Cranston City Council Special Meetings: Finance Committee and Full Council Approve Amendment to Attorney's Engagement Letter - August 20, 2025
Cranston City Council Special Meetings: Finance Committee and Full Council Approve Amendment to Attorney's Engagement Letter - August 20, 2025
On Wednesday, August 20, 2025, the Cranston City Council held three consecutive special meetings: a special council meeting, a special finance committee meeting, and a subsequent full council meeting. The primary agenda item was a proposed amendment to the letter of engagement between the City Council and Stephen Angel of Angel Law, the council attorney, concerning billing and payment procedures for hourly work. The amendment aims to increase transparency by requiring redacted billing statements and direct submission to the finance director.
Public Comments & Testimony
- Doug Sosha (6 Silver Maple Drive, Coventry) stated he came to learn what the amendment was, as it was not posted online. He expressed a desire to see it posted ahead of time.
- Drake Patton (684 Natick Avenue) criticized the council for not publishing the amendment before the meeting, saying "Shame on all of you" and expressing disappointment, particularly with the Democratic party.
Discussion Items
- Proposed Amendment to Attorney Angel's Engagement Letter: Attorney Angel presented the amendment, explaining that it updates the section on payments and responsibilities. The change requires that for hourly billing (which only arises during conflicts with the administration), Angel Law will submit invoices and redacted time specifications directly to the Finance Director, with copies to all council members. Unredacted statements remain available for inspection by council members by appointment, but must remain confidential to protect attorney-client privilege.
- Council Members' Questions and Statements: Council Vice President Wall noted the amendment provides greater transparency. Councilman Trafficante questioned the waiver of privilege. Councilwoman Graziano expressed support. Councilman Ritz asked why the amendment was brought forward now and sought the city solicitor's opinion. Councilman Bonano inquired about the process for authorizing hourly work, confirming it requires a full council vote. Councilman Anduhar suggested moving on. Several members noted the original contract was approved unanimously in February.
- City Solicitor Millet's Objections: Solicitor Millet strongly opposed the amendment, raising several points: (1) The amendment attempts to direct the Finance Director to pay, which he argued violates the city charter; (2) He claimed the charter gives him sole authority to approve contract form, which he did not do; (3) He criticized past billing practices, stating that Angel Law submitted 106 hours of work without itemization; (4) He argued the amendment fails to improve transparency. He urged the council not to approve it.
- Attorney Angel's Rebuttal: Angel countered that state law and rules of professional conduct preempt charter provisions, and that itemized billing exists but was withheld during litigation to protect strategy. He emphasized that the amendment actually increases transparency compared to current practice.
- Councilman Bonano's Support: Bonano argued the amendment adds transparency and prevents problems experienced in other communities, urging approval.
- Councilman Ritz's Uncertainty: Ritz stated he was confused by conflicting legal opinions and voted no.
Key Outcomes
- Special Council Meeting: A motion to refer the proposed amendment to the Finance Committee passed by a vote of 5 to 4 (with some council members expressing concern about Open Meetings Act notice).
- Finance Committee Meeting: After discussion, the committee voted 5 in favor (Graziano, Anduhar, Trafficanti, Heroyan, Wall), 1 opposed (Ritz), and 1 abstention (Marino).
- Full Council Meeting: The Finance Committee's recommendation was reported. The full council voted 6 in favor (Bonano, Graziano, Horayan, Anduhar, Traficante, Wall), 1 opposed (Ritz), and 1 abstention (Marino).
As a result, the amendment to the letter of engagement with Stephen Angel is officially approved, modifying billing procedures for hourly work.
Meeting Transcript
Good evening. Welcome to the Cranson City Council special council meeting. This evening is Wednesday, August 20th. At this time, I'll ask the clerk to please take the roll. Councilman Campo Piano. Present. Councilman Bonano. Here. Councilwoman Graziano. Present. Councilwoman Heroyan. Present. Councilman Anduhar. Present. Councilman Ritz. Present. Councilman Trafficante. Present. Council Vice President Wall. Here. Councilman President Marino. Present. Next we have introduction of new business. We have proposed amendments to the letter of engagement dated February seventh, twenty twenty-five, between the Cranson City Council and Stephen Angel of Angel Law as council attorney and litigation counsel for the city council for the term beginning January twenty twenty-five and ending January twenty twenty-seven to be re referred to the finance committee August twenty at six fifteen. Do I have a motion? Motion to refer the proposed amendment to the finance committee. Second. Any discussion? There being none. So as of right now, uh, I am warning the body that they might be run a file of the OMA based on the fact that there's been zero notice to the public or to this council or to the solicitor's office as to what the amendment to this contract is. Councilman Ritz. This meeting was set. To the clerk, if you may continue. Councilman Trafficante. No. Council Vice President Wall. Yes. Council President Marino. Yes. The vote is five to four motion passes. Motion to adjourn. Any discussion? No. All those in favor say aye. Any opposed? Ayes have it. And six fifteen, we will begin the special finance committee meeting. Thank you. Let's belay that good evening because I'm still a minute ahead of schedule. Hold on.
openpublica.com