HomeMy WebLinkAbout2004-04-01 ad Hoc Town Counsel Review Committee MinutesED
SJ.
Ad Hoe Town Counsel Review Committee Meeting
April 1, 2004
The meeting convened at 7:00 p.m. in the Town Hall Berger Room, 16 Lowell Street, Reading,
Massachusetts. Present were Chairman Richard Schubert, Selectman Camille Anthony, Assessor
Tom Ryan, CPDC Member Susan DeMatteo, School Committee Member Rob Spadafora, Len
Kopelman and John Giorgio from Kopelman & Paige, Gary Brackett, Elaine Lucas and Joan
Langsam from Brackett & Lucas, Town Manager Peter Hechenbleikner.
The first order of business was to interview two candidates for Town Counsel. They were
Kopelman & Paige and Brackett & Lucas. Kopelman & Paige were interviewed first.
Kopelman & Paige Interview
Present were Len Kopelman and John Giorgio. Kopelman & Paige represents 118 communities
as Town Counsel, and they also represent some communities for Town Counsel and Labor
Counsel. There are three things that Kopelman & Paige does well. They provide the towns with
accurate advice, they get back to the clients fast, and they are cost effective. Items two and three
go together quick response and cost effectiveness. They work hard to keep their clients out of
trouble.
Reading has historically had a small firm there was one person who was Town Counsel
for a number of years but changed firms. Len Kopelman indicated that they had trained former
Town Counsel Ted Cohen when Cohen was in Brookline. The Town then switched to Brackett
& Lucas which is a seven to eight person firm representing 10 towns. Mr. Kopelman indicated
that he would like the Town to give Kopelman & Paige a try. If they are dissatisfied at any time,
then they can make a change. He indicated that Kopelman & Paige has never been fired from
any engagement they have had. They have not been rehired a couple of times. He reviewed the
cost of Town Counsel services on a per capita basis for a number of communities --they average
$3.65 per capita. Reading is currently at $4.06 per capita. They have a lot of information on file.
For example, they have construction documents drawn that could be tailored to Reading's
requirements. They don't recreate the wheel and as a result, they were able to respond quickly
and with quality. They have scanned all documents into their computer systems. They do a
question of the day in the office.
John Giorgio indicated that he has been at Kopelman & Paige since 1986. He does exclusive
municipal law and would be the prime attorney for Reading. He is also the prime attorney in
Burlington, Chelmsford, Lexington and other communities, and he does a lot of work for North
Reading. As the prime contact and principal attorney for Reading, he would make sure that
promises are kept. He would be the single attorney at the firm that we would be dealing with.
The services they provide would be cost effective and speedy. He would characterize his
expertise as being general municipal law, land use law, licenses, contracts, specialty contracts
and procurement and environmental law dealing with water, wastewater, landfill capping, etc.
There are 50 lawyers in the firm and they serve 120 communities.
Town Counsel Review Committee Meeting= April 1, 2004 - Page 2
Richard Schubert and Rob Spadafora indicated that he is a pattern lawyer. He noted that Town
employees and Boards, Committees and Commissions enjoy the smaller boutique law firm
feeling. John Giogio indicated that he would put together a small team of lawyers to work on
Reading matters, and he would be the principal attorney. He would designate a back up, and
have a land use attorney, real estate attorney and others as needed, and provides a high level of
service. Through e-mail and internal control, the principal attorney is kept knowledgeable of
what's going on with that client.
Richard Schubert asked how as the principal attorney, he can work with Reading and still make
sure he's available for meetings and other communities how do you deal with conflicts like
Town Meeting, etc.? Mr. Kopelman noted that they have back-up systems in place and with an
advance schedule of Town Meetings, they can schedule this. They will make appointments to be
present at Town Hall if the community desires it.
Susan DeMatteo asked if they would have the same person at Planning Commission Meetings.
Mr. Giorgio indicated that land use law is so complicated and they have a lot of respect for
members of Boards, Committees and Commissions who handle these matters. Their land use
group is second to none. One of their principals was formerly counsel for MAPC. They will
accommodate the communities' needs and desires as to who will serve that community. Mr.
Kopelman noted that they are available by phone at no charge. They rarely get a call but they
sometimes do, and they have a couple of attorneys on call in that manner.
Tom Ryan asked about Appellate Tax Board expertise. Mr. Kopelman noted that they handle
hundreds of cases and have an excellent record. They represent other towns in Appellate Tax
Board cases. Mr. Ryan asked about the Hopkinton case. Mr. Kopelman indicated that they
update clients with client advisories periodically. They do aggressive tax title work, and they
have three people who do a lot of the work on Appellate Tax Board and tax work cases.
