Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Prosecution Contract topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council told to approve shorter prosecution contract after failed RFP
Summary
City staff told the council an outside prosecution contract packet showed a last-minute change from a proposed 10-year term to a 5-year term and asked the council to acknowledge that adjustment so the city will retain prosecution services after an RFP drew no bidders.
City staff asked the Price City Council on Monday to acknowledge and approve a revised criminal prosecution contract that was changed back to a five-year term after an earlier 10-year proposal and after the city's RFP attracted no bidders.
The council heard that the earlier, longer contract had been proposed to attract and retain prosecutors but that county negotiators reverted to a five-year arrangement late in negotiations. Staff member (S5) told the council a 10-year horizon had previously been offered, but "they wanted to go back to the original 5 years, which is fine." The council discussed whether to table approval to get updated packet language or to proceed so the police would continue to have prosecutorial coverage.
Why it matters: without an executed contract for prosecution services, staff warned, the city would lack a way to pursue misdemeanor prosecutions. Mayor (S1) said the city faces a practical gap if the council delays: "If we don't do this we have no way to prosecute anybody," he said, noting the urgency of maintaining prosecutorial capacity.
Council members noted the RFP returned no bidders and that the county's recent approach included different annual escalation terms. Staff (S5) said the county had initially approved different annual increases and that the newer agreement restored the five-year schedule; the staff recommended the council either acknowledge that change and approve the resolution on the agenda or table the item if members wanted the packet language to match exactly.
No formal roll-call vote was recorded in the transcript excerpt provided; discussion concluded with several members expressing comfort proceeding that night and at least one councilor urging legal review if questions remained. The council indicated staff would make the packet wording clear when the resolution is called on the docket.
Next steps: staff will present the final resolution text on the agenda for the council to act on; staff also recommended legal review of the final contract language before execution.
