, Ruben has vigorously and successfully opposed Pitchess motions to
prevent unwarranted invasion of police officers’ personnel files. Ruben also settled a case
involving a serious traffic accident between on-duty police officers who allegedly caused a
collision with a car filled with a family (a woman, her grandmother, and two young children).
The case was settled for significantly less than the potential exposure.
Ruben won on summary judgment in a federal civil rights lawsuit alleging excessive force. He
has settled numerous cases for clients through the use of mediation, including, for example, a
premises liability case involving an elderly woman injured at a city -owned bus stop and a tort
liability case in which city employees were unfortunately clearly at fault. These cases were
ultimately settled for significantly less than the risk manager was prepared to pay and the City
Council had authorized.
Ruben has extensive experience with land use, planning, CEQA, environmental, and real estate
law. He has advised planning commissions and city councils on matters such as use permits,
variances, zone changes, general plan amendments, annexations, habitat conservation and
other Endangered Species Act issues, redevelopment plan amendments, and density bonuses.
He has advised on and edited environmental reports and documentation such as initial studies,
negative and mitigated negative declarations, EIRs, notices of determination, and comments
and responses to comments on EIRs. Ruben has overseen and coordinated several land use
cases, including the successful shutting down of an illegal medical marijuana dispensary and a
water bottling plant operating in a residential zone. For t he benefit of his clients, Ruben has
developed staff trainings on CEQA, general plans (including housing elements), and the
development process.
Page 7
As lead redevelopment counsel, Ruben worked closely with agency staff and developers to
make several development projects a reality. These included an 80,000-square-foot shopping
center, a senior citizen affordable housing complex, and a state -of-the-art sports complex.
As Assistant General Counsel for the Big Bear City Community Services District, Ruben advised
staff on transactional matters and endangered species issues involving the U.S. Forest Service,
California Department of Fish and Game, and neighboring jurisdictions. In Desert Hot Springs,
Ruben guided the City through the habitat conservation plan proces s under the Endangered
Species Act.
In the area of real estate, Ruben has drafted and negotiated purchase and sale agreements,
leases, franchise agreements, disposition and development agreements, owner participation
agreements, affordable housing covenant s, deeds, restrictive covenants, general plan and
zoning amendments, and staff reports and resolutions or ordinances related to those
documents. Additionally, he has worked with City staff in engaging regulatory agencies such
as the South Coast Air Quality Management District, local water quality control boards, and the
Public Utilities Commission.
Mr. Duran believes that the best working relationships between a City and its city attorney
consist of several key components. These are:
Burke will represent the City through its elected City Council. Since trust is such an essential
part of our relationship with you, we work with and cultivate a relationship with each Council
person. However, it is the full Council to which we are responsible. We do not e ver forget
that, and we work closely with the City Manager and his or her staff to ensure the Council’s
goals are achieved.
We are your zealous legal advocates. But this often requires that we speak frankly with you
about facts, consequences, the law, and ethics, even if we know the discussion will be
unpopular. A key component of trust is adherence to unambiguous standards of ethics.
We are problem solvers, not hurdles to progress. Our charter is not to simply tell you “the law
says X,” but to help you find solutions that achieve your desired results within the ambit of the
law and an acceptable level of risk. Throughout, we stress strong public ethics.
We value critical feedback. By meeting with the Council both as individuals and collectively, as
allowed by the Brown Act, we will provide financial and work reports to elicit critical feedback
and to keep the Council informed. Our team emphasizes personal availability so your issues
are handled on your schedule, not ours.
We build strong, professional relationships. We will work diligently to develop a strong
professional relationship with the City Manager. It is critical that we have an open line of
communication and strong working relationship with the City Manager. We never forget we
represent and have obligations to the Council.
We are responsible. As City Attorney, Mr. Duran will be our primary point of contact between
our lawyers and the City Council and City Manager, and he is responsible for implementing the
directives noted above. He will work directly with the Council and the City Manager to
maintain the timeliness, quality, and cost effectiveness of the legal services provided by the
firm.
Page 8
We respect the taxpayers. We are very aware that the City’s mission is to provide service t o the
community. This means being able to use taxpayers’ dollars on programs and projects, not
litigation and attorneys, when it can be avoided. This is best achieved when the City Attorney
provides early and meaningful participation with a can -do attitude and foresight forged from
years of experience in the litigation trenches.
P r op os ed As sis t a nt Cit y At t or ne y – St ep h en A. M cE w e n
Stephen A. McEwen is a partner in the firm's Orange County office and has been with the
for over ten years as a public law attorney. Mr. McEwen currently serves as the Assistant
Attorney for the cities of Hemet, Atascadero, and Buellton and previously served as the
Attorney for Laguna Woods and as Assistant City Attorney for Stanton. Mr. McEwen is
responsible for supervising code enforcement efforts for Burke’s municipal clients.
firm
City
City
also
As a city attorney and assistant city attorney since 2005, Mr. McEwen has extensive experience
advising cities on land use and planning issues, the Brown Act, the Public Records Act, public
contracts, election law, environmental law, and constitutional law. He has provided training to
firm clients on governmental ethics laws to ensure compliance with the requirements of
AB 1234. He has drafted numerous ordinances, resolutions, construction contracts, and
franchise agreements for waste disposal and cable television services. Mr. McEwen also has
participated in closed session labor negotiations and advised city staff on complicated
personnel issues involving disability rights.
In addition to his advisory practice, Mr. McEwen has extensive and ongoing public law
litigation experience at both the trial and appellate levels on a broad range of issues, including
land use decisions, eminent domain, inverse condemnation, the Brown Act, c onflicts of interest,
tort liability, construction defects, construction contract disputes, CEQA, and the Federal Civil
Rights Act. Mr. McEwen’s defense of municipal clients has enabled him to develop a detailed
knowledge of statutory immunities, pre-litigation notice requirements, and other circumstances
unique to public entity litigation. As a result, Mr. McEwen will be able to approach the City
Attorney position with a unique perspective and understanding of litigation risks and effective
litigation management.
Professional Summaries for Mr. Duran and his team are included as Attachment A.
6.1
Subcontractor Information
This proposal does not include the use of subcontractors.
6.1.1
Does this proposal include the use of subcontractors?
Yes _______
No ___X___
Initials _______
Page 9
6.2
References
We are proud of our service record with our clients. We encourage you to contact the client
references listed below about the merits of Burke, its personnel, and its services.
Client Name:
City of Desert Hot Springs
Project Description:
Provide City Attorney and Redevelopment General Counsel
services. Oversee all of the City’s legal services, including labor
and employment, litigation, and other specialty work.
Project Dates:
2006-2012
Technical Environment:
Contract City Attorney with regular office hours at city hall as
designated by City Manager and City Council.
Staff Assigned:
Ruben Duran, City Attorney
Client Project Manager:
Hon. Scott Matas, City Councilmember – 760.200.7428
Chief Patrick Williams, Petaluma Police Department (formerly Chief
in Desert Hot Springs) – 707.778.4325
Client Name:
City of Long Beach
Perform special counsel work in the area of elections law and
other special assignments as needed.
Project Dates:
2013 - present
Special counsel, attending occasional meetings at city hall as
directed, through most work done from Burke’s offices
Staff Assigned:
Ruben Duran, Special Counsel
Michael Mais, Assistant City Attorney – 562.570.2230
Larry Herrera, City Clerk – 562.570.6849
Client Name:
City of Downey
Special counsel in real estate matters
Project Dates:
2013 – present
Special counsel, attending occasional meetings at city hall as
directed, through most work done from Burke’s offices
Staff Assigned:
Gilbert Livas, City Manager – 562.904.7282
Page 10
Client Name:
Port Hueneme, Oxnard Harbor District
Provide special counsel services in the area of new markets tax
credits, drafting state legislation, and other services as reque sted.
Project Dates:
2013 - present
Special counsel, attending occasional meetings at Port offices as
directed, though most work done from Burke’s offices
Staff Assigned:
Hon. Mary Anne Rooney, President, Board of Harbor
Commissioners and Andrew J. Palomares, Chief Administrative &
Finance Officer – 805.488.3677
Client Name:
L.A. Care Health Plan
Provide special counsel services in the area of public law.
Project Dates:
2011 - present
Special counsel, most work done from Burke’s offices
Staff Assigned:
Augustavia Haydel, General Counsel and Ellin Davtyan, Associate
Counsel at 213.694.1250, ext. 4740
CONCLUSION
Burke has the experience, dedication, and resources to serve the City’s needs ethically,
efficiently, and cost-effectively.
We will be happy to provide you with any additional
information you require about our firm and welcome the opportunity to meet face -to-face to
discuss Burke’s capabilities and readiness to represent the City of San Clemente. We appreciate
your consideration of our proposal.
Page 11
ATTACHMENT A – PROFESSIONAL SUMMARIES
Ruben Duran
An experienced Partner and City Attorney, Ruben Duran
provides strategic advice and counsel and vigorous
representation to public entities on a range of legal issues.
He currently represents governmental agencies such as cities,
health care districts, local health initiatives, ports, joint powers
authorities and school districts in areas such as:
Partner
State Bar No. 197780
Orange County Office
1851 East First Street
Suite 1550
Santa Ana, CA 92704-4067
direct: 949.265.3416
main: 949.863.3363
fax: 949.863.3350
[email protected]
P RACTICE G ROUPS
Education Law
Public Law
E DUCATION
J.D., University of California,
Hastings College of Law, 1998
B.A., Political Science,
University of California, San
Diego, 1993
A DMISSIONS
California State Bar, 1998
United States Court of Appeals
for the Ninth Circuit, 1998
United States District Court for
the Northern District of
California, 1998

