Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Town Attorney Contracts topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Charter review committee recommends replacing blanket attorney endorsement requirement with ordinance-based thresholds
Summary
Committee members agreed the charter's current requirement that the town attorney "approve and endorse all contracts" is impractical. They directed counsel to prepare proposed charter and ordinance language so specified contract categories and dollar thresholds — rather than a literal reading of "all contracts" — would require attorney review.
Members of the Town of Loxahatchee Groves charter review committee debated at length whether the charter should continue to require the town attorney to "approve and endorse all contracts, bonds, and other instruments" and reached consensus that the provision should be changed to reference a council-adopted ordinance that sets materiality thresholds and categories of agreements for attorney review.
Town attorney Jeff Kurtz read the current charter language aloud and explained the practical problem: "approve all contracts, bonds, and other instruments in which the town is concerned and shall endorse on each his or her approval of the form and correctness thereof. No contract with the town shall take effect until his or her approval is so endorsed thereon." Kurtz and several committee members said a literal reading would require the attorney to sign off on routine point-of-sale and purchasing-card transactions.
Committee members proposed a middle path: keep attorney review for high-risk categories (for example, deeds, easements, real-estate transactions and long-term service agreements) and for contracts above a material dollar threshold, but place the numeric threshold and detailed categories in an ordinance or procurement manual so the council could adjust them over time without a charter referendum. Kurtz described existing operational thresholds: under current town practice the town manager has authority to spend up to $25,000 per project under ordinance, and department-head authority in the procurement manual is $1,000.
Several members suggested including a mechanism for the town attorney to request review of any other contract that, in the attorney's judgment, raises legal risk. The committee directed counsel and staff to draft model charter language that would refer to an ordinance and to prepare a proposed ordinance enumerating contract categories and a suggested materiality threshold for committee review at the next meeting.
No final charter amendment was voted on at this meeting; the committee's direction was to prepare draft language for committee review and possible recommendation to the town council.
