Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Procurement topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Committee reviews three corporate-counsel proposals, invites firms to present

Richland County Executive & Finance Committee · November 13, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The committee opened three RFP responses for corporate counsel and discussed scope, hourly rates and potential conflicts of interest; members asked the firms to present at the Nov. 24 meeting rather than make an immediate selection.

The Richland County Executive & Finance Committee opened and reviewed three responses to a request for proposals for corporate counsel. Staff said the responses included cover sheets, references and proposed costs and that two of the proposals were provided in hard copy while others were routed through departments for review.

One proposal listed in the transcript as "Abstwain Law" proposed a contractual hourly structure described in the submission as $175 per hour for attorneys and $80 per hour for paralegals; the transcript spelling of the firm name may be inconsistent. A second submission identified in the record as "Russell Offices" provided a discounted hourly rate for the duration of a proposed three-year contract (the numeric transcription in the packet appeared unclear in the committee record). Eddie Phillips’ firm described a role focused on specific, nontraditional corporate-counsel services rather than serving as a full replacement for in-house counsel; the firm outlined hourly rates and conditions for out-of-county travel and billed expenses.

Committee members discussed that it is not uncommon for attorneys to represent multiple jurisdictions but noted that when conflicts arise an outside counsel may be brought in and billed separately. Members expressed interest in seeing the firms present their proposals in person; staff said the firms will be asked to present at the Nov. 24 meeting so supervisors can question them directly. No award or selection was made at the meeting.

Ending: The committee deferred selection, requesting that the respondent firms present proposals at the committee’s Nov. 24 meeting to allow members to compare scope, rates and conflicts more directly.