Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Legal Services Selection Criteria topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
How East Providence School Committee weighed fees, meeting attendance and construction experience
Summary
Committee members told three candidate firms that availability for meetings, fee transparency and construction contract experience mattered; members debated whether larger multi-district firms or a smaller dedicated education practice would better serve East Providence.
East Providence School Committee members spent substantial time comparing candidate law firms on billing structures, in-person availability at meetings, and subject-matter expertise before appointing new counsel.
Several members emphasized the value of regular legal attendance at executive sessions and subcommittee meetings so attorneys can answer on-the-spot questions and reduce information gaps. "If the committee wants to see the bills, committee gets the bills," one presenter said of delivering itemized invoices to the committee, while others said detailed monthly billing can be provided to the chair or full committee on request.
Firms described differing fee approaches. Barton Gilman referenced a blended $230/hour proposal and said it offers flat-fee and hybrid arrangements for recurring services. Haines Carroll Lombardo stated a $200/hour proposal and an up-to cap fee for meeting attendance (example cited: up to $750). The incumbent counsel cited a $215/hour base rate with higher litigation rates and offered detailed timekeeping and matter-by-matter invoices.
Members discussed the trade-offs: larger firms that serve many districts can develop reusable policies and share costs, while firms with deeper local education focus may offer more attention to East Providence-specific issues. Construction law experience was also a factor: the incumbent counsel pointed to work on the district—s Gilbane contract and on resolving sidewalk and HVAC disputes.
The discussion ended with two procedural outcomes: a member moved to retain the incumbent counsel (motion failed), and the committee instead approved hiring Haines Carroll Lombardo LLC by voice vote (3'). Members also requested clearer invoicing and periodic written updates on active cases.
Context: The committee oversees a district budget and must balance the desire for rapid, in-person legal support with cost controls through flat-fee or shared-policy work.
Quotation highlights - "We put a blended $230 an hour," Steve Adams, Barton Gilman LLP. - "We bill $200 an hour," Andrew Henness, Haines Carroll Lombardo LLC. - "The base fee is $215 an hour," Ben, incumbent counsel.
Next steps: the committee will negotiate contract details, confirm meeting-attendance expectations and require monthly invoices to improve transparency.
