[0:08] I'd like to bring this special meeting to order. So, if you do the roll call.

[0:15] » Jonathan Ramsey >> here.

[0:18] » Marian Rosa >> here.

[0:20] » Dan Coola. Tom Dattis

[0:23] » here. >> Kendir.

[0:26] Robert Dina >> here. Reina

[0:29] » here. >> Robert Retallik

[0:30] » here. >> Rachel Ryan

[0:32] » here. >> Thank you. And Dan should be showing up

[0:37] soon and Ken might be late. Um, as you guys are aware, we're here to

[0:42] interview a couple law firms tonight related to the role as the town attorney

[0:47] for Watertown. Um, previously you guys received some topics and kind of a

[0:54] summary of questions that we plan on asking each of the law firms that we're

[0:57] interviewing today. Um, as we ask a question, obviously they'll answer and

[1:03] any follow-up questions we could ask um along with it when we go through that

[1:08] list. Um, we do have roughly an hour allocated for each um, firm. So, just

[1:14] kind of keep that in mind when we're uh, discussing and asking questions. So

[1:18] first we'll start with Bosian and Ryan

[1:28] first the state if you wanted to start by introducing

[1:35] yourselves a little background and then we kind of go from there.

[1:38] » All right u Mr. Chairman, members of the council, and staff, uh my name is

[1:44] Franklin Pilly, 235 Main Street, Watertown, Connecticut.

[1:49] And uh thank you for allowing this uh presentation to supplement the original

[1:57] information provided with the application.

[2:00] Uh I'd like to comment uh briefly on some of the matters that are contained

[2:07] uh in a town me man manager memo that I that I saw and uh I'll I'll start there

[2:15] and then I'd like to provide some indicators of how I would approach any

[2:22] future position as town attorney based on how I approached

[2:28] the job In the past years that I served, I served uh six two-year terms as town

[2:38] attorney non-consecutive. And there was an additional period of

[2:43] time where I served for about another two years because uh at that time the

[2:51] town didn't have insurance except for liability insurance and there were

[2:54] significant number of other uh lawsuits mostly relatively minor in nature that

[3:00] were handled by the town attorneys at the time. and there were probably 12 of

[3:06] those or something still left over when my term was up. So, I was replaced uh

[3:13] but I was asked to continue to finish out with all the cases that were

[3:18] presently pending which I did that. So, it's approximately about 14 years uh

[3:23] where I have uh served in the past. Uh personally, I've been an attorney uh in

[3:29] Watertown, Connecticut for about 53 years. uh and the first two years of

[3:35] which I served as a legal officer for the police department in Watertown and

[3:40] police departments in Mbury, Nagatuck and Thomas as well as

[3:45] Watertown. Uh, one of the first things I noted in the memo from the town manager

[3:52] that a court record search uh, disclosed a couple of lawsuits against uh, my

[4:01] firm. Uh, the first is Costello. Costello was a case uh that was a that

[4:08] was brought against a condominium association that we represented. uh and

[4:15] he also sued the bank that was foreclosing his mortgage. So there was

[4:19] two cases against him. He turned around and filed about four cases against uh

[4:24] against the bank, against the association, against our office. Uh and

[4:29] that went on for uh quite some time. He had cases pending in both state court in

[4:35] Connecticut, appellet court in Connecticut, federal court in

[4:38] Connecticut, and the second circuit uh of the federal court. All of those cases

[4:44] were lost. Uh he did not prevail on anything. There was a case called Watts

[4:52] versus Charter Oak. It's correct in that case. Uh my name was mentioned in the

[4:59] lawsuit. uh but I had nothing to do with the lawsuit. Uh but nevertheless, the

[5:05] case was dismissed. Uh he was complaining about the procedure that was

[5:10] used by the association's management in calculating

[5:15] his common charges. Uh and he brought a lawsuit against the association and my

[5:20] office and the case was dismissed. There was a another case that's not

[5:26] mentioned, so I won't talk too much about it other than to say that it was

[5:30] withdrawn and there was no payments to anybody. There was a case recently filed

[5:35] by the name of Westage. That case I have no knowledge of it. I don't know any of

[5:41] the parties to it, but my partner was involved in it and all of the claims in

[5:46] that case will be denied and it's not likely that anything will come of it.

[5:53] the uh to follow up on litigations. Uh there's

[6:00] never been a claim against myself or my office where any claimant was ever paid

[6:08] a dime. There's never been a successful claim uh

[6:12] against my office. As far as grievances, that's mentioned,

[6:16] but not necessarily uh reported on. But grievances typically will not be shown

[6:23] uh if they're dismissed. I've had in 53 years, I think four or five, I've never

[6:29] had one that wasn't dismissed at a very early stage. And I've never had one

[6:33] filed by an actual client. They were always filed as the other lawsuits.

[6:37] They're always filed by non-clients that don't like some uh procedure or some

[6:43] issue or they're disgruntled because they lost a case that was handled by my

[6:48] my office where that client uh won. There's one grievance pending now was

[6:54] just filed. Uh it in my view has no merit. It's likely again to be

[7:01] dismissed. There was mention of insurance. Uh we have adequate

[7:07] insurance. Insurance certificates are available uh on request. Uh fire

[7:14] district. I was asked to comment on my relationship with the fire district.

[7:19] Uh hard to believe sometimes but for many decades the town and the fire

[7:25] district got along very well and occasionally discussed common interests

[7:30] in doing things together. However, as we know, uh that's not always the case. Uh

[7:38] but I have resolved a number of cases uh between the town and the fire district

[7:44] favorably to the town. The town never lost a case to the fire district when I

[7:49] was involved. Uh now one of the other indicators of how I

[7:57] would approach being town attorney in the future is based upon things that I

[8:03] did handle and I think some of the more significant things that I handled in the

[8:08] past. Some of most of these are recent past because I have not served as town

[8:11] attorney for approximately 16 or more years. Uh but when it comes to

[8:17] litigation matters in every matter that I ever handled for the town of

[8:21] Watertown, I never lost a trial. Watertown never lost any case that I

[8:26] handled.

[8:29] The other thing uh I was asked to talk about

[8:33] and part of that's what I'm saying now is how I would economize and provide

[8:39] services on a more costly basis for the town.

[8:43] First is I have never charged the town for any telephone call or verbal opinion

[8:50] that I can give by telephone only. I never charged for any of those ever. Um

[8:58] there were situations that I was involved in where the town needed

[9:04] condemnations of significant pieces of property in order to conduct important

[9:10] drainage projects. In two of those situations,

[9:14] I condemned the property for $1. I put a value of $1 on it, which is unheard of

[9:20] really. Uh, and I convinced both property owners not to file an appeal on

[9:26] the argument that when the project was done, their property would be more

[9:31] valuable than before the project was done. And in both cases, uh, they were

[9:38] they accepted that. One of them was a major drainage project that came down uh

[9:42] off of Main Street up near where Agnu's uh Florest used to be located uh and

[9:49] came down and then crossed over to Depot Street and so forth. So we obtained

[9:54] those property easement interests for no consideration.

[9:58] There was another case where the town needed a condemnation done very quickly

[10:04] because uh the French street bridge over Steelsbrook um was compromised and and

[10:11] couldn't be used or shouldn't be used. And we had that condemnation done uh in

[10:18] one week it was done. They sent this big representative from DC who was going to

[10:23] beat us up and that lasted about an hour and a half in superior court uh and the

[10:28] uh easement was obtained in in record time so that they could begin the

[10:33] process of addressing the bridge condition.

[10:38] Uh now there were I I think I already mentioned I have to go back to that. Uh

[10:45] almost several cases between the town and the fire district uh were all won by

[10:51] the town uh when I was involved. There was a time that the town and fire

[10:57] district were talking jointly for a while about building a joint water tower

[11:04] up on the sea property in back of Neil Drive. The idea being, or at least my

[11:10] idea was uh to build a water tower instead of the fire district rebuilding

[11:16] the water pump station on Neil Drive. The goal was that the town and the fire

[11:22] district would jointly own the tower. The tower would connect with the water

[11:28] town tower uh the on Buckingham Street and there would be an opportunity to uh

[11:35] cross uh hatch so to speak and have backup systems that could apply limited

[11:41] water to each party in the event of an emergency.

[11:44] uh that property was part of the open space that went with the SE subdivision

[11:50] and the fire district agreed in the beginning to pursue that and then

[11:54] changed course uh and did not they abandoned that idea and they went ahead

[12:00] and rebuilt the uh pump station uh at that time.

[12:05] What happened is there to this day is a lot of land that's available uh that is

[12:12] owned jointly by the town of Watertown and the fire district up off of uh Neil

[12:18] Drive which was a former Seir property. There was one example where I provided a

[12:25] legal opinion uh verbally that would have ended a matter and it was like two

[12:30] days before my term was up and I provided a verbal legal opinion to the

[12:34] zoning office off officer about how to handle uh an issue on a an unusual vote

[12:40] that occurred at a meeting and uh would have been resolved in one night at the

[12:47] next meeting. But the next town attorney gave a different opinion uh and it ended

[12:54] up with uh the applicant filing a uh lawsuit against the town. It ended up

[13:02] with the applicant filing a new application and after significant

[13:06] litigation cost to the town, it ended up the exact same way I recommended with a

[13:11] phone call. So that's another example of where I try to save money in litigation

[13:18] costs at all at all times. One other case I'll just mention again it's it's

[13:24] the fire district suing the town of Watertown and the issue was over an

[13:29] ordinance that the town passed that set out a procedure to assess special

[13:33] benefit assessments and general benefit assessments on a on future water and

[13:38] sewer projects. The ordinance was really nothing more than a cotification or a

[13:44] recottification of what Connecticut law required to do when funding water and

[13:48] sewer projects. The fire district filed a lawsuit against the town to try to

[13:53] seek uh avoiding the ordinance on grounds that fire

[13:59] district residents as general taxpayers should never be called upon to

[14:03] contribute anything to a water and sewer project.

[14:07] At the time the suit was filed, a court date was scheduled for hearing. And I

[14:12] called up the other attorney and I said, "Uh, we're not going to court." I said,

[14:17] "If you want to win the case, you can win the case." Uh, it was far more

[14:23] in the interest of Watertown. We simply repeal the ordinance rather than go

[14:27] through all that litigation because it didn't change anything. the procedure

[14:31] that was put in the ordinance was the exact same uh procedure that you had to

[14:36] follow follow anyway uh when you're funding those types of

[14:42] projects. So that uh saved the town of Watertown significant litigation costs

[14:48] and still the town didn't give up anything. Uh there were issues a couple

[14:54] of times with our Tillery Hill Condominium. That property was not

[14:59] getting developed for a number of years because the fire district had the

[15:02] ability to provide water service but did not have the ability to provide sewer

[15:06] service. So the fire district agreed to provide water but only if they also

[15:12] provided the sewer service. The town had a sewer main that literally goes right

[15:17] through a portion of the artillery property, but the town refused to allow

[15:21] the sewer project to be used for artillery hill unless they also became a

[15:28] water customer. So that stalemate existed for a number of years. When I

[15:33] became town attorney and got involved, that issue was settled uh by the fire

[15:39] district providing the water, the town of Watertown providing the sewer, but

[15:44] each unit had to pay a significant contribution in assessments to the town

[15:49] uh water system. So the town was able to break the stalemate, continue with the

[15:54] project, but have a substantial uh benefit um income from from Artillery

[16:02] Hill. There was another similar situation with Mount Fair Farm. When

[16:07] Mount Farm was first proposed for development,

[16:12] Mountain Farm could not obtain sewer from the town of Watertown. They could

[16:17] obtain water. So Mount Fair Farm developer went to the fire district and

[16:24] requested to be annexed into the fire district in which case the fire district

[16:29] annexation would have included uh other properties that weren't that were in

[16:34] between but were not yet part of the fire district. So I worked with the

[16:39] superintendent of water and sewer at the time and we were successful in obtaining

[16:44] an easement from a property owner where the the sewer easement to provide

[16:49] gravity sewer was brought down uh to Echol Lake Road at Ice House Road and

[16:56] that ended any thought of the fire district expanding uh and taking over

[17:01] that part of that part of town. Um

[17:06] there

[17:09] there was another case that many will remember and I I think of this as kind

[17:14] of one of our better achievements in town where a high school uh teacher uh

[17:20] was accused um of in in improper conduct with students.

[17:27] The afternoon that that that the student came forward, I was assigned by the

[17:32] superintendent of schools and the assistant superintendent to take over

[17:36] that matter and make sure it got investigated properly. I worked with the

[17:42] police department and the

[17:46] superintendent, the school schools and the school board and we took appropriate

[17:52] action. And while we were in the midst of that, the insurance adjuster for the

[17:57] town came to Watertown and asked how we were handling everything and it was all

[18:03] explained to him. He said, "You're doing all the right things. Uh, keep it up."

[18:07] Well, the case was concluded. The teacher was suspended that day and

[18:12] terminated. And then about uh about two to three months later that uh insurance

[18:19] adjuster showed up in my office and he said he came to Watertown to

[18:25] congratulate Watertown. He said in his entire career, he has never had a case

[18:31] like that where the town didn't get sued. He said he'd

[18:37] never had a case like that in his entire career where

[18:41] the individuals involved didn't get sued and he said that he talked to those

[18:46] people and they claimed that the way Watertown handled the case was so

[18:52] perfect in his view uh that there was never a claim made against the town or

[18:58] any uh settlements. Now there were two other situations

[19:05] where uh a lot of good could have been done for the town but it didn't happen.

[19:10] Uh I was authorized by a local bank at one time to donate property to the town

[19:17] of Watertown and it was a significant property. The bank had just foreclosed

[19:21] the property and I was friendly with a higher up in the bank and he authorized

[19:28] me to approach the town and offer that property to the town. They were seeking

[19:32] no monetary compensation. They only asked for some long-term recognition of

[19:36] their name being on a plaque or something to recognize the donation.

[19:41] That offer was conveyed to the town through me. I never got an answer. Two

[19:46] weeks later, I call again, didn't get an answer. 3 weeks later, I call again,

[19:50] never got an answer. And then after four weeks or six or eight weeks at that

[19:55] point, uh they withdrew the offer. Uh there was another uh situation where

[20:02] where Woodgate subdivision exists today. That property was offered by a different

[20:07] bank uh to myself to present to the town for $250,000.

[20:13] And town uh didn't respond in a timely manner. And about five weeks later, the

[20:19] bank signed a contract to sell the property to somebody else. And somebody

[20:22] else developed that property. Um the other thing that I'd like to comment

[20:28] on that I think is pretty important. Uh when I was town attorney um I provided a

[20:37] written list of every legal matter in my office uh approximately four to five

[20:45] times a year to the town council and town staff. Um,

[20:52] in a prior situation with Waterberry, we were in a water dispute for about six or

[20:57] seven years and every two months I wrote a written report restating the entire

[21:05] case, the status of the case and that was delivered to uh the council and the

[21:10] water and sewer authority. So, I've always believed in

[21:15] keeping everybody informed of everything that I was doing. And uh there's one

[21:21] other thing I probably didn't mention, but twice the town got sued uh over

[21:27] contiguous property to the landfill on Old Bed Road.

[21:32] in both cases. Uh the first one was the easiest one and it's a corner at the

[21:38] corner of Artillery uh and Hamilton and they claimed that

[21:44] the town polluted their property. So instead of spending a lot of money

[21:49] investigating the property or the environmental condition of the property,

[21:53] uh uh the town offered them uh about $10,000 to break off half of their

[22:00] property and convey it to the town rather than argue about it. That was

[22:04] done. Not too many years later, the owner of a

[22:10] 13 acre piece on the other side that's contiguous to the town landfill site um

[22:16] sent the town a proposed lawsuit and actually filed in court with a demand

[22:21] for $450,000 for the property. Um town responded that that was uh out out of

[22:29] bounds really. It was not even worth considering. Uh couple years later when

[22:34] I was town attorney again, I got we got the same letter. The town gave him the

[22:38] same response. About a few years later, probably six

[22:43] years from when it started, uh they again filed a proposed lawsuit for us to

[22:49] review. Um and we offered him $75,000 for the property,

[22:56] which he accepted. So to this day, the town owns 13 plus more acres. addition

[23:02] to the landfill. Uh, and these are the types of things that I got involved with

[23:09] that I thought were excellent outcomes for the town of Watertown. And I think

[23:14] there there's no better indicator of how I would act as town attorney in the

[23:19] future. So, um, I would ask you to consider those matters as well. And, uh,

[23:25] Kerasuma is here and she is part of the the team that would serve as town

[23:30] attorney. Um, I don't know if Cara wants to say anything or certainly she'll is

[23:36] prepared as I am to answer questions.

[23:40] » Um, good evening. I will not say anything at this time. I'm sure the

[23:43] council has some questions. Um, attorney Pelisy obviously has extensive um,

[23:48] institutional if not encyclopedic knowledge of Watertown history. So, um,

[23:53] I can't compete with that on that end, but um, we're happy to answer your

[23:56] questions and thank you for your time and meeting with us this evening. Yeah,

[24:00] thank you for a lot of the the historic cases that you've dealt with in town and

[24:04] how you have helped out the town. We will uh continue with our questions that

[24:08] we have here. >> Um we have eight questions that we want

[24:14] to ask each firm. Um we only have a half hour left for you. So hopefully you've

[24:21] answered uh some of them already, but certainly uh we'll go forward. The first

[24:26] question um describe your experience across the range of legal matters as a

[24:32] municipality like Watertown and uh relative to land use zoning contracts

[24:39] litigation etc. Um and tell us definitely who would be

[24:46] handling Watertown's actions.

[24:49] » I would be the lead attorney. I would handle uh almost all of it. Uh but I

[24:57] would also delegate and then supervise whatever I delegate. Uh if it's car or

[25:02] if somebody else in the office was get involved. Me personally, my experience

[25:06] is I've been handling municipal law since uh November 1st, 1973. I worked as

[25:13] I said as a legal legal office of police department. In 1975, I joined a firm

[25:20] that is the predecessor of my present firm and at that time they were town

[25:25] attorneys in Wilkit. So I assisted with the town attorney business in Wilkit.

[25:30] Later uh that firm established a Middbury office and one of my partners

[25:36] was a Mbury town attorney. So from time to time I assisted in that. As far as

[25:41] land use is concerned, I've handled uh numerous land use cases in both

[25:46] Watertown and contiguous towns and sometimes in towns not so contiguous. Uh

[25:52] I think I've been pretty successful with most of those cases. I've handled I

[25:59] can't give you a count of how many cases in the appellet court, but it's could be

[26:05] 15 or more. Uh I've handled six cases uh that went to the state supreme court and

[26:12] uh although not perfect I am foreign to one a couple of those were water town

[26:20] cases. So u so that's my background as far as municipal law goes. I think in

[26:27] the application I also mentioned I I still do some municipal law for uh

[26:33] special occasions for other towns. >> Right. The next question is, what

[26:38] response time standards would you commit for the town and how would the town

[26:44] manager, the council, and other officials reach timely advice when the

[26:49] primary attorney being you, is not available? Uh would there be a deputy

[26:55] person attending council meetings or executive sessions or how would that be

[27:00] coordinated? Well, uh,

[27:04] some of you may know or may not know that I rarely take a day off. I have

[27:12] never had a oneweek vacation and all the time I've been an attorney. Uh, I think

[27:18] I did it once when my children were little to go to Disneyland.

[27:22] But I am the easiest person in the world to reach. I live a block from here or

[27:29] two. Uh, and I can always be reached by anybody in my office. I think anything

[27:36] that comes up, if it's urgent, it could be a same day response. If it's not

[27:42] urgent, there'll be a a very timely response. I was always timely with

[27:47] anything I was assigned to do for the town of Watertown in the past. That was

[27:52] never an issue. And most of the time if I delivered something to town, I would

[27:57] bring it in person, which I always did because I was right across the street

[28:00] for many of the years that I was town attorney. I my prior office for 29 years

[28:06] was at 365 Main Street, almost directly across the street from the town hall

[28:10] annex. >> Um, does anyone have any follow-up

[28:15] questions to anything that's been asked so far?

[28:21] the chair. Attorney Pelosi, you had mentioned that you were four and two and

[28:27] um two some of them were through the Watertown cases. Were they wins or

[28:32] losses at the Supreme Court? >> The Watertown case.

