Columbus Council may get more legal bills stemming from Pierce lawsuit

While considering legal bills from former Sheriff John Darr’s lawsuit against the city, Columbus Council learned that another round of fees may soon be forthcoming.

City Attorney Clifton Fay told councilors that an attorney who represented former Superior Court Clerk Linda Pierce indicated in a court motion that he also intended to pursue payment from the city.

“At this point we don’t know what that is and we don’t know what that’s for,” Fay told councilors Tuesday at a council meeting.

The discussion occurred during the first reading of an ordinance that would amend the city’s 2017 budget “to appropriate and account for the payment of legal fees and expenses provided to the Muscogee County Sheriff in the case of Darr v. Columbus and for other purposes,” according to the city attorney’s agenda.

If the ordinance is approved, the city would pay three attorneys about $53,000 in fees for representing Darr. Councilors are scheduled to vote on the ordinance at the Jan. 24 council meeting.

The legal fees stem from lawsuits that Darr and Pierce filed in 2014, claiming their office budgets were insufficient to carry out their obligations. In 2016, the two elected officials lost their seats to Donna Tompkins and Ann Hardman, respectively. Since being elected, Tompkins and Hardman have filed documents dismissing the lawsuits.

Marshal Greg Countryman and Municipal Court Clerk Vivian Creighton Bishop co-filed another lawsuit, but were re-elected to office in 2016. And their case remains in Superior Court.

In the Darr and Pierce suits, the city had to pay for its own lawyers, as well as the plaintiffs’ because they were constitutional officers. Countryman and Bishop are not constitutional officers, so the city is not required to pay their bills.

In total, the city has paid more than $2 million in attorney fees in the three lawsuits.

On Tuesday, several councilors expressed concern about Darr’s fees and asked if they should expect more bills in the future.

“City attorney, does this mean that the case is officially over and we’re not expecting anymore invoices to the city?” asked City Councilor Glen Davis.

Fay said he hoped that was the case, but he couldn’t guarantee.

He said the $53,000 had been reviewed by a judge and ordered by the court, and city councilors really had no choice in the matter. If the fees aren’t paid, the council could be held in contempt of court, he said.

Fay said the council’s authority in the budgeting process should no longer be in question, and pointed to two court orders issued by Judge Phillip Raymond, a Macon judge who has been handling the case in Muscogee County Superior Court.

One order signed on June 21 reads: “Georgia law is clear that the Sheriff is not entitled to a specific amount of funding, nor is he entitled to a specific method of determining his budget. ... A county officer is subject to the authority of the commission to set his budget. Georgia law has delegated Defendant CCG specific authority to adopt the processes and procedures through which a proposed budget is developed, including an executive recommended budget.”

Fay said: “He made it crystal clear that the Mayor and City Manager have the authority, under state law and the charter, to recommend operating budgets, and that the council has the legislative authority to set a budget for constitutional officers.”

This story was originally published January 11, 2017 at 6:15 PM with the headline "Columbus Council may get more legal bills stemming from Pierce lawsuit."