Governmental transparency and best practices, including
conflicts of interest, open meetings and Public Records
Act, and Political Reform Act issues

Health care law

New Markets Tax Credits

Elections Law

Government contracting

Land use and real estate development
Ruben was the City Attorney for the City of Desert Hot Springs
and General Counsel to its Redevelopment Agency between
2006 and 2012. He has served as Assistant City Attorney for the
cities of Beverly Hills, Monrovia, La Habra Heights, Barstow and
La Puente. He also served as General Counsel to the Fontana
Unified School District.
Ruben regularly provides special counsel and transactional
advice to L.A. Care, an independent local public agency created
by the State of California to provide health coverage to low income Los Angeles County residents. With more than 1.4
million members in six product lines, L.A. Care is the nation’s
largest publicly-operated health plan. He also represents the
Inland Empire Health Plan (IEHP), the Riverside and San
Bernardino counties’ counterpart to L.A. Care.
Working with the federal New Markets Tax Credits program,
Ruben has successfully closed deals to provide needed fundi ng
for a $21.3 million health and wellness center and a $17 million
port infrastructure improvement project.
Affiliations
President, City Attorneys Association of Los Angeles County
Editor & Contributor: Practicing Ethics, A Handbook for
Municipal Lawyers
Page A-1
Stephen A. McEwen
Stephen A. McEwen joined Burke in 2003 and currently serves as
the Assistant City Attorney for the cities of Atascadero, Buellton,
and Hemet, and served previously as the City Attorney for
Laguna Woods and Assistant City Attorney for Stanton. In these
roles, Mr. McEwen has drafted numerous ordinances and
resolutions and has advised cities on a wide range of legal issues
with a special emphasis on the Public Records Act, the Brown
Act, and code enforcement. Mr. McEwen has also utilized his
extensive constitutional law background to advise municipal
clients on First Amendment and Fourteenth Amendment issues.
Partner
Suite 1550
main: 949.863.3363
fax: 949.863.3350
[email protected]
P RACTICE G ROUPS
Litigation
Public Law
E DUCATION
J.D., Stanford Law School,
1996
B.A., Political Science, Stanford
University, 1992
A DMISSIONS
State Bar of California, 1996
for the Ninth Circuit, 1996
the Central District of
California, 1996
the Eastern District of
California, 2006
Mr. McEwen is responsible for supervising code enforcement
efforts for Burke’s municipal clients. In this capacity, he utilizes
the full range of code enforcement tools, including informal
office conferences, inspection warrants, administrative hearings,
civil nuisance actions, and misdemeanor prosecutions. Although
his emphasis in this area is on resolving code violations without
the need for judicial intervention, Mr. McEwen has successfully
prosecuted numerous code enforcement cases to completion.
Mr. McEwen obtained a guilty verdict from a jury on all counts
against a property owner for maintaining multiple building code
and property maintenance violations.
He obtained guilty
verdicts against two defendants for operating an unpermitted
nightclub. He has also obtained preliminary and permanent
injunctions in multiple code enforcement matters involving
zoning violations, public nuisance conditions, and medical
marijuana dispensaries. Mr. McEwen advises municipal clients
throughout the state on issues related to medical marijuana.
In addition to his code enforcement prosecution experi ence,
Mr. McEwen has handled a broad array of litigation for the firm's
municipal and governmental clients, including disputes
involving eminent domain, inverse condemnation, tort liability,
construction defects, construction contract disputes, CEQA, and
the Federal Civil Rights Act. He served as co-counsel in a
successful bench trial regarding a client's right to take property
through eminent domain. Mr. McEwen successfully defended
the City of East Palo Alto in a trial involving alleged Brown Act
and Due Process violations. He has also represented a variety of
private clients in litigation involving construction projects,
insurance coverage, contractual disputes, and tort liability.
After law school graduation, Mr. McEwen clerked for Judge
Arthur L. Alarcon on the United States Court of Appeals for the
Ninth Circuit. He later served as a Deputy Attorney General in
the Criminal Division of the California Department of Justice. As
a prosecutor, Mr. McEwen represented the state in two
successful trial-level prosecutions, over seventy felony criminal
appeals in the California Court of Appeal, and over eighty
Page A-2
habeas corpus proceedings in federal district court and the Ninth Circuit. In November
2002, Mr. McEwen represented the California Department of Corrections successfully in an
evidentiary hearing in Federal District Court in a case involving allegations of prosecutorial
misconduct against the Los Angeles County District Attorney's Office.
Representative Matters
East Palo Alto Merchants Association v. City of East Palo Alto Planning Commission, San
Mateo Superior Court Case No. CIV 485355 – obtained a complete defense judgment in a
trial involving alleged Brown Act and conflict of interest violations.
People of the State of California and City of Industry v. True Health Cooperative, Inc., et al.,
Los Angeles Superior Court Case No. KC 057406 – obtained a preliminary and permanent
injunction against the operator of an unpermitted medical marijuana dispensar y.
People of the State of California and City of Stanton v. Alternative Tomatoes, Inc., et al.,
Orange County Superior Case No. 30-2010 00407861 – obtained a preliminary injunction
against the operator of an unpermitted medical marijuana dispensary.
People of the State of California v. Robert Burris , Orange County Superior Court Case No.
05WM04906 - obtained a guilty verdict in a criminal prosecution of a property owner for
maintaining a converted garage, unpermitted construction, and the outside storage o f junk,
trash, and debris.
People of the State of California v. Rene Cota and Cheri Cota , Los Angeles County Superior
Court Case No. 8JB08263 – obtained guilty verdicts in a criminal prosecution against bar
owners for operating a nightclub without required permits.
People of the State of California and City of Richmond v. Jawad A. Dayem, et al. , Contra
Costa County Superior Court Case No. C10-01925 - obtained a preliminary injunction against
the operator of an unpermitted medical marijuana dispensary. The parties subsequently
stipulated to a permanent injunction and Richmond recovered $50,000 in attorneys’ fees.
Affiliations
Orange County Bar Association
Orange County City Attorney's Association
Attorney Volunteer, Orange County Peer Court
Publications & Pr esent ations
Sleeping-In-Vehicle Ordinances Face Challenges Following Ninth Circuit Decision in
Desertrain v. City of Los Angeles, Public Law Update , Summer 2014
Reviewer, 2014 California Municipal Law Handbook (Cal CEB 2014), Chapters §§ 9.47-9.52
Pacific Shores Properties, LLC v. City of Newport Beach: A Challenge For Group Home
Ordinances , Public Law Update , October 2013
Due Process in Administrative Hearings, Northern News , September 2013
Marijuana Advocates Continue to Test Law, Daily Journal , August 1, 2013
Medical Marijuana Update: Local Control Prevails In The Supreme Court, Public Law Update ,
June 2013
Page A-3
Sabey v. City of Pomona: A New And Troubling Rule For Administrative Hearings, Public Law
Update , April 2013
Smith v. City of San Jose: The Applicatio n Of The Public Records Act To Private Electronic
Devices, Public Law Update , March 2013
The California Homemade Food Act: Cottage Food Operations Arrive in California, Public
Law Update , January 2013
Reviewer, 2013 California Municipal Law Handbook (Cal C EB 2013), Chapters §§ 9.47-9.52
Medical Marijuana: Local Land Use Authority Versus State and Federal Law, Daily Journal,
April 11, 2012
Medical Marijuana Update, Public Law Update, March 2012
City of Arlington v. Federal Communications Commission: The Fi fth Circuit Upholds the FCC
Shot Clock Rule, Public Law Update, February 2012
Case Law Update: Local Regulation of Medical Marijuana Dispensaries, Public Law Update,
February 2011
Update On The Status of Medical Marijuana Dispensaries Under California Law, Public Law
Update , January 2010
“Preparing Yourself for Oral Argument,” Los Angeles Lawyer , June 2002, Vol. 25, No. 4
Page A-4
Daphne M. Anneet
Daphne Anneet is a partner in Burke, Williams & Sorensen’s Los
Angeles office.
She is Vice-Chair of the firm’s Labor and
Employment Practice Group.
Partner
Los Angeles Office
444 South Flower Street
Suite 2400
direct: 213.236.2802
main: 213.236.0600
fax: 213.236.2700
[email protected]
P RACTICE G ROUPS
Education Law
Labor & Employment Law
Litigation
Public Law
E DUCATION
J.D., magna cum laude,
Southwestern Law School
A DMISSIONS
United States District Court,
Central District, 1994
A skilled litigator, Ms. Anneet has achieved excellent results for
clients in state and federal court, as well as in administrative
proceedings. She represents public and private employers in a
wide range of matters including class actions, wrongful
termination, discrimination and harassment litigation, pension
litigation, unfair labor practice disputes, arbitrations, disciplinary
appeals, and appellate matters. Ms. Anneet has served as lead
defense counsel in a number of class action lawsuits over the
past decade and has a proven track record of achieving
successful results in a variety of creative and cost -effective ways.
A graduate of the prestigious LA County Bar Association’s Trial
Advocacy Project, Ms. Anneet has served as a pro city attorney
prosecutor.
In addition to her labor and employment litigation practice,
Ms. Anneet serves as lead negotiator in collective bargaining for
the City of Hemet. She also currently provides labor relations
services on an as-needed basis for a number of cities, counties
and special districts. Since the enactment of AB 646, Ms. Anneet
has served as an agency advocate for several factfinding
proceedings.
Ms. Anneet conducts independent internal investigations of
complaints involving discrimination, harassment, retaliation,
workplace misconduct, and alleged conflicts of interest. She has
also written and lectured on a wide array of employment issues
for many organizations at their annual training conferences and
