Categorical Legal Cost Reporting Is Common Sense

In my previous posts, I explained the first two components of the Legal Services Transparency and Review Policy: Why Legal Reasoning Behind Legislation Must Be Public Record and Closed Sessions: The Standard We Should Meet. This post addresses the third and final component: quarterly reporting on legal services expenditures.

What the Policy Requires

The policy establishes a straightforward requirement: the County Administrator provides the Board with a quarterly report on legal services. That report includes:

• Total legal expenditures for the quarter, including County Attorney compensation, benefits, and outside counsel fees
• Itemization of expenditures by category
• Comparison of expenditures to budgeted amounts
• Summary of major legal matters addressed during the quarter and their status
• Anticipated significant legal expenditures in the upcoming quarter

The report is presented in open session unless specific line items involve matters properly subject to attorney-client privilege or pending litigation.

Cost Management

Quarterly reporting isn’t just about looking backward at what was spent. It’s a tool for cost management going forward.

One question I’ve asked the County Administrator to investigate: who in the county has authorization to engage the County Attorney’s services – to start the clock running (it is a contracted service, not a county employee)? Without knowing who can initiate billable work, and without routine reporting on what that work involves, the Administrator and the Board have no way to assess whether legal resources are being deployed efficiently.

Some may perceive this as a reflection on the County Attorney’s office. That’s a mistake. The issue isn’t with the attorney – it’s with the County’s consumption habits. The County Attorney provides services when asked. The question is: who’s asking, for what, and how often? Categorical cost reporting will help us get a better handle on that.

The Cost Data

Consider the numbers. Warren County’s population is nearly identical to Shenandoah County’s: ~42,750 versus ~43,250. Both counties receive legal services from the same contracted law firm. Yet Warren County’s 2025 legal services budget is more than double that of Shenandoah County’s: $423,000 vs. $205,000. Per person, Warren’s budgeted legal costs are $9.90 – more than twice Shenandoah’s $4.74, and the highest among neighboring Shenandoah Valley counties by a wide margin (69% higher than Frederick, 59% higher than Page, and 338% higher than Clarke).

Why? That’s exactly the question quarterly reporting would help answer.

This isn’t about finding fault. It’s about understanding. What is it about Warren County that results in such a high consumption of legal services compared to our neighbors? Are there structural factors? Patterns of usage? Matters that could be handled differently?

Especially given the disparity – more than 100% higher per-capita budgeted costs than a nearly identical neighboring county using the same law firm – quarterly reporting represents a sensible step to proactively manage, and very likely reduce, legal services costs.

Why It Matters

Warren County taxpayers spend hundreds of thousands of dollars annually on legal services. They deserve to know what that money buys. Categorical cost reporting on legal services will provide a viewport into how those funds are used.

This is the transparency thread that runs through the entire policy:

• written legal analysis makes the reasoning behind legislation visible;
• FOIA-compliant closed session procedures keep public deliberation in public view;
• Categorical cost reporting makes legal expenditures visible to both the Board and the citizens who fund them.

Visibility enables oversight. Oversight is how elected officials fulfill their fiduciary duty.

What Comes Next

Over the past three posts, I’ve explained what the Legal Services Transparency and Review Policy actually does:

• Written legal analysis for legislative matters – so supervisors and the public can see the legal reasoning behind proposed laws
• FOIA compliance for closed sessions – so closed meetings are reserved for matters that genuinely meet the statutory criteria
• Quarterly financial reporting – so the Board can exercise fiscal oversight over legal expenditures

Tomorrow, I’ll explain what’s at stake on Thursday – and why the Board’s first vote of the new year matters.

Rich Jamieson
North River Supervisor