[28:35] » Yes. >> Uh

[28:38] I think two were two or one. Um I'm not sure exactly how many of those

[28:46] Watertown probably three uh or so but I had many more cases in the appellet

[28:53] court and the appellet court probably about 60%

[28:58] or so uh with prevailing I prevailed on a good number of land use cases in the

[29:04] appellet court uh land use cases don't often get to the Supreme Court uh but I

[29:13] In my career, four times I wrote a legal opinion that

[29:17] did did end up in the Supreme Court and all four were upheld. And that's another

[29:23] kind of statistic I've always been proud of. And one of those I wasn't the

[29:28] lawyer, but I was um I was part of uh providing a legal opinion on that

[29:35] matter. Uh and that legal opinion was first um up uh changed by a superior

[29:42] court judge and the Supreme Court reinstated the legal opinion which is

[29:48] the advice that the town followed.

[29:52] » Anybody else?

[29:56] » The next question, how do you view the town attorney's role in preventing legal

[30:01] problems rather than reacting to them? Well, I think I've explained some of

[30:05] those uh as an the example I gave about the lawsuit that could have ended in uh

[30:14] some serious long-term costly litigation by just having the water and sewer

[30:20] authority uh repeal the ordinance and reaffirm that they would follow the

[30:24] state statutes. There's been other cases where uh I know very early on that

[30:32] Watertown is not likely to prevail. In those cases, I bring that opinion to

[30:39] whoever's involved in it, whether it's the planning and zoning commission, the

[30:42] town council, or the town manager if it's administrative in nature. Uh and

[30:48] many times we've headed off cases that are losers uh before they so to speak

[30:54] get legs. We try to end them before they become bigger problems.

[31:01] » Yeah. Um, how about kind of a lot of your examples were something

[31:08] that could have been a bigger issue that kind of got resolved in an easier

[31:12] manner, but can you give any examples where you truly like proactively suggest

[31:17] a change if it's changing regulations, policies, whatever it might be to

[31:22] prevent something that you know might happen in the future.

[31:25] » Well, that's kind of two questions. one is how to head off things before they

[31:29] get bigger problems and the other is uh getting involved in rewriting uh

[31:36] regulations and so forth. I've been through a couple of town charter

[31:41] revisions. The most recent I was council to the charter revision commission. In

[31:46] the past, uh I was a town attorney during charter revision amendments and I

[31:51] was involved in those. uh if I see uh a regulation or something that I think is

[31:58] improper, I would try to let everyone know before it even gets adopted.

[32:04] Sometimes that means scrap the idea all together. Sometimes it means it can be

[32:08] salvaged with but you have to massage it or revise it.

[32:16] Next question is uh as you know Watertown operates a water and sewer

[32:20] authority and periodically faces complex contractual regulatory financing and

[32:26] intermunicipal issues. Describe your experience with municipal

[32:32] water sewer matters and how you would handle anything in the future.

[32:38] Well, I have extensive experience with water and sewer matters. Um, I have uh

[32:48] successfully negotiated a $2.3 million case uh about 20 years ago. Uh if you

[32:58] called the city of Waterbury and asked how much Watertown owed for water, they

[33:03] would tell you Watertown has the highest outstanding bill and they owe about

[33:07] $2,250,000. If we asked Frank Nardelli, he would say

[33:12] that Watertown has overpaid by $300,000 based on his calculation. And the reason

[33:18] for that was that Waterberry had a a contract with a charter accounts of how

[33:23] to determine and compute the water bill, but they never followed it. And by not

[33:28] following it, it began to cost the town a lot of money. So in a meeting with uh

[33:35] Frank Nardelli and Jim Ftoer, his advice earlier on, uh the town paid 75% of the

[33:44] bill and ignored the interest. And that may sound a little familiar now, but

[33:48] that was a completely different situation. and the town did take my

[33:53] advice and did increase the rates so the money was available uh in case water

[33:59] ever lost that debate. Uh the contract provided for a mediation uh if either

[34:08] party requested mediation. I requested mediation about every six months. uh and

[34:14] Waterberry never agreed because they felt their case was weak and nobody

[34:19] wanted to give up that money that was on the books because they would have to

[34:23] admit that they were wrong to the point of over $2 million. Uh after about four

[34:29] years of that back and forth, uh a new town attorney in Waterbury came along

[34:34] and he called me up and asked if Watertown wanted to settle the case. I

[34:38] said, 'Well, I will recommend settlement provided it's agreed that Watertown

[34:42] doesn't owe a dime and we will agree that Waterbury doesn't have to pay the

[34:49] $300,000 that Frank Nadelli calculated. That was agreed. We agreed with that. Uh

[34:56] and we settled the case. Watertown didn't pay a dime. And we also agreed to

[35:02] a new chart of accounts how to bill going forward. And that amended chart of

[35:07] accounts was in the settlement agreement and that would continue to be following

[35:10] followed until uh 2013 when Waterbury terminated that contract. I negotiated

[35:18] on behalf of Watertown uh with respect to uh Watertown's

[35:24] contribution to the water filtration plant. That water filtration plant uh

[35:30] was designed for about uh 32 33 million gallons a day. Watertown

[35:38] reserved uh up to 3 million gallons a day. So Watertown had to pay something

[35:44] about like 8.75% of those capital costs uh in order to reserve future capacity

[35:51] which Watertown did pay. But then Waterberry immediately started abusing

[35:56] all that. Uh and that was part of why we believed uh Watertown overpaid because

[36:02] they misused other money that could have been used to reduce the outstanding

[36:06] bond. Watertown continued to pay its portion of the bond for the entire bond

[36:10] term. But Waterberry had other money available to reduce the bond and they

[36:15] didn't use it for that purpose. For example, they filed a lawsuit against

[36:20] the contractor for improper construction and won $8 million. That should have

[36:26] gone in to pay the bonds off early, but the mayor put it in the general fund.

[36:30] And that was just one of the big issues that we had with Waterberry over water

[36:34] billing. Uh but again, we prevailed in that case. I negotiated on behalf of

[36:39] Watertown when Waterbury uh amended or rebuilt its sewer treatment plant and

[36:47] Watertown uh reserved uh enough capacity uh knowing that DP was about to lower

[36:55] the hammer and refused to allow the fire district to keep its own sewer treatment

[37:00] plant in place. So, we negotiated uh a surplus, but only enough to accept water

[37:09] uh fire district sewage if necessary. And as it turned out, it became

[37:14] necessary because about a year later, uh D ordered them to shut down their sewer

[37:19] plant. And uh since then, they they pay approximately

[37:26] 35% or so of the sewer treatment costs. that go to that plant. They also paid

[37:34] the same percentage of the capital cost. There was a separate separate contract

[37:39] with Waterberry just to pay the capital cost. Waterberry spent uh $81 million uh

[37:46] at that time to upgrade the sewer plant and Watertown was in for roughly 10% of

[37:52] that shared between the town about 62% and the fire district for the balance.

[37:58] and the fire district contributed its share. Watertown contributed its share

[38:04] and those bond payments were made directly to the state uh the state

[38:08] because the money was loan by D at 2% interest. So uh it was interesting

[38:16] because um nobody was comfortable that the people in Waterbury knew how to run

[38:21] the sewer plant. So I asked D uh is the sewer plant being run cap

[38:28] properly and I was told the sewer plant is capable of being operated

[38:35] in accordance with its design but everybody knew that the people that were

[38:40] on site didn't know what they were doing and ultimately that led to Waterberry

[38:46] privatizing the operation of the sewer plant but I've had extensive

[38:51] negotiations with Waterberry over Watertown contracts

[38:57] Thank you >> to the chair.

[38:59] » Yes. >> Thank you, Attorney Pici. Thank you for

[39:02] being here. Um, so sitting on the bipartisan water and sword committee

[39:06] with my late colleague Michelle McHugh, your report um on the uh uh water issue

[39:13] with Waterberry really helped guide our thought process and uh grateful for

[39:18] that. Um and and one of the things that we pulled out of the report um was some

[39:24] advice that you gave uh uh in the report of WSA uh raising the rates and putting

[39:31] aside money um and then in case Watertown lost

[39:38] the case to Waterberry. >> Correct.

[39:40] » Great. And so um Watertown didn't do that. Um and so during the the committee

[39:46] meetings, we asked the the town attorney at the time um if he had given that

[39:51] advice or what advice he had given and and he reported that he gave the same

[39:55] advice to town leadership um in that 2019 or so window. Um

[40:03] when we asked for record of that advice, if it was in an email or in a memo, um

[40:08] he didn't have any available. And so my question to both of you is and and I

[40:13] think you answered this a little bit when you talked about written list to

[40:16] the TC every two months. Um but during advice to town leadership, will

[40:25] you have a record that the council can review to ensure 10 years later, 5 years

[40:30] later that we know what was talked about? I'm not talking about executive

[40:35] session. I'm talking about just the advice that you give us in terms of what

[40:40] to do. >> Well, unless it's a quick phone call, if

[40:43] I'm asked anything that requires it to be put in writing, uh I always put it in

[40:49] writing. Now, there's one other since you mentioned uh uh the uh Freedom of

[40:57] Information Act. Um, I have always been a great supporter of that act and I have

[41:06] always advised councils and other boards and commissions when I was town attorney

[41:12] that even if a matter qualifies for executive session, that doesn't mean you

[41:17] have to go into executive session. It means you have the discretion to discuss

[41:21] it in public. And I have always stated that. Uh, I still tell clients that

[41:28] today. For example, I've told the housing authority that on a number of

[41:32] occasions. Uh just because it qualifies as a potential executive session matter

[41:40] doesn't mean it has to be discussed in executive session. To me, executive

[41:44] session should be uh sparingly used only for the most sensitive ongoing matters.

[41:53] And once that sensitive ongoing matter is concluded uh and sometimes you can

[41:59] withhold records as well. Now executive session you typically don't take minutes

[42:04] so there's nothing to show after the fact but the documentation should be

[42:08] available to the public after the fact. >> Thank you.

[42:15] » Because your firm represents other municipalities and public entities. How

[42:20] will you identify and and manage potential conflicts involving Watertown?

[42:25] If a conflict prevented you, your firm from handling a significant matter, how

[42:30] would you help the town maintain continuity of representation?

[42:34] » I would disclose the conflict the minute it is

[42:41] presented as even a potential conflict. And if necessary,

[42:46] uh, I can often make the recommendation of somebody that would be competent to

[42:51] handle that. But in all the years that I've been town attorney and all the

[42:55] years others been have been town attorney, there's always going to be

[42:59] some conflicts that are going to come up, especially uh, in a town the size of

[43:04] Watertown. And uh I I had situations come up uh from time to time when I did

[43:13] serve as town attorney and they were immediately disclosed to the town

[43:17] manager. Uh and then if I was asked to obtain somebody to that was competent to

[43:24] handle that matter, then I would provide that referral.

[43:29] » A follow up on that. Um, I know you do a lot of land use and representing a lot

[43:34] of people for planning and zoning. Would you have to kind of take a step back

[43:38] from those clients if you were town attorney?

[43:42] » If I were town attorney, I would probably stop handling all

[43:49] private non-watertown land use matters. I have a few going on now uh in other

[43:55] towns. I think I have one in Watertown that may end tonight. Uh, praise be to

[44:00] God. Uh, and, uh, I would probably not take any future land use matters in any

[44:08] other town. Uh, I mean, I might if it was a long-term client that needed

[44:14] something. Uh, but I wouldn't take any that would be ongoing for any period of

[44:19] time. >> Thank you.

[44:23] Beyond your hourly rates and fee structure, what practices would you use

[44:27] to control the town's legal expenses? How would you flag a matter that's

[44:32] becoming more costly than anticipated? And what billing detail and periodic

[44:37] reporting would the town receive? >> Town would receive an itemized statement

[44:43] on a monthly basis. And uh if any matter came in that was in

[44:51] my view non-mrine, I would immediately

[44:56] disclose that to the town manager and I would suggest uh we consider other ways

[45:03] to resolve the problem without um ongoing litigation.

[45:09] Uh these days there's actually more opportunities to resolve matters without

[45:15] costly litigation because it's become fairly common uh to mediate matters. And

[45:22] there are probably in the last five or six years there's a a growing list of

[45:28] competent ex-judges that have found a second career in mediation. And I've

[45:35] been involved in some of those mediations. Uh and they're

[45:41] I say I would say 80 to% or more successful in resolving cases to avoid

[45:49] uh lengthy litigation. So

[45:52] » if I may add on that um you know I think part of it is just what attorney Pelisy

[45:57] mentioned before just the transparency um and the communication between the

[46:01] firm and the town. um if there's a matter that comes up um with clients,

[46:06] you know, and they say, you know, we're really not looking to spend a whole lot

[46:09] on this or um you know, this is kind of our cap of what we're looking at. You

[46:14] know, we have no problem working within those bounds and advising, you know, the

[46:19] client, hey, you know, this is where we are with our research on it or what

[46:22] we're doing. You know, we're approaching this amount. Let us know, you know, do

[46:26] you want us to proceed? Do you want us to wrap it up? And just keeping that

[46:29] line of communication open is huge. And I think our firm as a whole um are very

[46:35] conscious of costs for our clients um and being responsive to that need and

[46:40] being responsive to clients and understanding that um is a huge part of

[46:44] what we do and that's a huge part of recognizing when a matter may not be

[46:49] worth continuing fighting like attorney Pisy was saying and and being very

[46:54] upfront about that um because attorney's fees do add up and you know there comes

[46:59] a point in time when any given matter you it may be worth it to like, you

[47:03] know, let's have a frank discussion about it and wrap this up sooner than

[47:06] later. Um, but we will always keep communication open as far as cost

[47:10] control. Um, that's something we always willing to do and and would do with the

[47:14] town as well. >> Thank you.

[47:18] » Municipal legal matters often span years and personal changes. What systems and

[47:23] practices would your firm use to document legal advice, key decisions,

[47:28] open matters, and historical context to Watertown?

[47:33] I'm sorry. So, Watertown preserves institutional memory. How would you

[47:37] ensure a clean handoff if the assigned attorney changes on the engagement ends

[47:41] while appropriately protecting privileged and confidential material?

[47:45] Well, as long as I'm around, uh, I can provide a lot of historical

[47:52] institutional background, uh, to any matter that comes in. And almost all of

[48:00] what we do on a matter like that is documented. It is in writing and it

[48:06] would be included in a status report that I would do either every two months

[48:12] or every one month depending on how much change there is. But we always have

[48:18] pretty good records. Uh most of our records go back about a minimum eight

[48:26] years. Uh some matters uh go back uh up to 20 years, but the young people in

[48:37] my office tell me that that can all be saved on these things called computers.

[48:43] » It is all saved. >> And uh I don't personally do a lot of

[48:48] work on the computer, but if you send me an email, I can say thank you. Uh, but I

[48:54] have a lot of other people that that assist with that. I do read every email

[49:00] that comes to me. I read every day. Every phone call that comes in, I answer

[49:05] either the same day or the next morning. So, I'm always aware of what's going on.

[49:11] Uh, the other lawyers in my office, if they get an email, they can read it on

[49:15] their phone eating dinner. I mean, that's like magical to me, but I know

[49:20] they can do it because I've been with them when they Oh, this email just came

[49:23] in. By the way, it's for you. What do you want to say? So, there's always

[49:28] somebody watching all of our emails uh in the office. I watch only the ones

[49:33] that come to me. But if anyone else receives an email that they know or

[49:40] suspect even that it's mine, they will print it out and put it in a designated

[49:45] area for me to access it. >> But yes, all our all our documentation

[49:49] is saved electronically um securely and any transition is is fairly easily done

[49:56] because of the way the system's set up. So, if you know there was a transfer in

[50:00] counsel or whatever, um transferring those files, it's it's screened by the

[50:04] attorneys that handled the matter to make sure there's nothing that shouldn't

[50:06] be disclosed and it would be transferred over.

[50:10] » Okay, this is our last um formal question. Based on your review of

[50:14] Watertown's needs, what do you see as the most important responsibilities of

[50:18] the town attorney and how would your firm approach serving the council, town

[50:23] manager, boards, commissions, and departments? Well, the important thing

[50:28] to that I've always recognized is the town attorney has no independent power

[50:33] to make any decision or take any action unless it's authorized.

[50:39] So that's my starting point in any matter that is referred to me is to

[50:46] write a status report. If it's important, it will be more than a status

[50:50] report. It will be a sitdown in person with the manager or the council. Uh but

[50:56] as far as uh documenting and dealing with that stuff,

[51:03] uh we do it pretty quickly. >> And if I may add on that, I think, um

[51:09] one of the most important things from a town attorney perspective is just

[51:14] making sure that the town manager and the town council has the information

[51:18] that they need to make the decisions that they need to make. And that means

[51:22] um access you know explaining what options there are and what risks there

[51:27] are and making sure that the information is provided so that you guys can make

[51:30] the informed decision. >> Uh my position is I should never be

[51:34] working on anything uh or taking any actions unless it's

[51:41] authorized by someone else. And that could be a board or commission more

[51:46] likely the town manager's office. Uh but I

[51:51] have never taken action on my own without authority and the knowledge of

[51:57] either a chairman or a border commission or the town manager and then if it's

[52:03] appropriate the full council or the full water and sewer authority or the full

[52:06] planning and zoning any agency involved they should all know what's going on.

[52:12] » And finally is there anything we haven't asked you that you think the council

[52:15] should know?

[52:21] Well, uh I mean I always say that self-praise is

[52:26] no praise. Uh but I would say that during all of the time that I did serve

[52:32] as town attorney, uh I think I did a pretty good job and I always made the

[52:39] town the most important client in the office. So that wasn't by way of praise.

[52:45] It was just giving you my opinion.

[52:50] » And we do have a couple more minutes if we have any additional questions. I did

[52:54] want to start off with one kind of going back to our situation with water and

[52:59] sewer. Um, as you guys are aware, uh, Pel was not a

[53:04] lead attorney. He was not part of the litigation of any of that, but he did

[53:08] have a lot of opinions and a lot of the, um, history that went with, um, our

[53:12] water and sewer relationship with Waterberry. Um, and I guess my question

[53:17] is there's a lot of um, maybe I'm not sure if it would be

[53:22] trust issues, but a lot of people would start pointing fingers at any attorney,

[53:27] any person that was involved in our current water and sewer debate or uh,

[53:32] battle with Waterberry. I was just wondering if you had any comments on how

[53:38] you could kind of settle their their um, >> well,

[53:43] » their concern. First of all, I was not involved as an attorney in any of that.

[53:50] I was not present during any strategy discussions.

[53:56] I was not I I was asked a couple of times uh my opinion on something, but it

[54:02] was usually after the fact when a decision had already been pretty much

[54:07] made. So, I was not involved in any decision making about that. There were

[54:14] it came a time where I suspected uh that the town at large had not

[54:23] received enough information about the case. And I

[54:28] agreed and actually I promoted and brought up the idea of having a meeting

[54:34] in the high school auditorium and invite anybody there uh to come and hear what

[54:40] the case was all about. And ear prior to that, I wrote a memo to uh

[54:49] the interim manager, John Gavales, uh because he asked me about it and I said

[54:55] I would rather put it in writing so that it can be passed on. And so I explained

[55:02] most of what I knew in that. Uh and then uh after the fact uh when things didn't

[55:09] work out the way I had hoped and certainly the way everybody else had

[55:13] hoped uh I thought uh that the town council was getting a bad rap. So I took

[55:20] it upon myself to write a long background about the whole case and that

[55:27] was written after what happened happened. uh and I uh I probably

[55:35] personally distributed about 1,500 of those documents. And my goal was that I

[55:43] thought it was extremely unfair uh that people were blaming the town council and

[55:48] the town manager. And a lot of individuals that read that uh

[55:55] have called me or bumped into me and said, "Thank you." Because nobody knew

[56:00] any of this. And it also disturbed me that the Waterberry newspaper uh to this

[56:06] day has not printed one sentence of what Watertown's side of that case is. And I

[56:12] again took it upon myself to prepare a document that could be easily

[56:17] distributed so that everyone would know what what water towns what prompted the

[56:24] decisions that were made. And uh I think I did it a lot just to also defend the

[56:29] council and the town manager because uh a lot of people in my view that were

[56:34] critical of yourselves and the manager uh knew next

[56:42] to nothing about what that case was about.

