Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Contingency Fee Legal Contracts topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
County counselor urges opposition to bill requiring Kansas attorney general review of municipal contingency-fee legal contracts
Summary
Justin Wagner told commissioners that Senate Bill 242 would require local governments to hold public hearings and obtain Kansas attorney general approval before entering contingency-fee agreements; the bill would also allow the attorney general 90 days to review requests and could force disclosure of attorney-client materials.
Justin Wagner, Sedgwick County counselor, briefed the commission on Senate Bill 242, which would change how municipalities hire outside counsel on contingency-fee arrangements.
Wagner described contingency-fee agreements as contracts that pay outside counsel a portion of recoveries rather than hourly rates. He said the bill would require a public hearing, a multistep justification process, and a public vote before hiring contingency counsel; if approved locally, the agreement would then be sent to the Kansas attorney general for review with a 90‑day review period.
Wagner warned that the proposal would constrain local authority. “I just think it's preferable for you all as the governing body to have that power,” Wagner said, adding that subjecting retention decisions to the attorney general could delay legal action by several months and could require disclosure of privileged information. Wagner cited the county’s charter authorities (charter resolutions 46 and 68) that today empower the county counselor to retain outside counsel.
Wagner noted he was unsure what specific problem the bill seeks to solve but speculated it relates to a contested suit in Ford County regarding plastic producers; he also cited the county’s prior participation in the opioid settlement as an example where contingency arrangements were used.
The meeting record shows a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing was scheduled for Monday at 10:30 a.m.; commissioners indicated support for opposing the bill and asked Wagner to share draft talking points the board could use to send emails or testimony to committee members on a tight timeline.
No formal county vote was recorded at the meeting; staff will circulate suggested language for commissioner review and, if directed, transmit opposition comments to the Senate committee.