conventions, including the Los Angeles County Bar Association
(LACBA); Professionals in Human Resources Association (PIHRA);
California Public Employers Labor Relations Association
(CALPELRA); League of California Cities; Association of California
Water Agencies; Southwestern Law School; and, Southern
California Public Labor Relations.
Ms. Anneet received her Juris Doctor, magna cum laude , from
Southwestern Law School, where she was awarded the
Outstanding Woman Legal Graduate award.
Since her
graduation, Ms. Anneet has remained active alum. She currently
serves on Southwestern’s Board of Trustees.
Ms. Anneet is an active member of several organizations. She is
an Executive Board member of the Labor and Employment Law
Section of the LA County Bar Association and an affiliate
member of CALPELRA. She is Past President of the National
Association of Women Business Owners, LA Chapter and is a
local member of the AYSO Board for Region 759.
Page A-5
Case Name
Area of Emphasis
Verdict/Outcome
Representative pending labor and employment matters
Watkins v. UC Regents (2014)
Estes v. UC Regents (2013)
Hodge v. UC Regents (2013)
BC516764
Hemet FireFighters Ass’n. v. City
of Hemet (2013)
AFSCME Local 164 et al v.
CRALA-DLA (2013)
Machado v. Los Angeles
Superior Court (2012)
BC495691
Fernandez v. City of Hemet
(2012) RIC 1213391
Los Angeles Memorial Coliseum
Commission v. Lynch,
DeStefano, et. al. (2011) LASC
BC 472814
Disability discrimination;
harassment based on disability;
failure to make reasonable
accommodation; failure to
engage in the interactive
process; retaliation; failure to
prevent discrimination and
harassment;
Retaliation
Race discrimination
Pending
Challenge to contracting out;
preliminary injunction
Early Retirement Incentive
Program arbitration
Disability discrimination;
harassment based on disability;
failure to make reasonable
engage in the interactive
process; retaliation; failure to
prevent discrimination and
harassment.
Wrongful termination; age and
disability discrimination
False Claims Act/Breach of
Fiduciary Duty/Fraud/Conflict of
Interest
Pending (defeated TRO)
Pending
Pending
Pending
Pending
Pending
Pending
Representative employment litigation – complex litigation
Costa Mesa Employees’ Assn. v.
City of Costa Mesa (2012) 208
th
Cal.App.4 298 ( amicus )
SEIU et al v. City of Hemet
(2011) RIC 116129
Challenge to contracting out;
preliminary injunction
Amicus
Challenge to City’s Franchise of
Refuse Services/ Prop 218
Haro v. City of Rosemead (2010)
th
174 Cal.App.4 1067
Wage and hour class action
Bass v. City of Alhambra, et al.
(2010) USDC CV 08-07660
Disability discrimination class
action, civil rights
In the Matter of Statutory
Penalties for the Belated
Enrollment of 100 Class
Members (public agency client
confidential) (2008)
Pension rights class action /
application of penalty provisions
under Gov’t Code Section 20305
Defeated TRO/civil case
dismissed/unfair labor practice
charge withdrawn
Defeated class certification
(upheld on appeal); settlement
of individual claims as a result
of mediation
Dismissal of all claims against
individual defendants and
damages claims. Settlement of
class action claims without any
monetary payment to plaintiff
Settlement prior to issuance of
statement of decision
(3 week administrative hearing
before an ALJ at the Office of
Administrative Hearing)
Page A-6
Lisa Hagene, et al v. County of
Riverside (2008) RIC 376254
Class action writ of mandate;
employee benefits; pension
benefits; independent contractor
misclassification claim
Class action writ of mandate;
employee benefits and pension
benefits; independent contractor
Motion to strike damages
granted; writ denied
(Confidential employee) v. City
of Santa Clarita (2013)
SEIU v. City of San
Buenaventura (2013)
of Hemet (2013)
Arroyo Grande Police Officers’
Ass’n v. City of Arroyo Grande
(2012) LA-CE-822-M
Anaheim Police Officers
Association v. City of Anaheim
(2012)
(Confidential employee) v. San
Bernardino Superior Court
(2012)
of Alhambra (2012)
City of San Diego v. San Diego
Peace Officers Association
(2011) D056209
Disciplinary appeal arbitration
(termination)
Unfair Labor Practice Charge –
retaliation
Termination proceeding
Appeal dismissed during
arbitration
Settlement pre-litigation
Retaliation; discrimination;
interference
Resolved at mediation
(termination/retaliation)
Prevailed at arbitration (4 day
arbitration)
(termination)
Appeal dismissed
(termination)
Writ of mandate/unfair labor
practice (pension rights)
Appeal dismissed
Salas v. City of Alhambra (2011)
PERB Decision No. 2161-M
Unfair labor practice (retaliation)
Mialocq v. County of Santa Clara
(2011) OAH No. 2010060794
Pension benefits claim
Confidential employee v. City of
Arroyo Grande (2011)
(termination/fitness for duty
issues)
(demotion)
(demotion)
Unfair labor practice;
(retaliation)
Metropolitan Water District v.
Superior Court (2004) 32
Cal.4th 491
Global resolution following
Supreme Court ruling on legal
standard governing PERS
eligibility
Representative labor and employment litigation - bench trials, arbitrations, disciplinary appeals, and
administrative hearings
Peppers-Franklin v. Riverside
Superior Court (2011)
Alhambra (2011)
Teamsters Local 952 v. City of
Anaheim (2010) No. LA-CA-607M
Eddie Gutierrez v. City of
Alhambra LASC Case No. BS
123155 (2010)
Santa Clarita (2010)
Alhambra (2010)
Appeal dismissed
Writ granted; SDPOA’s
preliminary injunction denied;
SDPOA’s cross-petition denied
(upheld on appeal)
Complaint and underlying
unfair practice charge
dismissed (3 day administrative
hearing; upheld on appeal)
Prevailed at administrative
hearing (3 day PERS
administrative hearing)
arbitration)
Prevailed at arbitration (1day
arbitration)
arbitration)
Charge dismissed
Public Safety Officers Procedural
Bill of Rights
Prevailed on underlying
disciplinary action at
arbitration; pre-litigation
settlement of writ proceeding
(termination)
(termination)
Prevailed at arbitration
(1 day arbitration)
(2 day arbitration)
Page A-7
Alhambra (2010)
Alhambra (2009)
Menlo Park Fire District
Protection District v. San Mateo
County Firefighters Local 2400
(2009) SF-CE-390M
City of Hemet v. Hemet Police
Officers Association (2009) RIC
481240
LeDuc v. Board of Trustees of
Capistrano Unified School
District
Alameda Corridor Training and
Employment adv. Stewart UIAB
Case No. 569833
(demotion)
Unfair labor practice (retaliation)
(2 day arbitration)
(4 day arbitration)
Complaint and Charge
dismissed
Unfair labor practice/writ of
mandate (post-retirement
benefits)
Writ of mandate/wrongful
termination
Settlement prior to hearing on
the merits
Independent contractor
Reversal of administrative
determination that contractor
was misclassified
(1 day administrative hearing)
Writ denied
Representative employment/civil rights litigation - resolved through law and motion
Bauer v. County of San
Bernardino, et al (2012)
EDCV12-501 VAP (DTBx)
Confidential employee v. San
Bernardino Superior Court
Head v. Regents of the
University of California, Dr.
Joseph Lee, et al (2012)
LASCBC482981
Cantu v. City of Anaheim (2012)
CV 11-0465-RGK (CWx)
Cantu v. City of Anaheim (2012)
OCSC 30-2012-00599318
McCollum v. City of
Anaheim(2011) OCSC 30-201000431381
Panelli v. Berryessa Union
School District (2011) 108
CV121974
Reams v. City of Moreno Valley
(2010) RIC 10017492
Martinez v. City of Oakland, et
al. (2009) RGI8407717
Emirkhanian v. Metropolitan
Water District, et. al (2007) BC
210658
Gail Naylor vs. Metropolitan
Water District LASC BC 288114
Carmen Norona Yanez vs.
Metropolitan Water District
LASC BC 288114
Maria Biel vs. Metropolitan
Brenda Fisher vs. Metropolitan
FMLA interference and
retaliation
Settlement
Race discrimination
Race discrimination; defamation
(individual defendant)
Wrongful termination/USERRA
retaliation
Writ of mandate
Settlement (pre-summary
judgment)
Voluntary dismissal
Wrongful termination/race
discrimination
Summary judgment
Disability discrimination; failure
to make reasonable
engage in the interactive process
Wrongful termination/gender
discrimination
Race discrimination; failure to
hire
Pregnancy, gender and race
discrimination; retaliation;
Summary
adjudication/settlement
Race and gender discrimination;
failure to promote
National origin and gender
discrimination; failure to
promote
National origin and gender
discrimination; failure to
promote
Race and gender discrimination;
failure to promote
Summary judgment
(through early mediation)
Settlement (through early
mediation)
Settlement pending ruling on
defendant’s MSJ
Summary judgment
Summary judgment
Summary judgment
Page A-8
Fuller v. Los Angeles Unified
School District LASC BC 298214
SLAPP
Brauner v. Los Angeles Unified
School District, Sallye Gauthier,
et al. WL 31678404
Janian v. Metropolitan Water
District
Confidential employee v.
California Public Employee
Retirement System
Defamation
Nickerson v. Capistrano Unified
School District
Padilla v. City of Alhambra, et al.
(2007) UCSD CV-05-7609
Molina v. City of Alhambra, et
al. (2007) UCSD CV-02295
Peer-to-peer sexual harassment;
Title IX
Civil rights; wrongful death
Dismissal following successful
SLAPP motion and award of
attorneys fees
Summary judgment; upheld on
appeal
Retiree medical benefit claim
Pension benefits
Obtained reversal of initial
negative determination
regarding retired City
Manager’s pension benefit
Case settled for $1,000 prior to
hearing on defendant’s MSJ
Settlement at mediation
(through pre-trial mediation)
Settlement (through early
mediation)
Civil rights
Other representative litigation
Gonzalez v. Kinro, Skyline Corp.
(2009) UCSD CV-08233
Consolidated Electrical
Distributors, et al. v. Hebdon,
Henkel Corp., et al.
SDSCN61420
Certified to serve as pro bono
prosecutor through the LACBA
Trial Advocacy
Putative nationwide class action;
unfair competition/product
liability
Environmental groundwater
contamination; product liability;
complex litigation involving
three groups of plaintiffs and
sixty defendants; represented the
target defendant
4 Civil misdemeanor trials
Dismissal after defeat of class
certification motion
Case settled for a de
minimis amount after two
weeks, of what had been
scheduled as a 4 month trial
(Final demand before trial:
$240 million)
Defense plea in each case at
various stages in the
prosecution
A f fil iat io ns
California Public Employer Labor Relations Association, Affiliate Member
Labor and Employment Law Section of the LACBA, Executive Board
