Wilmington City Council authorizes outside legal counsel amid allegations and public calls for independent review

Wilmington City Council voted unanimously to hire additional legal counsel on a 7-0 vote after a lengthy public comment period in which residents urged the council to seek an independent review of allegations concerning the mayor and the police department.

The council approved Resolution 25-25, “authorizing Wilmington city council to hire additional legal counsel,” after a motion by Councilmember Don Wells and a second by Councilmember Osborne. Roll call votes recorded all seven members as voting yes. The resolution was passed and declared an emergency.

The vote followed sustained public comments from residents who said they had lost trust in city leadership and called for outside review. Elaine Silverstrom, a longtime resident, said, “This leaves lots of room for the public to wonder where we place our trust.” Jason Stoops, whose remarks described past disputes with the administration, asked for ‘‘further review and possible investigation by a neutral outside agency.’’ Kelsey Swindler told the council, “My concern is simple. Duplicity, infighting, and gaslighting undermine all of our attempts to collectively address the problems we face.”

Several speakers urged remedies ranging from an independent review board to administrative leave for the mayor while allegations are examined. Chuck Watts, who described himself as supportive of due process, told council members he hoped the process would “come out at a better point for all.”

Mayor Patrick Haley addressed the chamber after public comment and said he would provide documentation to explain the issues raised. “I ran simply to serve the community,” he said, and added he was willing to bring forward documentation “in whatever way we need to do it.” He also said he would avoid violating confidentiality while attempting to answer questions.

Council President (presiding) moved the resolution forward during the additional legislation portion of the meeting; Councilmember Wells made the motion to advance and then to pass the item. The council recorded the vote as unanimous. No further formal investigatory steps were recorded in the meeting beyond authorizing outside counsel for council.

Discussion vs. decision: public comments and calls for independent review were discussion items and public testimony. The formal decision the council recorded was to hire additional legal counsel; the resolution does not, on its face, direct a specific investigative body or mandate administrative leave. Council members said they would keep the public apprised and noted there will not be another regular council meeting until early June.

The council did not specify the scope, budget, or timeline for the outside counsel engagement during the meeting, nor did it name the firm. Those implementation details were not provided in the public record at this session.

Looking ahead, council members said they will report back at the next meeting; residents urged that any review include transparent findings and defined next steps.