- Stay Connected
Former city attorney returns as hearing examiner
Phil Olbrechts, former attorney for the city of Monroe, is one of three attorneys the city is engaging to replace hearing examiner John Galt.
Galt, who had been city hearing examiner for 10 years, asked for an increase in his hourly rate in September.
That led city manager Gene Brazel to realize that the city hadn’t reviewed his contract for some time.
“Typically every few years, we review contracts and go out for proposals,” he said.
The city put out a request for proposals and invited Galt to submit one. He declined.
The city then decided to try to find a roster of attorneys to handle hearings on a rotating basis.
Former city attorney Phil Olbrechts, who works through the law firm Ogden, Murphy and Wallace, put in a proposal and was given a contract. Two other attorneys are currently negotiating contracts.
Brazel said that the amount the three attorneys will earn is “in the ballpark” of what Galt had asked.
Hearing examiners typically resolve appeals when citizens or others question a decision made by a city body.
Meredith Mechling
October 24, 2012 at 7:47 pm
By hiring back Phil Olbrechts, the city is saying they are OK with conducting city business out of public view by email, and then keeping the public out of the loop by conveniently declaring those emails attorney-client privileged.
This is what happened in 2005, when Chad Minnick and Robert Zimmerman (then a councilmember) tried to get the Ethics Board eliminated. All done outside public view, by email. Minnick enlisted the help of Phil Olbrechts to get an ordinance quickly drafted, fast-tracked, and slipped on the agenda for a first and final reading. And they got the former city administrator to help them. He carefully edited the agenda to make it difficult, if not impossible, to know that the council was about to eliminate the Ethics Board. The city administrator sent the specially abbreviated agenda to Olbrechts, and bragged, “Good Grief! How’s that for an agenda? I know it’s not ‘right’, but best we could do considering…” (This particular email was withheld from me, but was turned over to another requester, and that is how I got it)
That email thread also contained references to the Watergate scandal, with Olbrechts cautioning that it “won’t look too great” if the council eliminates the board after it receives a complaint. “Remember Nixon and his special prosecutor? So we should get this done quickly.” There were several references in the week’s worth of emails that referenced the Watergate scandal. So there was a consciousness of wrongdoing. It appears that Olbrechts knew his reputation would suffer if these emails became public. So he had to keep them under wraps. It took five years for the city to release them.
Another significant revelation from this lawsuit was when the case was being heard in Superior Court. The judge asked Angela Belbeck(who took over the case because of Olbrechts’ involvement in the emails) whether the dozen or so emails that were withheld on the basis of attorney client privilege were properly withheld. She replied she could not answer that question, as she had not read them! Plausible denial?
After the Court of Appeals unanimously ruled in my favor in October 2009, I was able to have those dozen or so emails “unsealed” from the court record. Incredibly, I found that city had “silently” deleted a whole paragraph of one of the emails. Here is what the city illegally withheld from the judge responsible for determining if they were correctly withheld:
“Thanks to the council suffering the foolishness of the mayor last night, I feel like the hound of hell has been unleashed on my reputation. For my own part, I want to make sure we act on the changes before the target moves again. We’ve got to put this issue to bed. Forgive my understandably unreasonable attitude this morning. I have a headache.” (This is from an email written by Chad Minnick to Phil Olbrechts on 3/3/05)
Jim Hunnicutt
October 24, 2012 at 11:32 pm
I find it very troubling whats happening in our city and nothing is being done about it.The hiring of Mr Olbrechts as a hearing examiner for Monroe is just another example of the way this council works to manipulate things so they can satisfy certain friends that are trying to use the city and staff and city funds for there personal benefits.I would hope people step up and begin looking into these things,by way of state auditor or any other way possible.I would ask this council to always do the right thing for the people in our city,dont be a pawn for the Mayor or anyone else,just be honest and ethical in what you do for your city,thats all we ask.Thank you Jim Hunnicutt
Finis Tupper
October 28, 2012 at 5:28 pm
The biggest problem with this Hearing Examiner appointment is; it creates a “conflict of interest”.
The City Attorney is member of the Ogden Murphy Wallace law firm. Phil Olbrechts is a former partner of the same law firm. One can assume City Staff will be seeking legal advice from the City Attorney. Will the former law partner from the same firm be impartial and free of bias in his legal conclusions based on the city staff’s legal findings written on the advice of the City Attorney?
The attorney rules of professional conduct require disclosure of “conflicts of interest”. Has the Ogden Murphy Wallace law firm provided the City such a letter?
Now is time to get the Washington State Bar Association involved in this flawed process of choosing Hearing Examiner representation?