Central Alabama Water Faces Scrutiny Over Transparency Claims

Board members and public say new leadership has limited discussion and access to information

Mar. 11, 2026 at 7:55am

Got story updates? Submit your updates here. ›

Ten months after a state law restructured Alabama's largest water utility, now known as Central Alabama Water (CAW), the new board is facing criticism over its transparency claims. Board members say adequate discussion is not taking place, committees that previously served as a vehicle for discussion have been eliminated, and they are not allowed to see full legal invoices they are asked to approve. The public and some board members also allege they are being left out of key decisions, such as the hiring of a new CEO. CAW has also frequently gone into closed-door executive sessions, citing threatened or pending litigation, raising concerns about the board's commitment to open governance.

Why it matters

The restructuring of CAW was meant to address long-running customer complaints about inaccurate bills and high rates, as well as the utility's failure to maintain its aging infrastructure. However, the new board's actions have raised questions about whether the promised transparency and accountability are being delivered. This story highlights the tension between the board's stated goals and its actual practices, which could undermine public trust in the utility.

The details

Since the seven-member CAW board was seated, the two members appointed by Birmingham city officials have regularly asked for more discussion of and time to consider matters the board must decide. Often, they are overruled and voted down. The board has also adopted bylaws that strictly limit discussion by board members during meetings. Additionally, the new board has eliminated the standing committees that previously served as a forum for in-depth research and discussion of specific topics. The board has also frequently gone into closed-door executive sessions, citing threatened or pending litigation, which critics say is an abuse of the law's narrow parameters for such sessions.

  • In July, the new board adopted bylaws that set limits on discussion by board members during meetings.
  • In November, Birmingham Mayor Randall Woodfin accused the board of hypocrisy, saying its actions have been the opposite of transparent.
  • In January, the board settled a public records lawsuit for $77,500 over its policy of limiting access to legal invoices.

The players

Tommy Hudson

The board's chairman, who initially pledged to conduct the board's business in the most transparent manner.

Sheila Tyson

A Jefferson County commissioner whom the Birmingham City Council appointed to the water board, who has raised concerns about the lack of discussion and transparency.

Jarvis Patton Sr.

A board member appointed by Mayor Woodfin, who has also pushed for more discussion and transparency.

Randall Woodfin

The Birmingham mayor, who accused the board of hypocrisy regarding its transparency claims.

Jeffrey Thompson

The new CEO hired by the board, whose hiring process was criticized for lack of transparency.

Got photos? Submit your photos here. ›

What they’re saying

“Anytime you can come to a meeting with seven people and you don't talk about nothing, just vote on it … You had to communicate with those people, with at least five of them. So five people are communicating, and two are being left out.”

— Sheila Tyson, Jefferson County commissioner and CAW board member

“Ever since y'all have been a board, every action you've taken has been the opposite of that. None of it has been transparent. There's been no accountability.”

— Randall Woodfin, Birmingham mayor

“We didn't completely do what we said we were going to do in that process. It was laid out in the agreement letter (with Russell Reynolds Associates) how the process was going to be conducted.”

— Phillip Wiedmeyer, CAW board vice chairman

What’s next

The judge in the case will decide on Tuesday whether or not to allow Walker Reed Quinn out on bail.

The takeaway

This case highlights growing concerns in the community about repeat offenders released on bail, raising questions about bail reform, public safety on SF streets, and if any special laws to govern autonomous vehicles in residential and commercial areas.