Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Legal Procurement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
County staff to revise Title 25 defense‑counsel resolution after commissioner concerns
Summary
Staff reported on a public RFP for court-appointed Title 25 defense counsel and recommended forwarding firms to the district court; commissioners asked that individual attorney names be included and questioned use of firm names and the hourly rate noted in the packet.
During a legal update, county counsel reported that bids opened for Title 25 defense counsel and that staff and the review committee recommended forwarding three applicant firms (including a local legal aid office and an out‑of‑county firm referred to as “Cowboy Legal”) to the district court for appointment. Meeting materials listed a contract rate described in staff remarks as "$1.25 an hour" and noted that firms rather than individual attorneys were being included in the resolution packet.
Several commissioners expressed discomfort with listing firms instead of named attorneys and asked staff to add specific attorney names and a point of contact for each firm to the resolution. Staff said the RFP was publicly posted and reviewed by a committee and that the contract is with the firm; because firms often have multiple licensed attorneys, staff can add a named lead contact. Staff agreed to update the resolution and return it on the next agenda; no final action was taken at the meeting.
Commissioners also discussed practical concerns about coverage and continuity for court appointments and asked staff to clarify how firms will provide backup if a sole practitioner cannot cover a court date.
