Citizen Portal
Sign In

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

Get email alerts on the Procurement Legal topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Commission moves to task manager to prepare contract with long‑time city counsel after debate over RFP

Muskegon City Commission · February 10, 2026
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

After a wide-ranging discussion about fairness, price and institutional knowledge, commissioners signaled by show of hands (four in favor) that they want the city manager to draft a renewal contract with Parmenter under the terms the firm offered; several commissioners nevertheless urged an open RFP in the future.

The commission debated whether to run a competitive RFP for municipal legal services or to accept a renewal from Parmenter (the city’s longtime counsel) under new, reduced hourly terms. The city manager framed the options and said Parmenter had submitted a letter offering rates below recent market comparators.

Several commissioners argued an RFP would be appropriate to ensure openness and give other firms an opportunity to compete. "I would think it would be in the best interest to do another RFP," one commissioner said, citing transparency and fairness. Other commissioners countered that switching firms would be disruptive and costly and noted Parmenter’s institutional knowledge.

Brennan Gorman of Parmenter told the commission the firm prices itself to remain part of the local fabric and had intentionally proposed a flat, community‑oriented rate rather than raising fees sharply. "We view ourselves as part of the fabric of Muskegon," Gorman said, explaining the firm’s long local history and why their proposed rate is lower than some recent comparators tied to post‑inflation market increases.

After debate, the mayor asked for a show of hands to indicate support for tasking the city manager to return with a draft contract reflecting Parmenter’s proposed terms. Staff recorded roughly four commissioners in support; staff said they would work with Parmenter to prepare a proposed agreement for consideration at a future meeting. The action was not a formal, roll‑call contract award; the commission directed the manager to bring a draft contract forward for future approval.