City Attorney’s Surprise Decision to Resign Stuns Pomona Council

City Atty. Patrick Sampson is resigning after 16 years of service, a move some council members attributed to sweeping changes by a new council majority and bitter dissension among city officials over those changes.

Sampson announced his intention to leave City Hall at the beginning of Monday night’s City Council meeting, surprising council members, who said they had no prior knowledge of his plans.

Councilman C. L. (Clay) Bryant said the news was “earth-shaking. . . . You’ve been here for so many years.”

Sampson offered no explanation for his plans, merely telling the council: “I’ve always believed it has been a privilege to work for the city.”

In an interview Tuesday, the 52-year-old graduate of UCLA Law School evaded questions about his resignation.

“I don’t want to make any comments about the council or the city,” Sampson said. “I don’t want to criticize; I don’t want to praise.”

His colleagues, however, were quick to cite recent council actions--including the elimination of three top-level administrative positions and the firing of former City Administrator A. J. Wilson--as reasons for Sampson’s departure. The actions, they said, have created an atmosphere of divisiveness and antagonism that has become commonplace at council meetings.

Sampson is the second high-ranking city employee to resign this month. Former City Planner Konradt Bartlam left his post Aug. 17 to work for the city of Brea.

‘Overhaul’ Urged

The resignations followed suggestions by the council majority--Bryant, Nell Soto and Tomas Ursua--for a complete overhaul of the redevelopment staff and other city departments. At a recent meeting, Bryant said staff members should be reviewed individually to determine whether they should be laid off.

“You can’t just pass it off as a coincidence,” Councilman Mark A. T. Nymeyer said. “It’s not a coincidence. There’s a new majority and some kind of a new direction. I think the staff is concerned and, to a certain extent, rightfully so.”

Bryant acknowledged that because of “cost-saving” actions the council majority took, “there is reason for department people to be apprehensive if they’ve been classed among the deadwood. (Sampson) may have felt insecure and applied that to his job, but I don’t know how that would affect him. There is nothing in the new majority to make him feel threatened.”

“That man was indefatigable,” Bryant added. “He had answers to hairy problems. He gave sound and concrete advice.”

Deputy to Serve

Sampson said he has no definite career plans. He intends to spend time with his wife and two sons and travel to London to visit his daughter. He said he may return to teaching local government law at the University of La Verne.

Upon Sampson’s departure, Deputy City Atty. Bill Curley will serve as interim city attorney while the council searches for a permanent replacement.

In 1973, Sampson became the first city attorney to enter the position as a council appointee. His predecessor, Robert C. Gustaveson, was elected in 1963 and then appointed in 1965 when the City Charter was changed to make the post appointive.

Sampson first worked as deputy under Gustaveson for 10 years, at the same time working part time at private firms in La Verne and Claremont.

Reflecting on his tenure with the city, Sampson said he has taken a conservative approach to his position, rarely crossing the “very fine line” separating strictly legal advice from political advocacy.

“Some city attorneys have become involved in policy areas. We find this more with elected city attorneys, who seem more likely to cross over into the policy-making area,” he said.

For example, Arlo E. Rickett Jr., who preceded Gustaveson, was asked by the City Council to resign in 1951 for failing to carry out the spirit and intent of his office. In one case, Rickett refused to sign an agreement with the Metropolitan Water District, a decision Sampson said stemmed from personal objections rather than a professional opinion.

“That was an example of a city attorney doing something beyond the scope of his powers,” Sampson said. “He was criticized for that. Gustaveson ran against that type of philosophy and won.”

But on several occasions, Bryant has criticized Sampson for refusing to take any risks.

“I would become agitated and say, ‘Don’t tell me what we can’t do; tell me what we can do,’ ” Bryant said.

‘Took Job Seriously’

Nymeyer said Sampson “wasn’t a high-profile city attorney. That may have been an irritation to some people. But he took the job seriously. He was an excellent research attorney.”

Nymeyer praised Sampson for the work he did in helping to defend the city against charges that its at-large election system discriminated against Latinos and blacks. At the time, only two Latinos, and no blacks, had ever been elected to the City Council. A federal judge ruled in favor of the city, and a circuit court recently upheld the ruling after it was appealed.

Sampson said the case will probably stand out as the most memorable in his 16-year tenure, because he was put in the position of collecting evidence to defend the at-large system but believed that residents should have the final say about what system is preferable.

“I had suggested very early on in the process that voters should select whatever voting scheme they wanted, and recommended to the council that they put it on the ballot,” Sampson said. “I have always felt that even in the absence of discrimination, a federal judge has no right to tell citizens how to elect people. I think eventually it will be put on the ballot.”