Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Legal Services Contract topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
District attorney urges commissioners to keep county legal contract flat as litigation rises; decision deferred
Summary
The Oklahoma County District Attorneys office asked the Policy & Governance Committee to renew its FY27 county legal-services contract at the same level, arguing the office provided substantially more value than the contract price and that cuts would jeopardize representation; commissioners voted to defer the decision for two weeks to gather additional information.
The Oklahoma County District Attorneys office asked the countys Policy & Governance Committee to renew its FY27 legal-services contract at the same dollar level, saying the office provided substantially more legal work than the contract price and that reducing the contract would impair services.
"We are the ones that are out there protecting the county from the litigation and the threats that are to the taxpayers' money," DA Behenna told commissioners during a presentation on the offices 2025 work. Behenna said the office logged 852 written requests for legal services from county offices in 2025 and that some tasks performed for the county go beyond what state statute requires.
Behenna said the DAs civil division dedicates several attorneys and support staff to county work and estimated the county received roughly $964,000 in cumulative legal services in 2025 while paying a contract that is "right under $700,000." She urged commissioners to keep the FY27 contract flat at the proposed level and warned that scaling back the contract to statutory minimums would reduce the countys access to legal advice and representation.
Commissioners pressed for clarity on precise fiscal figures and noted competing budget demands, including rent and building relocation costs for county offices. One commissioner reiterated opposition to allocating funds to the county jail, a point raised during the discussion.
A committee member moved to defer action on the contract for two weeks to allow county staff to provide additional information; the motion was seconded and approved by voice vote. There was no recorded roll-call tally in the transcript. The committee will revisit the item at a special meeting and requested further cost-detailing from county staff before taking final action.
What happened next: The committee deferred the renewal for two weeks to gather additional budget details and facility-cost information. No formal change to the contract amount was adopted at the meeting.