[56:47] So that was uh again kind of like uh more should have been said in the public

[56:59] about this case in the old days. You could count on uh either the Waterbury

[57:06] paper or the town times uh would be willing to spend a lot of time

[57:13] explaining Watertown side of the case. I haven't seen a sentence yet in any in

[57:17] any newspaper uh explaining Watertown side of the

[57:22] case. Thus, I prepared what I prepared. >> Are there any other time? But

[57:30] » y >> Attorney Pelosi, from what I understand,

[57:33] um you made recommendations to raise rates and put money aside in case we did

[57:38] lose the litigation. Is that correct? >> That's correct. What would you do

[57:42] differently this time if um the same scenario arose and um it was kind of

[57:49] falling on deaf ears again? What could you do differently to make the council

[57:53] or the manager really understand? I made that recommendation verbally

[58:00] to a lot of people uh in the early stages of that case and I think they got

[58:07] sick of me saying that and uh and then I was told that they did raise the rates

[58:14] and I said it's probably not enough. You got to

[58:19] raise them to make sure you have every dollar you need in case

[58:26] you don't prevail in the case. And uh like I say, the last time we had that

[58:32] big dispute over water bills, uh I did the same thing and they did raise the

[58:37] rates. And when we settled the case with Waterberry without paying anything, the

[58:43] town had about 2002 2,4500,000

[58:49] in a special water and sewer account that wasn't needed for anything. and I

[58:53] recommended that that be used for future capital projects so you wouldn't have to

[58:58] go bond for it. But there were members of the water and sewer authority for

[59:03] whatever reason they wanted to give refunds. So they decided to give every

[59:08] rateayer a check for a refund. And that's the first time I think Frank

[59:15] Nardelli was going to was not was upset with everybody because he didn't want to

[59:19] write all those checks but he did. Uh and what was very frustrating to me

[59:24] personally was within a couple of years the town is off to a new uh sewer

[59:30] extension project and they had to go out and bond for the money that they had.

[59:35] And it made no sense to me because now the rate payers uh if that money was

[59:40] left there it might have earned some income investment income and you

[59:44] probably would have had about I don't know 2.6 6 million to use for future

[59:50] projects uh that you wouldn't have to bond. So I think that was a missed

[59:55] opportunity. >> And that being said, how do you explain

[59:59] to the taxpayer that we're holding on to your money in a way where they're

[1:00:04] saying, "Hey, hold on a second. We paid you this money. It's not being used for

[1:00:08] that particular scenario. We want it back." Well, that's the other side of uh

[1:00:13] what I just said, and that's the position that was adopted by the then

[1:00:18] members of the Water and Sewer Authority. They said, "It's the

[1:00:21] rateayers money. Let's give it back." Uh I was of a different view that you're

[1:00:27] only going to have to go out and borrow it again very soon. And the same people,

[1:00:32] so the same people that had already paid it, it was that much that they wouldn't

[1:00:37] have to pay again. uh and they would have saved a lot of

[1:00:43] interest. So I think the rateayers would have made out better without the refund.

[1:00:48] » Sure. I can understand that from a fiscal responsibility aspect. It's just

[1:00:53] you know trying to make sense out of that.

[1:00:55] » Everybody go to refund. >> Thank you. Appreciate your time.

[1:01:00] » Any other questions? We are about out of time. Anyone else?

[1:01:06] Well, thank you for everything. Thank you for the opportunity and uh I

[1:01:11] hope we've answered all of your questions and I hope we will be

[1:01:15] considered uh for the position. >> Thank you very much.

[1:01:19] » Thank you very much. >> Thank you.

[1:01:22] » Is attorney here yet? >> I think they're out in the hall.

[1:01:28] » And do we need to take a break at all or are we good to continue? Yeah, if we

[1:01:34] could just take a five minute recess and we'll reconvene.

[1:01:41] » I'm just scoring. >> So, we're putting in a one to five here.

[1:01:45] » And then it gets multiplied by that. >> Yeah.

[1:01:48] » To get to this.

[1:01:52] » All right. Five being the highest, one being the lowest.

[1:02:10] like to bring this meeting back to order. Uh next is um we're going to

[1:02:14] interview Torrance Sat Saddak and Hennessy. And if you guys want to

[1:02:20] introduce yourself and tell us a little about a little bit about your firm and

[1:02:24] then we have a handful of questions that we want to ask you.

[1:02:27] » Sure. Thank you. Good evening, Mr. Chair. Good evening, honorable council

[1:02:30] members. My name is Stephanie Cummings. I'm here with the honorable Judge

[1:02:34] Agatti. >> How do you do?

[1:02:36] » Good evening >> for this uh interview. We thank you for

[1:02:38] your time this evening. I know this is not your regular evening, so I

[1:02:41] appreciate this extra time. Um I have been with Cardi Torren Sandak and

[1:02:45] Hennessy since 2019. Prior to that, I was with a small firm

[1:02:51] directly across the street and also serving in the Connecticut legislature.

[1:02:55] Um I also served on the board of alderman in Waterberry. I spent grew up

[1:03:00] in Waterberry even though I went to St. Mary Magdalene. Um started my practice

[1:03:05] and in really being um local like a local girl have stayed in Waterberry

[1:03:10] with respect to practice um even though I have recently moved out and spent a

[1:03:14] lot of my formative years in public office. So one of the things I think is

[1:03:18] really unique about our experience is that I understand what it's like to sit

[1:03:22] in your chair and to be the legal counsel. So, I understand with both hats

[1:03:26] and sometimes the legal decision is not just the decision that is the one that

[1:03:33] meets the the statutes or the case law, but there's also the public perception

[1:03:36] that you have to be worrying about. And those things are so critical when you're

[1:03:39] looking at um how to proceed as a municipality.

[1:03:42] Um my practice at Cardy is a bit diverse because I came from a smaller practice.

[1:03:48] Um so I do a little bit of everything. Um, I currently handle uh primarily all

[1:03:53] of the land use for the town of Prospect. Um, I have, uh, with his

[1:03:58] honor, we have done the town of Woodberry's charter revision commission.

[1:04:02] Um, I chaired my own charter revision commission in the city of Waterberry.

[1:04:07] Um, I handle uh, employment matters, labor matters, and a lot of real

[1:04:12] property and development matters. So, I have a very diverse practice. Um but I

[1:04:18] am able to rely on and one of the beautiful things about is the depth of

[1:04:22] our bench. So if there is a matter that comes to me that is not within my

[1:04:26] specialty, I can reach out to one of my colleagues amongst our offices and to

[1:04:30] rely on their specialty either to introduce my client to that specialty um

[1:04:35] or to work hand inand if it's something that we need to collaborate on. So I'll

[1:04:39] turn it over before we talk about >> I'll be a little shorter. Um so I

[1:04:43] practice >> longer practice. I practiced for 19

[1:04:45] years in in Waterbury uh downtown Waterbury. So I I have matters involving

[1:04:51] Watertown, represent many people in Watertown. Um I moved to Watertown

[1:04:55] myself. I live living in Watertown for 31 years now. And then um I just saw my

[1:05:00] builders out in the hallway. He has a uh wetlands meeting, but um I'm building in

[1:05:04] up on Palm View, the 55 and older community, Mark Lovely community. So um

[1:05:08] I we moved here, as I said, 31 years ago. We love Watertown. So, um, you

[1:05:13] know, it's close to my heart. Um, I was a superior court judge for 22 years. I

[1:05:19] handled every kind of matter you can think of. Um, I was sat on complex

[1:05:23] litigation for five years. I was the administrative judge for for five years.

[1:05:28] I was a a presiding judge over civil matters for uh nine years. So, I um, you

[1:05:34] know, I've got a a wealth of knowledge, which is what I do now at at the firm.

[1:05:39] What I do is I do private mediations and arbitrations, but I'm also the um uh

[1:05:45] consultant for the litigation department. So, I review a lot of the

[1:05:49] litigation matters. I assist u and any kind of statutory issues. So that's how

[1:05:54] I got involved with the the charter revision commission actually uh your

[1:05:59] president or now leaving council Paul Jessel recommended me to Woodbury to uh

[1:06:05] to uh uh chair the uh the uh charter revision commission in in Woodbury and

[1:06:11] Stephanie and I did that together. So, um,

[1:06:16] so I I'm I'm here because I'm the water I'm the water tone element of this, but,

[1:06:21] um, but, uh, I I obviously I know this the town very well, having lived here

[1:06:27] all my kids once I still feel like this is I remember this is Hemingway school

[1:06:31] and my kids going to school here. So, um, and and they started at Griffin,

[1:06:36] which is now CBS. So, things have changed, but we're still here. So,

[1:06:40] » went to all those schools. >> Yeah, I know. I know. Well, we're using

[1:06:43] them in one way or another, so it's great. So, I'll let I'll go defer back

[1:06:46] to Stephanie. She'll give you a little more of the detail of what um the firm

[1:06:50] does. >> Yeah. So, comedy is a full practice law

[1:06:52] firm. We've been in Connecticut for over 125 years. Actually, this is our 12th

[1:06:57] 25th anniversary. Um we are the largest law firm that's solely within

[1:07:02] Connecticut. We do not have offices outside the state of Connecticut, but we

[1:07:05] do have several locations throughout the state. We started in Waterberry. We then

[1:07:09] moved to New Haven where we still have an office. Um, we now have an office in

[1:07:14] Stamford. There was a merger I think back in 2014. Um, we have since picked

[1:07:19] up a firm in Guilford that's merging into our New Haven office and recently

[1:07:23] we picked up a New London office. Um, so some of the the information that you'll

[1:07:28] see in the packet indicates, you know, for example, East Lime that we were not

[1:07:31] handling their labor negotiations. Um that's likely because the firm that was

[1:07:36] in New London didn't have the the practice um and able to do that. So they

[1:07:41] have last year merged in with us. We have about 90 attorneys um and we have

[1:07:47] the way that we're divided is into primary practice groups. We have a

[1:07:50] litigation practice group. We have a business services practice group which

[1:07:54] is what the municipal um items would fall under. And then we have trust and

[1:07:59] estates and then real property and kind of development which is a real hot focus

[1:08:04] for our communities down more in the Fairfield County area like Stamford that

[1:08:08] sees a lot of growth. Um so our offices are staffed those offices are staffed

[1:08:12] full-time. We also have um satellite offices in South Berry and Litfield

[1:08:16] which are primarily used by our estate planning attorneys more for convenience

[1:08:19] of their clients. Um the Stamford office really seems to focus on the real estate

[1:08:24] the development just based on the nature of where that that office is located.

[1:08:28] New Haven and Waterberry were kind of a mix of business services and litigation.

[1:08:33] Um the New London office was primarily a trust and estates office and the

[1:08:37] Guilford office was primarily medical malpractice defense. But you do find us,

[1:08:42] you know, merged around through all of the offices. Um, we have a fantastic

[1:08:46] support staff team. Um, we have, uh, you know, from summer associates to

[1:08:51] associates to contract partners and and and full partners. Um, so, and one of

[1:08:56] the things that we very much focus on is our succession planning. So with a deep

[1:09:01] bench and with being able to be around for 125 years, you have to have a plan

[1:09:07] of how are your clients going to transition um from generation to

[1:09:11] generation. Um so that is something that the firm very much focuses on. It's a

[1:09:15] lot of time spent at our partners meetings talking about if you're

[1:09:19] planning on retiring at any point in the future, I can't wait. Um but I got a lot

[1:09:23] of lot of years to go. Um there's you have to be identifying who's going to be

[1:09:28] taking over your cases and bringing them up to speed so that it's not a hard stop

[1:09:32] and the client feels that there's a continuity of practice and that they're

[1:09:37] going to be handled by someone who understands the nuances of whatever they

[1:09:41] may be. Um our clients typically range from municipalities,

[1:09:45] um hospitals, um business entities and some individuals. We typically, you

[1:09:50] know, do not represent, for example, um the typically we won't represent the

[1:09:55] union in a collective bargaining action. We typically represent the employer in

[1:09:58] our labor and employment practice. We do not represent um plaintiffs in medical

[1:10:04] malpractice cases. We only represent the hospitals to stay away from those

[1:10:07] positional conflicts. And I know there was concern about like what does a

[1:10:11] conflict process look like at Cardy. So the conflict uh check process is very uh

[1:10:18] elaborate. anytime that we want to bring in a new client, we send um every single

[1:10:24] name of a person that's involved in that um through a system that then runs a

[1:10:28] check against all of the matters firmwide so that we make sure and then

[1:10:32] we get a printed report that we look through to see if there's any sort of

[1:10:36] conflict and it also goes out by email at the end of the day so that if there's

[1:10:41] a positional conflict that didn't get a direct hit, we can talk about that. Um,

[1:10:46] so we are always making sure that we are above board with ethics and if there's

[1:10:52] there are certain conflicts that we know that are not waveable. You know, one I'm

[1:10:57] not going to be sitting next to Sal suing his client and he's defending

[1:11:00] mine, but there are sometimes that there's gray area. So, we actually have

[1:11:03] an ethics attorney um on our team that we can go to and say, "What do you think

[1:11:08] about this? Is this something that we need to get a is this waveable? Is this

[1:11:12] something that we should get a waiver?" So we even have we've gone to that

[1:11:15] length to make sure that we can be above board in all circumstances and uh

[1:11:21] proceeding as ethically as possible. >> Thank you.

[1:11:26] » Okay. >> The chair,

[1:11:27] » may I ask a follow-up question to that? Um, this came up in one of the town

[1:11:31] council meetings, um, about possible conflicts of interest with the Taft

[1:11:35] school and you obviously have a current attorney who represents Taft and a

[1:11:40] former Taft attorney who is working for the firm along with her husband who are

[1:11:45] also Taft parents. So, I'm just wondering how would that be resolved? I

[1:11:50] mean, you just obviously talked about your whole process. Um, but yeah, just

[1:11:54] could you speak to that? Sure. So, that was actually me. I was the one who was

[1:11:57] representing Taft before the land use boards which is a procedural

[1:12:01] » I'm speaking about the Hennib and Gianbana Weller

[1:12:05] » specifically. >> Okay. So yes and for full full

[1:12:09] transparency I did represent Taft before the land use board. Um Susan Hannib is

[1:12:13] of council with our firm. Um there's a lot of matters that we represent for

[1:12:18] Taft and for other businesses that have that are completely separate and

[1:12:21] distinct from what anything that would be a conflict of interest with the town.

[1:12:24] For example, if Taft wants to purchase a piece of property from a third-party

[1:12:28] land owner that doesn't involve the town. When we do find that there are uh

[1:12:33] direct conflicts, we don't represent either side. So, we will not be either

[1:12:36] side of a position where there's a direct conflict. If we find something

[1:12:40] that we believe that could be a conflict that we want to get a waiver for, we

[1:12:46] make sure to do that in a very informed and written manner. So, we would say,

[1:12:49] you know, we don't believe that there's any current conflict. We could foresee

[1:12:53] that if for some reason this went sideways, there could be a conflict. And

[1:12:58] then in our conflict waiverss, we say if we ever get to the point where this is

[1:13:04] no longer procedural, it has become adversarial, we get out from both sides

[1:13:08] and we would then refer out. >> Okay. Thank you. You're welcome.

[1:13:15] » Can I guess >> as long as we're on the conflict issue?

[1:13:19] Sure. Um, I need reassurance

[1:13:24] or comments from you with regard to your representation and your loyalty to the

[1:13:30] city of Waterberry. >> Sure. So, in seeing the due diligence,

[1:13:34] we actually went back and did some additional digging as to what our

[1:13:38] current representation of the city of Waterberry is. It doesn't seem that we

[1:13:41] actually have any matters that are active. So when I ran my conflict check

[1:13:48] again, I saw five matters that show up as open and simply because they haven't

[1:13:51] been closed. So it was things like establishing the um Waterberry Land

[1:13:57] Bank. So a regulatory establishment in 2023. I helped the city of Waterberry

[1:14:02] establish their fair rent commission procedures and policies. That was a

[1:14:05] oneanddone situation. Um our firm helped create the nonprofit entity and gain tax

[1:14:11] exemption for Waterberry Promise, which is a scholarship foundation. Frankly, we

[1:14:16] have not done any work since the um Olyri administration. Have not done any

[1:14:20] substantial work since the Olyri administration was in. Um we do uh have

[1:14:26] relationships with the city of Waterberry. We are we're across the

[1:14:29] street from city hall. We try to be good partners with the city of Waterberry,

[1:14:33] but we don't have any active litigation matters or ongoing negotiations uh with

[1:14:39] the city of Waterberry at this time. >> The firm's never represented the city

[1:14:44] directly. They've always been uh brought in as a either a conflict or for a

[1:14:49] particular case or issue, but they they have never had an active relationship

[1:14:54] because they have their own corporation council. Yeah.

[1:14:56] » And they have and they have Yeah. They have at least you know uh you know staff

[1:15:00] of attorneys that >> So you haven't represented them the same

[1:15:03] way you would be representing us? >> Not since the Yria administration. So

[1:15:07] the water waterberry has corporation council. So, they actually have a

[1:15:11] full-time legal department which handles the majority of their cases. So,

[1:15:15] historically, attorneys I had not even met that were gone prior to my arrival

[1:15:20] at Cardy and the Jarura administration had done some um like one-off work when

[1:15:26] it was a specialty that their corporation council could not handle,

[1:15:29] needed to refer it out for uh more expertise. Um but Maro Liry has been was

[1:15:36] has is out of office now and was in since I think 2011. So, it's been a long

[1:15:41] period of time since we've done anything substantial except for creating policies

[1:15:45] and procedures, kind of the little one-off um information. Thank you.

[1:15:49] You're welcome. >> Are we ready?

[1:15:53] » Please turn your mic on. >> Thank you.

[1:15:57] » It's good to see you again. I've met you in the past and it's good

[1:16:01] to see your honor, Judge. >> And you were not at my home at two in

[1:16:04] the morning.

[1:16:08] Don't even want to know. >> I don't want to know.

[1:16:15] » Search or arrest warrants. One or the other.

[1:16:17] » Yes. >> Yeah.

[1:16:19] » There is a concern I do have. >> Sure.

[1:16:22] » And it's a major concern to me regarding item seven firm specific matter

[1:16:30] requiring resolution. It mentions that during this evaluative

[1:16:35] process of us determining whether we're going to retain your firm to represent

[1:16:41] the town of Watertown. >> What occurs thereafter regarding the

[1:16:47] water dispute? >> We were not involved in the water

[1:16:50] dispute at all. >> Pardon?

[1:16:52] » We were not involved in the water dispute at all.

[1:16:56] If you're representing us, >> would it be a conflict if it's

[1:17:02] contradictory what as to what they would want?

[1:17:06] » No. >> No. We don't have any active engagement

[1:17:08] with them. >> We don't have a relationship with the

[1:17:11] the city of Waterbury on u >> based on what all so we did some

[1:17:16] homework on this anticipating that question and we have not discovered

[1:17:20] anything that would create a conflict. Now, you know, if something were to

[1:17:24] unrise as I'm unearthing things, that would be something that we would

[1:17:28] discuss. But at this point in time, we have no reason to believe that we would

[1:17:31] not be able to uh, you know, voraciously advocate for the town of Watertown

[1:17:37] against the city of Waterberry in the water issue or any other issue that may

[1:17:41] arise. Specifically, it says here, Attorney Cummings, during the town has

[1:17:48] engaged outside council to handle Waterberry adjacent manners during this

[1:17:53] evaluation period. What about thereafter?

