1/14/1981 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

DISCUSSION FOLLOWED REGARDING THE LENGTH OF TIME OF THE EXTENSION AGREEMENT. COMMISSIONER WODTKE COMMENTED THAT HE HAD DONE EXTENSIVE RESEARCH OVER THE YEARS IN OTHER COUNTIES REGARDING FULL-TIME ATTORNEYS AND POINTED OUT THAT LAW LIBRARIES ARE VERY EXPENSIVE. HE STATED THAT THE COUNTY HAS BEEN INVOLVED IN LITIGATION, AND HE WAS CONCERNED WITH THE PROBLEMS WITH THE ADMINISTRATION COMPLEX AND THE COURTHOUSE RENOVATION PROJECT. COMMISSIONER WODTKE FELT THAT WE WILL NEED ATTORNEY COLLINS, AS WELL AS HIS ENTIRE FIRM, FOR THEIR KNOWLEDGE AND EXPERTISE DURING THIS CRITICAL PERIOD OF TIME, AND CERTAINLY WOULD SUPPORT THE EXTENSION AGREEMENT. COMMISSIONER SCURLOCK POINTED OUT THAT DURING BUDGET SESSION THIS CONTRACT COULD BE EXTENDED. HE FELT THAT IF THIS APPOINTMENT IS DELAYED UNTIL JANUARY, THIS SAME DISCUSSION WILL GO ON YEAR AFTER YEAR - HE THOUGHT IT WAS TIME TO GET SERIOUS ABOUT THE SITUATION AND HAVE THE TRANSITION TAKE PLACE IN OCTOBER. CHAIRMAN LYONS REALIZED THE IMPORTANCE OF THE RENOVATION QUESTION, BUT FELT THAT JANUARY WAS SOON ENOUGH TO GET STARTED ON THIS MATTER, AND HE PLANNED TO VOTE FOR THE MOTION. COMMISSIONER FLETCHER BELIEVED THE BOARD HAD ALL DECIDED THE COUNTY WAS GOING TO HAVE TO HAVE ITS OWN LAW OFFICE FACILITIES - THE QUESTION WAS WHEN. HE COMMENTED THAT IF THE BOARD DECIDED TO HAVE THEIR OWN IN-HOUSE ATTORNEY, IT WILL HAVE TO PHASE IN THE NEW ATTORNEY WHICH WILL COST MORE MONEY. COMMISSIONER WODTKE STATED HE ASSUMED FROM THE COMMENTS MADE THAT WE NEED TO GO TO A FULL-TIME ATTORNEY WITHOUT RESEARCH OR STUDY. HE AGAIN STRESSED CONCERN ABOUT THE MATTERS COMING UP BEFORE THE BOARD WHERE WE WOULD NEED THE EXPERTISE OF THE PRESENT ATTORNEY. COMMISSIONER WODTKE COMMENTED THAT A STUDY SHOULD BE MADE, AND BE AWARE THAT THE BOARD IS NOT PAYING A RETIREMENT OR PENSION FUND FOR ATTORNEY COLLINS. HE THOUGHT THE TOTAL CONCEPT MUST BE STUDIED IN ORDER TO OPERATE EFFICIENTLY AS WELL AS HAVE PROPER LEGAL REPRESENTATION. JAN 141981 21 45 m599