National Association of Women Business Owners-LA (NAWBO LA) Immediate Past President
Professional in Human Resources Association (PIHRA), member
Southwestern Law School, Board of Trustees
Publications & Present ations
Impact Bargaining, Southern California Public Labor Relations Council’s 31st Annual Labor
Relations Conference, February 6, 2014
Sexual Harassment Prevention Training for Directors and General Managers, Association of
California Water Agencies (ACWA) Fall Conference, December, 2013
Contracting Out Under Siege: Preserving the Power of Public Agencies to Contract Out ,
California Public Employers Labor Relations Association (CALPELRA), Annual Training
Conference, November 2013
Page A-9
Risk Management: Crisis Control, Media Relations, Contracting and Labor Negotiations ,
California Contract Cities Association Conference, May 2013
Contracting Out Under Siege: The Potential Impact of Costa Mesa City Employees'
Association v. City of Costa Mesa, League of California Cities 2013 City Attorneys Spring
Conference, May 9, 2013
Staying out of Troubled Water: Effective Management of Employees With Disabilities , ACWA
Spring Conference, May 8, 2013
The Contingent Workforce – Managing the Risk, ACWA- JPIA Training, January 2013
The Pension Reform Act of 2013, Special Training for the Administrative Office of the Courts,
Labor Relations Form, November & December 2012
The Contingent Workforce, ACWA Fall Conference, December 2012
CALPELRA Learn Training Program: Interactive Process and Reasonable Accommodation ,
March 2012
Worker Misclassification 101: Avoiding Liability and Penalties California Public Employers
Labor Relations Association (CALPELRA), Annual Training Conference, November 2011
Hearing Secrets That You Keep: Is There Any Such Thing As Employee Privacy? Los Angeles
County Bar, Labor and Employment Section, Annual Legal Symposium, March 2010
Managing Employment Practices Liability in Challenging Times: Strategies to Reduce Risk ,
National Association of Women Business Owners-LA/ Chubb Insurance Co., February 2010
Elimination of Bias in the Workplace , Southwestern Law School, Annual MCLECompliance
Program, January (annually since 2005)
Responding to EEOC/DFEH Charges: So you have received a charge from the EEOC/DFEH,
what now? CalPELRA Annual Training Conference, November 2009
Employment Law Update: Staying Ahead of the Curve, ACWA-JPIATraining Conference,
Sacramento, California, February 2009
The New FMLA Regulations : ACWA-JPIA Training Conference, Sacramento, California,
February 2009
Privacy in the Electronic Workplace, PIHRA Annual Legal Update, multiple locations, January
2009
Effectively Managing Family Leave in California: Curbing F MLA/CFRA Abuses While Treating
Your Employees Fairly , Association of California Water Agencies Conference (ACWA),
December 2008
The Runaway Jury: Avoiding Litigation Over Your Implementation of the Family Medical
Leave and California Family Rights Acts , California Public Employers Labor Relations
Association (CALPELRA), Annual Training Conference, November 2008
Life in the Big Easy and Million-Dollar Payout , Preventing Retaliation Cases , CALPELRA
Annual Training Conference, November 2008
Recordkeeping – What to Keep, What to Toss, and How to Make Sure Your Electronic
Records and Complete and Compliant , ERI 2008 Advanced California Employer Seminar,
September 2008, Irvine, California
HR Best Practices Seminar – Employee Hiring, Employee Benefits & Effective Workforce
Management , September 2008, Playa Vista, California
Page A-10
Tools and Techniques to Effectively Use the Discovery Process in Employment Litigation , Los
Angeles County Bar Association, Labor and Employment Section, September 2008
Workplace Monitoring in the 21 st Century Workplace – How Far Can You Go? Professionals
In Human Resources, District 4 (PIHRA), September 2008
Strategic HR – Leadership Development: Key Legal Strategies to Ensure Success, Association
of California Water Agencies, Spring Conference, 2008
Privacy and Security in the Workplace , Southern California Public Labor Relations Council,
June 2008
The Contingent Workforce – Minimizing the Risks , Professionals In Human Resources (PIHRA)
2008 Annual Legal Update, January 2008
Pre-hire Screening: Legal and Successful Ways to Screen Applicants , Annual Conference of
the California State Personnel Commissioners Association, October 2007
Responding to DFEH Complaints and EEOC Charges: PIHRA District 12, October 2007
Responding to DFEH Complaints and EEOC Charges: A step-by-step process , CIPMA monthly
meeting, September 2007
Responding to DFEH Complaints and EEOC Charges: PIHRA District 7, July 2007
Public Sector Legal Update , PIHRA 2007 Annual Legal Update, January 2007
The Contingent Workforce – Common Mistakes and How to Avoid Them , PIHRA’s 49 th
Annual Conference and Exhibition, September 2006
Managing Capital Programs in Challenging Times, presented to the Association of California
Water Agencies Annual Spring Conference, May 2006
The Contingent Workforce – How to Conduct an Effective Contingent Worker Audit CIPA
Annual Conference, Spring 2006
Nuts and Bolts of Employment Law, presented to the Los Angeles County Bar Association,
Labor and Employment Section’s Annual Nuts and Bolts of Employment Litigat ion, February,
2006
The Contingent Workforce – Beware and Be Prepared, presented to PIHRA’s 2006 Annual
Legal Update, January, 2006
The Use of Contingent Labor in the Public Sector – Update on the pending contingent
worker class actions , presented to the Southern California Public Labor Relations Association,
January 17, 2006
PERS and Contingent Worker Liability , presented to the California Public Employers Labor
Relations Association Annual Training Conference, November 2005
The Contingent Workforce – Is Your Organization at Risk? , presented to PIHRA’s 48 th Annual
Conference and Exhibition, October 7, 2005
The 2004 Cargill Decision – Steps Your Agency Should Immediately Take to Ensure
Compliance, presented to the Southern California Public Labor Relations C ouncil, April 2004
A Case of the Tail Wagging the Dog –With A Vengeance: Are Leased Workers Public Agency
Employees and Does the Common Law Apply , presented to the Association of California
Water Agencies Annual Spring Conference, May 2004
Page A-11
Recent Developments in Contingent Worker Claims , presented to the League of California
Cities, Employee Relations Institute, January 2003
Contingent Worker Litigation – The Potential Impact of the Cargill Action , presented to the
Association of California Water Agencies Annual Spring Conference, May 2002
Contingent Worker Litigation – An Update, presented to PIHRA’s Annual Legal Update
Conference, January 2002. (Co-author)
Coping with Contingent Worker Issues – presented to the CALPELRA Annual Training
Conference , November 2002 (Co-presenter)
The Use of Contingent Labor in the Public Sector , presented to the Southern California Public
Labor Relations Council, May 2001
Contingent Worker Litigation: Is Your Organization at Risk? , Public Law Journal , Vol 22, No.
4, Fall 1999.(Co-author)
Page A-12
Susan E. Bloch
Susan Bloch specializes in economic development and
transactional real estate matters. Ms. Bloch represents public
agencies and private and non-profit developers in transactions
involving the acquisition, development, finan cing, leasing and
sale of residential, commercial and industrial properties; and the
development and implementation of affordable housing policies
and programs.
Partner
Oakland Office
1901 Harrison Street
Suite 900
Oakland, California 94612
direct: 510.903.8809
voice: 510.273.8780
fax: 510.839.9104
[email protected]
P RACTICE G ROUPS
Construction Law
Public Law
Real Estate & Business Law
E DUCATION
J.D., University of California,
Davis, 1995
Master of City Planning,
University of California
Berkeley, 1987
B.A. (with distinction),
University of Michigan, 1979
A DMISSIONS
for the Ninth Circuit
the Central District of California
the Northern District of
California
Ms. Bloch is a member of the California Redevelopment
Association’s (CRA) Technical Advisory Committee, and in that
capacity has conducted training for successor agencies
addressing the windup of redevelopment agency affairs. She is
also a member of the Post-Redevelopment Task Force organized
by the City Attorneys’ division of the California League of Cities
(LOCC) and is the Chair of the Task Force’s subgroup addressing
property transactions, litigation, and City-Agency agreements.
Ms. Bloch is also an active participant in the housing committee
of the LOCC Post-Redevelopment Task Force.
Ms. Bloch has negotiated and drafted real estate acquisition,
development, disposition, financing and leasing documents for
redevelopment agencies, municipalities and other public
entities, including the Community Redevelopment Agency of the
City of Los Angeles, the Redevelopment Agency of the City of
San Leandro, Placer County Redevelopment Agency, Sacramento
Regional Transit District, East Bay Regional Parks District, the City
of Union City, the City of Rancho Cordova, the City of Dublin,
the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Milpitas, the
Redevelopment Agency of the City of South San Francisco, the
City of Millbrae Redevelopment Agency, the Petaluma
Community Development Commission, the City of Elk Grove, the
Transportation Agency of Monterey County, and the M oragaOrinda Fire District.
Prior to joining Burke, Ms. Bloch represented institutional
lenders, private developers and non-profit organizations in
connection
with
leasing,
development
and
financing
transactions.
Before beginning her practice as an attorney, Ms. Bloch served
as Program Manager with the Sacramento Housing and
Redevelopment Agency and as a consultant to the
Neighborhood Reinvestment Corporation and the National
Economic Development and Law Center.
She has been a
speaker at conferences and seminars sponsored by the League
of California Cities, the California Continuing Education of the
Bar (CEB), the Real Property Section of the California State Bar,
the California Redevelopment Association, Housing California,
the Northern California Association for Non-Profit Housing,
Page A-13
California Association for Local Economic Development (CALED), the Calif ornia Association
of Local Housing Finance Agencies (Cal-ALHFA), the Bay Area City Attorneys Association
(BACA) and the City Attorneys Association of Los Angeles County (CAALAC).

