Getting out of Dodge

On Friday, the Oakland Tribune posted the first real leak in who has been shortlisted in the Alameda City Manager search.    Oakland’s elected City Attorney John Russo is one of three candidates that the City Council, in a closed session meeting, voted unanimously to move to the next phase of the search process: background checks and vetting through the advisory panels.

For those following Oakland politics, there have been lots of article and blogs written about how unhappy John Russo has been lately — rumors have speculated about a possible Assembly run (which he quashed via Twitter), he had listed himself as a mediator for ADR, and essentially has told anyone who will listen that he has considered quitting as Oakland’s City Attorney.

John Russo has, of course, clashed publicly with newly elected Oakland Mayor Jean Quan over her appointment of her friend, Dan Siegel, as an unpaid legal advisor to her administration.   Dan Siegel’s law firm is representing the defendants in a gang injunction that John Russo has spearheaded to purportedly help stop gang violence in the Fruitvale district.

Another major bone of contention has been over John Russo’s public announcement that he would not represent Oakland if they continue to push the issue of the pot cultivation ordinance, citing  rule 3-700 of the California Rules of Professional Conduct, which defines the rules under which an attorney may terminate a client.   The reporter points out that:

…section C (1) states that an attorney may withdraw legal representation if “the client seeks to pursue an illegal course of conduct.”

So that’s a nutshell of John Russo’s conflicts in Oakland.  Which makes his decision to look for alternative employment no big surprise.  What is a surprise is the decision to look across the estuary to a much smaller pond than John Russo is accustom to in Oakland.

There are big pluses and big minuses to the City Council appointing John Russo as our new City Manager.

Let’s start with the pluses, because I like to be positive.

Clearly John Russo is a man who will not let any Council majority push him around given his history of very public conflicts with the Oakland City Council and Oakland Mayor.   If one is looking for a strong personality, I don’t think you can get a whole lot stronger than this guy.   A concern was that the City Council might opt to over-correct and select someone as City Manager who may be more deferential to the City Council, but John Russo would definitely not be anyone’s doormat.

He is a big proponent of transparency, having drafted Oakland Sunshine Ordinance when he sat on Oakland’s City Council, which would be a huge plus given recent history of keeping as much information from the public as possible.

He has worked in a city that has much bigger problems than Alameda and so our issues should seem small in comparison.

He definitely looks outside the box to deal with certain issues (see gang injunction) which could be a real asset.

But, on the other hand, there are also big negatives.  Big ones.

The first is that, if selected, given John Russo’s previous relationships with Marie Gilmore, Rob Bonta,  and Lena Tam (he  contributed to  their campaigns for the November election) the perception is one political payback which the East Bay Express — no fan of John Russo– has already added to this narrative.   In more disclosures, Marie Gilmore and Lena Tam also endorsed John Russo in his 2006 run for the Assembly.  Beverly Johnson and Doug deHaan both endorsed Sandre Swanson in that race.   So the notion that this is some recent political back scratching is not examining the history of the relationships amongst local politicians.

Next is that he is highly political.  He was elected to the Oakland City Council in 1994, served for six years, then was elected at the Oakland City Attorney in 2000.  He ran in 2006 for the open Assembly seat and lost to Sandre Swanson in the Democratic primary.   I would prefer that the next City Manager be apolitical, so someone so steeped in politics makes me nervous.   I didn’t like the vote counting that was the basis of the Ann Marie Gallant regime and a political animal is more likely than not to elect to appease enough votes to push his/her agenda through rather than try to build consensus amongst the whole Council.

Finally, it is not clear that he has any real experience in the executive branch of city government.   He has acted as a legislator in his role on the Oakland City Council and as the City Attorney he has worked to protect Oakland legally, but how much he understands the day-to-day work of running a city and the complex budgets is a big fat question mark.    According to his biography on his website, he did sit on the Finance Committee for the Oakland City Council, but how much that can replace actual experience is unknown.  However, based on a recent op-ed he wrote for the Bay Citizen, he does understand the impacts of deferring pension obligations.

Essentially, everyone has to love love love John Russo for him to be appointed  City Manager without bringing a cloud of controversy before he has even started or has even been selected.   Every single panel will need to sing his praises to the high heavens and the eventual vote will need to be unanimous if there is to be legitimacy if he is selected.

Personally, I would rather the next City Manager be much less controversial than someone like John Russo is shaping up to be, but I will concede that it is an interesting and different choice and could possibly be truly inspired.   But, it’s a huge gamble and while there is the possibility that this could be a great opportunity for Alameda, I can also see it being epically disastrous.

However, let’s not forget that there still are two other candidates — leaked over the weekend as former Alameda Assistant City Manager David Brandt (who is now City Manager in Redmond, Oregon) and Marcia Raines Millbrae City Manager — and they all received unanimous nods to move forward by the City Council, it will be interesting to see what the others bring to the table.

Advertisement