Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the City Attorney topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
City attorney defends record, cites multimillion-dollar settlements; critics press for answers on past cases
Summary
City Attorney Christopher Duncan presented a detailed career update that he said produced millions for the city; public commenters and some council members raised questions about past lawsuits and a motel hot-tax case, and the council scheduled a contract review in executive session.
Christopher Duncan, Freeport’s city attorney, spent the meeting’s scheduled update outlining major legal work he said has produced large financial returns for the city and explaining pending litigation. He framed the office’s role as both protective and revenue-producing for taxpayers.
Duncan said his review of a proposed three-way deal with the Port of Freeport — where the council nearly approved a $400,000 settlement — led him to commission engineering valuations showing replacement costs and infrastructure value far greater than the port’s offer. He said the port ultimately paid more than $9 million in settlement funds that were placed in a port settlement fund. “We were that close to giving everything up,” Duncan said, and later described hiring engineers and eminent-domain counsel to press the city’s valuation.
He also described industrial-district agreement negotiations that he said could increase receipts for the three cities involved from historical totals to substantially higher sums under new terms. Duncan described ongoing collection and litigation efforts, including a Covarrubias contract dispute (civil action, depositions scheduled) and a previously-filed hot-tax case against a Motel 6 the city sued in 2022.
Public critic Sam Reyna questioned why the Motel 6 lawsuit was dismissed and asked whether settlement funds were received. Reyna said court records did not show a settlement and urged transparency about more than $100,000 he referenced. Duncan responded that the case had been pending and the motel entered a binding settlement agreement and payment plan, including an initial $30,000 payment, and that the city completed collection under that plan. “There’s no disappearing money,” Duncan told the council and public.
Duncan acknowledged rumors that some councilmembers had discussed terminating him and said he had requested meetings to discuss his work; he urged members to weigh the monetary and legal results he said the city has received before taking personnel action. After public questions and council discussion, the council moved to executive session to review the city attorney’s contract under Texas Government Code 551.074.
Next steps: The council signaled a contract-review executive session at the end of the meeting. Any formal personnel action would require a subsequent public notice and recorded vote.