[1:17:58] » So, I don't know what. So, there are certainly times that we have um referred

[1:18:04] cases out for other municipalities when we thought that there could be a

[1:18:07] conflict again for ethical purposes. For example, um there is a land owner in the

[1:18:12] town of Prospect um with whom we've done um unrelated not land use work, but we

[1:18:19] thought that it would be a conflict to have done that some some work for the

[1:18:24] family and then to be representing the town of Prospect in kind of an

[1:18:27] adversarial position. So, we contacted council and referred it out. um we

[1:18:32] simply did not want to put either party that we have had a relationship with

[1:18:36] even though we weren't involved in either side um we didn't want to create

[1:18:40] a positional conflict. >> Thank you very much explain to me. Thank

[1:18:45] you. So we could continue with our set questions and we'll come back to some of

[1:18:49] the one-off ones near the end. I'm sure >> um

[1:18:52] » we have eight questions. You may have answered some of them but happy to

[1:18:56] answer any questions you may have. >> Okay, that's fine. Uh first one,

[1:19:00] describe your firm's experience across the range of legal matters and

[1:19:04] municipality like Watertown. Um how you encounter municipal

[1:19:09] governance, land use, contracts, litigation,

[1:19:13] FOI, ethics, ordinance, etc. Uh how would you determine which attorney in

[1:19:18] your firm would handle a given matter and who would be Watertown's primary

[1:19:23] contact? >> So that's I will try to get to all of

[1:19:26] the elements of that. If I miss one, please do remind me. So, I would be your

[1:19:30] primary point of contact, but it would unlikely be me handling every single

[1:19:34] kind of matter that you have because we have developed our own specialties. For

[1:19:38] example, my colleague Vincent Fericella would be able to represent the town with

[1:19:42] respect to its collective bargaining agreements. I think you have five

[1:19:45] collective bargaining units. Uh actually when we were doing our research we found

[1:19:50] that back in the like 86 87 era did represent the town of Watertown and had

[1:19:56] done some like very historic um uh union negotiations. It seems like you know

[1:20:02] you've got your communications unit, you've got your public works unit, um

[1:20:06] your highway unit. Um so those would be handled likely by my colleague Vincent.

[1:20:11] But you could call me and say, "Hey, you know, I have this issue. It's collective

[1:20:14] bargaining. Who do we go to?" and I would send you to Vincent. At some

[1:20:17] point, likely the relationship would develop that if there's a collective

[1:20:21] bargaining issue, I go to Vincent. With litigation, it depends on what the

[1:20:24] litigation matter is. You know, is it a um a slip and fall? Is it um a tax

[1:20:31] appeal? And then we would internally discuss who's the best fit and fit the

[1:20:36] the client with the best attorney to do the representation. It's not going to be

[1:20:41] up to you to go on the website and look through and be like, "Oh, I think this

[1:20:44] is the right person." you contact me and internally we would figure out who is

[1:20:48] the best fit. If it's not me, who is it going to be? Um, we do handle

[1:20:52] litigation. We do handle FOI. I do a lot of the land use, so likely that would be

[1:20:57] me. Um, I don't remember what else was on your list.

[1:21:01] » You've covered pretty much >> pretty much. So, we we have our own

[1:21:04] specialties within the firm. And one of the good things again about the depth of

[1:21:08] our bench is that there's always coverage. So, it's not like if I go on

[1:21:13] vacation, there's nobody that's available to to cover a meeting or if if

[1:21:18] an issue comes up. Uh, I'm always reachable and if something comes up, we

[1:21:23] send somebody else to the meeting. That's that's that's that's one of the

[1:21:26] benefits of having great colleagues is that they do cover for you and then you

[1:21:29] do for that. >> Great.

[1:21:32] » Anybody have >> Can I just add one question? If I could

[1:21:35] add just there's a few sub specialties within the firm too that we have two

[1:21:41] attorneys that do education law. I know issues come up

[1:21:45] » with you know during the school year with with students and so on. We have

[1:21:49] people who have dealt with this on a regular basis. They've handled cases

[1:21:52] both for um uh different towns and and as well as for uh for individuals. So

[1:21:58] they know they they know the education issues. We don't have to go find

[1:22:02] somebody. We have someone who can do that. Um, we have environ a couple

[1:22:06] people. Yes. Especially just in environmental issues. I know that comes

[1:22:09] up all the time. I know in the process you as I say my builders in the next

[1:22:13] room with the, you know, inland wetlands, but I mean environmental

[1:22:16] issues come up in in any of developments that are going on in town and all. So,

[1:22:20] we have people who can provide assistance in those areas. So, if you

[1:22:24] were to say, you know, contact Stephanie and say, we have an, you know, we have

[1:22:27] this issue that came up in this particular development uh and it's an

[1:22:31] environmental issue. she'll she'll we've got somebody who can key right into that

[1:22:36] and and knows what to ask and knows what how to deal with it. So, um I I think

[1:22:41] that's what's the the the the beauty of the firm is it has so many attorneys

[1:22:46] that are have all these different specialties that

[1:22:50] » and if we were to be selected for to to represent you. One thing we would want

[1:22:54] to look to is how to develop the hierarchy because you know looking at

[1:22:58] your charter it talks about that we are the representative for both the town

[1:23:01] manager, the town council on all its boards and commissions. So you have a

[1:23:05] finite budget and we we're mindful of that. So understanding what your chain

[1:23:08] of command is, who's authorized to call up and say, "Hey, we need an opinion so

[1:23:12] that we're not running up a bill that's now been incurred." So those are the

[1:23:18] kinds of things that we would want to develop in in creating what we would

[1:23:22] hope to be a long-term relationship so that we know who should we be talking to

[1:23:26] and who do I need to call the chair or the town manager to say, "Hey, is it

[1:23:32] okay that this person has asked me a research question? Do you want me to

[1:23:35] take this on?" um those kinds of relationships.

[1:23:38] » Um in your um I don't want to say the file, but in your information, you list

[1:23:42] out about 25 different towns that you guys have done work for in the last five

[1:23:46] years, I believe it says. Um how many towns are you guys the kind of the

[1:23:51] primary town attorney for versus just doing oneoff projects? So, kind of the

[1:23:56] same role that we're looking for here. Um how many towns do you have that same

[1:24:00] similar role? >> So, for me, my primary town is the town

[1:24:03] of Prospect right now. So, we handle all of their business. Um, we do have some

[1:24:08] down in the eastern coast, I believe, east line. We we handle that primarily

[1:24:12] for um I don't know off the top of my head how many other communities we

[1:24:18] provide like full service legal for. A lot of towns we will come in more as the

[1:24:23] specialty council because they do have um a local town council or a corporation

[1:24:28] council that's captive um and only representing that community because then

[1:24:32] we could bring in um a little bit more depth

[1:24:35] » for for instance one of our attorneys has been working

[1:24:38] » almost exclusively now for the last three years with West Haven on all their

[1:24:42] ARPA that's a good point regul that that's all he's been doing and he's been

[1:24:45] he's he's really the mayor calls him directly doesn't even call the

[1:24:49] corporation council anymore. smoker. So that's how involved he is. So it's it's

[1:24:55] so that's part of the the again the the the depth of specialties that we have

[1:25:01] available that um uh another attorney is on the Mberry

[1:25:09] » WPCA >> WPCA. So um and so he and you know

[1:25:13] they're having all those issues about development on straights turnpike and

[1:25:16] all and so he's he's on that uh serves as the council for that commission. So

[1:25:21] um so we we we're aware of what the issues are and we know how to deal with

[1:25:26] them. So thank you >> through the chair. Thank you. So um

[1:25:30] Stephanie, my my dad voted for you once upon a time. So uh nice nice to meet

[1:25:35] you. Absolutely. Um, and it sounds like your firm is robust and and that has

[1:25:41] pros and cons though, right? And so one of my concerns as I'm listening to you

[1:25:46] is um the the interaction between the town attorney and the town manager and

[1:25:52] the town council. It's it's relational, right? and and so um I I want Mark to be

[1:25:59] able to pick up the phone and know that there's one go-to who's not only gonna

[1:26:04] handle a case but give advice about whether we should pursue that case,

[1:26:09] » right? And and so um that to me is is critically important because we're small

[1:26:18] and we need that level of of of of individualized service. So I hear you

[1:26:25] talking about >> Sure.

[1:26:26] » but shrink it down for me. >> Sure. So let me just use pro as an

[1:26:30] example because that's the one I work for most frequently. So the mayor has my

[1:26:33] cell phone. He'll call me up on his cell on my cell. But I'm not the best person

[1:26:38] to do their labor negotiations. My colleague is the best one. So you can

[1:26:43] always contact me and I can always farm to who who it needs to be. But I would

[1:26:47] be doing you a disservice if I tried to handle every single one of your matters

[1:26:51] knowing that some of my colleagues know the nuances of a particular field um

[1:26:55] with more detail. I I that's just I think the hallmark of good practitioners

[1:27:01] is knowing where the limitations of your knowledge lies and knowing that your

[1:27:05] colleague may be able to do it better. So I think that by we would be I would

[1:27:10] be the primary point of contact. You would have my cell phone. You would know

[1:27:13] how to get a hold of me. I have an assistant that is there who can pick up

[1:27:16] if if I am not picking up. But I do anticipate that other relationships over

[1:27:21] time would form where if there is a collective bargaining, Matt, I use that

[1:27:25] as it's an easy example. You would that the town manager would call um the

[1:27:31] person who's doing all of the labor negotiations to cut out the essentially

[1:27:35] to cut out the middleman. But certainly I would not be expecting the town to try

[1:27:40] to evaluate on its own who's the best fit. You could always call what we call

[1:27:45] in in our our internal nuances the relationship manager. That's the person

[1:27:50] that handles the relationship, but we make sure the best expertise is handling

[1:27:55] the individualized matter. >> If I could follow up just for a second

[1:28:00] on that on that question, >> I understand that you want someone who

[1:28:05] you can rely on for advice, but I think it's important that you get the right

[1:28:10] advice. So, um, you if you were to call me about a zoning matter, I I don't do

[1:28:17] zoning anymore. I haven't done zoning in 26 years. So, um, but I I know someone

[1:28:22] in the firm who does zoning on a regular basis. So, we can get whatever the issue

[1:28:26] is, we can get that done and give you a, you know, a specific answer that's and

[1:28:31] it should be the correct answer, right? >> So that you can make a a decision on how

[1:28:35] you want to proceed. >> And it's more cost- effective that way,

[1:28:37] too. because if you know someone that knows the answer, doesn't have to spend

[1:28:40] five hours trying to figure out what was the question and to to figure out the

[1:28:43] answer. So that's, you know, that's important, too.

[1:28:46] » Thank you. >> Mr. Chairman, may I I'm sorry. Did you

[1:28:51] want to go? >> I just and I'm getting ahead of the

[1:28:54] council because we haven't had this discussion yet, but we do have some

[1:28:57] carveouts. One is actually labor and the other one would be tax sales. Is Harmony

[1:29:03] and Torrance willing to discuss those carveouts?

[1:29:06] » Sure. >> Okay. Um, that's council's decisions

[1:29:09] obviously, but we haven't had an opportunity to actually talk about talk

[1:29:12] through that yet. >> We're here to support whatever the the

[1:29:15] town's needs are. And those relationships can evolve over time.

[1:29:18] » And on that point, we discussed this, you know, you know, in anticipation of

[1:29:23] the meeting, we we would look at something like the tax sales and all. I

[1:29:28] I I don't think we would look at that as a um an hourly rate case. I think those

[1:29:33] would be like a flat fee. because those are those are more um matters aren't as

[1:29:39] complicated, but they just need to be done. You need somebody they make sure

[1:29:42] they get they get done. They get done right. So we can make sure that those

[1:29:46] are done on a more limited financial basis. So So we won't be running up, you

[1:29:52] know, 20 hours on a tax sale. It's just that it would that'd be inconceivable

[1:29:56] and it's not correct. It wouldn't be proper representation.

[1:30:01] » You pretty much answered the second question. uh relative to

[1:30:07] uh contact and the only part of that not responded to was would you uh intend

[1:30:14] council meetings or executive sessions? >> Sure.

[1:30:17] » If if the town wanted us to absolutely you know it's it's about what does the

[1:30:21] town want from us? If you don't want us to attend, we don't attend. If you want

[1:30:24] us to attend, we're happy to attend. >> And it would would that be you or it

[1:30:28] would be a person assigned for a specific issue? It would likely be me

[1:30:33] for a majority of the the commissions, but we may also, you know, spread the

[1:30:38] work out a little bit to give other people um some of the work. Uh it

[1:30:42] depends on like scheduling conflicts and things of that nature. Um but yes,

[1:30:46] somebody responsible who understands would would be there. Well, and to to

[1:30:52] add to that, just on the assumption that you you indicate

[1:30:57] that you would like someone to come to the town council meeting because there's

[1:31:00] a litigation matter, >> right?

[1:31:02] » Well, >> you know, I could come, someone else

[1:31:06] who's doing part of the litigation team could come because we we have a better

[1:31:10] understanding of how the court system works and how cases proceed and and how

[1:31:16] how they should be handled. So, >> okay. Uh the next question is how do you

[1:31:21] view the town attorney's role in preventing legal problems rather than

[1:31:26] reacting to them? >> Um do you have any examples of helping a

[1:31:32] municipality reduce legal or operating risk before it became litigation?

[1:31:39] » Certainly. So you know a lot of what we do is counseling. So when they say

[1:31:43] attorney and counselor at law they do mean the counseling part. So there are

[1:31:46] times where, you know, we can foresee that an issue can become adversarial,

[1:31:51] but we try to find a solution that um gets the job done um without it having

[1:31:59] to be a major issue. I see this a lot in my land use practice of how can we be

[1:32:03] creative, how can we get compliance rather than necessarily forcing a suit.

[1:32:09] sometimes and sometimes that just has to be a suit. You know,

[1:32:13] sometimes you're just not getting what you need and unfortunately you have to

[1:32:16] go that route. But we recognize and I regularly tell folks, you need to be

[1:32:19] very thoughtful if you want to bring litigation because it's a long process

[1:32:23] and it's extremely expensive. So there are a lot of ways that we can work

[1:32:28] through issues without it having to go to the court system. That's not

[1:32:31] necessarily the best resolution. And you see, honestly, you see it a lot more in

[1:32:35] practice, particularly with the what the judge is doing these days. you see a lot

[1:32:38] more mediations and arbitrations. So that um latigious nature seems to be

[1:32:43] shifting a little bit through times. It's still important. It still plays a

[1:32:46] role. Um but there are certainly a lot of ways that we can try to find

[1:32:49] solutions. Um if we identify, hey, you know, this ordinance may need to be

[1:32:54] updated. Um hey, there's something coming from the state. You know, we give

[1:32:57] that advice. Ultimately, it's your decision of how you want to proceed um

[1:33:02] based on what the town's needs are. Um, but we we give advice and we my goal

[1:33:08] always to make is always to make sure that my clients feel that they've made

[1:33:10] an educated decision. That's really what I want for them.

[1:33:14] » Okay. Um, Watertown operates a water and sewer

[1:33:20] authority and periodically faces complex contractual regulatory financing and

[1:33:27] intermunicipal issues. uh what experience, if any, do you have

[1:33:32] with municipal water and sewer matters and how do you handle an issue outside

[1:33:38] the regularly assigned attorney's expertise?

[1:33:42] » So our regular so a regularly assigned attorney I think would be me but we

[1:33:47] would always um you know look to our bench to see who has that kind of

[1:33:51] expertise in complicated contract issues depending on what the nature of that

[1:33:55] issue is. That's something that we, you know, we ordinarily handle complex

[1:33:59] issues. Um, you know, I'll give you a a regulatory example. It's not water and

[1:34:05] sewer, but there was I had a client that had to get um had to go through the

[1:34:10] cyphus process, which is the committee on foreign investment in the United

[1:34:13] States. So, we had to bring them through a very complicated process um with the

[1:34:18] federal government, with the DoD, with other parties. So, complicated is not

[1:34:23] scary for us. We're we're not afraid of taking on a challenge. Um and water imu

[1:34:28] uh we have as the judge mentioned we have people that sit on WPCAS as their

[1:34:34] legal council. So we do have experience in looking at those um municipal

[1:34:39] adjacent kind of um organizations. So they're part of your or whether you're

[1:34:44] part of your town but they have different um obligations and guard rails

[1:34:49] that they have to abide by. And I think and it hasn't been pointed out but one

[1:34:54] of our major clients is Eversource good, bad or indifferent depending on

[1:34:59] how you feel but we do exclusively we do all their rate uh appeals. We do all

[1:35:05] their other um uh representation before the DPU. So we've got people who know

[1:35:11] regulatory work very well. They're they know how to deal with regulatory issues.

[1:35:16] They know how to deal with contracts. They you know there's there's people

[1:35:19] that they're very they're very well invested. There are I'm going to just

[1:35:24] estimate but I I think there's at least seven or eight people that just do

[1:35:27] effort source work. That's how well invested and we and they have an

[1:35:32] inhouse staff of attorneys but they rely on us to do a lot of the other work.

[1:35:38] » I do contracts for hydroelectric generation facilities. Um so similar

[1:35:42] nature of that complex, you know, land use and water use kind of issues.

[1:35:47] » Um quick question just while we're on the water and sewer area. Um obviously

[1:35:51] you guys weren't involved at all with our water um lawsuit, but I'm assuming

[1:35:56] that you know >> the only thing I'll say I was sitting as

[1:35:59] a judge when that came in. So and I had to recuse myself because I live in

[1:36:02] Watertown. I pay I pay the water bill. Um, just from kind of an outsider, is

[1:36:08] there anything that you saw that the town did that you guys might have done

[1:36:13] something different that might have result in a different outcome?

[1:36:18] » I'll answer that. I mean, I I saw I saw the case when it came in. I knew what

[1:36:23] was what was happening. As I said, I had to recuse myself and I had to I shifted

[1:36:28] to other judges in the in the Waterbury courthouse. Um,

[1:36:34] I I I don't think it's fair for us to comment on that. I I we we didn't go

[1:36:41] through either any negotiations that happened or go through the court case

[1:36:44] and how it was presented. Um I you know I know the Bill Stevens was one of my

[1:36:49] dear friends and I know he had the case before he passed away. Um and um and uh

[1:36:55] you know I I thought the world of Bill. He's I'm He was a very good friend of

[1:37:01] mine. Uh I know it ended up having to be far from down to outside council. I I I

[1:37:07] just don't think it's fair for us to say they did a good job. Bad job. I know you

[1:37:11] were dealing with a very difficult situation with Waterberry. Uh

[1:37:16] Mayor Oir had a real issue with wanting to stick Watertown, I

[1:37:23] think. So uh I know and and that's that he wasn't he wasn't negotiable and then

[1:37:29] and so it had to be litigated but as far as the litigation is concerned I don't

[1:37:34] think we can comment about that. >> How about any comments about going

[1:37:38] forward with waterberry and contract negotiation and things of that nature um

[1:37:44] » going forward? >> Yeah I I think it's necessary. I mean

[1:37:48] what if we have to lose each other you know I mean there's certain things that

[1:37:53] I know that you know obviously the the pipes go through water town I know we

[1:37:59] have an we had an agreement at least previously that

[1:38:03] um that we were to maintain those we were help maintaining the the uh pumping

[1:38:08] facilities and all that. So I mean I think we had we need each other

[1:38:13] » they need us I think as much as we need them you know.

[1:38:16] » Absolutely. Um uh so um it's it's you know it's unfortunate it got to the

[1:38:22] point it got to and what happened but I I don't I don't think either side can

[1:38:26] just walk away you know so um you know there's going to be a way to

[1:38:33] start up there's a new administration there's new people involved new people

[1:38:37] in the corporation's office I think you can we can start up a you know a line of

[1:38:43] communication to see how that would work to to try to work out something that is

[1:38:47] favorable to to both parties. I mean, that's still Yeah.

[1:38:50] » And having a good relationship with corporation council to be able to to

[1:38:53] call and to be able to say, "Hey, can I get on your calendar to have a

[1:38:56] conversation?" I think that that does go a long way, you know, in that

[1:38:59] relationship sense of, you know, we're not representing them, but it doesn't

[1:39:05] mean that we're not seeing them as we walk to the dry cleaners or as we, you

[1:39:09] know, I I when I chaired charter revision, corporation council was

[1:39:13] involved. So, we've developed a relationship

[1:39:16] um where we're colleagues in the legal field. So, it's good to have those

[1:39:20] people that you can contact even if they're not representing them.

[1:39:24] » Thank you. through the chair. Sir, with all due

[1:39:28] respect, twice you mentioned that you have attorneys um in the next room

[1:39:32] working on a project for yourself. Is that correct?

[1:39:35] » No. No. My builder's next door on an inland wetlands issue. Mark Lovely.

[1:39:41] » Okay. >> I'm I'm building in the development up

[1:39:44] in Palm View >> in Watertown.

[1:39:46] » Yeah, in Watertown. >> Okay. And so that

[1:39:48] » I'm not moving out of town. >> You're not moving out of town. Okay.

