Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Environment Pfas topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Oneida County votes to hire contingency-fee outside counsel to pursue PFAS lawsuits

Oneida County Board of Supervisors · March 1, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The Oneida County Board authorized outside counsel on a contingency-fee basis to pursue litigation against companies whose fluorosurfactant products (PFAS/PFOA/PFOS) have contaminated county soil and water; county officials said litigation aims to recover remediation and monitoring costs.

The Oneida County Board of Supervisors on Jan. 20 authorized outside counsel on a contingency-fee basis to initiate lawsuits against companies that designed, manufactured, marketed, distributed or sold fluorosurfactant products that contributed to PFAS contamination in county soil and groundwater.

The board acted on a resolution offered by the Executive Committee directing Corporation Counsel to execute an engagement letter authorizing outside counsel to file claims and pursue recovery of investigation, monitoring, remediation and restoration costs. The resolution specifies counsel will be paid only if the county receives a financial benefit from litigation.

County materials and the resolution say per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), including perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) and perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS), have been detected in samples taken in county-owned areas including airport property. The resolution asserts those compounds are persistent, mobile in water and pose environmental and human-health risks; the board cited other local governments’ lawsuits as precedent for pursuing recovery.

Chairman Scott Holewinski presented the recommendation; the Executive Committee offered the item for board consideration. The board approved the resolution as presented; the motion and roll-call adoption were recorded in committee materials.

The resolution directs county officials and employees to provide support to outside counsel and requires outside counsel to proceed under the direction of Corporation Counsel and keep the county apprised of case status. No specific targets (named companies) or estimated litigation costs were listed in the resolution.

Next steps: Corporation Counsel is authorized to execute the engagement letter and coordinate with outside counsel; the county will await filings and further public updates as the litigation team develops claims and strategy.