Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Legal Services Contract topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Jefferson County approves 2025 legal services agreement with one abstention
Summary
At a joint meeting, members approved a 2025 fee agreement with the county's outside counsel — who announced the firm has rebranded as West 6th Law — after discussion about substitution of other firm attorneys and a mediation conflict that caused an earlier absence.
Jefferson County members approved a contract for outside legal services for 2025, with one member abstaining, at a joint meeting on an agenda item to renew the county’s fee agreement.
The contract approved on a motion “to approve the agreement for 2025” keeps the same base components and hourly litigation rates used the previous year, according to Pat, an attorney and partner at the law firm that will provide the services. “No. I think the contract is the same as it was last year. It has the same base component and then same hourly rate for litigation that we've been working off before,” Pat said.
County members said they had received the agreement by email ahead of the meeting and moved to approve it during the joint session. A motion to approve received a second; the vote passed with one abstention. The motion included approval of the salary line for 2025, but the transcript did not specify the salary amount.
During discussion, Pat told members the firm recently adopted the name West 6th Law to avoid changing firm name whenever partners come and go. “What is it? West 6th. So it's… West 6th Law,” Pat said. Pat named colleagues at the firm as Mary Alcorn (founding partner), Kendall Sage (managing partner), and Anne Schwartz (partner), and said two senior associates — Ashley Eklunds and Reann Pryor — are on staff and that the firm is looking to hire additional associates.
Members asked how litigation coverage would work if Pat were unavailable. Pat said other attorneys from the firm could step in when schedules allow and that substitution is not a contractual requirement but a practical practice the firm follows. On the subject of an earlier missed meeting, Frank described a mediation that extended beyond a scheduled deadline; Pat said the case required staying until paperwork was signed to avoid a settlement falling through. “If we left without everybody signing the paperwork, then it meant that something could fall through,” Pat said.
The formal action recorded in the meeting was approval of the 2025 outside counsel agreement. The contract’s substantive terms were described in general — base components and existing hourly litigation rates — and a minor rate increase was noted as having occurred in the prior year; no specific dollar amounts or the contract term length were stated in the transcript.
Members adjourned the joint meeting after the vote. The firm’s new name, the continued practice of substituting available firm attorneys when needed, and the recent hiring plans were the main items discussed after the vote.
