Boone County Council approves moving state grant balance to health department attorney line amid dispute

Boone County Council on Tuesday approved an auditor request to place $33,000 from a state grant cash balance into the Boone County Health Departmentattorney line to cover outside counsel through the end of the year.

The action came after more than two hours of discussion involving council members, county staff, health department representatives and members of the public about how the grant funds may be spent and whether the countyshould instead start using in-house counsel before January.

The auditor, Debbie Crum, asked the council to move $33,000 into the health departmentattorney line (account ending in 0001), saying the money was in the departmentcash balance and had been allocated but had been paid out from an unappropriated line that made tracking difficult. Crum said the funds would remain in the same state grant fund and were not being moved to a different fund.

Abby (environmental director, Boone County Health Department) told the council, "This money was already allocated. It was state funding we've had from the beginning of the year. It was already allocated to where it needs to be. Now it just needs to be put in a different front line so they can spend it on legal fees." She said the commissioners had approved outside counsel for the remainder of the year and that the change was an accounting action to let the auditor track the spending.

Council members repeatedly questioned the scale of the outside counsel spending. Council member Vicky (surname not specified in transcript) and resident speakers noted that in 2024 the health department spent about $3,500 on outside legal fees, while the current arrangement would cost at least $15,000 in retainer fees (the commissionersapproved retainer was described as $3,000 a month for five months). Several council members urged the health department and commissioners to consider transitioning to in-house counsel sooner to reduce costs. One commenter, Jody Stewart (public commenter), said, "The state issued that grant money, and that grant money was to use, not use to pay an attorney. I don't feel like the big county health department has justified the additional expense."

County attorney Kevin Van Horn (county attorney) explained the practical arrangement: the commissioners approved a contract effective Aug. 1 that pays outside counsel a $3,000 monthly retainer for five months; litigation expenses beyond the retainer would be additional. Van Horn and others said the arrangement reflected negotiations among the health board and commissioners; he also noted the agreement to move to in-house counsel beginning Jan. 1.

Tim Meyer (online commenter) said he was not aware of any threats of litigation and that, in his view, no substantive agreements were made in earlier informal meetings: "There were no agreements that came out of that meeting. In fact, if there were any agreements, it would have been a violation of the open door law because there were 3 commissioners there." Health department and commissioner representatives said the matter had been discussed in a special meeting and that minutes were pending approval.

After public comment the council voted on the auditor's request. Council members approved the transfer by voice vote; the motion carried and no roll-call tally was provided on the record.

Discussion: Council members asked that health-board and commissioner discussions be more visible to council liaisons and said they wanted full documentation and minutes of the meetings that shaped the recommendation. Several members stressed fiduciary responsibility for both state and county funds.

The council vote authorizes the auditor to move the $33,000 from the health departmentcash balance (state grant fund 1161) into the department's attorney line for use this year.

Looking ahead, speakers and county staff said the health department intends to begin using the county's in-house counsel (Beth Copeland) beginning Jan. 1, 2026, but that ongoing litigation or matters initiated before that date could require continued use of outside counsel.