Brookings council hears presentations from two law firms to replace retiring city attorney

Brookings City Council on a regularly scheduled meeting heard hourlong presentations and question-and-answer sessions from two finalist law firms seeking the city attorney contract: Woods Fuller Shultz & Smith (represented by Vince Jones and Susan Rasmussen) and Cutler Law Firm (represented by Nate Shane, Eric Erickson and Meredith Moore). The council, which is replacing long‑time contracted city attorney Steve Britzman, will consider a recommendation and expects to take final action at its April 22 meeting.

The presentations mattered because the city’s contracted attorney advises elected officials and staff on local ordinances, code enforcement, land use, permitting and emergency legal issues. Councilors used the interviews to evaluate firms’ municipal experience, proposed billing structures, conflict‑of‑interest safeguards and how the firms would support day‑to‑day council and court work.

Woods Fuller emphasized a “deep bench” and a team model led by Vince Jones. Jones said the firm would name him as the primary city attorney but bring specialists as needed, including litigation, construction contract drafting and ordinance work. He told the council that the firm does not require a monthly retainer and charges hourly, offers paralegal work at lower rates, bills in tenth‑hour increments and bills monthly. The firm proposed billing travel time at 50% of the hourly rate and said it typically considers annual rate adjustments tied to changes in the CPI. Jones said, “By hiring me as the city attorney you would also get the benefit of the expertise of all the other attorneys in our office.” (Vince Jones)

Cutler Law Firm framed its pitch around a collaborative model in which a single point of contact would triage calls but draw on specialists in bond counsel, public finance, employment and litigation when needed. Partner Nate Shane said a benefit of his firm is the ability to supply bond counsel without sending work outside the firm. Shane described the model this way: “That’s the advantage of having a larger law firm, help you guys out.” (Nate Shane) Cutler noted it already represents several South Dakota municipalities and stressed the ability to deploy a lead attorney while using colleagues for HR, utilities, telecommunications and litigation tasks.

On scope and availability both firms said they would provide a primary attorney reachable by cell phone, would attend council meetings in person as requested and could use video or phone appearances when appropriate to save travel time. Both firms said they could respond to emergencies outside normal business hours and described existing backup arrangements to ensure coverage.

Councilors pressed about conflicts of interest and how conflicts would be screened. Woods Fuller described a firm‑wide conflicts check and said conflicts that can be waived would be presented to the city for a waiver; nonwaivable conflicts would require the city to seek different counsel for that matter. Cutler likewise said it monitors conflicts and argued that serving municipalities across the state — without a heavy local client base in Brookings — can reduce conflict risk.

On technical matters, candidates described relevant experience: Woods Fuller described litigation and permitting work involving a long‑running mine site matter and experience with state environmental regulators (referred to in the interview as DANR). Cutler emphasized public finance and bond counsel experience, land‑use and annexation work, employment law support and litigation for municipal code enforcement and nuisance cases.

Councilors also questioned billing detail and cost control. Both firms said they can use lower‑rate attorneys or paralegals for routine tasks, can provide flexible invoice formats (separate bills by matter, block billing or detailed time entries) and expected to coordinate to avoid duplicate billing. Neither firm proposed a monthly minimum retainer; both proposed hourly billing, monthly invoices and the option to negotiate travel billing and other details.

The interviews concluded with public comment and a short discussion about next steps. The mayor and staff said proposals and interview summaries are in the public packet; the council expects to consider a recommendation and vote on a contract at its April 22 meeting. The current contracted city attorney, Steve Britzman, was referenced by both firms as a possible resource during any transition period.

Votes at a glance: At the start of the meeting the council approved the agenda by voice vote after a motion and second; a roll call earlier in the meeting recorded six council members present and voting Aye. At the end of the meeting the council approved a motion to adjourn by voice vote.

Less critical details included repeated council questions about meeting attendance frequency (some councilors said they are accustomed to an attorney attending most meetings), how each firm would handle magistrate court hearings and whether firms would be willing to collaborate with the outgoing contracted attorney during a transition.

The council did not select a firm during the interview session; a formal decision is expected at the April 22 council meeting.