Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the County Governance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
County clerk seeks outside counsel over disputed MOU; commissioners table request for one month
Summary
Sheridan County Clerk Vita Sean Thompson asked the board to appoint special counsel to clarify a memorandum of understanding (MOU) over payroll and accounts‑payable duties. Commissioners raised cost and process concerns and voted to table the appointment for one month to pursue additional review.
Get email alerts on the County Governance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Vita Sean Thompson, Sheridan County clerk, asked the Board of County Commissioners on May 5 to appoint special counsel to advise her on court duties and to clarify a memorandum of understanding (MOU) that the clerk says has failed to protect the office’s statutory functions.
Thompson told commissioners she had shared a March 31 memo outlining the problems and had already signed an engagement letter with Timothy Anderson of Crowley Fleck to advise specifically on her office’s duties. She said the MOU “as interpreted by the board makes the clerk fully performing the duties of the county clerk and directs the board to exceed their statutory authority.”
Several commissioners said hiring outside lawyers would be an expensive next step and suggested handling the questions through the finance committee or a working group. One commissioner recalled prior mediation, disputed whether the MOU had an expiration date and said the county had operated under the 2024 MOU for some time. Another commissioner angrily defended employee privacy and said HR matters were not the clerk’s request.
After extended discussion about potential conflicts of interest, engagement‑letter scope and whether a working group could address statutory questions, the board voted to table the motion to appoint special counsel for one month while members review the memo and the MOU and consider a working group to attempt reconciliation without immediate litigation.
The clerk declined to withdraw her request and said she would resubmit specific budget changes linked to her proposal. The item will return to the board at its next regular meeting.