City of Oakland Successor Agency – representing the Successor Agency to the
Oakland Redevelopment Agency in connection with redevelopment agency
dissolution matters, including development of asset disposition and retention
strategies, implementation of enforceable obligations, and representation before the
State Department of Finance.

County of Placer/Placer County Successor Agency - representing the County of Placer
in redevelopment and affordable housing matters, including matters related to
dissolution of the Redevelopment Agency and implementation of enfor ceable
obligations. Recent projects include updating first -time homebuyer and residential
rehabilitation loan documents; and negotiation and drafting of financing and
development documents for a scattered-site affordable housing project and a mixeduse/mixed-income housing development.

City of Chico/Chico Successor Agency – representing the City of Chico and the
Successor Agency to its Redevelopment Agency in connection with redevelopment
agency dissolution matters, including representation before the Stat e Department of
Finance.

City of Union City/Union City Successor Agency - representing the City of Union City
and the Successor Agency to its Redevelopment Agency in connection with
redevelopment agency dissolution matters, including representation before the State
Department of Finance, implementation of enforceable obligations, and the
development and implementation of asset retention and disposition strategies.

City of San Leandro/San Leandro Successor Agency – Affordable Housing and TransitOriented Development. Representing the Agency in connection with the proposed
financing of a 100-unit affordable rental development as part of a transit -oriented
development, including the negotiation of owner participation agreements and loan
documents. Representing the City and the Successor Agency in connection with
redevelopment agency dissolution matters, including representation before the State
Department of Finance, implementation of enforceable obligations, and the
development and implementation of asset retention and disposition strategies.

RC Peninsula Park, LLC. Represented private developer in the negotiation and drafting
of a long-term development agreement governing a phased residential condominium,
retail and hotel project; an infrastructure financi ng agreement; and agreements
governing developer contributions for affordable housing and childcare.

Sacramento Regional Transit District – Transit-Oriented Mixed-Use Developments.
Represented the District in the negotiation and preparation of dispositi on and
development agreements for two proposed transit-oriented developments that will
provide a mix of residential, retail and commercial uses. The documentation included
option agreements and loan and security instruments for the District’s construction -topermanent financing for the projects.

City of Reno. Represented the City of Reno and its Redevelopment Agency in
connection with the private development of a minor league baseball stadium and
related retail projects, including the negotiation and draf ting of complex disposition
Page A-14
and development agreements, ground leases, property exchange and option
agreements, retail leases, and financing documents.

Community Redevelopment Agency of the City of Los Angeles – Alexandria Hotel.
Represented the Agency in connection with financing the rehabilitation of a historic
hotel into 463 studio apartments. Negotiated permanent loan documents with the
private developer while concurrently negotiating a proposed settlement agreement in
complex federal litigation relat ed to the project.

City of South San Francisco/Successor Agency. Represented the City of South San
Francisco and its Redevelopment Agency in affordable housing and commercial
transactions involving the purchase, sale and rehabilitation of residential and
commercial properties and the negotiation and preparation of financing, acquisition
and disposition agreements. Represented the Successor Agency in connection with
redevelopment agency dissolution matters.

San Leandro Redevelopment Agency – Senior Housing. Represented the Agency in
connection with the financing of an affordable senior housing project. The project
was financed with a combination of city, agency, and county loans; HUD 202
financing; tax-exempt bonds; and low-income housing tax credits.

City of Dublin – Inclusionary Housing and First-Time Homebuyer Programs.
Represented the City in connection with the implementation of its inclusionary zoning
ordinance and its first-time homebuyer loan program. This included negotiation with
the developers of single family and condominium developments that are subject to the
inclusionary ordinance; drafting program guidelines and regulations; drafting
amendments to the ordinance and regulations as changing circumstances have
warranted; and assisting staff in a myriad of implementation issues such as requests
for refinancing, violation of resale restriction agreements and foreclosures.

City of Dublin – Mixed-Income Housing. Represented the City in connection with
development of a 660-unit, mixed-income housing development that includes senior
and multi-family phases financed with 4 percent tax credits, tax -exempt bonds and a
low-interest City loan. Negotiated and drafted development agreements detailing the
developer’s obligations to construct public improve ments, loan documents, and
affordable housing regulatory agreements to ensure compliance with the City’s
inclusionary zoning requirements. Represented the City in negotiations for the
disposition and redevelopment of Dublin Housing Authority property for
redevelopment as a mixed-income senior, multi-family, and homeownership
development.

City of Dublin – Low-Income Senior Housing. Negotiated and drafted ground lease,
predevelopment and construction loan documents, regulatory agreements, and
easement agreements for a low-income senior housing project financed with a City
loan, tax credits and a conventional construction loan.
This project required
coordination with the City’s concurrent construction of a senior center on an adjacent
parcel. The project included shared access, parking and reciprocal easements.

Milpitas Redevelopment Agency – Affordable Housing, County Health Center and
Parking Facility.
Negotiated and documented numerous owner participation
agreements, disposition and development agreement s and financing documents for
these projects. Transactions included the Agency’s conveyance of adjacent parcels to
a non-profit developer and to Santa Clara County for construction of an affordable
senior housing development and a County health clinic fac ility, and the ground lease
of an additional Agency-owned parcel for County construction of a parking garage.
Page A-15
Documentation included a ground lease with option to purchase, loan documents for
the housing project, and a reciprocal access easement agreement governing
construction and maintenance of a common driveway.

