Cochise County supervisors debate giving individual supervisors the right to seek outside counsel

The Cochise County Board of Supervisors on July 22 reviewed draft amendments to the board's rules of order that would allow any supervisor to raise concerns about the county attorney's office and request that the board hire outside counsel for a specific issue.

The board held an initial vote to enter executive session under ARS 38-431.03(A)(3) to discuss the proposed rule changes and returned to open session to debate details of section 7, which governs the county attorney's role and attendance. The motion to enter executive session was moved from the floor and seconded; the board approved the motion by voice vote.

Why it matters: The draft aims to create a formal path for a single supervisor to flag a conflict or lack of confidence in the county attorney's office and to have the board consider hiring outside counsel for that discrete matter. Supporters said the change protects the board's ability to obtain counsel all members trust; critics cautioned the language must be carefully drafted to avoid undermining the county attorney's statutory duties.

Board members repeatedly referenced Rule 1.13 of the Arizona Supreme Court and ARS 38-431.03 during the discussion, saying the rules must be reconciled with legal and ethics obligations. One committee member moved the executive-session discussion "as authorized under ARS 38-431.03 subsection a 3" to obtain direction on the proposed rules of order. The motion passed and the board spent roughly 40 minutes in executive session before resuming.

On the record, supervisors debated whether the county attorney should be required to attend all executive sessions or whether attendance should depend on the subject matter. The draft language under consideration would allow the county attorney, a deputy, or outside counsel to attend executive sessions relevant to legal matters, but members said the rules should clarify when the county attorney must appear and when a supervisor may seek outside counsel.

"We add that or outside counsel in there, and then that'll take care of that," the chair said when discussing a draft amendment providing for outside counsel. Supervisor Kathleen Gomez argued members have a right to legal representation they trust, saying, "Everybody has a right to have an attorney that they have faith in." Another member stressed the need to clarify whether the county attorney is representing the board as a collective public body or acting in other capacities under statute.

The board also discussed practical follow-up steps: further redlining of the language, setting an executive-session meeting with the county attorney for clarification, and returning the revised draft to a subsequent work session. No final change to the rules was adopted at this meeting; the board scheduled additional review and redrafting.

Actions: The board voted to enter executive session to discuss the proposed rules under ARS 38-431.03(A)(3). The motion was moved by a committee member, seconded by another supervisor and carried by voice vote. The chair announced the board had been in executive session from about 10:02 a.m. to 10:44 a.m. and said staff would prepare a follow-up executive session with the county attorney.

Next steps: Supervisors asked staff to circulate a redlined draft and set a targeted executive session to resolve attendance and recognition questions with the county attorney. The board will consider a revised draft at a future work session before a final vote.