The summary:
- Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton ruled Fort Bend County Commissioners Court has legal authority to hire its own law firm for redistricting work, citing over a century of precedent allowing commissioners courts to employ outside counsel
- The Nov. 19 opinion, requested by State Rep. Gary Gates, clarifies that redistricting is a legislative function, not a judicial one, giving commissioners court contracting authority
- County Attorney Bridgette Smith-Lawson had claimed exclusive authority to select legal counsel and pressured county officials not to pay the outside law firm's invoice; the AG opinion resolves the dispute in favor of commissioners court
RICHMOND, Texas (Covering Katy News) — Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton has ruled that Fort Bend County Commissioners Court has the legal authority to select and hire its own law firm to assist with redistricting election precincts, settling a dispute between the Republican-majority court and Democratic County Attorney Bridgette Smith-Lawson.
The Nov. 19 opinion, requested by State Rep. Gary Gates, concluded that the commissioners court may employ outside legal counsel without interference from the county attorney when fulfilling its redistricting duties under Chapter 42 of the Texas Election Code.
"The notion that a commissioners court may hire a law firm to assist it in carrying out its responsibilities has been recognized for over a century," the opinion states.
Dispute over legal authority
The dispute arose after State Rep. Matt Morgan, R-Richmond, alerted commissioners in February that the county had failed to review and redistrict election precincts in accordance with state law, resulting in some precincts falling outside required population limits. The Republican-majority commissioners court voted to redraw precinct maps and allocated funds for the work, but Smith-Lawson asserted her office had exclusive authority to select legal counsel for the project.
Smith-Lawson's argument relied in part on her statutory duty to represent the county in civil matters pending before courts.
However, Paxton's opinion dismantled that reasoning by clarifying that Commissioners Court is not a judicial court.
"The commissioners court is an administrative body without substantial judicial functions" that often acts as "a court in name only," Paxton wrote.
Redistricting is legislative, not judicial
Paxton's opinion stated that while county attorneys have exclusive authority to represent counties in civil matters pending before courts, redistricting is a legislative function, not a judicial one.
The opinion notes that redistricting has long been characterized as the exercise of legislative or quasi-legislative power, citing a 1982 Texas Supreme Court case.
The opinion emphasized that commissioners courts serve as "the general business and contracting agency of the county, and it alone has authority to make contracts binding on the county, unless otherwise specifically provided by statute."
As the administrative head of county government, a commissioners court also possesses broad implied powers to contract with experts when necessary, including attorneys, the opinion states.
County attorney's overreach
The attorney general's opinion makes clear that Smith-Lawson's position would interfere with the commissioners court's authority rather than protect her own.
The opinion explains that a law firm hired to assist with redistricting would be helping the commissioners court with its legislative duties, not representing the court in a judicial proceeding.
Requiring the county attorney's involvement would serve only to "frustrate" the commissioner court's authority — not vice versa, the opinion states.
The opinion also addressed whether Smith-Lawson could unilaterally contract with a law firm of her choice to assist with redistricting. Paxton ruled she could not.
A county official has no authority to make contracts that are binding on the county, except where specially authorized to do so by statute, according to the opinion.
The commissioners court has settled discretion to choose the method of hiring attorneys it deems most beneficial to the public and set the terms of a contract with outside counsel, the opinion states.
However, the opinion included one limitation: A commissioners court's hiring of counsel may not interfere with or usurp the statutory duties of other officials, including the county attorney.
Overturning past precedents
In reaching its conclusion, Paxton's opinion overruled two previous attorney general opinions from 2003 and 1990 that had suggested county attorneys had broader authority in similar situations. The opinion found those earlier rulings had disregarded statutory language and failed to properly analyze the limits of county attorney powers.
October redistricting battle
The redistricting controversy comes after Fort Bend County commissioners approved new precinct boundaries in October in a contentious 3-2 party-line vote. Republican commissioners Andy Meyers and Vincent Morales, along with County Judge K.P. George, voted for the new map, while Democratic commissioners Dexter McCoy and Grady Prestage opposed it.
The October redistricting addressed 38 voter precincts that did not meet state population requirements, which mandate that counties with populations over 100,000 must have between 100 and 5,000 registered voters per precinct.
Invoice to be paid
Following the attorney general's opinion, County Auditor Ed Sturdivant said the outside law firm's invoice for redistricting work will be paid. Smith-Lawson had previously argued the firm should not be paid and pressured the county auditor and county purchasing agent not to pay the invoice. The AG opinion resolves that dispute in favor of the commissioners court's authority to hire and compensate outside counsel.
The Attorney General's opinion is posted here.
The owner of Covering Katy News, Dennis Spellman, is also employed by the Fort Bend County Precinct 3 Commissioner's Office.