San Leandro Redevelopment Agency – Affordable Housing, Motel Conversion,
Commercial Development and Rehabilitation. Represented the City of San Leandro
and San Leandro Redevelopment Agency on housing and economic development
matters including residential and commercial rehabilitation programs, multi -family
housing development, and the disposition and development of land for commercial
and residential projects. Assisted the Agency in the acquisi tion of a dilapidated motel,
and the negotiation and preparation of ground lease and financing documents
pursuant to which the Agency leased the property to a non -profit developer for
conversion into affordable studio apartments, provided construction fina ncing, and
will provide an operating subsidy to ensure continued affordability.
Affiliations
State Bar of California, Real Property Law Section
Los Angeles County Bar Association, Real Estate Section
American Bar Association, State and Local Government Law Section
American Bar Association, Affordable Housing and Community Development Forum
Speaker, “Development in the Post-Redevelopment Era: The Legal Aspect,” 86th State Bar of
California Annual Meeting, October 2013
Speaker, “Where Are We Going: Legislation & Litigation,” California Redevelopment
Association Webinar, July 2013
Speaker, “Housing Successor Agency Implementation Issues” California Association of Local
Housing Finance Agencies (Cal-ALHFA), conference workshop, October 2012
Speaker, “What Does AB 1484 Really Mean in the Post -Redevelopment Era?” California
Association for Local Economic Development (CALED) Webinar, July 2012
Speaker, “Post-RDA Latest Developments,” City Attorney’s Association of Los Angeles
County,” July 2012
Trainer, “Implementing ABx1 26 - Successor Agency Training,” California Redevelopment
Association, 2012
Trainer, “Housing - Successor Agency Training,” California Redevelopment Association, 2012
Speaker, “Nuts and Bolts for Successor Agencies,” Webinar, 2012
Speaker, “Toolkit for Economic Development: Land Use and Housing,” Webinar, 2012
Trainer, “Critical Elements of the OPA/DDA” Redevelopment Institutes of the California
Redevelopment Association, 2009 and 2010, San Ramon
Speaker, “Leveraging Public Funds for Affordable Housing,” Sonoma County Bar Association,
2008
Speaker, “Before Saying “Yes”: How Local Governments Can Evaluate Proposed Affordable
Housing Projects,” Non-Profit Housing Association of Northern California Annual
Conference, 2008
Page A-16
Trainer, “Basic Affordable Housing” and “Advanced Affordable Housing,” Redevelopment
Institutes of the California Redevelopment Association, 2006, 2007, and 2008
Moderator and Speaker, “Motel Conversion: Creating Permanent Affordab le Housing,”
Housing California Annual Conference, Sacramento, 2008
Speaker, “Plan Adoption, Amendment and Merger,” California Redevelopment Association,
Introduction to Redevelopment program, 2008
Moderator and Speaker, “From Slum to Shangrila: Converting Dilapidated Transient Motel s
into Affordable Housing,” CRA/Cal-ALHFA Affordable Housing Conference, 2007
Moderator and Speaker, “Tackling Neighborhood Blight: From Problem Motels to Permanent
Affordable Housing,” California Chapter of American Planning Association Annual
Conference, 2007
Moderator and Speaker, “Motel Conversion: Creating Permanent Affordable Housing,”
League of California Cities Annual Conference, 2007
Speaker, “Redevelopment Agreements,” CEB Land Use Seminar, 2006
Speaker, “Investigating Real Estate: What Public Ag encies Need to Know Before They Buy,”
Client Seminar, 2006
Speaker, “The Powers of Redevelopment,” California Redevelopment Association,
Introduction to Redevelopment Program, 2006
Speaker, “Getting Blight Right: A Review of Recent Case Law and Tips for Bu lletproofing
Redevelopment Plan Documents,” California Redevelopment Association Legal Issues
Symposium, 2005
Speaker, “Redevelopment and Cost-Sharing Agreements,” Municipal Management
Association of Northern California, 2004
Speaker, “Anatomy of a Mixed-Income Multi-Family Housing Project: Land Use and Financial
Tools that Increase Affordability,” Bay Area City Attorneys Association (BACA), 2004
Speaker, “Introduction to Redevelopment,” California Redevelopment Association, 2002
Speaker, “Tax Increment Financing for Community Development,” Neighborhood
Reinvestment Corporation/Neighborhood Housing Services Conferences, 1987 -1988
Author, Tax Increment Financing: A Tool for Community Development, Neighborhood
Reinvestment Corporation, 1988
Co-author, “Developments in Non-profit Production of Low-Income Housing,” with David
Kirkpatrick and Mary Ann Dillon, Clearinghouse Review , 1987
Speaker, “Housing Trust Funds,” National Legal Aid Defenders Association Conference, 1987
Author, “Unique Partnership Launched in Chicago,” Economic Development and Law Center
Report , July/August 1985
Page A-17
Ronald F. Frank
Partner
State No. 109076
Los Angeles Office
444 South Flower Street
Suite 2400
direct: 213.236.2840
main: 213.236.0600
fax: 213.236.2700
[email protected]
P RACTICE G ROUPS
Litigation
Public Law
E DUCATION
J.D., University of Virginia
School of Law, 1982
B.A., summa cum laude ,
Bucknell University, 1979
A DMISSIONS
Ron Frank is a partner in Burke, Williams & Sorensen’s Los
Angeles office and is the Chair of the firm’s Litigation Practice
Group. He is admitted to practice in California, and formerly
admitted in Texas.
He has tried over 40 cases, including
employment discrimination, commercial and contract litigation,
products liability, and consumer warranty cases. Mr. Frank has
litigated a diverse range of matters for public agencies ranging
from public works contract disputes to police tort defense to
employment claims to public utilities matters. His range of
matters for private clients includes employment advice and
litigation, bodily injury and wrongful death claims, con tract and
partnership disputes, and litigation involving motor vehicle
warranty and unfair business practices, class actions,
professional liability, prescription drugs and medical devices. His
practice also includes counseling clients pre-litigation, handling
administrative proceedings and product recall campaigns,
training employees, conducting internal and personnel
investigations, and providing expert witness testimony.
While attending the University of Virginia School of Law,
Mr. Frank was an Articles Editor for the Virginia Journal of
International Law , was selected for inclusion in the inaugural
Virginia Trial Advocacy Institute, captained the law school
soccer team, and competed in moot court.
Mitchell A. Grobeson, etc. vs. City of Los Angeles, et al., Los
Angeles Superior Court No. BC 150151 (c/w BC 159142, BS
043521 and BS049282). Mr. Frank represented the defendants
in a multiple-count employment discrimination case alleging
First Amendment violations, breach of contract, retaliation,
constructive discharge, and a hostile work environment arising
out of claimed sexual orientation discrimination at the Los
Angeles Police Department in the mid-1990’s. The jury returned
a defense verdict in December 2007, but due to alleged j uror
misconduct, a new trial was ordered. The re-trial began in
February of 2013 but was settled after seven days of trial.
William Taylor vs. City of Burbank , Los Angeles Superior Court
Texas State Bar, 1982
No. BC 422252. Mr. Frank represented the defendant in an
employment case alleging wrongful termination, wrongful
demotion, and retaliation at the Burbank Police Department.
Plaintiff, the former deputy chief of the Burbank police
department, claimed he was retaliated against for reporting
discrimination against fellow officers. The City claimed it fired
plaintiff after an outside investigation found he committed
official misconduct. The jury returned a plaintiff verdict in March
of 2012 and an appeal is pending.
the Central District of California,
1983
the Southern District of
California, 1984
Page A-18
Stump’s Market vs. Plaza de Santa Fe, San Diego Superior Court No. 37-2009-00052809-CUCO-NC. Mr. Frank represented the plaintiff in this commercial lease dispute concerning a
grocery market whose landlord attempt ed to force an eviction and who allegedly violated the
written and oral agreements of the parties. The jury returned a verdict in May of 2010 in
favor of the plaintiff, and the trial judge granted judgment in plaintiff’s favor on equitable
issues as well. The verdict was affirmed on appeal
Doris Russell v. Massachusetts Mutual Life Insurance Co. (1985) 473 U.S. 134.
Mr. Frank
represented the defendant in this insurance disability benefits case under the Employee
Retirement and Income Security Act (ERISA). The U.S. Supreme Court reversed the 9th Circuit,
based on Mr. Frank’s briefing concerning implied private rights of action, establishing an
important precedent limiting litigation and remedies arising out of benefits decisions by plan
fiduciaries in self-funded benefits plans covered by ERISA.
Henry Unger v. Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC, Los Angeles Superior Court Case No. BC 396926.
Mr. Frank represented the defendants in this consumer class action case alleging improper
business practices and violation of disclosure rules concerning as vehicles alleged to be
Lemon Law buybacks. The case was resolved by settlement which was approved by the
Court, without any determination on whether a class would be certified or not.
Chad Peters v. City of Hemet, et al., United Stated District Court Case No. EDCV09-2235 CJC
(OPx). Mr. Frank represented the defendants in a case of alleged excessive force that
occurred incident to an arrest. The case was resolved by settlement before expert discovery.
City of Glendale vs. Catalytica Combustion Systems, Inc., et al., Orange County Superior Court
Case No. 00-CC-13002. Mr. Frank represented the plaintiff in this public contract dispute
concerning emissions control technology for the plaintiff’s power -generating facilities. The
case was resolved by settlement on confidential terms favorable to the City.
Affiliations
American Bar Association Section on Litigation
Defense Research Institute; member, Products Liability Committee
Los Angeles County Bar Association
California Law Chapter in Products Liability Defenses, a State-by-State Compendium , 1992,
2001, and 2007 eds.
Power of Congress Under the Property Clause to Give Extraterritorial Effect to Federal Lands
Law, 15 Natural Resources Lawyer 665, 1983
Indemnity, Contribution and Third Party Practice in Occupational Disease Litigation, PLI
Occupational Disease Litigation , 1983 (co-author)
Presentations to clients on compliance with California sexual harassment laws
Guest lecturer in various law school classes on trial advocacy, Lemon Law, and torts issues
Recognitions
Southern California “Superlawyer” 2004, and 2006 - 2013.
Page A-19
Mark J. Mulkerin
Mr. Mulkerin's practice includes litigation and commercial
matters for public and private entities in a wide variety of subject
matters.
Mr. Mulkerin has successfully represented clients in eminent
domain, inverse condemnation, land use, ground and riparian
water matters, public works, construction law and construction
defect actions, business and finance matters, products liability,
complex business and personal tort, and computer and Internet related litigation.
Partner
Suite 1550
direct: 949.236.2835
main: 949.863.3363
fax: 949.863.3350
[email protected]
P RACTICE G ROUPS
Education Law
Mr. Mulkerin has successfully defended public entities,
developers, and general contractors, subcontractors, architects,
engineers, and other design professionals in multi-party
construction defect actions, as well as in general legal matters.
He also has successfully represented public entities, businesses,
and individuals both in the defense and prosecution of civil
litigation claims. Mr. Mulkerin has also represented EarthLink
Network, Inc. and other commercial enterprises in computer law,
general business, and Internet-related matters.
Affiliations
Orange County Bar Association
Litigation
Public Law
E DUCATION
J.D., Loyola Law School, 1993
Studied at London School of
Economics
B.A., International Relations,
Stanford University, 1988
A DMISSIONS
the Central, Eastern, Northern,
and Southern Districts of
California, 1994
Page A-20
Kelly A. Trainer
Kelly Trainer is a partner in Burke's Orange County office,
representing public and private sector clients in labor and
employment law matters.
Partner
Suite 1550
direct: 949.265.3416
main: 949.863.3363
fax: 949.863.3350
[email protected]
P RACTICE G ROUPS
Litigation
Public Law
E DUCATION
J.D., University of the Pacific,
McGeorge School of Law,
2001
B.A., Political Science,
University of Houston, 1998
A DMISSIONS
Texas State Bar, 2002
