Cochise County supervisors approve outside counsel for AP Ranch case after executive session
Loading...
Summary
The Cochise County Board of Supervisors voted 2-0 on Jan. 15 to retain James M. Souza of DeConcini, McDonald, Yetwin & Lacey, P.C., to represent the county in AP Ranch v. Cochise County, after holding an executive session for legal advice; one supervisor was absent.
The Cochise County Board of Supervisors voted 2-0 on Thursday, Jan. 15, to retain outside counsel to represent the county in AP Ranch v. Cochise County, a case currently pending before the Arizona Supreme Court.
On the advice of the county attorney's office, an unidentified supervisor moved to retain James M. Souza of DeConcini, McDonald, Yetwin & Lacey, P.C., to represent the county in the matter. The motion was seconded, there was no discussion in open session, and the board recorded the motion as carrying 2-0 with one supervisor not voting (Supervisor Crosby was absent).
The board first voted to enter an executive session for legal advice and consultation with counsel before returning to open session. For the record, officials said the executive session included County Attorney Lori Zutko; Acting Civil Deputy Dylan Haendel; attorney Burt Whitehead; and participants identified in the transcript as Miss Gilman, Laura Lowenheim, Joe Casey, and County Assessor Phil Weinecker.
After the board reconvened, the hiring motion was made and approved on the advice of the county attorney's office. A speaker on the record also said the county attorney recommends that the board consider retaining an attorney identified only as 'Jenkins'; no firm or first name was given in the transcript.
The meeting opening included routine notices about possible agenda modifications, public access via Microsoft Teams and the mobile app, and a citation to Arizona law governing executive session confidentiality (Arizona Revised Statutes §38-431.03).
The board scheduled its next special meeting for Tuesday, Jan. 20, in the main hearing rooms to approve demands and budget amendments.
A brief legislative note was raised near the end of the meeting when an unidentified speaker mentioned a recently filed state bill (referred to in the transcript as "house bill 22 61") attributed to Gail Griffin and David Gowen; the speaker said the proposal would identify agricultural land and improvements as real property to be valued under an income-valuation approach. Board members did not take action on that item during this meeting.
The meeting was then adjourned.
