Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Legal Fees topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council votes 6-4 to reimburse outside attorney fees after heated debate; requests billing details and legislative review
Summary
After extended debate about precedent and cost, Columbus City Council approved a resolution to reimburse an employee’s outside attorney fees. Councilors raised concerns about large invoices, the state appellate rule requiring reimbursement, and asked staff to seek billing detail and pursue a legislative remedy.
Columbus City Council narrowly approved a resolution on June 17 to reimburse an employee’s outside legal fees, following a contentious discussion about appellate case law that can require local governments to pay attorney fees when an official retains outside counsel.
The council debate focused on a single invoice from an outside firm that several councilors described as unusually large. Councilors expressed concern about the potential for setting a precedent that could expose the city to repeated high invoices; other councilors said failing to follow appellate precedent would expose the city to far greater costs through appeals. The final recorded vote was 6 in favor and 4 opposed.
City Attorney Clifton Faye explained the city’s legal obligations under recent appellate decisions and said the requirement to reimburse arises when an official “acting in their official capacity” must hire outside counsel and later prevails. Several councilors asked for the underlying billing records and a written explanation of legal obligations; the city attorney agreed to provide the final bills and supporting documentation ahead of the council’s July meeting.
Council discussion included a substitute motion to reimburse a $5,000 retainer immediately and delay action on the remainder of the bill while staff negotiated, but that motion was not the final outcome. Opponents urged the council to negotiate the full invoice or seek judicial review; supporters said refusing payment would likely require costly appellate litigation and that legislative change would be the preferable long-term fix.
Councilor Walker Garrett, who described himself as a lawyer with appellate experience, urged colleagues to follow the case law and then pursue legislative change. Several councilors asked staff to add a recommended legislative agenda item asking the General Assembly to require in-camera judicial review of fees or to set statutory limits for municipal reimbursement.
The council also directed the city attorney to send members the invoice detail and a written summary of the applicable case law before the council’s next meeting on July 8.
Ending: Council approved the reimbursement by a 6-4 vote; members asked staff for billing details and recommended pursuing a legislative change to limit local fiscal exposure.