Ms. Trainer has represented and advised employers on matters
involving numerous federal and state law claims, including
discrimination, harassment, retaliation, wrongful termination,
leaves of absence, wage and hour, freedom of speech and
association, and privacy. In addition, Ms. Trainer's practice
includes representation of public employers in areas unique to
public employment such as due process, disciplinary procedures,
the MMBA, CalPERS, and the Public Safety Officers Procedural
Bill of Rights, and the Firefighters Procedural Bill of Rights.
Ms. Trainer has an extensive counseling practice, concentrating
on preventive measures of employment and labor law. In this
regard, her practice has focused on revising personnel rules and
personnel ordinances, updating specific policies, and advising
public agencies on the handling of a variety of employ ment
matters.
Ms. Trainer has acted as lead negotiator during labor
negotiations for public agencies, and has negotiated many labor
agreements. In addition to labor negotiations, Ms. Trainer has
experience in handling related labor relations issues such a s
grievances and PERB proceedings, and she regularly advises
employers on such matters.
Ms. Trainer has served as a neutral investigator for internal
investigations
of
employment
complaints
involving
discrimination,
harassment,
retaliation,
and
workplace
misconduct.
She also conducts a variety of seminars and
workplace trainings for employees on matters such as
harassment prevention, disability discrimination, workplace
investigations, managing difficult employees, workplace
violence, discipline and termination, social media, performance
evaluation, creating effective documentation, and leaves of
absence.
While in law school, Ms. Trainer served as a staff writer and later
as the comment editor for The Transnational Lawyer. She
authored a student comment entitled, "The Vienna Convention
on Consular Rights in the United States Courts," 13 Transnational
Lawyer 227 (2000).
Ms. Trainer is admitted to practice in both California and Texas.
Page A-21
Upcoming and Recent Presentations
Preventing Workplace Harassment, Discrimination and Retaliation for Supervisory and
General Employees , Multiple Client Presentations, 2003-2014
Working in a Fishbowl: Practical Challenges for Public Sector Employees , Multiple Client
Presentations, 2011-2014
Solving the Performance Evaluation Puzzle , Multiple Client Presentations, 2013-2014
We, the Rude, Angry and Violent People: Preventing and Responding to Dangerous
Workplace Conduct , PARMA Annual Conference, Anaheim, February 2015
Power of the Pen: Creating Effective Workplace Documentation , PARMA Annual Conference,
Anaheim, February 2015
Avoiding Wipeouts on the Wave of Social Media , CalPELRA, Monterey, November 2014
Riptide Ahead: Preventing and Responding to Dangerous Workplace Conduct , CalPELRA,
Monterey, November 2014
Trying to End the Endless Summer: Conducting Reasonable Accommodation Meetin gs , CJPIA
Annual Risk Management Educational Forum, Santa Barbara, October 2014
Avoiding Gnarly Wipeouts by Conducting Totally Tubular Workplace Investigations , CJPIA
Annual Risk Management Educational Forum, Santa Barbara, October 2014
Keep Calm and Update Your Status:
Emerging Trends in Social Media, CSDA Annual
Conference and Exhibitor Showcase, Palm Springs, October 2014
The Troll Under the Bridge: Consequences of Not Addressing Disability Discrimination , 11th
Annual Disability Employment Awareness Conference & Training, Emeryville, October 2014
Keep Calm and Update Your Status: Emerging Trends in Social Media, State Bar of California,
Los Angeles, October 2014
In Order to Form a More Perfect Workplace Investigation , 2014 IMPA-HR International
Training Forum, Philadelphia, September 2014
Don’t Tweet Your Way to Termination: Social Media and the Public Workplace, League of
California Cities Annual Conference and Expo, Los Angeles, September 2014
It’s Elementary, Dear Watson: Conducting Effective Workp lace Investigations , State Bar of
California, Los Angeles, July 2014
Really Bad, in a Good Way: Performance Evaluations, Employee Discipline, and Effective
Documentation , CSDA General Manager Leadership Summit, Squaw Valley, June 2014
They Unionized…Now What?! , City of Temple City, June 2014
Human Resources Boot Camp for Supervisors , City of Hemet, May 2014
The Troll Under the Bridge: Disability Discrimination in the Workplace, IPMA-HR Western
Region Annual Conference, San Francisco, May 2014
Diving in the Deep End of Disability Discrimination: Legal Aspects of Handling Injured
Workers from an HR Standpoint , PARMA/PASMA Joint Meeting, La Habra, March 2014
Status Update:
Recent Developments on Social Media in the Public Workplace , PARMA
Annual Conference, San Jose, February 2014
Page A-22
How to Strengthen Your Agency: Human Resources Boot Camp for Managers, CJPIA
Executive Academy, January 2014
Human Resources Boot Camp for Supervisors , City of Pismo Beach, January 2014
Diving in the Deep End of Disability Discrimination , CALPELRA Annual Conference,
Monterey, November 2013
Diving in the Deep End of Disability Discrimination, CJPIA Risk Management Educational
Forum, Indian Wells, October 2013
Preventing Workplace Violence, CJPIA, Indio, September 2013
Predict a Better Future: Dealing with Difficult Employees , IPMA-HR Western Region
Conference, Anaheim, May 2013
To Tweet or Not To Tweet: Developments on Social Media in the Workplace , IPMA-HR
Western Region Conference, Anaheim, May 2013
Don’t be Disabled by Disability Issues: A Holistic Focus! , Cal-PRIMA Southern California
Workshop, Diamond Bar, April 2013
The Power of the Pen: Creating Effective Documentation , CJPIA Human Resources Academy,
San Luis Obispo, April 2013
Human Resources Managers’ Role in Solving the Per formance Evaluation Puzzle, CJPIA
Human Resources Academy, San Luis Obispo, April 2013
How to Strengthen Your Agency: Human Resources Basics for Managers, CJPIA Leadership
Academy, Huntington Beach, March 2013
Diving in the Deep End:
Exploring Four Challenges of Disability Discrimination,
CalPRIMA/PARMA Joint Mini-Conference, Sacramento, October 2012
Leave Stress: Disability, Workers’ Compensation and Leaves of Absence, CJPIA Workers’
Compensation Symposium, La Habra, August 2012
How to Strengthen Your Agency: An Executive's Guide to Human Resources , CJPIA Executive
Academy, Pasadena, January 2012
To Tweet or Not to Tweet: Managing Social Networking in the Workplace , Orange County
City Attorney's Association, Anaheim, October 2011
Playing Your Trump Card: Managing Social Networking in the Workplace, CJPIA Risk
Management Educational Forum, Indian Wells, October 2011
Risk Management Strategies for Dealing with Difficult Employees, CalPRIMA/PARMA Joint
Mini-Conference, Temecula, October 2011
Dealing with Difficult Employees , CJPIA Human Resource Academy, Huntington Beach, May
2011
To Tweet or Not to Tweet: Managing Social Networking in the Workplace , CJPIA Human
Resource Academy, Huntington Beach, May 2011
To Tweet or Not to Tweet: Managing Social Networking in the Workplace, Tri-County Local
Government Attorney's Association, Camarillo, January 2011
Common Employment Law Issues: Wage & Hour, Disability, Leaves, and Termination , Pro's
Choice Beauty Care, Inc., September 2011
Effective Employee Evaluations, CJPIA, September 2011
Page A-23
To Tweet or Not to Tweet: Managing Social Networking in the Workplace , CALPELRA,
November 2010
The Shadowy Underworld of Employment Law: Employee Complaints, Extended Leaves of
Absence, Performance Problems, and Disciplinary Actions , CJPIA Risk Management
Conference, October 2010
Recent Publicati ons
Legal Trends ( Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP , 2008-2013)
Pocket Guide to Disability Discrimination in the California Workplace (CPER. November 2011)
Compliance with AB 218: California JPIA Model Form for Criminal Inquiries (The Authority,
CJPIA, July 2014)
How Outdated is Your Harassment Prevention Policy (The Authority, CJPIA, June 2014)
Q&A: Harassment Prevention Training and Special Districts (CSDA e-News, June 2014)
Common Public Employer Misconceptions (The Authority, CJPIA, April 2014)
To Document or Not to Document: Life After Poole vs. Orange County Fire Authority (The
Authority, CJPIA, February 2014)
Failing to Train Employees and Officials About Workplace Harassment Can be Disastrous
(Employment Law Update, December 2013)
2013 Employment Legislation Highlights (Employment Law Update, November 2013)
2013 Employment Legislation Highlights (The Authority, CJPIA, November 2013)
Legal Matters: Volunteers…Too Good to be True? (The Authority, CJPIA, October 2013)
Affordable Care Act Frequently Asked Questions (Employment Law Update, August 2013)
Legal Matters: SB 1021: More Changes Required for Retired Annuitant Contracts (The
Authority, CJPIA, August 2012)
Case Name
Alhambra Firefighters Association
v. City of Alhambra
William Cannon v. City of Santa
Clarita
Steve Soria v. City of Hemet
Steven Swaim v. City of Hemet
Alhambra Firefighters Association
v. City of Alhambra
Area of Emphasis
Employment litigation
Discrimination litigation –
gender, marital status and family
leave
Discrimination litigation –
disability, national origin and age
Wrongful termination and
disability discrimination litigation
Unfair Practice Charge
Verdict/Outcome
Prevailed on summary
judgment
Settled before trial
Settled after mediation
Settled after mediation
Prevailed on appeal
before PERB
(PERB Dec. No. 2139M)
Mike Briedert v. City of Santa
Clarita
R.P. Brar v. City of Banning
Wrongful termination
Wrongful termination
Prevailed at arbitration;
writ of mandate denied
Page A-24
EXCEPTIONS TO THE RFP
While Burke would generally accept the City’s standard form if required to do so, some of the
provisions in the standard form either don’t lend themselves to the city attorney relationship or
are not appropriate in the context of the city attorney relationship. Accordingly, Burke
respectfully requests the following changes to the City’s standard form, and would be happy to
discuss with City representatives these or any other necessary changes to the form:
RFP Section
Number
RFP Page
Number
Exception (Provide a Detailed Explanation)
Section 1.7
Attachment B,
page 3
Delete subsection (ii) language and reformulate with (i)
only.
Section 3.1
Attachment B,
page 5
Delete last sentence (“Total Compensation” language). It is
difficult to place a not-to-exceed on a contract for legal
services without knowing how many and which legal issues
will arise.
Section 5.1
Attachment B,
page 7
We would prefer to delete indemnity and defense of city
provisions.
Section 7.7
Attachment B,
page 12
Delete in full.
City of San Clemente
100 Avenida Presidio
San Clemente, CA 92672
ATTACHMENT G
COST SUBMITTAL
CITY ATTORNEY SERVICES
Option “A”
Retainer Fee
$
Retainer/fixed fee cap (with an explanation of what it covers) plus hourly fees for
litigation or special projects
Services
See attached
MONTHLY FIXED RETAINER/HOURLY
Hourly Fee
Services Not in Retainer
$
OTHER COSTS
(Photocopying, Westlaw, or Lexis fees, overhead factor, etc.)
Fee
$
Option “B”
Hourly Fee
$
Item
Services at No Cost
See attached
Hourly fees for all work (no retainer/fixed fee)
Services
HOURLY FEE – NO RETAINER
Attorney & Personnel
Minimum
Increment
See attached
OTHER COSTS
(Photocopying, Westlaw, or Lexis fees, overhead factor, etc.)
Fee
$
Option “C”
Item
Services at No Cost
See attached
Proposers’ choice. Explain any billing methodology you wish.
Utilize space below or include an additional attachment to expand.
PROPOSERS’ CHOICE
RFP NO. 2015-001
ATTACHMENT G
COST PROPOSAL
7.1
Option A – Fixed Retainer Plus Hourly Billing
Burke understands the appeal of a monthly retainer, which would give the City some
predictability in planning for payment of legal s ervices. Accordingly, we present the following
retainer proposal at the City’s request.
For a monthly retainer amount of Ten Thousand Dollars ($10,000), Burke will perform up to 45
hours of General Legal Services per month. This would include all of the w ork listed as General
Legal Services below, including regular office hours at City Hall as requested by the City, and
up to 5 hours per month on basic labor and employment advice (such as routine policy and
contract/MOU review, staff reports for labor and employment-related agenda items, and basic
labor and employment advice presented by the City Attorney and/or Assistant City Attorney).
If the General Legal Service hours exceed 45 hours in a given month, additional hours will be
billed at $250 per hour for partners and $235 per hour for associates.
Monthly Retainer
General Legal Services (up to 45 hours)
Rate
$10,000
G e ne r al Co u ns el L ist of S er vi ce s

