East Spencer dismisses attorney

EAST SPENCER — In a 4-3 vote, the East Spencer Board of Aldermen dismissed its town attorney Wednesday night but left open the possibility that he could reapply for the job.

Before severing their connection with attorney Freddie Lane Jr., the board took his advice and unanimously decided to intervene in a lawsuit brought by Citizens on the Move in East Spencer and join that group as plaintiffs.

“All this does is strengthen the case against Business Partners,” Lane said of the action. “... It has been the option of choice since the beginning of the lawsuit.”

Business Partners USA, based in Winston-Salem, formerly contracted with the town to manage most of its operations, except fire and police service. The COMES suit alleges that Business Partners breached its contract with the town and also makes claims of conspiracy and fraud against the company, some of its employees, other businesses and former town officials.

The original COMES suit named all members of the previous Board of Aldermen as defendants, but COMES attorney Michael King agreed in court Monday to dismiss complaints against Aldermen John Noble, Deloris High and Ronald Hash, all of whom remain on the town board.

With their names removed as defendants, Noble, High and Hash joined Aldermen Phronice Johnson, John L. Rustin and Titus King in voting for East Spencer to join COMES as plaintiffs.

“I think it’s a good thing,” Rustin said, recalling how the board once had worked closely with the Negro Civic League.

Mayor Erma Jefferies said the move will bring the board and citizens together “as a united front.”

In a written statement, Citizens on the Move in East Spencer asked the town to join its side.

COMES President John E. Jones said the town’s addition as plaintiff will make the case and community stronger.

But Jones also called on Lane to step down as town attorney because of his past defense of the town officials that COMES had originally sued. Jones accused Lane of championing the cause of people who wrecked the town’s finances and made a list of arguments for Lane’s dismissal.

With town board members initially listed as defendants, Lane acted on their behalf in filing answers to the COMES suit, though he argued from the beginning that COMES had placed the town on the wrong side of the legal action. Lane took time Wednesday to respond to many of Jones’ complaints.

He disputed Jones’ claim that Vance Holloman, director of the Fiscal Management Section of the Local Government Commission, participated in his hiring last fall. The state officer had no vote in the matter, and only audited accounts to make sure the town had sufficient funds to hire him, Lane said.

As town attorney, he was obligated to defend suits brought against the town, Lane added.

What Jones described as a “campaign press conference” held by former Mayor Kenneth Fox last October was really a “litigation press conference” called to address the claims publicized when COMES filed its suit, Lane said.

At that meeting, Lane had to explain the legal positions of the town and that he would represent town officials as individuals and in their officials capacities.

Lane said Monday’s court action was in the town’s best interest, clearing the way for the town to prosecute rather than defend a claim against Business Partners. The town did not breach the contract — Business Partners did, Lane contended.

Now that the town is no longer a defendant in the suit but will be a plaintiff, it creates a conflict for him to represent former Mayor Kenneth Fox and former Alderman Jerry Miller, Lane said.

That’s why he said Monday he would withdraw as their attorney.

Lane said his wife, Meleisa Rush-Lane, also will withdraw as attorney for Kim Fox, the former mayor’s wife. Lane disputed Jones’ claim that his wife participated in any town board executive sessions in which the COMES litigation was discussed.

Knowing that aldermen had called their special meeting Wednesday in part to discuss his fate, Lane said he would live with any decision they made, but he added that he always had performed in the town’s interest and felt strongly about helping the board and citizens.

“I do think the town should have the attorney it wants,” he said.

After a lengthy executive session, the board emerged with Rustin making a motion asking Lane to resign as town attorney. Before the board could vote, Lane answered that he would not resign because he felt he had done nothing wrong. He asked that the board vote on removing him instead.

Rustin then made a motion for Lane’s dismissal “with regrets.”

“You see where we’re coming from, don’t you?” Rustin asked Lane, reflecting some of the board members’ attitudes that they wanted to start fresh.

Jefferies, Rustin, King and Johnson voted for dismissal. Noble, High and Hash voted against the motion.

After the vote dismissing Lane, the board immediately discussed keeping him on until it could receive proposals from other attorneys.

“The position we’re in now, we need an attorney,” Hash said.

Lane acknowledged that legal questions had been surfacing for East Spencer “almost on a day-to-day basis.”

At first he offered to serve as attorney until the board found a replacement or rehired him.

But Lane reconsidered, saying that if it was a trust issue with some aldermen, he did not want to work under that pressure because it would set him up for failure. Lane then left the meeting.

Lane was scheduled to conduct a workshop for the aldermen from 9 a.m. to 2 p.m. today at the Dunbar Center..

“Right now, we don’t have an instructor,” Jefferies noted.

The board decided it would meet anyway to do some strategic planning and set goals for the near future.

Earlier, before Lane was dismissed, the question surfaced as to what attorney should represent the town in the lawsuit against Business Partners and the other parties.

Jefferies recommended that the COMES attorney, Michael King, handle the suit for the town, COMES and individual plaintiffs Jones and Roland Cohen.

Lane said King has a possible conflict in that he originally opposed the town in the lawsuit. But Lane said he thought the conflict could be waived. He suggested that the town consult with the state Bar Association and the N.C. Attorney General’s office for an opinion.

The board will have to vote in the future whether it wants King to be its attorney on this case, Lane added.

Lane told the board it has a strong breach of contract case against Business Partners for the company’s failure to account for funds, keep proper records and supply public documents — requirements stipulated in the contract.

Lane called it “a well-written contract but an improvident one.”

Contact Mark Wineka at 704-797-4263, or mwineka@salisburypost.com .