Members of the Little Rock Board of Directors at a meeting Tuesday grilled outside attorneys on the controversy over how the Arkansas Municipal League and its hired counsel has handled settlement negotiations on behalf of Little Rock with the estate of Bradley Blackshire, who was killed by a city police officer in 2019.
Attorney Susan Kendall, a lawyer at a private firm who was hired by the Municipal League, gave the rationale for their approach along with her co-counsel. Kendall told city directors that the board has delegated certain authority on settlements to the city manager.
"And I do apologize if any board member feels slighted," she said. "That was obviously not our intent. Our intent was to reach a resolution in accordance with the board's policies."
City Attorney Tom Carpenter last week objected to the agreement.
He has described being left out of the loop on the proposed $300,000 settlement and has said his office's opinion was not sought before the tentative agreement was announced via a court filing earlier this month.
Carpenter has portrayed the settlement agreement's nonmonetary provisions, which include the implementation of additional police training on the use of force, as policy matters that require the board's review.
And he has argued that the $49,500 sum to be paid by the city to the estate without the board's approval -- though less than the $50,000 threshold traditionally thought to be the cost ceiling for the city manager to unilaterally OK a purchase -- was not subject to a competitive bid.
According to the settlement agreement, the Municipal League would pay an additional $250,500 to the estate.
The city as well as two police officers, Charles Starks and Michael Simpson, were sued in federal court by Blackshire's estate after Starks fatally shot the 30-year-old Black man.
At the time of the Feb. 22, 2019, shooting, Blackshire was behind the wheel of a car that had been reported stolen. Simpson -- who resigned from the Police Department in October 2020, according to his personnel file -- was the first officer to arrive at the scene of the shooting as backup.
Starks, who is represented separately in the litigation by local attorney Robert Newcomb, was terminated in the aftermath of the shooting for violating police rules related to the use of force when confronted with a moving vehicle.
He was later reinstated pursuant to a Pulaski County circuit judge's order, only to resign from the department last year. The decision to reinstate Starks is now under review because the Arkansas Court of Appeals recently remanded it to the lower court.
Also on Tuesday, a Pulaski County Circuit Court judge approved the Blackshire estate's petition in probate court to enter into the $300,000 settlement.
The development appears to clear the way for attorneys to finalize the settlement in federal court. In an order last week, the federal judge overseeing the case wrote that the court would not take action "until the parties have finalized a settlement and the probate court has approved it."
Under the probate court order from Judge Casey Tucker filed Tuesday, proceeds from the settlement will be divided as follows: $15,000 will go to Britney Walls, the special administrator of Blackshire's estate, $29,625 to Blackshire's mother, Kim Blackshire-Lee, and $32,785 to each of Blackshire's five minor children.
Attorneys for the firm Loevy and Loevy are due to receive $85,000, which, according to the judge's order, represents a voluntary reduction from their 40% contingency fee.
During Tuesday's board meeting, Kendall, who works for the Kendall Law Firm, and Tom Kieklak, an attorney with the firm Harrington, Miller, Kieklak, Eichmann and Brown, appeared before the board along with John Wilkerson, general counsel for the Municipal League, and Bill Mann, senior litigation counsel for the Municipal League.
Justin Eichmann, another attorney representing the city who works for Harrington, Miller, Kieklak, Eichmann and Brown, was absent.
Kendall told the board how Carpenter had withdrawn from the case in August 2020 because of a conflict and said she, as well as Eichmann and Kieklak, entered as substitute counsel for the city through the Municipal League. She added that Mann was assigned to the case, too.
Kendall said any settlement offers made during the informal negotiations were very clear that anything above the city manager's authority of $50,000 required board approval.
During this time, and especially as attorneys got closer to a resolution, Kendall said they provided Carpenter with the status of negotiations and other information.
Typically, Kendall said, attorneys would work closely with a city or county attorney.
"That was not the case in this case because of Mr. Carpenter's stated conflict," she said. "But nonetheless, we were very clear on keeping Mr. Carpenter in the loop, particularly when we felt we had reached a point that settlement was possible."
Authority was obtained from the Municipal League's legal defense fund through Wilkerson for the settlement figure and from the city through Mayor Frank Scott Jr. and City Manager Bruce Moore for the city's share, Kendall said.
A proposed $50,000 sum to be paid by the city was later reduced to $49,500 "at the request of Mayor Scott to the Arkansas Municipal League directly," Kendall said.
The nonmonetary provisions to the settlement were specifically cleared with Scott, Moore and the police chief, Kendall said. She said any additional training would be subject to the training staff's discretion.
Kendall emphasized that the agreement "does not constitute an admission of liability on any issues, including training," and added that language in the agreement specifically denies any liability.
She described the agreement as advantageous for the city in bringing the litigation to a close.
City Director B.J. Wyrick of Ward 7 asked why Carpenter was not given information on the pending settlement given Kendall's statements about information reportedly flowing to the city attorney, and inquired what the value would be of the nonmonetary elements to the settlement given that the city would incur those costs.
Kendall said the training would occur at no additional cost. The cost to produce a video featuring Blackshire's family to be shown to police recruits for at least 10 years would be "de minimis," or minimal, she suggested.
Mann, who previously worked for the city of Little Rock, told board members the case was unusual. He said there were a couple of conversations with Carpenter after the settlement discussions began, Mann said.
The $300,000 figure was a take-it-or-leave-it offer to the estate's lawyers, Mann said.
Mann told the board it was his understanding that the information on the city's share of the proposed settlement had made it to Carpenter.
Kendall said the city attorney was kept apprised but was not involved with the litigation. And she said she and co-counsel fully anticipated, when making settlement offers that were contingent on board approval, that they would be presenting the terms to the board because of Carpenter's conflict.
At-large City Director Dean Kumpuris said that in his years on the board, he would get called by Carpenter and apprised about a forthcoming settlement -- not as a way to gauge Kumpuris' up-or-down opinion on it, but to keep him informed.
Members of the city's outside legal team Tuesday suggested they were taken off guard by the federal judge making public the tentative settlement via a statement in the court docket earlier this month.
But Kumpuris chastised the lawyers and sought to remind them that the city board sets policy while the mayor and city manager carry it out.
"So tell me how, in your mind, that we shouldn't have known about this?" he asked. "I mean, I'm not trying to be argumentative, but it makes me a little bit upset to hear you say that you've been negotiating on this all this time, and we're completely kept out of [sic] the dark."
Mann told him that "timing was an issue here because we were trying to keep this out of the press and trying to accomplish what we were asked to accomplish within the bounds of the ... city manager's authority, and then at the appropriate time, inform the board."
He went on, "And I can only apologize that it came down the way it did. I understand your displeasure, and I don't disagree with you, but it was not something that was a plan to put one over on the board."