City Services committee issues neutral recommendation on reappointing City Solicitor Alan Sewald amid debate over council having separate attorney

The Northampton City Services Committee voted unanimously to forward a neutral recommendation to the full City Council on the reappointment of attorney Alan Sewald as city solicitor, after a lengthy discussion about Sewald’s experience, invoice totals and a separate proposal to explore a council‑only legal representative.

Sewald, who introduced himself to the committee as a longtime Northampton resident and municipal lawyer who has served as city solicitor since 2012, told members he bills $200 an hour and typically invoices quarterly. He said his quarterly invoices have commonly been in the $30,000–$40,000 range and estimated his own annual billing at roughly $120,000–$140,000; he noted other lawyers are also paid from the city’s legal budget. “The organization is the client. The mayor is not my client, the city council is not my client, individual councilors are not my clients,” Sewald said when describing how he approaches his work.

Committee members asked for more granular billing detail and departmental breakdowns. Staff read the city’s legal actuals and budget figures during the meeting, indicating the city’s legal spending was about $275,000 in 2024 and the budget for 2025–26 is $275,000; members asked finance staff to provide a clearer line‑item breakdown for the full council meeting.

The discussion also centered on whether the council should pursue a separate, council‑specific attorney. Councilor Robbins said she supported Sewald’s work but proposed that the council explore issuing an RFQ to consider a council‑only attorney so councilors could have independent legal advice. Councilor Stratton and others said the broader question about creating a separate council attorney is on Thursday’s full‑council agenda and cautioned that the committee’s recommendation on Sewald should not preempt that discussion. Stratton said he was reluctant to give a straightforward positive recommendation if the committee’s decision would preempt the full council’s consideration of a separate arrangement.

Faced with a divided set of views, Robbins moved that the committee issue a neutral recommendation on Sewald’s appointment; the motion was seconded and, after roll call, the committee recorded a unanimous vote in favor of the neutral recommendation. Members asked that the committee’s report to the full council capture the differing positions expressed during the meeting so that the larger body could continue the wider discussion.

What happens next: The committee’s neutral recommendation will be included in the packet sent to the full City Council; the council will consider the mayor’s nomination and any separate proposals about council legal representation at upcoming meetings.