Cranston finance committee presses city solicitor, finance director for full list of pending lawsuits and audit explanation

Council President Marino and members of the Cranston Finance Committee pressed city legal and finance officials March 3 for a complete list of pending lawsuits, clearer monthly reporting of outside legal expenses and a staff explanation of a large change in audited program revenues.

The committee asked Solicitor Christopher Malay and Finance Director (Director) Zadelis to provide documented answers at the next committee meeting. Council members said they had repeatedly asked for a consolidated, public inventory of litigation and the expenses associated with outside counsel and want the information before budget deliberations.

Why it matters: Pending lawsuits and outside legal spending can affect the city's budget planning and bond disclosures. Committee members said they need a single, consistently updated list to see settlement exposure and legal‑expense trends before finalizing fiscal year budgets.

Solicitor's account and council follow‑up Solicitor Christopher Malay told the committee he had a list of matters by firm and that many cases already appear in the law department's monthly legal expense report. Malay walked members through several cases he said were active or recently closed, including property partition litigation and other matters handled by outside counsel.

Malay acknowledged the monthly billing reports may not include every filed complaint and said he would produce a written list of pending lawsuits that are publicly filed and active. "Anything that's been filed is public knowledge and I'm happy to include that in the list," Malay said. He also said some matters are being handled in‑house and that certain long‑running superior‑court matters can result in supplemental outside bills when outside counsel is needed.

Council President Marino and Councilwoman Graziano said that past reports have omitted suits the council later learned about, sometimes only when a settlement surfaced. "We want to know exactly what suits are pending currently with the city," Marino said, asking that the list be produced for the next finance committee meeting.

Audit question: the $40 million program‑revenue discrepancy The council also asked Director Zadelis for an explanation of a roughly $40 million drop in program revenues shown in the city's annual financial report. Zadelis said the comparison required looking across multiple tables and fund classifications and that different accountants can reclassify items between revenue and program categories.

"It's not a simple one‑line answer," Zadelis said, noting that adjustments on the expense side and changes in grants (for example ARPA and ESSER funding) affect how totals appear. He offered to sit down with the council president and the audit preparers to walk through the accounting exhibits in detail.

Federal grants and near‑term risk Marino also asked for an overview of federal funding that supports the current and next fiscal year. Zadelis said the city's largest active grants (including a SAFER firefighter grant) had been reviewed and he did not have immediate concerns about termination. He noted, however, that federal grant oversight and state pass‑through rules require ongoing monitoring and that he will notify the finance chair promptly if any funding appears in jeopardy.

What the committee requested - A written, consolidated list of pending, publicly filed lawsuits (sourced to the legal expense report and other records). - Any missing or supplementary litigation entries that do not appear in monthly bills. - A detailed walkthrough of the audit exhibit showing the program‑revenue change, tying exhibit tables to revenue and expense reclassifications. - A notification procedure from the finance director to the committee chair if any federal grants appear at risk.

Next steps and context Solicitor Malay agreed to provide the list of pending lawsuits and update the committee at its next meeting. The committee also agreed to continue discussion of litigation and any privileged matters in executive session where legally appropriate.

Council members said the records are needed in time for budget work to ensure the city accounts for possible settlements and outside counsel spend in its fiscal plans.

Ending: The finance committee did not take formal action beyond asking for the written lists and audit explanations; members said they expect the materials to appear with next month's finance packet so the council can review potential financial impacts ahead of budget votes.