Camille Anthony used Memorial Park issues as an example. She asked how they would handle
the issues there. Mr. Kopelman indicated that they have done many cy pres agreements and they
work through the Attorney General's Office on these matters. They would give the Town a
number of options, including possibly retaking the Memorial Park by eminent domain which
would be a very aggressive stance. This would give the Town the greatest flexibility.
Mr. Giorgio indicated that there is a benefit to a large firm. They can utilize the experience and
expertise of all the attorneys on issues that Reading might have. He used Article 97 issues as an
example. He indicated that they try to think three steps ahead and find out what the client is
really trying to do.
Camille Anthony asked where their offices were. They noted that there is a single lawyer in
Pittsfield and the others are in Boston. They do a lot of in-house teaching and their insurance
company has commended them for this. The three areas of practice are land use law, real estate
law and contracts. Rob Spadafora indicated that his firm has converted to blackberries for
communication purposes. Kopelman & Paige has not yet done this but uses electronics a lot.
Tom Ryan asked what the largest and smallest communities were. It was noted that Plymouth
was the largest and Mount Washington was the smallest.
Town Counsel Review Committee Meeting - April 1, 2004 - Page 3
Rick Schubert noted that the relationship between Town Counsel and the Town is important. He
asked why Kopelman & Paige was interested in Reading. Mr. Kopelman indicated that the
128/495 belt is their area of specialty. Reading fits in nicely with the portfolio of clients that
they have. He also noted that when they raised their rates, generally the community does not
have to raise their budget. They are very cost effective. The firm needs to grow and add clients
or they cannot keep their staff.
Camille Anthony noted that the Town of Reading expects a lot exceptional services, and wants to
know who they will be dealing with. Mr. Kopelman noted that at the last interview process, he
put himself down as the first person. He didn't do that this time. He doesn't want to make a
false promise. Mr. Giorgio is the managing partner, and he indicated that the firm is very aware
of the interest in personal services and they can deliver that.
There was discussion about staff stability. They bring in a couple of lawyers per year. Some of
the people they bring in are young people out of law school and others are people with
experience in government. They seldom lose people to the private sector. The top land use
people are Joe Bard, Betsy Lane and Judy Cutler. The top environmental people are John
Giorgio and Mark Rich. Their top contracts people are John Giorgio and David Danesky and
their top ATB person is Rich Bowen. The interview concluded at approximately 8:00 p.m.
Brackett & Lucas Interview
Gary Brackett, Elaine Lucas and Joan Langsam were present representing the firm. They
indicated that they have eight attorneys and the minimum experience is 15 years. They serve
communities from a population of 3,500 to a population of 40,000. They are special counsel to a
number of communities. They contribute heavily to the profession by providing panelists for a
number of MMA and City and Town Counsel Meetings.
Elaine Lucas and Joan Langsam have been past presidents of the City and Town Counsel
Association. Yvonne Gonzalez is very involved with the Massachusetts Association of
Conservation Commissions. Their experience in Reading has been to provide quality, timely and
cost effective service. Joan Langsam is the first level attorney. She's gotten to know Reading
quite well and feels the community is very well run. Litigation has been minimal and she feels
that Brackett & Lucas have been partly responsible for this. They provide succinct opinions and
clear legal advice, and they respond in a timely manner. She enjoys working with Reading and
noted that the staff is excellent. They get what they need from Town Counsel and Town Counsel
pushes them to do those things that they can do themselves. Working with the Schools, they are
working on construction documents and architect contracts. They have an excellent relationship
with, the CPDC and Zoning Board of Appeals. Politics does not get in the way of their doing
business in Reading.
Elaine Lucas noted that the firm was founded in 1983. Reading is an important client. She
personally shares mostly in the back-up role. She's also on the Wireless Steering Committee of
MMA along with the Town Manager, and is involved with the advisory committee to the
Housing Appeals Court.
Town Counsel Review Committee Meeting - April 1, 2004 - Page 4
Rick Schubert asked what the potential for conflict with neighboring communities might be; i.e.,
Brackett & Lucas has done work as special counsel for Woburn, and we may have a conflict with
Woburn on Inwood Office Park or the 128/93 Interchange. Gary Brackett noted that they
anticipate issues and would not look to take on any special counsel role that would in any way
conflict. Reading is the primary client here.
Tom Ryan asked who their attorney is and who would be dealing with the Appellate Tax Board
cases. John Gannon, who just left the firm to become City Solicitor in Somerville, was the
person. Gary Brackett and Joan Langsam have experience and expertise in ATB cases. The firm
has never handled cases against towns they've always represented towns. A lot of cases are
settled. They talked about the Butler case with Flatley that resulted in a mixed result. Ellen
Doucette will be working with Joan Langsam in the Winchester Office picking up much of what
John Gannon had done. She's done Appellate Tax Board work. They were not familiar with the
Hopkinton case.