Attendance at all meetings of the City Council (including regular sessions, closed
sessions, and as needed work sessions)

Attendance, as needed and as directed by the City Council and/or City Manager at
certain meetings of the City's Commissions or other City committees

Attendance at staff meetings as requested by the City Manager

Review and/or preparation of ordinances, resolutions, orders, agreements, forms,
notices, declarations, certificates, deeds, leases, and other documents required by the
City

Consultation with the City Council and City staff as needed - rendering of legal advice
and opinions concerning legal matters that affect the C ity, including new legislation
and court decisions. Perform research and interpret laws, court decisions, and other
legal authorities in order to prepare legal opinions and to advise the Council and
management staff on legal matters pertaining to City ope rations

Legal work pertaining to routine issues related to property acquisition, zoning, property
disposal, public improvements, public rights-of-way and easements, and matters relating
to public utilities

Coordinate the work of outside legal counsel as needed and as directed by the City
Council and/or City Manager
Page 1

Regularly scheduled office hours at City Hall as designated by the City Council and/or
City Manager
H o u rly Ra te – G en er al C o u ns el i n Ex c es s o f 45 Ho u rs
Staffing
Hourly Rate
Partners
$250
Associate Attorneys
$235
Paralegals
$135
H o u rly Ra te - Sp e cial / Lit i g at io n S er vi ce s
For Specialty and Litigation Services, Burke proposes a rate structure that takes into account
the experience and specialized skill of each attorney called upon to perform wor k for San
Clemente, though at a discounted rate to account for the City Attorney/Client relationship the
firm and the City will have developed through time working together.
Specialized Legal Services and Litigation Rates (for all work not considered “Gene ral Legal
Services”) are as follows:
Staffing
Hourly Rate
Senior Partners
$310
Junior Partners and Of Counsel
$290
Associates
$250
Paralegals
$135
R ei m b ur s em e nt s
We routinely charge our clients for our direct out -of-pocket expenses and costs incurred in
performing the services.
These costs and expenses commonly include such items as
reproduction of documents, facsimile, mileage reimbursement for travel at the IRS approved
rate, and other costs reasonably and necessarily incurred in performing servic es for the City.
We do not charge a service fee or overhead for cost reimbursement items. We also do not
charge for computer or word processing time. Reimbursement amounts may be adjusted
annually.
Expense
Rate
In-house reproduction charges
black and white
10¢ per page
color
$1 per page
Mileage
56¢ per mile (or current IRS rate)
Facsimile
$1 per page
Page 2
Expense
Rate
All other costs reasonably and
necessarily incurred in performing
services for the City
at cost
B illi ng F or m at an d Pr oc e d u re
Bills are sent out each month invoicing charges for the prior month. Fees for our services are
charged in increments of 1/10th of an hour. The bills provide a specific description of the work
performed by all attorneys, the time actually spent on the work item, and th e billing rate of the
attorney. The bills also contain itemized descriptions of any out -of-pocket expenses incurred
during the prior month.
7.2
Option B – Hourly Fees for All Work Without a Retainer
H o u rly Ra te – G en er al S e r vic es
Staffing
Hourly Rate
Partners
$275
Associate Attorneys
$250
Paralegals
$135
H o u rly Ra te - Sp e cial / Lit i g at io n S er vi ce s
For Specialty and Litigation Services, Burke proposes a rate structure that takes into account
the experience and specialized skill of each attorney called u pon to perform work for San
Clemente, though at a discounted rate to account for the City Attorney/Client relationship the
firm and the City will have developed through time working together.
Specialized Legal Services and Litigation Rates (for all work no t considered “General Legal
Services”) are as follows:
Staffing
Hourly Rate
Senior Partners
$310
Junior Partners and Of Counsel
$290
Associates
$250
Paralegals
$135
R ei m b ur s em e nt s
We routinely charge our clients for our direct out -of-pocket expenses and costs incurred in
performing the services.
These costs and expenses commonly include such items as
reproduction of documents, facsimile, mileage reimbursement for travel at the IRS approved
Page 3
rate, and other costs reasonably and necessarily incurred in performing services for the City.
We do not charge a service fee or overhead for cost reimbursement items. We also do not
charge for computer or word processing time. Reimbursement amounts may be adjusted
annually.
Expense
Rate
In-house reproduction charges
black and white
10¢ per page
color
$1 per page
Mileage
56¢ per mile (or current IRS rate)
Facsimile
$1 per page
All other costs reasonably and
necessarily incurred in performing
services for the City
at cost
B illi ng F or m at an d Pr oc e d u re
Bills are sent out each month invoicing charges for the prior month. Fees for our services are
charged in increments of 1/10th of an hour. The bills provide a specific description of the work
performed by all attorneys, the time actually spent on the work item, and the billing rate of the
attorney. These bills also contain itemized descriptions of any out -of-pocket expenses incurred
during the prior month.
Page 4

Nuance Communications, Inc.

Transcription

Similar documents

View our Legal Services Brochure - Bel Air Professional Translation

Lane Lacoy AUCTION

open Office Overview Brochure

10 Marina Terra - Seaside Realty

Cabrillo Playhouse

Angono Festivals

Consumer Fraud Complaint - Sacramento County District Attorney

a Complimentary Preview!

Flier - Triland Realty Partners, LLC