[1:39:51] That's actually my question would be um could there be a conflict of interest

[1:39:57] being representative with you know if you have such a big project or

[1:40:02] » I I don't represent Mark we don't represent he has his own council he has

[1:40:06] his own attorney >> who's building yourself or

[1:40:09] » no m is developing that you know he upon view he's you know part of that is

[1:40:14] lovely drive and all that there's a a section there he's building a 55 and

[1:40:19] older community. It was approved and and so he's built I contracted for him to

[1:40:25] build build a house for me. >> Okay.

[1:40:27] » And the wetland I don't think the wetlands application has anything to do.

[1:40:30] We happen to see them in the hallway. >> I just saw him in the hallway. I just

[1:40:33] mentioned it because I said, you know, it's just coincidence.

[1:40:35] » Thank you. Because it was mentioned twice while you were here. So I just

[1:40:38] » Yeah. No, no. I'm just saying he's he's you know, he's here. So we know but I

[1:40:43] I'm I'm aware of what again we're aware of the issues that are he's he's dealing

[1:40:48] with but he has his own attorney for that.

[1:40:50] » Thank you. >> We we don't represent him.

[1:40:52] » Okay. >> Okay. So next question. I think you've

[1:40:55] touched on a lot of this but I'll just read through this. If there's anything

[1:40:58] else you feel you should add please do. >> Because your firm represents other

[1:41:02] municipalities and public entities. How will you identify and manage potential

[1:41:06] conflicts involving Watertown? If a conflict preventing your firm from

[1:41:11] handling a significant matter, how would you help the town maintain continuity of

[1:41:15] representation? So I think we've described the conflict

[1:41:20] check process and then so if we were to identify a conflict that was not

[1:41:26] waveable, which means that we have to refer out. What we like to do is

[1:41:30] identify who we think would be a good fit and then we bring them up to speed

[1:41:35] and then we hand off and we we you know feel free to consult with us. to to get

[1:41:39] the facts, the information, but we know our clients, so we know like who's going

[1:41:43] to be a good personality fit, who's going to be a good knowledge base fit,

[1:41:47] um, and who's going to take care of them because we want to make sure we refer

[1:41:51] you to somebody, we want to make sure that they're going to do a good job

[1:41:53] because it's a reflection on us. Um, if it's a wavable conflict, what we do is

[1:41:57] we say to to, you know, the town, this is what the potentials are. here's what

[1:42:03] we would do if it becomes adversarial and no longer in this hypothetical

[1:42:08] situation. And that's all part of a written agreement that both parties have

[1:42:12] to sign. So it can't be unilateral. So if we were to have a conflict that was

[1:42:17] waveable, we get conflict waiverss from both sides. those go in the file and

[1:42:22] then if something you know if it gets to a different point that we did not

[1:42:25] anticipate and we really do try to anticipate you know what is practical

[1:42:30] and and what is possible in going to happen you could spend I love going down

[1:42:35] a rabbit hole it's just the way my brain works but you can't do you can't predict

[1:42:40] every single thing that could happen you try to look at what is probable in a

[1:42:44] situation >> I don't want to get far down in a case

[1:42:47] and have there be a problem because it's just not good for my client and that's

[1:42:50] not that doesn't look good for us like that doesn't feel good. So if we do you

[1:42:55] know anticipate a problem >> we refer out at the beginning so there

[1:42:59] can be continuity there. Um if we really don't anticipate a problem we get the

[1:43:03] waiverss and we proceed and you know most of the time it it's fine.

[1:43:08] » Thank you. >> Okay. So beyond your hourly rates and

[1:43:12] fee structure what practices would you use to control the town's legal

[1:43:16] expenses? How would you flag a matter that's

[1:43:20] becoming more costly than anticipated and what billing detail and periodic

[1:43:24] reporting would the town receive? >> So that we bill on a monthly basis. So

[1:43:29] we track our time on a daily basis. We put it all into a system. So the town

[1:43:35] would get very all of our billing comes in with the how much time we have spent

[1:43:40] and exactly what we were doing on that and then you would get monthly invoices.

[1:43:44] So you'd be able to see what is happening. the way that we like to

[1:43:47] write. So you could have like a general matter. So for example, um an inland's

[1:43:52] wetlands commission matter, a planning and zoning commission matter, a town

[1:43:56] council matter, and we would build to those. So you could kind of keep track

[1:44:00] of which um committee is taking up a lot of your budgetary monies. Um, again

[1:44:05] talking about the chain of command, like that's going to be important for us to

[1:44:09] understand as to who has authority to ask for us to commit legal services

[1:44:15] because once they're committed, they're they're build. Um, so if there and if we

[1:44:20] did identify a matter that was kind of turning from the ordinary to something

[1:44:24] that was unique, we could talk about engaging in a separate matter for that,

[1:44:29] which would be a separate billing code. You'd get a separate matter and

[1:44:32] developing a budget for what that looks like.

[1:44:37] Okay. >> How often do we get report?

[1:44:41] » How often would we get a outside of the billing um say an open

[1:44:48] » um stat >> a status report on on what's occurring

[1:44:53] » every month. >> Oh,

[1:44:54] » we send out bills every single month. >> Yeah.

[1:44:56] » So, we have one. So, typically the way that it's handled is like the

[1:44:58] relationship when we set up a new matter, we have a relationship person, a

[1:45:03] billing person, um, and then an originating person. So, the there's one

[1:45:07] partner that's looking at all of the billing. Um, so we we review our bills

[1:45:13] each month to make sure that there's nothing that needs to be like that's an

[1:45:17] associate spend too much time. I write that down before I send it out. for

[1:45:21] example, um during the course of the year, do you you give us a list of the

[1:45:25] open situations or claims or litigation that

[1:45:31] you're handling so we know we've got five lawsuits and and two appeals or if

[1:45:36] that's something that you wanted to have a certain check-in point? Absolutely. Um

[1:45:40] you know, typically your litigation matters would be a separate billing

[1:45:43] matter. Um so we could, you know, those would be tracked separately so you could

[1:45:48] you could see what that's looking like. Um, but yes, we would be checking in

[1:45:52] with you to make sure that you know in the in the stratosphere what contracts

[1:45:56] do you have that are still ongoing? You know, are you running close on what we

[1:46:00] think your budget is? You know, in looking at, for example, in looking at

[1:46:03] your budget, um, I noticed that you have primarily one line item for your um, for

[1:46:10] for legal and then it's it all of your commissions are kind of pulling out of

[1:46:14] that amount. So, one thing we may think about is do we want to have Okay. um

[1:46:20] inlands, wetlands, like this is what your enforcement budget is going to be.

[1:46:24] Then you have to come and ask for a different line item shift so that you

[1:46:26] could kind of control them more on a department basis rather than just having

[1:46:31] one line item. So there's there's different ways to try to handle it. Um

[1:46:35] but there always does come this like push and pull of the one commission

[1:46:39] wants to do something but then it there someone's got to pay for it. So there's

[1:46:44] always that responsibility. >> Mr. Chairman, just so you know, the

[1:46:49] policy of the town has always been that any department head or commission should

[1:46:52] go through the town manager's office before it gets to the town attorney.

[1:46:57] That way we could keep an understanding because as pointed out, we do it track

[1:47:01] it through one line item. >> Council members too, I think we need to

[1:47:04] say since we have new council people, >> yes,

[1:47:07] » no council person can can call them >> and it's just really for fiscal, you

[1:47:13] know, being fiscally responsible, that's all.

[1:47:16] Sure. Can you make mic?

[1:47:22] » I come from a structured environment where I previously worked

[1:47:28] and I don't want to call it the chain of command that who would directly be able

[1:47:34] to reach out to you in your firm about legal advice.

[1:47:40] » I'd like to limit that. town manager, the chair, vice chair. It can't be a

[1:47:47] hodgepodge of people just contacting you to get advice before we go further.

[1:47:53] » Right. So you right now >> right now your charter says that we're

[1:47:57] representing and it's true we do represent the town manager, we represent

[1:48:01] the the the town council, all of the commissions. But that's why, you know,

[1:48:05] we were saying it's important for us to figure out what who are we authorized to

[1:48:10] deal with regularly so that we know what that chain of command is going to be so

[1:48:16] that if we do get an errant phone call, I then call Mark and say, "Hey, do you

[1:48:21] want me to do this?" Like, and he may say, "Oh, yeah. I just forgot to give

[1:48:24] you a call. Can you, you know, go ahead." Um, but that's all part of the

[1:48:28] relationship building and figuring out what do you what is your expectation of

[1:48:32] us and what who are we expecting to hear from

[1:48:37] » through the chair. >> Just follow up in the in the same vein.

[1:48:40] Um, so then when you're providing legal advice,

[1:48:48] um, my assumption is based on the structures that you're talking about is

[1:48:53] that it's always going to be written. Will it ever be verbal?

[1:49:00] » Yeah, absolutely. Depends on the sever like it depends on what you're looking

[1:49:03] for. Do you need something? Do you need a memorandum that has like a lot more

[1:49:07] depth to it that we anticipate, you know, is going to be disseminated for

[1:49:11] other people's use? Is it just a, hey, I want to run this by you? Do you think

[1:49:15] that this this course of action is right? Yeah, I think that that you

[1:49:18] totally think you're right on track. Okay, talk to you later. Um, so it

[1:49:21] depends on the severity of the issue and to what purpose is the advice going to

[1:49:26] be used for. >> Great. And and and thanks for clarifying

[1:49:29] that. And uh um I I guess if there's a if there's a long-standing issue that um

[1:49:35] the town is dealing with for multiple years, um should we expect to find

[1:49:39] written documentation of advice on that issue?

[1:49:42] » I would imagine so. Yeah. You know, so for example, like if I'm doing a title

[1:49:46] issue, sometimes it's really hard for me just to have a conversation and say and

[1:49:50] then back in a legitimate one back in 1800, you know, this person conveyed to

[1:49:54] this person and then this person died and then it went to these two heirs and

[1:49:57] then out. So it those things like are easier to track in writing. So we we we

[1:50:02] use our professional judgment as to what the best manner in which to deliver the

[1:50:06] advice is. And then sometimes they say, "Hey, can you put that in a memo for us

[1:50:10] so that we can, you know, share it with the council." Okay. And we send it out.

[1:50:15] Um you know, we also have to think about what's privileged and what is not and

[1:50:19] not breaching the attorney client confidentiality provisions. So, we

[1:50:23] would, you know, if it's something that's going to be legal advice,

[1:50:26] strategy decisions, we would be marking it attorney client confidentiality, you

[1:50:30] know, attorney work product. If it's something that you're intending to

[1:50:34] disseminate to, you got an inquiry from the public that you're trying to respond

[1:50:38] to and that you're asking for a legal opinion on, then we would, you know,

[1:50:43] what goes out is not necessarily all of the the legal advice. Like, that's

[1:50:46] that's held in the tree of trust. So, it depends on what we're what we're doing.

[1:50:51] you you're the client, >> right?

[1:50:53] » So, we're we're going to do whatever we can to satisfy whatever you your needs

[1:50:59] are and what your requests are. If you need a memorandum that you need to share

[1:51:02] with all the members of the council about an issue that's coming up before

[1:51:06] the council, we will obviously meet with you, discuss how what we what you need,

[1:51:11] prepare it, so you will have it available for everyone to to digest. If

[1:51:15] it's a question of can does this seem like we we can do or can't do and we can

[1:51:21] just give you a verbal answer. Well, we we can get back to you with a verbal

[1:51:24] answer if that's all you require. Um we're not going to do extra work just to

[1:51:29] bill you. That's not that's not not what we're trying to do, you know. Um again,

[1:51:34] we're we're cognizant it's it's a municipality.

[1:51:38] » We're running late on time. How are your phones build out to us

[1:51:45] every phone call? So Mark just called you up and said, "Hey, am I on a right

[1:51:49] path with this?" Is that build out right away that month? That question

[1:51:54] » just a small little question. >> It depends. It depends on how much time.

[1:51:58] So we are we do bill by the hour. I'll be 100% transparent with you. We track

[1:52:02] everything in traditional law firm sense. So we we bill to the six. So

[1:52:08] every six minutes. But if it's a quick phone call, sometimes we don't. But if

[1:52:12] it's, you know, a half an hour phone call, yeah, that's going to that's going

[1:52:15] to get because these are this is this is still our profession. Um, but we try to

[1:52:20] be judicious about like I don't bill for opening the mail, right? Like there's

[1:52:24] there's administrative tasks that we do that we just anticipate having to do.

[1:52:28] Um, you know, if I reply to a quick email, I don't necessarily bill that

[1:52:32] unless I'm getting 10 little emails in a day, then I'm going to bill that.

[1:52:37] » Thank you. Okay. Municipal legal matters often span

[1:52:42] years and personnel changes. What systems and practices would your firm

[1:52:46] use to document legal advice, key decisions, open matters, and historical

[1:52:51] context so Watertown preserves institutional memory? How would you

[1:52:56] ensure a clean handoff if the assigned attorney changes or the engagement ends

[1:53:00] while appropriately protecting privileged and confidential matters? So,

[1:53:05] we have a very sophisticated client management system. Um so each client is

[1:53:09] assigned a client number and then each matter is assigned a specific matter

[1:53:14] number and that number lives with the client irrespective of of who the

[1:53:19] attorney assigned to it is. So if I want to look up you know like historically

[1:53:24] the the ones that have been with the firm for since its inception are four

[1:53:29] digits. They're now like up to six digits. So they're just n they're just

[1:53:32] numerical identifiers. And then we have a we have a whole IT team. We have um

[1:53:38] ongoing training um that we all have to conduct annually. Um they also do um

[1:53:46] routine testing of us like they send us fishing emails to see if we'll click on

[1:53:49] them and if you get on the naughty list you have to take retraining. Um so we do

[1:53:53] take we have a lot of institutional like banking institutional clients as well.

[1:53:57] So we we our systems are designed for the most restrictive um in protecting

[1:54:05] personal identifying information, healthc care records, those kinds of

[1:54:09] things. So our client management system um is a cloud-based software that we we

[1:54:15] save our emails, we can save our voicemails, all of our memorandums, our

[1:54:20] motions, all of those things to one system. Um and then that carries

[1:54:23] forward. So even when a matter is closed, uh we send things off site and

[1:54:29] we retain them for the appropriate amount of time. We also have that

[1:54:32] digital footprint too. So I can go in and look at, you know, items that were

[1:54:38] from far before I started practicing law. I can also recall items. Um, we we

[1:54:43] tend to save things like mapping, charters, those kinds of we I don't know

[1:54:48] if we would necessarily save every single motion from a multi-year

[1:54:51] litigation case after this requisite period of time. Um, but we do have all

[1:54:57] of that knowledge in the system. Um, I just did a a real estate transaction

[1:55:01] where I went years back and found some very old title work that had been done.

[1:55:06] Um, and it was extremely helpful, but it was probably 15 years old. So we have a

[1:55:11] system that we can document it all um that we maintain

[1:55:14] » but everything that goes out of our office is stored in that document

[1:55:19] preservation system. So >> it does it doesn't get purged until a

[1:55:24] matter is going to be closed and is determined what needs to be saved.

[1:55:28] » But I'll give you another real quick example. I was involved in a very um uh

[1:55:36] I was appointed by a bankruptcy court to review

[1:55:40] um sexual assault claims against the dasis of of uh of Norwich. Everything

[1:55:47] there was confidential and we have firewalls and all that. No one can see

[1:55:52] that what I what the things I looked at all the documents I had, you know, uh

[1:55:58] victim statements. I I had to go and interview all the victims. several were

[1:56:04] in prison that um and all all that's no one can find out because we have a

[1:56:10] document preservation system. We have firewalls and all that anything that's

[1:56:14] confidential will never get >> exposed. We can lock a matter internally

[1:56:19] so that like an assistant can't go like there are matters that are locked that

[1:56:22] you can't even see in a search if they're of such a sensitive nature.

[1:56:26] Generally speaking like if if I want to look for a template I can go in and be

[1:56:29] like hey some you know Patrick created a great template. Thank you. Um so we do

[1:56:33] have it but we can tailor what kind of security measures need to be associated

[1:56:38] with a particular file >> through the chair. Um with all that

[1:56:45] security the question I would have is have you ever had a data breach and if

[1:56:49] so has any sensitive information been you know stolen?

[1:56:54] » Not that I'm aware of. We actually do have there's a one of our partners is

[1:56:58] Sherwin Yoder and he is the data breach guy. So he actually provides a lot of

[1:57:04] advice to um data prevention uh data breach prevention and then how to react

[1:57:09] to it if there is a data breach like what do you need to do those compliance

[1:57:13] rules um the European ones the California ones um you know the the new

[1:57:18] AI rules that are coming. So we have someone that specializes in that um that

[1:57:22] does facilitate. So a lot the way the partnership works is like the people who

[1:57:26] have um specialized expertise often help in management decisions as to what kind

[1:57:32] of protocols need to be implemented. So not only do we have a full-time IT team

[1:57:36] with a lead and then the staffing, we have an attorney who specializes in

[1:57:41] regulatory compliance with data breach and resolution. Sarof,

[1:57:45] » how many attorneys are in this? Uh >> 90 about 90

[1:57:49] » 19 >> 90

[1:57:51] » 90 okay it sounds big it really does >> not 90 in water we're spread out through

[1:57:56] I don't we you know we >> No no no I know throughout Connecticut

[1:57:59] but I mean it was mentioned before it's almost on a it it's just seems large and

[1:58:06] and personal almost a little bit not to offend you but in the course of action

[1:58:12] if somebody you know uh uh reaching out to you specifically or you had mentioned

[1:58:19] at some point there was a uh relations manager and you know it just it just

[1:58:24] seems so large. >> You you you may feel like you're a small

[1:58:28] town but you got a very large budget. That's a lot of

[1:58:31] » I know I'm well aware of that. >> You know so it's it's not a oneman I

[1:58:35] don't think it's a oneman operation anymore that you can rely on to for

[1:58:38] representation. It just that's the nature of the beast at this point.

[1:58:41] » Yeah. >> You know there's and there's so many

[1:58:43] areas that you're involved in. basis you get live requests you get you

[1:58:49] know as I said you you name it labor issues

[1:58:54] uh tax issues you know u there's just and one person can't do all that there

[1:59:01] there's the jack of all trades and master of none is not going to be a good

[1:59:05] fit for you you know >> not whether you whether you use us or

[1:59:09] not doesn't matter but I think it's it's hard to I think to be

[1:59:13] you know one man one man shop to do this type of stuff. There's just just there's

[1:59:17] too much involved. You can't know it all.

[1:59:20] » Absolutely. >> Yeah.

[1:59:21] » Absolutely. >> You know, and you know, I know I know as

[1:59:24] a judge I had things that come came before me. I mean, thank God I had, you

[1:59:28] know, I had the uh you know, research clerks and all that could find stuff,

[1:59:31] but there was things that first impression to me anyway. So, um

[1:59:37] you know, you you're just But if you have the resources, you can handle it.

[1:59:43] I have one specific question and then one last uh general question to wrap up.

[1:59:48] So based on your review of Watertown's needs, what do you see as the most

[1:59:52] important responsibilities of the town attorney? And how would your firm

[1:59:56] approach serving the council, town manager, boards, commissions, and

[2:00:00] departments? >> Sure. So I think the most frequent need

[2:00:04] that you're going to have are just various items that are coming before

[2:00:07] your various commissions and guidance, particularly as the state statutes

[2:00:10] change. you know, for example, regulatory changes that are required by

[2:00:14] the state in order to be compliant. Um, you know, the state says you must, you

[2:00:18] know, amend your uh zoning regulations in order to allow middle transit

[2:00:22] housing. We have to do those things. So, it's more of like the day-to-day

[2:00:25] management stuff that I think is going to be your most pressing need because

[2:00:28] that's just going to be what's most frequent.

[2:00:30] » Um, so making sure that, you know, are do you have your quorum done right? Like

[2:00:33] are you getting your minutes up on time? Like those day-to-day things that can

[2:00:36] cause bigger problems. That is what I see as the the most important thing to

[2:00:40] get underway. And then you have the one-off issues. You've got, you know,

[2:00:43] your contracts. You've got, you know, you've got your municipal golf course

[2:00:47] that has contracts. I think your Sunset Girl is going to run in 2027. So, you

[2:00:51] have those like oneoff contract negotiations. Um, the water deal, which

[2:00:55] you have council on. I don't know if you would be expecting that us to take that

[2:00:58] over. We would be, you know, more than happy to do so. Um, so there's those are

[2:01:04] more of the oneoff things, but really you're going to want to call us up and

[2:01:07] be like, "Hey, we have a problem. What do we do here?" And that's really what I

[2:01:10] see the most relationship part as being. >> Okay.

