Kim Baldwin Must Be Removed From AC Government
Position Immediately For Conflicts of Interest!
By taking a position adverse to her client (The City
of Atlantic City), Baldwin has disqualified
By Don P. Hurley
September 24, 2007
Rules of Professional Conduct for NJ
Rule 1.7/1.8 CONFLICT OF
"A Lawyer employed by a "Public Entity" SHALL
NOT undertake an action which presents a "Substantial Risk" that the lawyers
responsibilities to the public entity would limit the lawyers ability to provide
"Independent Advice or Diligent and Competent" representation to the public
Kim Baldwin has proven the long time adage, "that the
lawyer who represents herself, has a fool for a client".
Baldwin has placed the City of Atlantic City on notice
by filing a Tort Claim Notice as her own lawyer, while advising that she
intends to sue the city that she, (before this notice), was serving
as their lawyer.
Baldwin even went a step further than individuals
normally do, by declaring publicly in The Press that "the only thing I can
tell you is that the suit is going to be filed".
This is particularly of interest as, a Tort Claim
Notice is not a law suit, but merely an advisory that a law suit may be filed in
It should also be noted that a law suit can not
be filed until 6 months after filing a Tort Claim
And you may recall Baldwin saying
on countless times in the past that "most Tort Claims never result in a law
But, somehow Baldwin knows the future, six months in
advance, that her own law suit has already been
guaranteed, and has promised that it is going to be
Kim Baldwin created a position for herself during the
campaign for Mayor of Atlantic City, where it has been previously
publicly acknowledged that Bob Levy and Baldwin had a deal during the
campaign that Baldwin would receive a job as City Solicitor or the Director
of the Department of Law, which did not even exist at the
It has been publicly stated that Baldwin
was also promised a considerable increase in pay from any other attorney who has
ever been employed in a similar position.
This salary increase was affected by Levy and Baldwin
in the form of a "Merit Increase" of $44,000.00 per year, in spite of the fact
that the city of Atlantic City is only permitted to remunerate a "Merit
Increase", in an amount not to exceed $1000.00 in any one
It is truly noteworthy that Baldwin received this
reward from Bob Levy in the form of a Merit Increase, retroactive to January 1,
2006, even though she had not worked a single day at that point.
How does someone earn "Merit" pay, before they've even
been on the job?
This whole political conspiracy also completely
flies in the face of the Citizens Petition and successful referendum that has
effectively frozen all salaries at the rate they were before these public
officials raised them an additional $44,000.00.
It is important to note that it is not permitted in
the State of New Jersey to promise anything of value during a political
campaign. Although, at this time I believe that the premise will be fodder
for another day.
Back to the Conflict of Interest and Kimberly Baldwin,
I am urging City Council and the NJ Bar Association to
take note of this egregious conflict and conduct by
Baldwin can not take a position adverse to her client,
(the citizens of Atlantic City), and than also serve in a legal position of
representation for the same client all at the time.
By filing this Tort Claim Notice and publicly
declaring that she is suing the city, Baldwin has permanently disqualified
herself from ever representing the people of Atlantic City ever
Baldwin needs to be removed from this public
position of conflict immediately.
Baldwin claims that she is the victim of retaliation
by certain members of the government in Atlantic City.
I have to wonder if this is similar the
retaliation that she reportedly inflicted upon AC Councilman George
Tibbett , whom Baldwin reportedly retaliated against in writing, one day after
Councilman Tibbett signed the petition to recall Baldwin's boss and meal ticket,
Bob Levy, from the Office of Mayor of Atlantic City?
Is this the kind of retaliation that Baldwin is
speaking of; the kind where you misrepresent facts in Superior Court, and
attempt to block a lawful citizens petition, designed to roll back an
unjust salary such as Baldwin's?
The Rules of Professional Conduct requires Kim Baldwin
while working as a lawyer in the State of New Jersey to among other things:
(1) be fair to opposing parties and
(2) to be
truthful in statements, and to others;
(3) To disclose material facts to a third person when
a disclosure is right or necessary, (as Baldwin DID NOT DO when
she intentionally failed to transmit Judge Armstrong's Order to City Clerk
Rosemary Adams and the County Clerk to place the citizens Salary Question on the
ballot in order to further intentionally obstruct the citizens of Atlantic City)
(4) To never undertake actions which present
a "substantial risk" that would limit the lawyers ability to provide
"independent advise or diligent and competent
(5) State or imply an ability to influence improperly
a government agency or official, or to achieve results that violate the Rules of
Professional Conduct or other law.
I applaud the members of Atlantic City Council who
wisely voted last Wednesday to abolish the Department of Law that
Baldwin had been previously operating in the form of a
political cabal from within the offices of Atlantic City
I also do not believe that Kim Baldwin has ever been
confirmed by City Council in the position of City Solicitor, so with the
elimination of The Department of Law, from what position is Kim Baldwin
conducting legal business on behalf of the people of Atlantic City
This should be specifically scrutinized in
order to protect the people of Atlantic City from future liability from
Baldwin, as there may be no legitimacy to any actions that she may
attempt to take from here on.
In view of this previously stated information, it is
my opinion that Kimberly Baldwin, Esq. must be immediately removed from any
position of legal representation in Atlantic City government, as her own adverse
action against her client disqualifies her from representing the people of
Atlantic City ever again.
I believe that the conflict is so egregious that
even if Baldwin were to drop the action that she has filed and
the further threatened actions; the adverse position she has taken
against the people of Atlantic City permanently disqualifies her from
ever representing them again.
Baldwin is certainly free to pursue what I
believe to be a frivolous legal action on her own time and at
her personal expense.
However, she should not be allowed to continue to
serve two masters any longer.
In my further opinion, Kim Baldwin may
have a fool for a client. Herself.
But, it is critical that she can not be permitted
to make additional and undeserving fools of the people of Atlantic
City any longer.
Don P. Hurley