Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Legal Counsel Retention topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Riverside Local board approves retention of outside counsel after narrowing contract scope
Summary
The Riverside Local School District Board voted to retain outside counsel from McGowan and Mark Lane Company, LPA, after amending the proposed engagement to remove language that would have made the firm responsible for "all covered litigation matters." The board then recessed into executive session to discuss personnel and imminent litigation.
The Riverside Local School District Board of Education voted to retain outside legal counsel on a 3–2 roll call after first approving a narrower scope for the engagement.
At the start of the meeting, the board amended the agenda and then turned to a proposed retention of the law firm identified in the record as McGowan and Mark Lane Company, LPA, and the attorney present, Matt Markling. An unidentified board member raised concerns that the draft contract’s language—specifically a clause referring to representation in "all covered litigation matters"—was overly broad and asked that the board limit the engagement to the specific matter the board would discuss in executive session.
"This says that you will represent us in all covered litigation matters," the board member said during the public exchange, seeking to strike the word "all." Attorney Matt Markling responded that the document in front of the board is a standard retention letter and that he had been invited to meet with the board in executive session only after the board formally retained counsel. He also said the firm represents school boards throughout the state.
After discussion and a motion to remove the word "all" from item 3 of the legal services agreement, the board approved that amendment by roll call, 4–1, with Miss Brewster recorded as the lone no vote. The board then considered a formal resolution to retain the firm and to authorize the board president, treasurer and superintendent to execute the engagement and related treasurer certifications. Following clarification by staff that invoices would be processed through established treasurer approval procedures and therefore would not routinely appear as separate agenda items, the resolution passed on a roll call of 3–2.
The board subsequently voted 4–1 to adjourn to an executive session at 5:43 p.m. "for the purpose of considering the appointment, employment, dismissal, discipline, or compensation of a public employee and conferencing with an attorney concerning disputes that are the subject of imminent court action," and asked nonessential attendees to leave the room except for those at the table and the attorney present.
The record contains inconsistent spellings of both the attorney’s and the firm’s names (appearing variously as "Markling," "Markle," and "McGowan Markling," and as "McGowan and Mark Lane Company, LPA"). The board approved the retention as modified; the public record available here does not specify the final signed contract or any dollar amounts for the engagement.
Next steps: the board entered executive session to discuss the matters described in the motion. Any subsequent public action or a published engagement letter was not included in the meeting record provided.