[2:01:15] Finally, is there anything we haven't asked you that you think the council

[2:01:19] should know? >> Don't think so. Look at all the notes.

[2:01:26] » Oh, I do have a question. So, the volunteer fire department is a separate

[2:01:29] 501c3 entity, but it's funded primarily by the town. Would you be anticipating

[2:01:34] that they would have their own counsel or would that be something that we would

[2:01:37] be providing counsel on as well? >> Fall under us. Yeah.

[2:01:41] » Okay. >> Okay.

[2:01:45] » The the town would town attorney would cover um legal discussions stuff with

[2:01:51] the volunteer fire departments. Yeah. >> So, yes, is what I'm hearing. Okay. Some

[2:01:56] some 501c3s want to have that separate council. Uh and then thinking about also

[2:02:00] like from an FOI perspective. Um other small towns have well you foyer the

[2:02:06] town. You didn't foyer the volunteer fire department. We don't represent the

[2:02:09] volunteer fire department. So like just knowing about how to be able to answer

[2:02:12] those kinds of questions. Um thinking about you know what are we

[2:02:18] going to do for are you going to change your budgeting process to give your

[2:02:21] departments um specific budgets? Do you want to keep it the way that it is? Just

[2:02:25] thinking about like what what do you want to see in the future? That's kind

[2:02:29] of the what do you what do you see your town council as responsibil of being

[2:02:35] responsible for? What's your ideal? >> It's a hard one.

[2:02:42] » I don't think we'll have an answer for that tonight. But um I did have one

[2:02:46] question. Um if you were chosen for town attorney, what do you see kind of that

[2:02:52] first few months that transition from current attorney to um your firm? How

[2:02:58] the the knowledge base being transferred and kind of areas that you might want to

[2:03:03] kind of deal with right up front versus other projects that you know might be

[2:03:07] more down the road. >> We want to get as much information from

[2:03:10] Paul as pos. He's a wealth of knowledge. He's got a lot of historical knowledge.

[2:03:13] So we would likely say to him, okay, what is coming down the pike? What do we

[2:03:18] need to be reactive to? And then also, you know, integrating into what is there

[2:03:23] a big public hearing that's coming up that we need to be made aware of that

[2:03:27] that's going to be what's coming down the pike that we need to be most focused

[2:03:31] on in and then also coming up to speed on the other um more uh benign issues.

[2:03:40] » Anyone else have any questions? No. >> Then thank you for coming.

[2:03:47] » Thank you very much for your time. I appreciate it.

[2:03:49] » Thank you for your time. >> Good night.

[2:03:52] » Do we want to take another five minute recess?

[2:03:54] » Have a great evening.

[2:04:01] » Bring this meeting back to order. Next on the agenda is interview with Zable

[2:04:06] Shelonberg. Um, if you guys want to introduce yourselves, tell us a little

[2:04:11] about your firm, and then we do have a handful of questions that we'll ask

[2:04:14] after that. >> Okay, I'll start off. Do I have to press

[2:04:19] the button? >> Nope, you're all set.

[2:04:20] » It's automatically. Okay. Uh, my name is Brian McCann. I'm an attorney with Zable

[2:04:24] Shelonburg. Um, I joined the firm about two years ago. Um, before that I was

[2:04:33] with a uh firm, Pullman Comm. I was based out of the Bridgeport office. Um,

[2:04:40] and prior to that I was, um, assistant corporation counsel for the city of

[2:04:45] Norwok. Um,

[2:04:48] I, um, to my left is attorney uh, uh, Jeremy, uh, Gustafson and to my right is

[2:04:56] attorney uh, Barbara Shelonburg. Um

[2:05:01] I decided to join uh Sable Shelonburgg largely because of their municipal

[2:05:08] practice. Um I did um some municipal practice after I

[2:05:15] left the city. Um obviously uh a lot with the city. I was um inhouse

[2:05:23] full-time um with the city for about 13 14 years. Um

[2:05:31] when I went to uh Pullman Comm, I did um a fair amount of municipal

[2:05:39] uh work, but it was mostly what I would call like special counsel. Um it wasn't

[2:05:46] the day-to-day operations um that I'm that I enjoyed and that I'm

[2:05:54] back to doing now. Um, it was a lot of, um, like I said, what I

[2:06:00] would call special counsel, excuse me. It was um a lot of work with uh you know

[2:06:09] redevelopment um eminent domain

[2:06:14] um blight

[2:06:18] um some special land use projects um that were basically

[2:06:26] um you know outsourced by the the town attorney um or town attorneys wherever

[2:06:33] that maybe like for example I worked for the burrow of Ngat on some downtown

[2:06:39] redevelopment projects. I worked with um the town of East Haven on um the uh

[2:06:49] airport expansion project. Um but um after a few years there at at

[2:06:58] Pullman, I think that I realized that um I wanted to

[2:07:06] work a little bit more on the everyday municipal affairs that I was that I was

[2:07:11] used to. Um I um and I learned that through I think

[2:07:19] you have some of our CVs and and background but um I represented a uh

[2:07:27] it's called the first taxing district in Norwok but it's basically um a town

[2:07:34] within a city. Um, I could give you the full backstory, but

[2:07:40] the short story is that when the city was incorporated, it was a a

[2:07:46] consolidation of several towns into a chartered city. And uh

[2:07:51] those towns retain certain powers, certain taxing powers, certain powers

[2:07:56] related to jurisdiction regarding certain utilities, electric utilities,

[2:08:01] water utilities. Um so there was an interest at the time

[2:08:08] um to retain some of them some of those powers and they were given them in the

[2:08:14] consolidation through a special act uh by the legislators.

[2:08:18] Um, even at Pullman, I worked very closely with this um, one entity and um,

[2:08:27] I think I fell back in love with what I had known uh, on a day-to-day basis for

[2:08:34] 13 or 14 years, which is the the municipal practice they have. Zable

[2:08:39] Shelonburgg has a very robust um, municipal practice. um and outside of

[2:08:46] that um they have um a great land use practice. Um it's a a passion that I

[2:08:56] think all of the attorneys there really share. Um and then outside of that they

[2:09:03] have other components that also uh make the um synergies work well. Like

[2:09:11] for example, um a robust uh labor employment practice, which obviously is

[2:09:17] very important for um municipal law. And um

[2:09:26] we have uh expertise in in some other matters uh related to municipal law like

[2:09:31] uh FOYA and um um

[2:09:37] water sewer authorities and and and various other practice areas. So I was

[2:09:42] really impressed and uh and drawn to the firm. Um so that's that's my story.

[2:09:51] You guys want to introduce yourselves individually?

[2:09:55] » Sure. Hi. So again, I'm Barbara Shelonberg

[2:09:58] and uh I have been doing municipal work now for about 25 years. Um I'm current

[2:10:07] microphone a little closer. >> I'm sorry.

[2:10:10] » Um I'm currently the town attorney for Greenwich and uh interim town attorney

[2:10:16] for Mberry. uh and I have worked in various

[2:10:20] capacities over the past couple of decades with probably about 25 different

[2:10:27] municipalities around the state. Um as Brian mentioned, our firm has always

[2:10:34] been very focused on municipal practice. We the group of us who started the firm

[2:10:40] um in the beginning of the pandemic, we didn't know it was going to be the

[2:10:44] beginning of the pandemic. it just worked out that way. Uh we all came from

[2:10:50] a larger firm and it was primarily the mun most of the municipal attorneys who

[2:10:56] decided we wanted to go out on our own. Uh but as Brian also mentioned, we do

[2:11:01] have a lot of other practice areas that have that synergy with municipal work

[2:11:08] such as labor and employment, land use, appellet. That's another practice area

[2:11:13] that I have focused on. um for the past 20 years or so along

[2:11:19] with land use work. Um we do all kinds of civil litigation

[2:11:26] as well. Um I just want to make sure I'm not

[2:11:30] leaving anything anything out. >> Tax appeals.

[2:11:33] » Tax appeals. Yes. Thank you. We do we handle tax appeals right now for a

[2:11:38] number of municipalities including Greenwich and Middbury and um all of the

[2:11:45] other municipalities where uh one of us is acting as town attorney in addition

[2:11:52] to special counsel work with with several different uh municipalities.

[2:11:58] » And then in addition to that, hi my name is Jeremy Gustoson. Thank you for having

[2:12:02] us tonight. And in addition to that, one of my interests and some of our firm's

[2:12:08] attorney's interests is state administrative proceedings as it relates

[2:12:11] to municipalities. So we have done hearings in front of the

[2:12:16] Department of Public Health for both emergency medical services and public

[2:12:20] health order appeals from local public health directors. As both Brian and

[2:12:26] Barbara mentioned, we frequently appear in front of the FOIC, the FOY Freedom of

[2:12:31] Information Commission, and have generally receive favorable outcomes for

[2:12:36] both our municipalities and our private clients. We represent the FYC.

[2:12:41] In addition, we um one of my interests is also grant administration and grant

[2:12:47] writing and grant supervision. So um today I just finished a um grant for one

[2:12:53] of our municipalities or tied up all loose ends and that was through deep um

[2:12:59] department of environmental energy protection and in addition we also have

[2:13:04] experience in municipal solid waste. Um we represent some regional waste

[2:13:09] authorities and we also represent um a council of government as well. And um I

[2:13:17] guess one final um state administrative proceeding we also handle is um labor

[2:13:24] employment. So, CHRO um and the Department of Labor um

[2:13:30] workers comp um commission we've handled hearings in front of and then in my work

[2:13:36] I've also done some federal regulations as well in front of the US um sorry the

[2:13:44] United States um engineering corp for the military. So um handled that in

[2:13:50] regards to um one of the town or one of the cities I serve as special counsel

[2:13:55] for for their water um authority, their water company. They were constructing a

[2:14:01] huge project that was over $10 million and they had to go through the

[2:14:05] regulatory process both at the state and federal level to get environmental

[2:14:09] protections and um I came in and helped them towards the end with certain

[2:14:15] draftings of easements and restrictive covenants.

[2:14:20] » Thank you. I think we'll start with our some of our set questions.

[2:14:27] Um, describe your firm's experience across the range of legal matters um

[2:14:32] involving municipalities like Watertown um

[2:14:39] encountering um land use, zoning, contracts, litigation, FOI, ethics and

[2:14:44] ordinance. How would you determine which attorney within your firm would handle a

[2:14:50] given matter and who would be the specific contact for the town?

[2:14:55] I could take that one. >> Okay.

[2:14:57] » Um, so I think what we had envisioned, um,

[2:15:02] subject to conversation with, uh, town council, I think we had envisioned that

[2:15:08] I would be the lead, um, person, the, you know, the primary point of contact.

[2:15:15] And I think that that's important um because um the clients that I've the

[2:15:22] municipal clients that I've worked with um I think have enjoyed

[2:15:29] um having a principal point of contact. you know, if there are and I'm not sure

[2:15:34] how, you know, Watertown operates or how this council or its uh town manager

[2:15:40] operates, but um you know, my clients in the past have enjoyed, you know, listen,

[2:15:47] if there's an emergency at 11 p.m., you know, I want somebody's cell phone

[2:15:52] number. You know, I want to I want to rattle off a question. If there's, you

[2:15:56] know, something that comes up, uh, obviously your your land use boards, um,

[2:16:01] a lot of your commissions probably, you know, meet in the evening hours. If

[2:16:06] there's something that comes up from, you know, Robert's rule of rules of

[2:16:11] order, parliamentary procedure down to, you know, well, do we have to accept

[2:16:16] this environmental intervention petition or something, you know, that there's

[2:16:21] someone that they could, you know, speak to. Um

[2:16:26] from there um yes there definitely are uh situations where um I would involve

[2:16:34] some of my other team members. Um we have uh uh like I said before we have a

[2:16:42] fantastic uh labor employment practice. So if it's something comes up regarding

[2:16:47] Mera or collective bargaining or or something um I probably would

[2:16:53] um involved that the attorneys from that practice area of my firm um and and in

[2:17:01] other areas too. I mean although I um have experience in in a lot of of areas,

[2:17:08] I think um I think there is a benefit at times to

[2:17:15] you know specific uh delegations at the firm so that something can be you know

[2:17:21] handled while you know that would you know free me up for for other things

[2:17:27] that that that pop up. But um I don't really think that there are many

[2:17:33] I was trying to think of it on the write up like that there are many areas

[2:17:40] where municipal areas where we don't have expertise. Um I would say probably

[2:17:50] some areas of like very specific environmental litigation, brownfield

[2:17:55] litigation would probably be one. and probably municipal bonding would be

[2:18:02] another. But outside of that, um, like what Jeremy said, I think I've appeared

[2:18:07] in front of every single state administrative agency. I think I've

[2:18:12] prosecuted or defended just about every type of administrative appeal that there

[2:18:18] that there is. Um, so while I don't know that I would

[2:18:25] necessarily need to delegate um a specific matter, I think

[2:18:32] it's probably in the best interest of the town just to have efficiency. Like

[2:18:36] if you have a litigation u a complex uh you know property

[2:18:42] litigation or or um a very involved uh labor negotiation

[2:18:49] that's been you know a contract negotiation that's been taking several

[2:18:53] months. it's probably best if it just sits a in in um the labor attorney's

[2:19:00] hands, but also that it receives that level of dedication

[2:19:04] to that single matter. >> Yeah, if I could just follow up on that,

[2:19:08] I I think that's I think that's one of the strengths we have because as Brian

[2:19:12] mentioned, we have people who um have expertise in all these different areas.

[2:19:18] So although I agree there should always be a point person um there's would

[2:19:23] really never be a time where there isn't going to be somebody available

[2:19:27] um not just because that person has the particular expertise but also you know

[2:19:32] people take vacations or they get sick or you know things happen um we always

[2:19:38] cover for each other and because so many of us have a lot of experience in all

[2:19:43] these different areas we're able to do that and so therefore we're able to

[2:19:48] really meet the client's needs. >> Chair,

[2:19:53] » how many attorneys are in your group? >> There are nine of us.

[2:20:00] » Nine together. >> Yes.

[2:20:03] » And I Yeah, I think there's I mean, some people obviously do more municipal work

[2:20:08] than others, but I'm trying to think I I think pretty much everybody does

[2:20:14] something. Like again, one of our attorneys focuses on labor employment.

[2:20:19] So she does that for m municipalities and private clients.

[2:20:24] » Um others deal with tax appeals again for municipalities and private clients.

[2:20:31] Um Jeremy happens to do a lot of work in you know FOYA appearing before FOIC

[2:20:37] commissions. As I said, I'm an appellet attorney. So, you know, I've I've

[2:20:42] appeared a number of times before the appellet supreme court. Um, so yeah, I

[2:20:47] think pretty much everybody to some extent has handled municipal work in one

[2:20:54] capacity or another over >> and when we Sorry, I was just going to

[2:20:59] add when we delegate or when an assignment is delegated to another

[2:21:03] attorney, we're always in constant communication. we would always maybe

[2:21:07] copy the town attorney on matters just so not so much for them to do anything

[2:21:12] just so they are aware of what is going on. And then another area that we do

[2:21:16] have some experience in is town and education relations which pops up in um

[2:21:24] several towns where there might be issues or conversations that need to be

[2:21:29] had between the town attorneys and board of ed attorneys and working through

[2:21:34] those issues as well. Um, and just to echo both of Barbara and Brian's points,

[2:21:42] uh, I guess the final point that I will say on this is, um, that we do work as a

[2:21:49] team. So, if there are questions that we've not had before, we go to someone

[2:21:53] that has the experience and asks just to ensure that towns get the best legal

[2:21:58] advice that they can >> through the chair. Yeah.

[2:22:02] » Just clarify for me uh the locations of your offices.

[2:22:06] » It's uh our office is in New Haven. >> New Haven.

[2:22:09] » Yeah. >> Thank you.

[2:22:12] » Um you've pretty much answered the second question which was response

[2:22:17] ability if if the U primary contact isn't available. But in addition, I

[2:22:22] would say would you or any member of your team attend council meetings or

[2:22:28] executive sessions if needed? Absolutely. Yeah, I think that that's um

[2:22:36] I think that that's important. Um

[2:22:41] the um you know, I've been working with a

[2:22:44] couple clients and you know um training on

[2:22:51] um and improving you know uh open meetings uh compliance with open

[2:22:56] meetings foyer. Um I'm working with a client now on you

[2:23:01] know appropriately uh noticing executive sessions

[2:23:07] um in fact one of the towns um in lower fearful county. I mean, I

[2:23:14] recently read a decision about um um some violations of the use of

[2:23:21] executive sessions, and I used that as for my municipal client, I used that as

[2:23:26] a learning tool just so that we could so that they could understand, you know,

[2:23:31] you can't go into an executive session just because you don't want the public

[2:23:34] to hear what you're going to discuss. There are very specific

[2:23:39] um exemptions that exist within the statues, right?

[2:23:43] um the purchase of property, you know, um negotiation of a purchase price,

[2:23:49] personnel matters, very specific personnel matters. Um and even within

[2:23:55] those like, you know, you have to give the employee the the the option to to

[2:23:59] handle that in in open session. So yes, um to answer your question, I think we

[2:24:07] would definitely be available and uh I personally think that it's important. So

[2:24:12] um with with my municipal client I mean I attend um the monthly meetings

[2:24:21] largely if there's as a general rule if there's even if there's not an agenda

[2:24:25] item that I'm going to assist with or speak to. Um, and what I found, but we

[2:24:31] could, you know, if we're lucky enough to get selected, we could have this

[2:24:35] discussion, but what I found is that it's also a really great way to sort of

[2:24:40] keep up with the affairs of the town, right? Like, um, it's a very convenient

[2:24:48] manner in which like a lot of the issues are sort of consolidated down into a

[2:24:52] two, three hour meeting. like it's it's difficult for me to keep a pulse on okay

[2:24:58] like what's going on what are the big applications in zoning right now or um

[2:25:04] have there been issues in the in the health department that have you know

[2:25:08] crept up um is there something coming down the pike that we should be aware of

[2:25:15] and um we had this discussion earlier like what

[2:25:19] what one of the things that I like about the municipal work is the opportunity um

[2:25:27] to be proactive. Like there's pro, you know, there's proactive lawyering and

[2:25:32] there's reactive lawyering. I enjoy um the opportunity to um you know,

[2:25:39] prevent some of those issues from creeping up before before they happen,

[2:25:43] right? So like if the council wants me to sit down and draft some resolution on

[2:25:50] a kind of controversial topic is I'm happy to happy to do that. Um if the if

[2:25:56] the council or any one of the agencies, the commissions wants, you know, um to

[2:26:02] have some discussion about uh an agenda item um or seek legal opinion on one

[2:26:09] something an agenda item. Happy to do that. I actually really welcome it

[2:26:13] because personally I think it's just a lot easier heading off that exposure

[2:26:19] before it comes to fruition because then you're just you're just completely on

[2:26:23] your heels. You're just always reactive. We have litigators that love to

[2:26:28] litigate. Don't get me wrong, but um I think even you know the litigators would

[2:26:34] tell you I mean I tell my clients all the time litigation is not cheap.

[2:26:39] Um it's not. and and especially when you're on uh the defendant side of the V

[2:26:45] because you're not necessarily in the driver's seat, if if if someone wants to

[2:26:52] do an aggressive amount of discovery, you have to respond to an aggressive

[2:26:57] amount of discovery. Um but so that's yeah, to answer your question, I would

[2:27:03] be happy. >> Well, you you've gone into the next

[2:27:05] question, which is >> through the chair. How do you view the

[2:27:09] town attorney's role in preventing legal problems rather than reacting to them?

[2:27:15] » Uh do you have an example of maybe helping a municipal client reduce legal

[2:27:20] or operating costs before it becomes litigation?

