Commissioner raises transparency concerns over proposed hiring of outside counsel

During a special session April 15, a Montrose County commissioner challenged a proposal to engage the law firm Bechtel and Santos as outside counsel for employment-law matters, arguing the county’s HR staff and in-house legal counsel could handle sensitive personnel issues and questioning the timing and transparency of the move.

The chair introduced the agenda update proposing the outside counsel engagement and called for a motion; a commissioner said he opposed the hiring and asked for more information about why outside counsel was needed. "I can only imagine what that's for... I'm not really sure why we have to have an additional law firm at additional cost," the commissioner said. (Commissioner)

The chair responded that the subject involves "very personal, employment subjects" and is "very sensitive in nature," saying the board was seeking outside counsel for advice on how to handle the two personnel matters on the agenda. County staff later read the statutory citation for the executive session and clarified the board met under CRS 24-6-402(4)(f) — the provision the staff characterized as for interim positions and personnel issues rather than for legal advice.

Before a public vote on hiring Bechtel and Santos was recorded, the board moved into executive session. The public record of the special session contains discussion and vocal "aye" responses on other motions but does not show a vote on the proposed outside-counsel engagement; county staff said the item would be discussed further in executive session.

The exchange marks a point of internal concern among the commissioners about spending on outside legal services and transparency in agenda preparation. The board did not document a public vote to hire the firm in the special session; any future engagement would require formal approval and public documentation.