Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Legal Budget topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Sandoval County approves $150,000 for outside legal counsel amid rising litigation costs
Summary
The Sandoval County Board of County Commissioners voted to raise the county's outside counsel budget to $150,000 after the county attorney described unexpected litigation and administrative proceedings requiring additional legal resources.
Sandoval County commissioners on Feb. 26 approved a resolution increasing the county's outside legal counsel budget to $150,000 for the remainder of the fiscal year.
County Attorney Michael Eshelman told commissioners that recent administrative proceedings and litigation had generated intensive discovery and unpredictable legal expenses, and asked for additional funds. "These things are unpredictable and they're black swan events," Eshelman said, adding that "it's possible to commit no mistakes and still lose." Commissioner remarks at the meeting noted the county operates "a very lean machine" and that the increase is intended to cover unpredictable costs rather than ongoing staff hires.
The request prompted public comment. Ramona Goolsby, a Sandoval County resident, urged the commission to reject the resolution until officials explained why legal costs are rising and who is directing the county attorney's priorities. "Taxpayers are footing the bill for this increased legal activity," Goolsby said during public comment, asking for transparency before approving more spending.
Chair Meek and other commissioners framed the increase as a fiscal choice between short-term outside counsel expenses and the long-term cost of hiring another attorney on county payroll. Meek said hiring a full-time attorney could cost about the same as the increase requested. The commission voted to approve the increase.
The resolution does not change existing staffing; county officials said the funding is intended to respond to current, unpredictable legal matters and administrative proceedings. No additional detail on the specific cases or firms that will receive outside counsel funds was provided at the meeting.
The vote followed brief discussion and passed on a recorded roll call of commissioners in attendance.
Looking ahead, residents and public commenters requested more detailed periodic reporting on legal spending and the causes of rising outside counsel use. Commissioners and staff did not provide a timeline for further reporting during the meeting.
