Report Rejects Grand Jury View on County Lawyers

A county report released Thursday disagrees with the Orange County Grand Jury that former county attorneys had to wait a year before they could be rehired as private legal counsel.

The report, however, agrees with the grand jury that stricter controls and monitoring of county contracts with outside law firms is needed.

But the report, prepared by the County Administrative Office, stopped short of endorsing a grand jury proposal to prohibit all “open-ended” contracts with private firms hired by the county. The structure of a contract should be determined on a case-by-case basis, not a blanket policy, says the county report, which will be submitted for approval Tuesday to the County Board of Supervisors.

The 1988-89 grand jury in late May issued a report critical of the county’s use of private law firms. Among its complaints was the county’s practice of hiring attorneys who had recently left the county counsel’s office. By doing so, the grand jury concluded, the county showed favoritism toward certain attorneys or firms. To prevent the appearance of a conflict of interest, the grand jury recommended that county attorneys who leave for private practice not be rehired for at least a year, except with special approval by the supervisors.

At the same time, the grand jury also charged that the county counsel’s office had failed to adequately review millions of dollars in billings from private lawyers hired by the county and had not keep track of their hours or caseloads.

In its response released Thursday, the county said there has only been one case in recent years when a former county attorney was hired soon after he had left. And that hiring, the county contended, was justified because of the attorney’s expertise in a specific area.

The county report also denies that accounting procedures are lacking when it comes to contracts with private firms, adding that an “audit trail” does exist to monitor billings and payments.