Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Outside Counsel Energy Ethics topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council approves outside counsel for ethics board and for community solar work
Summary
Harford County Council approved two outside-law-firm retentions on June 16: Gallagher LLP to represent the Board of Ethics (6-0-1, one abstention) and a boutique environmental/land-use firm to assist the executive on community solar and battery projects (7-0).
The Harford County Council voted on June 16 to hire outside law firms for two separate purposes, citing conflicts of interest for in-house counsel and the technical demands of rapidly changing energy law.
The council approved a request from the county's ethics office to retain Gallagher LLP, with partners Anna Smalkin and Megan Casey to represent the Board of Ethics. The county attorney's office said it could not represent the ethics board because of conflicts; "Because of the subject matter of the complaint...the law department has a conflict and they are not permitted by law to represent the ethics board," the presenting official said during the meeting. The motion passed with six votes in favor and one abstention from Councilman Aaron Penman, who said he would abstain due to the matter's nature.
Separately, the council approved hiring a boutique environmental and land-use firm, G. Macy Nelson LLC, to assist the Department of Law and the county executive on community solar energy generating systems and related administrative proceedings. County counsel said recent changes in state law and proposed regulatory recommendations from the Maryland Department of Natural Resources complicate matters: "This firm has experience practicing before the Public Service Commission and the Department of Natural Resources," a county attorney said, arguing that outside specialists could strengthen the county's position in administrative dockets.
Council members asked about hourly rates and potential costs. County officials said the engagement would proceed in increments and be monitored; one council member noted past promises that an expanded in-house law office would reduce outside spending. The council approved the retention for the solar work unanimously; the county indicated it will return to the council for incremental funding approvals as work progresses.
No litigation or specific dockets were announced at the meeting; the retentions were framed as preparatory steps to allow the county to participate effectively in administrative proceedings and to review local land-use code in response to evolving state guidance.
