San Benito County has spent $1.9 million since April 2000 on
services of two private law firms that have handled a lengthy civil
case and various other matters, according to county records.
San Benito County has spent $1.9 million since April 2000 on services of two private law firms that have handled a lengthy civil case and various other matters, according to county records.
The release of the itemized report comes two days after the Free Lance reported $564,000 in payments by the county to another Sacramento firm – Hyde, Miller, Owen and Trost – over the past two years. And that firm’s bill is rising.
The county has authorized the hiring of high priced lawyers even while maintaining its own legal office, which includes County Counsel Karen Forcum and three deputy counsels. Forcum makes $113,000 a year.
And such spending on private lawyers continues, despite the county facing potential deficits and employee layoffs in the future.
The fees stunned a government watchdog who wonders why the Board approved so much funding for private lawyers when it has its own in-house legal team.
“Oh my gosh… Oh my gosh. Isn’t that something?” said Dennis Madigan, founder of Citizens for Clean Government, when told the figure Wednesday. “That’s just those two law firms. How many more are there possibly?”
Supervisor Pat Loe, who joined the Board in early 2003, defended the Board’s authorization of such spending, saying many cases have demanded expertise.
“You have to deal with them,” she said. “If you get sued, you have to deal with them. A lot of it is very technical.
“You obviously can’t go into it without good legal representation.”
According to the report obtained Wednesday, the county has paid $1.35 million to San Francisco-based Cassidy, Shimko & Dawson. And the county has paid $569,000 to San Francisco-based Sedwick, Detert, Moran & Arnold.
Aside from those three firms, the county in recent years briefly hired only one other firm for advice on appealing a civil case in 2003, according to Forcum. Its costs were minimal.
“I can’t think of any (others) in the past few years,” Forcum said.
By comparison, Yuba County has a population of 61,000 – a few thousand more than San Benito.
Yuba County Auditor Dean Sellers on Wednesday could not provide a precise amount spent on private lawyers. But he estimated last year’s figure to be “probably $20,000.”
San Benito County officials initially hired the two San Francisco firms on a nearly 9-year-old Superior Court civil case, Sandman versus San Benito County.
Sandman is a mining business owned by resident Jerry Blatt. He sued after the county attempted to highly restrict mining on his 100-acre property located on the San Benito River, according to court records.
Although there have been several rulings – including the first in favor of Sandman in 1998 – the case is still dragging along. The latest bill on the matter for $21,127 was paid March 24, according to the documents.
The County Counsel’s Office litigated that case until 2000 when one of the private firms took over, according to Forcum.
She attributed the need to hire Stephen Cassidy and his firm in 2000 to a “transition in the office” when several key people took leaves of absence, she said. Forcum became the county’s top lawyer in February 2001 after former County Counsel Steven Sanders was elected to a judgeship.
Sandman’s lawyer, Jim Moose, called the county’s choice of lawyers, “top-rate San Francisco attorneys.” It is unclear how much the county paid the lawyers per hour.
“I’d imagine his hourly rate is quite high,” said Moose on Wednesday of Cassidy.
It was unclear as of press time how much of the $1.9 million went toward the Sandman case.
“We’re aware of how much taxpayers’ money has been spent on our suit, and we take no pleasure in it,” Moose said. “We just haven’t felt the county was willing to meet us halfway.”
Many of the payments made to the two law firms are itemized on the balance report as “professional services” or “services rendered.” Forcum said those payments covered an array of matters since 2000.
Whether San Benito’s spending on private lawyers is excessive compared with other counties, Forcum said: “I couldn’t say. I haven’t done a formal study. I just know we’re facing some unique challenges.”
She mentioned San Benito’s proximity to growing urban areas. And she mentioned San Benito’s own growth strains, too, as reasons for so much litigation here.
Many small counties such as San Benito, she said, maintain only one county counsel. Some, she said, employ no deputy county counsels.
And if complex matters arise or too much litigation emerges at one time, it is often necessary to hire outside help, she said.
Future supervisor of District 1, Don Marcus, who won the March 2 race, declined to comment on the current and past Boards’ spending habits. He wants to learn details of the involved issues before speaking about the legal costs, he said.
He did say, “I’ll be very critical about going to outside hiring unless it’s absolutely necessary,” Marcus said.
He also said openness with the public about such spending will be imperative once he’s in office.
Madigan requested public documentation of the county’s legal spending on the Sandman case a week ago. Forcum on Wednesday said she would provide those documents today.
“We have to dig to find out the answer,” Madigan said. “While it’s public knowledge, it’s certainly not made public at the time they hire these (lawyers).”
The Board is required by law to report out of closed session when its members vote to hire a lawyer. It was unclear as of press time whether the Board followed that rule on those matters.
Asked if the County Counsel’s Office needs more resources, Forcum said: “If we were to take on more litigation, I would recommend looking at a deputy that had specialized litigation experience. Then we would need more resources.”
But she isn’t so sure hiring outside help won’t be necessary in the future.
“It may, in the long run, be more economical to retain outside counsel,” Forcum said. She pointed out that full-time positions, including benefits and office needs, can carry substantial costs.
