Freestone County identifies insurance gap after closed-door litigation discussion
Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts
Subscribe
Summary
Freestone County officials met in a closed executive session under Texas Government Code 551.071 to discuss ongoing litigation and said they will seek insurance to cover a gap not provided by TAC while continuing to pay county attorneys on the case.
Freestone County officials said they met in a closed executive session under Texas Government Code 551.071 to discuss litigation and identified an insurance coverage gap that county leaders said Texas Association of Counties (TAC) insurance does not cover.
"We were in executive session discussing, with our attorney in accordance with, Texas government code 551.071 about, litigation," said the County Judge. The judge said the conversation covered the county's exposure in a Freestone County case and the need to find insurance beyond the TAC policy.
The County Attorney confirmed the court's next steps, saying, "That's correct, judge. And to continue with the the county paying our attorneys that are representing us on this case." Court members said they will look for additional insurance to "fill" the gap in coverage and continue with the county paying attorneys who are representing Freestone County in the matter.
Court discussion and direction
Officials described the matter as a Freestone County case in which plaintiffs have named Freestone County and county employees. Participants said some claims in the litigation are not covered by the county's TAC insurance and that the county was not aware of that lack of coverage before the case arose. The court's stated direction was to seek insurance options to address the uncovered exposure.
No contract award, premium amount, procurement timeline or vendor names were specified during the discussion. The County Attorney said the county will continue to pay attorneys currently representing it on the case; the court did not specify a funding source or formal vote on insurance procurement in the public record excerpt.
After the closed-session discussion and public reconvening, the court moved to adjourn. The clerk recorded the motion, it was seconded, and members voiced "aye" to close the meeting.
What happens next
Court members directed staff to explore insurance that would cover the identified gap and to continue covering legal fees for the current representation. No timetable for reporting back, request for proposals, or formal approval of new insurance coverage was given in the record provided.