In a recent lawsuit, former lawyer for the Birmingham Water Works Board Mark Parnell takes aim at the legislature's reconstitution of the board and their motivation behind it, saying that his now canceled multi-million dollar contract was "to ensure institutional continuity," and to prevent senior leadership from leaving as a result of "political chaos."
In the 26-page suit filed on Monday, lawyers for Parnell said the contract was offered to him because, "In May of 2025, there was substantial concern that, for improper and unfounded political reasons, changes would be made to the structure of the BWWB that could have a devastating impact upon the reforms and improvements that had been made to the operations and management of the BWWB."
The lawsuit names each of the new Central Alabama board members and the new entity itself among the plaintiffs.
In addition to ending Parnell's contract, the new board has requested that the state conduct a forensic audit, cut contracts that do not provide direct services to customers and turn over multiple theft investigations to law enforcement.
The suit claims, "Parnell did not actively seek to become an employee of the BWWB. At the time the January 2025 Board asked Parnell to assume the dual roles of Deputy General Manager/General Counsel, there was general concern that Underwood, and other senior management, Williams and Parker, deemed essential employees, were considering resigning because of the confusion and upheaval that may result from political chaos of a new board. In order to provide essential continuity, Parnell was offered a management and operations position with the BWWB. This was in addition to the offer to him to become General Counsel of the BWWB."
The word "continuity" is repeatedly used to explain why the contract was offered and Parnell accepted, "To provide management and operational continuity to the BWWB, and as a service to the customers of the BWWB, Parnell agreed to accept a position as the Deputy General Manager/General Counsel. He agreed to this expansion into management and operations to ensure continuity in the BWWB."
The lawsuit claims that the compensation would have been less than Parnell would have received without it, while also strongly implying that the contract was necessary due to concerns that his services would no longer be continued under the new board and that they would lose his institutional knowledge.
The suit states, "The compensation terms for Parnell included annual compensation, fully vesting in the BWWB's Pension Plan, and other normal benefits. All these terms were material and induced Parnell to agree to become an employee of the BWWB."
The lawsuit also alleges, "While terminating the Parnell Agreement, some of the Defendants took the opportunity in Parnell's absence to disparage and harm his professional reputation. Once the meeting was adjourned, some of the Defendants continued to disparage and harm Parnell's professional reputation by making comments to the public and the news media."
Public comments centered around the specifics of the contract and the way in which it was executed, saying that the process resulted in questions of trust. An AL(dot)com report quoted board member Jeffrey Brumlow, "After the way the contract went down with Mr. Parnell, it did not inspire confidence in me."
"Once I read that contract and saw what it did, that was a slap in the face to the ratepayers, to the employees, to the pensioners, to this board. It was incredibly one-sided, and if a lawyer will do that to the board, I can't have you around, I'm sorry," he explained to the outlet, further saying, "We've got to have good counsel, and we've got to have counsel that everyone trusts."
Parnell is asking the court "Declare that the Parnell Agreement is still in effect and that Parnell is still employed by the BWWB." Require the utility to pay Parnell back pay, plus interest, ensure he is fully vested in the BWWB Pension Plan, and "Declare that the BWWB and Regional Defendants ratified the Parnell Agreement and are estopped from questioning its validity or seeking to terminate it."
Central Alabama Water released the following statement: "Central Alabama Water (CAW) is aware of the lawsuit filed by Mark Parnell. The CAW cannot comment further as this is pending litigation. However, the CAW looks forward to its day in court and defending itself against these allegations."
To connect with the author of this story or to comment, email [email protected]
Don't miss out! Subscribe to our newsletter and get our top stories every weekday morning.
