Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Legal Contracts topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council members press law department over $500,000 Miller Law contract for historic‑district litigation
Summary
Committee members questioned the law department about an emergency contract with Miller Law Firm tied to litigation involving the Historic District Commission in Lafayette Park. Members asked why in‑house attorneys could not continue the work and asked to bring the item back in one week for more details.
The Internal Operations Committee pressed the city law department on a proposed contract that would allocate up to $500,000 to Miller Law Firm for outside legal representation related to historic‑district litigation.
Graham Anderson of the law department said Miller Law Firm was engaged last year under an emergency procurement because in‑house attorneys in the transactional section had a conflict and the matter required immediate action. "We brought in Miller Law Firm from the beginning," Anderson said, explaining the firm has been working on litigation involving the Historic District Commission and a property owner association in Lafayette Park.
Councilmembers sought clarity about whether in‑house counsel or the corporation counsel could assume the matter. The committee was told the law department’s sections are specialized and the attorney who supervises the transactional team had a conflict that made it difficult for the team to continue the work without supervision. Anderson said the department’s current balance on the contract is smaller than the maximum and that litigation remains ongoing. A fee rate cited in the discussion was $450 per hour for some outside attorneys.
Councilmember Renata Miller questioned why the city would pay outside counsel for ongoing work when multiple city attorneys exist; the law department replied some sections have just a few specialized attorneys and that the emergency contract vehicle permits quick action when necessary. Members agreed to bring the contract back in one week so corporation counsel and outside counsel can answer additional questions and to review invoices and case numbers.
Why it matters: The item involves taxpayer money and a litigation strategy where the city has previously used emergency contracting authority. Members asked for more documentation before forwarding the contract to formal session.
What’s next: The committee voted to bring the item back in one week to allow corporation counsel and Miller Law representatives to provide further details on billing, scope and alternatives.
