.

Mack Apparently Out..... Who's In?

BCWA vote for legal RFP

It appears that Sandra Mack of Cameron and Mittleman has been ousted from her position as legal counsel to the BCWA.  At a special meeting of the board on Wednesday evening, January 16th, Ms. Mack failed to garner the five votes required to secure the position. The state enabling  legislation requires a minimum of five votes  to pass a resolution.  The vote was 4-3.

BCWA has scheduled another meeting the last week of January to continue the voting process.  The other two candidates are Michael McElroy and Keough & Sweeney.

Michael McElroy of Providence,  is currently president of the  2012-2013  Rhode Island Bar Association, a former three-term Chairman of the Superior Court Bench/Bar Committee, and is a member of the House of Delegates and the Executive Committee. He is a Fellow of the Rhode Island Bar Foundation. He is a member of the  Rhode Island Association for Justice. He is a former Special Assistant Attorney General and is currently Legal Counsel to the Rhode Island Personnel Appeal Board.

Keough & Sweeney represent and counsel Water, Wastewater and Renewable Energy clients in all aspects of the regulatory process before the Rhode Island Public Utilities Commission and the Rhode Island Division of Public Utilities and Carriers.  Their areas of expertise include Water Utility Law, Wastewater Utility Law, and Renewable Energy Law.

The BCWA board of directors opened the voting process on the 16th with the statement that they had three well qualified firms to choose from and that any one of them would be able to handle the job well.  From the qualifications mentioned above we urge the directors to give serious consideration to cost and qualifications and give less weight to "institutional knowledge".

This post is contributed by a community member. The views expressed in this blog are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of Patch Media Corporation. Everyone is welcome to submit a post to Patch. If you'd like to post a blog, go here to get started.

Manifold Witness January 19, 2013 at 01:12 PM
This is the time to support the GOOD men on the BCWA board. They need to continue the meeting (after 48 hours public notice) and get the vote done on the other 2 candidates. Are there 5 good men?
Bob Venice January 27, 2013 at 12:14 AM
I do not understand why people are saying thar Mack is out. All the Board has to do is not give fivee votes to the two remaining Law Firms, and then take a vote to start all over again with the first of the three firma to obtain the 5 needed votes is elected. They will then vote ffor Mack again, and she is assured of getting the votes needed. We, can not beat the BCWA, we have been trying and we have lost each time. Remember, The Board has already voted for new management hirings, and also for a pay raise for all of Management. We do not even treat the water. The BCWA, is becoming a greater joke then ever in the first year of the new Director and her no cut contract. No wonder Providence was willing to give her $250,000 to walk away from the job. Enough is enough.
Jack Baillargeron January 27, 2013 at 12:55 AM
Agreed Bob, the correct title should be out for now in the selection process. Will surely still be considered in the next round of "Keystone Cops" episode this has become. Funny thing or sadest thing is she is still their legal counsel and responsible for all this in the first place as the BCWA legal Counsel. Pretty inept when you cannot even advise the Board and Management on the proper way even get your old Job back, when you look at the bottom line of all this. Just saying lol.
Manifold Witness January 27, 2013 at 01:18 PM
Mack didn't get enough votes. She's out of the pool. If neither of the other two get the required 5 votes, then BCWA needs a new pool. Rejected applicants don't keep applying in the same hiring cycle once a potential employer has said, "no" via a legitimate process. The other 2 candidates appear to be very well qualified. Which one goes to a vote first? This process seems to be taking them an awfully long time. What are they waiting for? Tick tock.
marina peterson January 27, 2013 at 09:34 PM
title reads "apparently" out. She di not garner the votes required. Votes need to be taken for the other two candidates, and if there is no consensus, then the procedure would have to begin again. I agree with your supposition that they will probably just keep re-voting for Mack until they get enough votes. Hope people speak up!!!

Boards

More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something
See more »