Camille Anthony asked how things work within the firm. Most things go through Joan Langsam
and she'll address them. Some issues like conservation would be passed along to those with
expertise like Yvonne Gonzalez. However, Joan Langsam would still be involved in those
issues. When the workload is high, certain work will be delegated out. For example, John
Gannon was doing Charter review work with the Charter Review Committee. If Joan feels that
somebody else in the firm would be better experienced for a particular project, she will have
them do that work. All work into and out of the firm is filtered through Joan Langsam. Joan
Langsam, for example, pulls Gary Brackett in to review Warrants, and he generally attends
Town Meeting since he has a lot of experience in that area.
Rob Spadafora indicated that we have an exceptional school system. How has Joan Langsam
worked with the school system? He noted especially that the School Department has people who
are residents and watching everything that the School Department does with an eagle eye.
Joan Langsam noted that she has open meeting questions and public records questions. Nine out
of 10 times, they are not violations. Superintendent of Schools Pat Schettini is very proactive in
these matters. There is a specific issue on open meeting violations with e-mails, and Gary
Brackett noted that this may be a case where they should talk to the D.A's Office if they feel the
D.A. is getting too aggressive. He did note that on public records, open meeting and conflict of
interest issues, the firm tends to be conservative; i.e., avoiding any conflict or appearance of
conflict with these laws.
Rob Spadafora noted that we just interviewed a large law firm that has a meeting specialization
in Cable TV, Appellate Tax Board, etc. How would Brackett & Lucas deal with these issues?
Gary Brackett noted that large firms have a lot of associates and you pay for a lot of duplicated
work. With Brackett & Lucas, you're dealing with a lot of experience and not paying to review
work. For example, there is nobody at Kopelman & Paige who has the same level of expertise in
contracts as Brackett & Lucas. Brackett & Lucas works on developing a relationship with a
client and responds directly and immediately to questions. They replaced Kopelman & Paige in
Billerica. They only lost one client and that was because they would not politicize their opinion.
Town Counsel Review Committee Meeting April 1 2004 - Page 5
They are not the biggest municipal law firm but they feel they are the best. They focused a lot
on education of their clients and of municipal officials.
Richard Schubert asked if they provide general municipal information to all clients, or if things
have to be specialized to particular clients. Brackett & Lucas indicated that opinions have to be
specialized to clients because the facts in every situation will be different.
Brackett & Lucas left at approximately 9:00 p.m. The committee continued to discuss and
deliberate. The Town Manager indicated that the choices would be to send one or two
candidates to the Board of Selectmen for their review. Tom Ryan felt that we should
recommend only one. The Committee reviewed the charge establishing the committee, and
noted that the first sentence reads "there is hereby established a Town Counsel Review
Committee to solicit proposals for Town Counsel services, screen and interview candidates and
make a recommendation to the Board of Selectmen." The recommendation could be one or two.
Rob Spadafora noted that we do miss out on something by not having a large firm. To balance
that, the relationship between Counsel and the Town is important. There are benefits to the small
firm and considering all things, this small firm of Brackett & Lucas is doing an excellent job as
one can see from the survey.
The Town Manager reviewed Brackett & Lucas' overall performance. He noted the settlement
of a number of cases: Video Expo, Cumberland Gulf, etc. He also noted that one area where
there had been some concern was how the Nancy Eaton matter was done. Rob Spardafora felt
that Town Counsel works well now and we should continue with Brackett & Lucas.
On motion by Spadafora seconded by Ryan, the Town Counsel Review Committee voted to
recommend Brackett & Lucas to the Board of Selectmen for reappointment as Town
Counsel. It was noted that even though Bill Griset was not present that he would also be in
favor of that action. The motion was approved by a vote of 5-0-0.
The Town Manager will prepare a report to the Board of Selectmen and copies of the survey, and
Tom Ryan's breakdown of who uses Town Counsel services will be included. The Town
Manager will send a letter to both firms indicating that on the 13th there will be discussion with
the Board of Selectmen, and the Board will then determine whether or not it wants to interview
one or two firms or none.
On motion by Anthony seconded by DeMatteo, the Board directed that Town Counsel be
appointed for five years with an annual performance evaluation to be done. The motion
was approved by a vote of 5-0-0.
On motion by Spadafora seconded by DeMatteo, the Minutes of March 17, 2004 were
approved by a vote of 5-0-0.
Town Counsel Review Committee Meeting= April 1, 2004 - Page 6
On motion by Spadafora seconded by DeMatteo, the Town Counsel Review Committee
Meeting of April 1, 2004 was adjourned at 9:55 p.m. by a vote of 5-0-0.
pSecretary