[2:27:25] » Yeah. Uh yes. I um I've had municipal clients in the

[2:27:31] past and I I don't mean to take up the conversation. if you you guys could step

[2:27:36] in whenever. But um I've had municipal clients where they know that there's

[2:27:40] going to be um a controversial um application that's coming up that they

[2:27:48] will ask me to get involved really from from the onset. Um I've done that for

[2:27:56] 20 years. I've done that the my you know my entire career. I mean, even when I

[2:28:00] went to, here's an example. When I went to um Homeman and Comm I referenced some

[2:28:07] of the work for the for the Bureau of Nagatuck, like they were they were

[2:28:10] having um um a a controversial application come

[2:28:16] before their land use boards. Um they knew that it would be, you know, kind of

[2:28:21] controversial to a lot of the neighbors. Uh they knew this because of the use.

[2:28:26] And so, um, they hired me as special land use counsel just to come in and

[2:28:32] make sure that, um, you know, I wasn't steering anything in any particular

[2:28:36] direction. Um, but, uh, you know, to come in and make

[2:28:41] sure that the public hearings were held the way that they're supposed to. Um, so

[2:28:47] that, you know, there was everyone had a a chance to speak, but there also wasn't

[2:28:53] a a dialogue. I explained to them that it's not a question and answer. It's a

[2:28:57] public hearing. You're supposed to hear the public. Um so we put it down for the

[2:29:01] requisite number of public hearings. Um there were um opinions that I rendered

[2:29:08] during the deliberations. Um there were multiple issues that came

[2:29:13] up um in their decision um you know how this

[2:29:21] should be how this particular use should be treated because there was some

[2:29:25] ambiguity as to what it should be classified as. Um and then also just

[2:29:31] writing uh drafting uh alternative uh resolutions. Um you know one thing that

[2:29:37] they asked me is like can you um you know based on this record could you come

[2:29:41] up with a draft approval and a motion to approve motion to deny and you know

[2:29:48] explain what were some of the things maybe you could outline some of the

[2:29:51] things that were detailed in the record in the transcript

[2:29:55] so that you know our decision could be you know based on substantial evidence

[2:30:00] before the agency and so I was I was happy to do that.

[2:30:06] I think if I could just follow up on that, it's important and and I know

[2:30:10] something I do, I think we all do all the time dealing with municipalities and

[2:30:15] any client for that matter is you have to present the facts and you have to let

[2:30:22] the client know what the strengths and weaknesses of the matter are so that

[2:30:28] that person or board or commission can make an informed decision. Um, and you

[2:30:35] know, I I I think that involves usually making some recommendation. Ultimately,

[2:30:41] it's up to the client to decide which direct direction to go in. Um, but I

[2:30:47] just think it's very important that, you know, as Brian said, that's one of the

[2:30:50] advantages. If you come to certain meetings regularly, you're in contact,

[2:30:56] you know what's going on, you can anticipate what may become a controversy

[2:31:01] and act in a proactive manner and and properly advise in that regard.

[2:31:07] » Question. >> Yes, please. First,

[2:31:10] » thank you. Thank you. Um recognizing that your office is in New Haven,

[2:31:14] section 401 of our charter requires a town attorney to have an office within a

[2:31:19] 20 mile radius. Um based on a review, you're just a little bit outside of

[2:31:24] that. Do you plan on opening up um a satellite office or how would we

[2:31:30] consider that as far as the chart uh our charter is concerned in your distance to

[2:31:35] town?

[2:31:39] » I don't know. Um I I I assume that we were within the the

[2:31:44] range, but >> yeah, that but that is certainly

[2:31:47] something we could do. I mean, it's not I don't think that's a that's a major

[2:31:52] issue just to be able to open an office. I mean, from a I I understand charter

[2:31:57] requirements from a practical perspective. Um many of us work at least

[2:32:03] part-time from home. We live in various places, you know, some closer, some

[2:32:07] further away. a lot is done now. I think we've all changed since the pandemic.

[2:32:13] You know, we do a lot virtually. Um but if that, you know, is an issue based on

[2:32:19] the charter, um I I don't think it would be a problem. Um especially since we are

[2:32:26] in Mbury now, we hope to stay there. Um and uh so, you know, I think that's

[2:32:32] something we could easily >> Thank you. I'm sure we'll have cons uh

[2:32:35] you know, people to answer to as far as that's concerned. So that is a question

[2:32:39] that you know we would have to have answered. And then how would that become

[2:32:44] would um if you opened up a satellite office would the town be you know

[2:32:48] responsible for carrying that costs and how would you do that would be our

[2:32:55] responsibility but look there would be advantages to us because we view

[2:33:00] ourselves as statewide you know again myself um I happen to live in Trumbull I

[2:33:08] travel to Greenwich I travel to Middbury I'm now doing I've been brought on as

[2:33:13] special counsel in Ansonia. You know, I'm driving all around. We're

[2:33:19] » represent West Hatam. And so, actually, we have

[2:33:25] actually thought already about opening certain satellite offices for that

[2:33:32] reason. I mean, it's good from a marketing perspective. So if that is

[2:33:35] something that would be required then you know I don't I don't think that's an

[2:33:41] issue. >> Okay. Thank you Dan.

[2:33:44] » Yeah thank you. Um so you said something that I thought was really great Brian

[2:33:48] which is um you really see it as as kind of a responsibility of the town attorney

[2:33:52] to be president at our at our meetings. Um so from a fiduciary standpoint are

[2:33:58] you billing us for those meetings when you're coming on your own accord? And

[2:34:02] and kind of related to that, if Mark has a, you know, five, six, seven minute

[2:34:08] call that he needs to make to you, where does that fit into your billing

[2:34:13] structure? >> Yeah. I mean, I don't

[2:34:17] » It's a future question on the list. >> I did it again.

[2:34:22] » You could answer it, though. >> Okay. Let's go out of turn. Um, I think

[2:34:27] on other contracts we don't bill for travel. Correct.

[2:34:30] » No, we don't bill. Right. We bill for the time that is spent with the client.

[2:34:36] » We don't bill for our travel to and from that kind of thing. Like

[2:34:41] » and >> I go to regular board of selectment

[2:34:44] meetings, you know, >> sometimes I'm in the car. I could be in

[2:34:49] the car, especially going to Greenwich with the traffic an hour and a half, but

[2:34:54] that's on my time. And I use it as I call it my mobile office. I use that

[2:34:59] time. I'm on the telephone a lot, >> you know, either for other work or

[2:35:04] personal matters. So, you you know, you just learn to accommodate that way. So,

[2:35:08] yeah, we built we built for the time that we work

[2:35:11] » and we and we are like Barbara said earlier, we are almost all all over the

[2:35:17] place, too. I mean, um, I represent, uh, uh, the redevelopment

[2:35:25] corporation for the city of Norwich, and I'm working on a project now with the

[2:35:29] town of Winchester. I mean, they are in very opposite corners of our state, but

[2:35:35] um, we uh we we we we travel. And to uh Dan's last question, um I'm sorry,

[2:35:44] Council Person Cociola. Um there are certain um

[2:35:54] there are certain uh courtesies that I think that we all

[2:35:58] offer, you know, municipal clients. Um, I was just talking to a client on the

[2:36:04] way up here, you know, and if it's generally speaking, if it's, you know, a

[2:36:10] 6 10 minute conversation, um, it, um, it could it could just be, you know, a

[2:36:16] courtesy to the to the client. Um I don't think that there's

[2:36:22] um really any interest from any members of our firm to you know for every four

[2:36:28] minute um expenditure of of of our time. Um and

[2:36:35] like I said I think that that also works. I think that's mutually

[2:36:39] beneficial. Like I mean I would hope that if I was appointed town attorney

[2:36:43] that I would be able to you know develop a a rapport relationship with you know

[2:36:50] the chairperson and the and the and the town manager so that we all feel

[2:36:54] comfortable you know being able to reach out to each other and um have

[2:37:00] conversations because I think that like you know it I think that really does

[2:37:05] blend with the other concepts that we were discussing like you know proactive

[2:37:10] lawyering, understanding, being very familiar with the issues. There's no

[2:37:15] like magic bullet on how that you accomplish all that. It's just it's a

[2:37:20] lot of things. It's attending the the the council member meetings. It's, you

[2:37:26] know, having a rapport with the town manager. It's being available so that

[2:37:31] you could hear things when there something comes up and it's it's an

[2:37:34] emergency. That's how you have your finger on the on the pulse. It's all

[2:37:38] those things. Thank you. >> The other thing we do to address the the

[2:37:43] concern with billing is, you know, sometimes, as you said, it's very, as

[2:37:46] we've said, it's very important for us to have a team approach. And so, there

[2:37:50] are sometimes that maybe they're going to be two or three of us in some

[2:37:57] communication. But I know what I always do when I go

[2:38:01] over my bills is I will accommodate for that. I'm not going to charge for every

[2:38:06] attorney who's been involved, that kind of thing. Or again, um, you know, if I'm

[2:38:14] town attorney and for example, one one of one of the towns I'm working in right

[2:38:19] now has mostly labor issues, a lot of labor issues,

[2:38:25] unemployment issues. So, my partner Courtney George, who specializes in that

[2:38:31] area, she's working on that and she's developed now a rapport with um the

[2:38:37] first select person, which that is fine. You know, I'm always copied on emails

[2:38:44] having to do with her work because I'm the town attorney. I don't charge my

[2:38:47] time for reading those emails. I know she's charging her time. She's the one

[2:38:52] who's really doing the work. That's that's the way I look at it. So unless

[2:38:56] I'm d right unless I'm directly involved I'm really the one doing the substantive

[2:39:01] work I don't charge my time. So I think you know we're we're cognizant of trying

[2:39:05] to be fair but still do an excellent job.

[2:39:12] » Uh the next question operates a water and sewer authority and periodically

[2:39:17] faces complex contractual regulatory financing and intermunicipal issues. Um,

[2:39:26] tell us what experience your firm has with municipal water and sewer matters

[2:39:30] and how you handle an issue outside of the regular assigned attorney's

[2:39:35] knowledge.

[2:39:39] » Um, so I represent a water company, so um I probably would not require special

[2:39:47] counsel for that. Um we work with um very closely with um

[2:39:56] Connecticut DPH, the uh Department of Public Health, as well as PURA.

[2:40:02] Um, and

[2:40:05] very recently, I don't know if Watertown is a member, but very recently, I've

[2:40:12] been um brought on um to the CWWA, the Connecticut Waterworks Association,

[2:40:21] um on a very limited discrete uh basis, but um not to bore you all, but one of

[2:40:30] the things that the a lot of the CWWA water companies are dealing with is um a

[2:40:37] bit of a um issue with the Connecticut DOT because the Connecticut DOT requires

[2:40:43] has recently started requiring that the water utilities apply for state highway

[2:40:48] encroachment permits and we've explained to um the legislators as well as um

[2:40:57] general counsel and the uh commissioner of the DOT

[2:41:01] that this is problematic for a number of reasons. Number one is because that the

[2:41:07] water companies don't typically own the sewer or water laterals that travel from

[2:41:12] the main to the private property. Uh signing on as a um as a permit and

[2:41:20] assuming certain responsibilities uh shity performance bonds maintenance

[2:41:26] bonds etc. as well as just plain contractual language could be

[2:41:30] problematic because that could create anyone that's familiar

[2:41:35] with property laws, you know, maintenance upkeep can lead to

[2:41:40] conclusions of ownership and that's problematic. So, um yeah, I have

[2:41:46] actually quite a bit of experience in dealing with uh a lot of the regulatory

[2:41:50] agencies. Right now, we're going through a a rather big project. Um, my water

[2:41:57] company client is um repairing a a dam. They're actually under a consent order

[2:42:02] from the Connecticut Deep to uh to repair this dam. So, I'm working with

[2:42:08] them. We have to go through the various regulatory um agencies to seek approval.

[2:42:13] We're applying for grants so that we could actually do the work because $40

[2:42:16] million does not fall out of the sky, unfortunately.

[2:42:20] Um and um yeah, we uh we have to work with all of we have to work with

[2:42:27] Connecticut deep uh as a a class one or class two water company. Any sort of

[2:42:34] disposal of land has to go through a a process. Um

[2:42:40] there are we've gone through um SEIPA interventions where neighbors to the

[2:42:47] reservoir have come forward and we've had administrative hearings at

[2:42:50] Connecticut Deep that then goes on and gets appealed to Superior Court. Um,

[2:42:56] so, uh, long story short, we do have, uh, experience with water and sewer

[2:43:04] utilities, and I don't think that we would have to, um, farm that out or need

[2:43:09] special counsel for that. >> And then in addition to the first taxing

[2:43:13] district, we also represent the WPCA, town of Orange. And um like I mentioned

[2:43:19] earlier um we've also done some work for the water company in the city of New

[2:43:24] Britain as well. Um and that one dealt more as I mentioned with the US Army

[2:43:28] Corps of Engineers. And um I don't want to for the details, but it was an

[2:43:32] interesting project because originally the US Army Corps said that they would

[2:43:37] not accept a certain type of restrictive covenant and that this district, the

[2:43:43] Northeast District for the Army Corps said that they don't usually consider

[2:43:46] restrictive covenants because they find them to be uninforceable or they find

[2:43:50] them to be less enforceable than um some sort of easement conservation easement.

[2:43:56] However, after several months of going back and forth with them and explaining

[2:44:00] the laws in Connecticut and how a conservation ement is actually also

[2:44:05] enforceable by the AG, we were actually able to come to an consensus and

[2:44:10] agreement to create and draft and implement a conservation or a

[2:44:15] restrictive covenant. Um, which as mentioned is uncommon for the US Army

[2:44:20] Corps at least in this district.

[2:44:24] » Okay. Because your firm represents other municipalities and public entities, how

[2:44:30] will you identify and manage potential conflicts involving Watertown? If a

[2:44:34] conflict prevented your firm from handling the significant matter, how

[2:44:38] would you help the town maintain continuity of representation?

[2:44:46] » Good question. Um, I'm not really sure how a how a legal

[2:44:52] conflict of interest would arise, although um

[2:44:59] we are very sensitive to potential conflicts of of interest. Um, I was

[2:45:07] actually just talking to a partner this morning um on an issue

[2:45:15] involving a potential conflict of interest with a municipal client, but it

[2:45:20] was um it was a a former client that was an owner of a particular property uh

[2:45:27] within our jurisdiction. Um I think um if you know a conflict should come up I

[2:45:37] think that um you know the process would be you know first uh taking a look at it

[2:45:44] analyzing the conflict speaking with with you with the client um and you know

[2:45:51] analyzing whether um that's something that's you know we could render the the

[2:45:56] the legal opinion we would come up with the opinion in the first instance, but

[2:46:00] discuss it with you and uh if it does become, you know, insurmountable, I

[2:46:06] think that we can um try to find um a very qualified, reasonably priced um

[2:46:14] attorney that could step in and and handle the matter. I mean, we work, one

[2:46:19] of the benefits um with our firm is that we we routinely work with a lot of um

[2:46:26] municipal uh law firms um around the area. So, I don't think that would be be

[2:46:33] difficult. I I'm just wondering though because you

[2:46:37] mentioned since we work with a lot of other municipalities. I I don't think in

[2:46:41] my entire career I've ever been in a situation where there's been a conflict

[2:46:45] » between two municipalities. So I I don't know if there was something specific you

[2:46:50] were thinking thinking about. Um >> well we we did have our big lawsuit

[2:46:57] between Waterberry and Watertown over our our um water rates. So I think that

[2:47:02] maybe was one of the reasons why we developed

[2:47:05] » and you mentioned your question you do work from Milberry which is nearby. So

[2:47:09] if there was any type of >> Yeah.

[2:47:11] » Yeah. If there you know sometime obviously in a situation like that and

[2:47:15] you've got major litigation you can't wave a conflict. There are situations

[2:47:19] where conflicts can be waved. So that you know in the first instance is

[2:47:24] something >> you would look at. But yes, of course,

[2:47:27] as Brian said, then if it couldn't be waved, we would have to get competent

[2:47:32] counsel. >> Yeah. The outside to to represent town.

[2:47:38] » You've addressed a fair amount of this next question, but I'll read it and

[2:47:41] please add anything else in that you haven't covered quite yet. So, beyond

[2:47:46] your hourly rates and fee structure, what practices would you use to control

[2:47:50] the town's legal expenses? How would you flag a matter that's becoming more

[2:47:54] costly than anticipated? And what billing detail and periodic reporting

[2:47:59] would the town receive?

[2:48:05] You know, I mean, not to repeat myself, but I think one of the best um

[2:48:10] you know, measures for for cost effectiveness would be, you know, a a

[2:48:16] heavy measure of of proactive lawyering. I mean, I think really just kind of

[2:48:20] getting ahead of those issues. We already touched on this. Litigation is

[2:48:23] expensive. Um, if it can be avoided, um, it's probably best for the town. So,

[2:48:30] that would probably be my primary measure of of cost effectiveness. And I

[2:48:36] think this actually this question, this answer is going to bleed in to a lot of

[2:48:40] previous uh answers, but I think it's also just sort of understanding. I think

[2:48:44] one measure would be just understanding what those issues are. you know, those

[2:48:49] those hot button issues are that are that have come up or are, you know,

[2:48:54] potentially going to to come up. Um, and then the other things, like I said,

[2:49:00] which is just, you know, um um you know, having courtesy, you know,

[2:49:06] 5 10 minute conversations with the town manager over something. I don't I

[2:49:12] personally don't want um you know the chair or the town manager to ever like

[2:49:18] feel shy about reaching out to me like one of those ways could be you know well

[2:49:24] geez you know is he going to bill me for this you know very short question like

[2:49:30] if that's if that's something that could potentially if that five minute or

[2:49:34] 10-minute conversation is something that could steer off a you know half a

[2:49:39] million dollar lawsuit or or you know grievance or appeal.

[2:49:45] um then then I'm happy that we had that understanding and that relationship

[2:49:52] where you know he feels like he could reach out to me

[2:49:56] » um you know like I said even if it's >> quote after hours because

[2:50:03] we all I mean I travel to public hearings at 9:00 at night so I I mean

[2:50:08] there's not there's not really too much um after

[2:50:13] hours Maybe 2 am. That may be excessive. >> Do you send out

[2:50:19] » billing? Yes, we bill monthly. >> Yeah. Okay.

[2:50:22] » And we're very specific in our billing. We put down all our time and say what

[2:50:27] we're doing, you know, so that the client is well aware of what they're

[2:50:32] being built for. >> Okay.

[2:50:34] » Yeah. And I like to I mean one of the things like to to just piggyback on that

[2:50:38] like I like to you know put like you know ray lines in a lot of my billing.

[2:50:43] So if it is, you know, so that the client's not receiving a bill for

[2:50:48] generic telephone conference or generic whatever meeting that they could

[2:50:53] understand because I understand that the person that I'm dealing with may not be

[2:50:57] the same person that's actually cutting the check or or auditing the bills,

[2:51:03] right? So they all they all need to be on the same page.

[2:51:08] » Do you have a question? >> Yes, I do. This would be for attorney

[2:51:11] Tony Shelonberg regarding municipal references. You yourself got a very

[2:51:17] stellar reference from first select woman Moore in Middbury.

[2:51:23] And I'm not asking to comment on any pending litigation, but what did you do

[2:51:27] when you inherited all the lawsuits involved regarding

[2:51:33] people being sued as to rehiring not hiring the terminated employees?

[2:51:40] Okay. So, as I mentioned, I mean, middlebury happens to be the

[2:51:45] municipality where there is a lot of um there are a lot of labor and employment

[2:51:51] issues, which is why my partner does a lot of work there and and she herself

[2:51:56] has established, you know, that relationship with with the first select

[2:52:01] woman. Um, Middberry, like many uh uh municipalities, is covered by insurance.

[2:52:09] for a lot of these matters. So there is insurance counsel

[2:52:14] in some of these matters which may be more sensitive or more complicated if

[2:52:20] the first select woman and I have had a conversation and decided that um my firm

[2:52:25] should also come in as additional counsel. We have done that occasionally.

[2:52:32] Um, but we it it really hasn't in in terms of the

[2:52:38] litigation that was pending when I came in.

[2:52:43] I'm just trying to think. Um, other than a couple of instances where my firm came

[2:52:48] in as additional counsel, there was not a reason to have to change any of the

[2:52:53] outside counsel who was working on matters. There's just a lot that's come

[2:52:58] in in that sixmonth period that we've had to, you know, figure out what to

[2:53:03] what to do with. >> We did pick up a few or quite a few um

[2:53:08] FYIC matter. >> Yeah, we've had right Jeremy and as I

[2:53:12] said, my partner Courtney George are working on a number of those matters.

