Kent County ACC weighs county attorney access and possibility of contracting outside counsel

Kent County Administrative Charging Committee members discussed legal support for ACC matters on Nov. 6 and weighed whether to rely on the county’s retained attorney or to consider contracting an independent attorney with ACC‑specific experience.

Speaker 3 explained the county attorney currently serves on a retainer basis rather than as an in‑house full‑time attorney, and that any consultation generally runs through Pete, who has a direct line to that attorney. Speaker 2 asked whether the county attorney is employed by the county or retained; Speaker 3 said he believed the attorney is retained and that the county does not have a full‑time county attorney’s office to handle routine administrative reviews.

Committee members said funding would be the primary limitation on hiring dedicated counsel. Speaker 4 noted that some ACCs in other jurisdictions have attorneys assigned to them; Speaker 3 suggested that Kent County could instead consult attorneys in other counties or reach out to statewide contacts facilitated by trainers such as Wayne Silver. Speaker 6 added that the attorney general’s office maintains a liaison who can advise on policy and procedures but generally does not handle individual cases.

Members agreed on a practical procedure for seeking legal help: two committee members would coordinate and then have Pete contact the county attorney, with Shelley's office included in communications. Speaker 3 asked members to notify him or Valerie when a consultation is needed so the appropriate contact can be made.

No vote was taken on contracting outside counsel; the committee placed the issue in the 'needs further research and funding' category and will rely on the county attorney and peer resources in the near term.

The committee adjourned after confirming scheduling details for the December meeting and noting the January meeting date would require rescheduling.