$13,000 in legal fees on Open Meeting Law

The Town’s law firm billed the Town $13,000 in legal fees to address Open Meeting Law issues, in the final three months of 2020.

Over $8,000 was spent on the Planning Commission’s response to a formal notice of violation filed by three residents. The complaint related to working groups run by the Planning Director for the Planning Commission.

Another $5000 in legal services was provided to the Town for a training session that was closed to the public. The law firm indicated that those fees will be waived.

Here’s the excerpt from the Town Manager ‘s written report in the packet for the January 13 Selectboard meeting.

Additional OML issues continue to be raised. From October through November, the Town spent over $8,000 in legal fees alone to address and try to resolve the letter sent to the Town by Stuart Richards, Doug Wilberding, and Ernie Ciccotelli. (The cost offered in reply to Stuart’s request.)
An OML training workshop was provided by the Town legal counsel to elected and appointed officials of the Town and to Town staff. The training was provided at no cost – a savings of over $5000 related to the training, preparation for the training, and reply to specific questions raised by participants in advance of the training. (Thank you Stitzel Fletcher & Page, PC! Most appreciated!)

I have not seen the legal bills and don’t know the going rate for Burlington law firms. However, if one takes the Planning Commission project costing $8000 for an example. By my math, if the firm charges $1000 an hour, then an experienced municipal attorney spent a full work day on the matter. That seems like too much time for someone with superior knowledge of the Open Meeting Law. And if every close question costs that much to answer, then the Town might be better off complying with the Open Meeting Law rather than try to skirt it.

The Town continues to confront claims of Open Meeting Law violations. The Town Manager insists that working groups run by him are not bound by the law. At issue are the Diversity, Equity and Inclusion working group and the Green Fleet working group. Sounds expensive.

2 Replies to “$13,000 in legal fees on Open Meeting Law”

  1. Why isn’t the town paying that kind of money to a local attorney with expertise in the Town’s issues? We used to use Frank Olmstead. In my opinion, his work was at least as good as that from SF&P, and probably considerably less expensive. At least Olmstead didn’t cobble up lame rationalizations like that used by SF&P to deflect the OML claims, such as claiming that the Planning Commission work groups were working for the Planning Director f/k/a Zoning Administrator.

    Our Town Manager demonstrates with alarming regularity that his position is that cost is no object when it comes to spending Norwich citizens’ tax money. Whatever Norwich is paying SF&P, it is excessive and out of line with what VT attorneys charge.

  2. I don’t think the Town made a concerted effort to hire a local attorney. Ads were placed in ‘right’ places. But, to my knowledge, no one contacted other Upper Valley towns to learn who they used and why. RFPs weren’t sent to local law firms. The SB was fine with the TM’s approach.

    Thanks for keeping it local.