[2:53:17] » I may add specifically the main target of the litigation was the premier's

[2:53:21] first selement. There there was uh one matter

[2:53:30] yes that involved there are a couple of matters actually at this point that

[2:53:34] involve the former first selectman but those matters are being handled by

[2:53:39] insurance council. >> Thank you.

[2:53:42] » And quickly on the FIC matters we were able to resolve all of the ones that we

[2:53:48] received in either a dismissal or a favorable stipulation.

[2:53:53] Yeah, there have been I I think I have to say Mberry

[2:53:58] for a small town has a a lot of issues, you know, a lot of legal issues um to

[2:54:06] deal with. And I, you know, I believe the first select woman is she's come in

[2:54:10] with a charge to to handle a lot of these things. She's she's very bright

[2:54:15] and dedicated and detailed oriented and is just working really hard and we work

[2:54:21] well together in in dealing with a lot of challenges that that the town has at

[2:54:26] this point. Municipal legal matters often span years

[2:54:32] and personnel changes. What systems and practices would your firm use to

[2:54:37] document legal advice, key decisions, open matters, and historical context so

[2:54:43] Watertown preserves institutional memory? How would you ensure a clean

[2:54:48] handoff if the assigned attorney changes or the engagement ends while

[2:54:52] appropriately protecting privileged and confidential material?

[2:55:00] um you know when necessary we provide written legal opinions. So those would

[2:55:06] certainly be kept on file. Um and we if if there was ever a change in counsel,

[2:55:14] we would meet with that person, you know, go through in detail all of the

[2:55:19] history, answer the questions. Um we keep our files. We we have in the past

[2:55:26] several years uh to a large extent moved from paper to electronic filing.

[2:55:32] » Um and I think we've done a a very good job with the um systems that we have

[2:55:38] » keeping those electronic files which also makes it a little easier because

[2:55:42] you can email um and yeah I I don't think we've we've

[2:55:47] ever encountered any you know any issue in that regard.

[2:55:52] Yeah. No, I actually think that's an excellent answer. I can tell you from

[2:55:56] experience that when I took over um

[2:56:01] » for my Norwok municipal client um I received you know with a trolley in my

[2:56:07] office um of you know about 200 of these.

[2:56:14] » Now this is this is this doesn't involve this is a zoning application that we

[2:56:17] were handing off. ordinarily we we at least I'll speak for

[2:56:22] myself. I try not to keep paper files. >> Um so I I I piggyback I uh second

[2:56:29] Barbara's answer. I think you know it's it's very important I think not only in

[2:56:35] the way that you handle the matter but the way that you paper the matter I

[2:56:40] think is very important. Um, you know, my my background is is um I would

[2:56:47] outside of, you know, a a long history of municipal law, I think, but really I

[2:56:52] started with with land use environmental. My my my degree is

[2:56:56] environmental science. I started off my career before as attorney as an

[2:57:00] environmental scientist. And um I've worked throughout the years

[2:57:06] a lot in property law. And any property attorney can tell you that the

[2:57:12] importance of keeping great records makes all the difference. Like think

[2:57:17] about your your town clerk. I don't know where they are, but think about your

[2:57:20] town clerk's office. The land records are a perfect example, right? You want

[2:57:24] to be able to pick up that chain of title and understand exactly what

[2:57:27] happened. Does that always happen? Hardly ever. I mean, they're usually

[2:57:30] just a garbled mess, but that's because some lawyer made it a garbled mess. So,

[2:57:35] I think, you know, to piggyback on Barbara's answer, I think it's, you

[2:57:38] know, if you're papering the file, if someone can be, and I told my municipal

[2:57:42] client actually this the other day. I was like, you know, the difference

[2:57:45] between me is I'm going to be able to send you a share file with 200 folders

[2:57:50] that you'll be able to click on and see exactly the work and the matter is

[2:57:54] entitled something that's, you know, descriptive, intuitive that you'll

[2:57:58] understand and not something that, you know, only I could understand, right?

[2:58:04] Um, so I think keeping records, written legal opinions I think are really

[2:58:07] important, but also just, you know, papering that file so that when you're

[2:58:12] working on it, you're designing it so that someone else can pick this up and

[2:58:18] know exactly what was done and why it was done.

[2:58:20] » I I will just uh just add to that that, you know, obviously we are a relatively

[2:58:25] small firm. Uh, we were a startup. Can't believe it's been I guess six and a half

[2:58:31] years already. Um and for a long time we were doing a lot of this ourselves. We

[2:58:37] are very lucky that we happened to finally hire a firm administrator who

[2:58:43] started in April who is wonderful and I have to say she has been instrumental in

[2:58:50] helping us really get our act together in terms of these kinds of

[2:58:55] administrative >> uh matters. So that's that's a huge plus

[2:58:59] as well >> to the chair.

[2:59:02] » Yeah. Um so I I I love your answer. Um one question define when necessary and

[2:59:09] let me frame it. Um you're giving verbal advice um to the town manager. Um but

[2:59:15] the litigation continues over an extracted period of time. like how do

[2:59:21] you define when necessary to put it in writing so that there is a record for

[2:59:26] future generations?

[2:59:29] » That's a good question. I mean, it's it's a judgment call and it's going to

[2:59:34] be different in different municipalities because part of it depends on what the

[2:59:39] client wants. Sometimes the client doesn't always want written opinions.

[2:59:45] Um, so it just it's

[2:59:50] it it it really it's hard to say. It just depends on the situation and you

[2:59:55] have to have a conversation with the client and you know again just decide

[3:00:00] what is desired. Um is it a really major issue?

[3:00:05] » Sure. >> Is it a more minor issue?

[3:00:08] » Um is it a controversial issue? Sure. you know.

[3:00:13] » So, so would you advise the client that um having written advice and a major

[3:00:20] protracted issue might be beneficial long term

[3:00:26] » theoretically, >> right? But there are times when the

[3:00:29] client will say I don't want it for, >> you know, there could be different

[3:00:35] reasons. Sometimes they're political reasons, but the client doesn't want

[3:00:40] that. It could just be feed sensitivity. Like sometimes if something is a

[3:00:44] discreet issue that's not going to pop up again or like something doesn't need

[3:00:49] to be >> handed off to the next council or next

[3:00:54] commission. Um then you know a client may not want to pay for an hour and a

[3:00:59] half written legal opinion. But I mean, I think we just I've I've never had an

[3:01:05] issue there because I think there are I think we've done this long enough that

[3:01:11] we know when something is probably best if it's papered and we could we could

[3:01:16] have that conversation. Whoever is making that decision, we could have that

[3:01:19] conversation. Listen, do you want do you want a verbal answer or do you want me

[3:01:23] to, you know, write a legal opinion? And then, you know, I would hope that we

[3:01:27] have the type of rapport where that person that I'm speaking to could say,

[3:01:30] "Well, what do you think?" And I'm happy to give, you know, my opinion and my

[3:01:34] experience about, you know, this type of issue. Well, this might come up again,

[3:01:38] you know, with a lot of some of the like some of the foyer things, some of the

[3:01:42] meeting things. There's some things that just I mean, you know, every single new

[3:01:46] municipality that I've representative represented, like I can't help but

[3:01:51] notice there are issues that just creep up. Like as soon as I walk in the door,

[3:01:55] they're like, could you write us a blight ordinance? I'm like, I I don't

[3:01:58] know why that's happened to me like five different times, you know. Um,

[3:02:02] » right. Or we'll hear, you know, started in a new municipality and right away

[3:02:08] notice something that is so obviously wrong and then I'll be told, well, but

[3:02:13] we've done it this way for 20 years. And I'd say, okay, but nobody's complained

[3:02:17] about it before and it's not right, so let's let's fix it. But just, you know,

[3:02:22] now with email, we're in a different world for it's been many years now. But

[3:02:28] so sometimes it might be verbal formal legal opinion or it could be written

[3:02:34] down in an email. >> Sure.

[3:02:36] » In a more simple form, but that's still something that can be saved and somebody

[3:02:41] can go back and reference later. So that's that's kind of a middle ground,

[3:02:46] right? lots of lots of legal advice is going back and forth in emails all the

[3:02:52] time >> and sometimes it's a hybrid as well

[3:02:54] where let's say I'm talking to the first selectman or um mayor legal coun like

[3:03:00] direct legal counsel for the town and at the end of the conversation I might say

[3:03:03] oh do you want me to send an email just confirming what I said so give them the

[3:03:08] opportunity especially if it's a much smaller issue but still give them the

[3:03:13] decision you know again if it's a boy related question, maybe you don't need

[3:03:18] every single answer relating FOYA written down because it's reciting the

[3:03:23] statute, but in other times you may want to answer. So, giving them the option

[3:03:29] during that initial conversation is another

[3:03:32] » Yeah. >> Thank you.

[3:03:34] » Thank you. >> Okay. Based on your review of

[3:03:37] Watertown's needs, what do you see as the most important responsibilities of

[3:03:42] the town attorney? And how would your firm approach serving the council, town

[3:03:47] manager, boards, commissions, and departments?

[3:03:55] » Um, you know, I'll be honest. I personally

[3:03:58] don't know a lot about the about the town fairs or what's you know what's um

[3:04:03] what are the hot and hot button issues or what's you know the most important

[3:04:09] um but like I said there are definitely things that um you know seem to

[3:04:17] um be you know common with a lot of our

[3:04:21] municipal clients. Um, you know, I think the first thing that I

[3:04:28] would probably do is just want to um, you know, meet with the appropriate um,

[3:04:34] leaders, department heads, um, chairpeople and and and just decipher,

[3:04:41] you know, what what are those issues that I should be, you know, that I

[3:04:46] should keep my ear to the ground about. Um I don't want to come in with any I

[3:04:51] mean I think in some ways it's good you know not to come in with any sort of

[3:04:55] preconceived notions. Um,

[3:04:59] this issue came up a lot actually in my in my Norwok job, my in-house job where

[3:05:06] the council had considered at several different times to pass a uh a residency

[3:05:12] requirement for the for the town attorneys and um I didn't I didn't live

[3:05:17] in town and so I was um I was kind of against that. But on a more um that's

[3:05:26] the that's the personal level. on a more like material objective level. What I

[3:05:31] told the leaders was that um I do a lot of um enforcement uh code

[3:05:41] enforcement, you know, um at the time, this was a while ago, but at the time,

[3:05:47] you know, they had the the the city had really bad

[3:05:51] um a real lack like zoning enforcement

[3:05:55] effort and it was one of the you know, they they knew my correct background. It

[3:06:00] was one of the reasons that they that they came in. When I went and spoke to

[3:06:03] city council, one of the things that I said is, "I'm currently suing 150

[3:06:08] residents of this town." Um, I don't necessarily agree that it would

[3:06:14] be the best if I was in the congregation with that person or if I was on the PTA

[3:06:21] with that person or if I was um, you know, a boy scout leader with that

[3:06:27] person. Um sometimes I think that uh objectivity could could benefit um

[3:06:37] in a town attorney role. Um but regardless you know um I think it is

[3:06:42] important and I think that uh we could easily u you know meet with the right

[3:06:48] officials um chairpersons officials department

[3:06:52] heads and um and and you know glean what are those

[3:06:58] issues that that are either currently important or that are you know coming

[3:07:01] down the pike. The other thing that we do um is we find

[3:07:06] you know again we come into new municipalities and there hasn't been a

[3:07:10] lot of training um particularly like when it comes to foya issues for the

[3:07:15] land use boards you know what their statutory obligations are and we have

[3:07:20] done a lot of trainings with our municipalities. Um, it's something that

[3:07:25] we could offer to do right away for whatever boards or commissions the town

[3:07:30] thought that would be a good idea for or um it's something that we have found

[3:07:35] very helpful after a municipal election because you always have new new people

[3:07:41] coming in and just getting all the boards and commissions up to speed on,

[3:07:48] you know, what their responsibilities are. um and being able to ask questions.

[3:07:53] And so that's that's something we found very helpful

[3:07:57] » and we are aware of the ongoing water company um and water authority um

[3:08:04] dispute with Waterberry and that's one of the reasons why we actually applied

[3:08:08] for this RFP is because of especially attorney McCann's experience working

[3:08:13] with water authorities and water companies. We thought we could come in

[3:08:17] and help as much as possible to, you know, correct the ship that's

[3:08:24] currently um a float and to help improve um the outcome and to improve the city

[3:08:31] overall. And touching on trainings, we've also done ethics trainings in some

[3:08:36] of our towns and we regularly do other sorts of um events out in public and

[3:08:43] lectures out in public. Um, if any of you are going to the CCM conference in

[3:08:47] October, I'll be doing a presentation about the first amendment, first

[3:08:52] amendment auditors and civility towards municipality or municipal employees and

[3:08:57] officials. >> And one issue that I know is facing all

[3:09:01] municipalities across Connecticut because I just reviewed the

[3:09:04] intergovernmental report today was staffing shortages.

[3:09:09] And something that I'm cognizant of when I'm

[3:09:14] helping municipal clients and especially those with smaller departments or where

[3:09:18] there are gaps in employment is how best can I help

[3:09:23] the departments that do have those staffing shortages. How best can I make

[3:09:28] sure that I can help ensure that they are responding to a foir, that they are

[3:09:34] gathering all the necessary documents for litigation or to help complete an

[3:09:38] application through a state administrative proceeding?

[3:09:43] » Yeah. Well, we just if we just um you know, I think we we we you know, walk

[3:09:49] the walk. Um, like I just got done um serving a stint on the my town's charter

[3:09:57] vision commission. Um, a lot of people said, "Why do you want to do at night?

[3:10:00] What you do during the day?" >> Yeah, good point. Um, and then before

[3:10:07] that, five years on the conservation commission. Um but you know we enjoy

[3:10:12] this stuff and uh just like what trainings like Jeremy I think this is my

[3:10:17] third or fourth year teaching up at the Connecticut um assessor school up at

[3:10:22] stores. Um next month we're going to teach at the

[3:10:26] Lichfield County Assessors. Um

[3:10:30] you know we we we enjoy it. It's uh

[3:10:36] yeah it's fun. I have one final question for you. Um,

[3:10:41] is there anything we haven't asked you that you think the council should know?

[3:10:48] » Something really embarrassing.

[3:10:55] » And do any of the town council members have any

[3:10:58] additional questions?

[3:11:03] » I think >> Yeah, we just want to thank you. Thank

[3:11:06] you for the opportunity. Thank you for your for your time and great questions.

[3:11:12] Um >> yeah, you're really covered.

[3:11:16] » The gamut. >> It was interesting though how we kind of

[3:11:19] predicted we got ahead of ourselves. >> I think I think one thing that

[3:11:26] attorney McCann highlighted a little bit was

[3:11:29] Brian worked inhouse in Norwalk. of you work directly for the city and before

[3:11:34] law school I worked for the town of North David Haven. So we have as

[3:11:39] non-legal been their department of public works and worked with their water

[3:11:43] department and public regional public health authority and their land um

[3:11:48] zoning offices. So having that experience as well of working for the

[3:11:54] municipality directly, I hope at least it comes off that

[3:11:59] I understand some of the struggles that municipal employees have and how many

[3:12:04] regulations there are and how many statutes there are and how difficult is

[3:12:08] to keep track of everything. And with that background, at least I believe that

[3:12:14] when I go to board selectment meeting, I instead of just reading the statute,

[3:12:18] it's or a town council meeting or any sort of board or commission, instead of

[3:12:23] reading the statute directly, I might cite it, but then explain it in a way

[3:12:27] that everybody will understand and just to ensure that everybody's on the same

[3:12:33] page because public service isn't necessarily

[3:12:37] knowing every single statute and regulation. But instead, it's wanting to

[3:12:42] help people. And I believe as >> municipal attorneys, we try to strive

[3:12:47] every day to help our municipalities and their residents as best as we can.

[3:12:52] » There's only one other thing I'd like to add. just it just occurred to me because

[3:12:56] I I guess nobody contacted Greenwich, which which is fine, but um I have a

[3:13:03] little bit of a different position there because I am town attorney, but

[3:13:07] Greenwich does have an in-house legal department.

[3:13:11] » So, I also am the department head. I supervise that um entire legal

[3:13:18] department >> and there are five assistant town

[3:13:21] attorneys >> um two parallegals and three staff

[3:13:27] people. So that that has also given that that's actually been something that I

[3:13:32] have enjoyed having that kind of different experience but it also has

[3:13:37] given me as Jeremy mentioned real insight to the workings of

[3:13:44] a municipality from a different perspective than just the pure legal

[3:13:49] perspective. >> I think those are actually excellent

[3:13:52] answers. I'll I'll piggyback on that. Um, you know, when I started off, I was

[3:13:57] the environmental consultant that was making wetland applications to the

[3:14:01] wetland commission and then I became the uh conservation compliance officer that

[3:14:07] was receiving the applications and giving the applicants a hard time and

[3:14:11] then I went to, you know, on the inland wetlands commission that was

[3:14:16] deliberating over the application. Um, and then after I lost a couple inland

[3:14:22] wetland appeals, I said, "You know what? I want to be the attorney that defends

[3:14:25] the town in the inland wetlands appeals because I'm I want to win them." Um, but

[3:14:30] that's I think that was actually that's really good points. I I mean I think it

[3:14:34] gives you incredible experience to sort of you know see it from every

[3:14:39] angle and also to sit on the panel that's deciding it like to give you that

[3:14:45] understanding of like you know these folks don't want you know they

[3:14:51] want to exercise their own judgment. They're smart people. They you know they

[3:14:54] just they just need a little bit of guidance

[3:14:58] in certain areas where they may not be an expert. So that you know so make sure

[3:15:02] that they're not doing because none of them want to do the wrong thing and if

[3:15:05] they do it's probably inadvertent and they just need you know some steering

[3:15:09] but to understand it from that side of the table I think or all sides of the

[3:15:13] table I think is really uh important. >> One final example I guess to go back to

[3:15:19] council member Ryan's question dealing with retention of records and historical

[3:15:25] knowledge. When I worked for the town of North Haven, one of my assignments was

[3:15:29] to scan and digitize every single septic system in the town

[3:15:36] » and we were in the basement of the regional public health authority and

[3:15:41] they were all on the thinnest piece of paper. A lot of them were crumpled up,

[3:15:45] ripped apart, but we did it. We digitized it. And it's funny enough,

[3:15:51] this week I got a text from someone that I worked with who's now at a private

[3:15:55] consulting firm that does some work for the town of North Haven. And she texted

[3:15:59] me and said, "Do you remember when we did this?" And of course, I said, "Yes."

[3:16:04] And then she said, "Well, I actually just needed to request those digitized

[3:16:08] copies to help the town with their um storm water plan." So we at least for me

[3:16:16] and I believe that Brian and Barbara agree is we understand from both sides

[3:16:22] the importance of keeping records and to building a record especially in a zoning

[3:16:26] context where you want a robust record to support the town or city's um

[3:16:30] decision or in historical records as well. It's vital that we know where the

[3:16:36] septic septic systems are if there's a leak or where there might be um a sear

[3:16:42] connection. >> Yeah.

[3:16:44] » So, >> and it's almost always there. It's

[3:16:47] almost always there, right? It's just that like, you know, one of the things

[3:16:50] that I do on training is like, you know, when you're when you're deliberating,

[3:16:56] discuss the things that were discussed during the hearing. you know, like, you

[3:17:01] know, repeat those items, you know, that are going to support your decision.

[3:17:07] Like, is it a little bit weird to kind of like repeat back what you you know,

[3:17:11] what you heard or what you said during the last three hearings? Yeah. Okay. I

[3:17:17] agree. It may be, but you know, you have you you you really need to do it. And uh

[3:17:23] um and they, you know, like I said, they all they all want what's best for the

[3:17:27] town. They all mean really well, but they just need that little persuasion.

[3:17:33] » Any other questions or comments from town council?

[3:17:37] » Seeing none, thank you for coming. >> Thank you so much.

[3:17:41] » And did we go over our time? >> That is our third and last interview for

[3:17:46] tonight. So, um, at our next town council meeting, we'll probably have

[3:17:50] more discussion and we'll go from there as far as what plans are for selecting a

[3:17:55] new town attorney. Is there a motion to adjurnn?

[3:17:59] » Motion to >> second. Second. All in favor? Have a

[3:18:03] good night.

Special Town Council Meeting 9/10/26

Transcript