The Collin County Observer

Last week, the Collin County Commissioners Court met at Murphy City Hall. On its agenda was a notice that the court would go into executive session (secret meeting) for, "consultation with legal counsel on County Auditor's AG Opinion request of April 3, 2008 concerning IT and Financial auditing."

The Texas Open Meetings Act does allow "private consultation" with the county's attorneys if there is a law suit pending or contemplated. Since the county has filed suit in the 219th District Court for a Declaratory Judgment against the Auditor, we can assume that a law suit was indeed contemplated.

However, the Texas Open Meetings Law does require that all votes and decisions taken by the commissioners court be done in open session, with minutes recorded of each vote taken.

§ 551.102. REQUIREMENT TO VOTE OR TAKE FINAL ACTION IN OPEN MEETING.
A final action, decision, or vote on a matter deliberated in a closed meeting under this chapter may only be made in an open meeting that is held in compliance with the notice provisions of this chapter.

and

§ 551.021. MINUTES OR TAPE RECORDING OF OPEN MEETING REQUIRED.
(a) A governmental body shall prepare and keep minutes or make a tape recording of each open meeting of the body.
(b) The minutes must: (1) state the subject of each deliberation; and (2) indicate each vote, order, decision, or other action taken.

I was at, and I have watched the tapes the Murphy meeting. After returning from executive session, Judge Self announced, "I would like to reconvene the commissioners court. We have no actions to be taken, so we stand adjourned."

No actions? Well a few days later, the county did file suit. Who, if not the commissioners court, authorized such a drastic (and expensive) law suit?

Collin County taxpayers will be forced to pay huge legal bills for both sides of this idiotic turf battle. I ask again, Who authorized filing suit against the Auditor?

According to law, "The county auditor shall have continual access to and shall examine and investigate the correctness of:(1)the books, accounts, reports, vouchers, and other records of any officer;" Don Cozad, the county's auditor, wants the authority to audit the computer programs and protocols that send financial information to create the financial statements. However, the commissioners consider those programs their turf, and they want the IT department responsible for their correctness.

The Auditor asked the Texas Attorney General for a legal opinion on the issue, and that scared the pants off our commissioners. Not willing to wait for (or afraid of) the Attorney General's ruling, they filed for a Declaratory Judgment, effectively demanding a court decide - not the AG.

This turf war could get expensive. The County has retained Peter S. Vogel a partner of Gardere, Wynne, Sewell, LLP. Mr. Vogel is Chair of the Electronic Discovery and Document Retention Team and co-chairs the Internet and Computer Technology Practice Group at Gardere, Wynne, Sewell. One thing I can tell you is Mr. Vogel is no light-weight - he doesn't come cheap.

As of now, the court records show Mr. Cozad as representing himself. We can be sure that will change and suitable counsel will be hired to represent him - at taxpayer expense.

The case will have to be heard by a visiting judge, since all the Collin County district judges will have a conflict of interest in the case - they are Mr. Cozad's bosses. A few weeks ago, Cozad told the commissioners that he requested the AG's opinion on direction of the district judges. So in effect, the judges are being sued in their own courtroom.

As I said, this is a turf battle. The victor controls the software. The taxpayers pay the bill.

The cost of ring side seats at a Vegas heavy weight title match will seem to be a bargain compared to the cost of this bout.

Who authorized the law suit and hiring Mr. Vogel?
Was it done in secret?
What are the commissioners afraid of?

Bill