Richland County Faces Scrutiny Over Legal Fees Amid DOJ Investigation
In Richland County, South Carolina, a recent investigation has raised serious questions about the county’s finances in connection with the ongoing Department of Justice (DOJ) inquiry into the Alvin S. Glenn Detention Center. The county has reportedly amassed a staggering nearly $400,000 in fees for outside attorneys, all without explicit approval from the county council. This has sparked concerns among local officials and residents alike.
Unapproved Spending Raises Eyebrows
It seems Richland County officials have been hiring outside legal help since November 2022, but the county council never voted to approve these expenditures. Councilman Don Weaver confirmed that during a closed meeting last November, there was no formal vote to initiate this hiring. “We didn’t say no,” Weaver remarked, explaining that while there was no opposition voiced in the meeting, the gravity of a federal investigation likely weighed heavily on the council’s decisions.
Despite the county’s claims that they were acting within legal boundaries, there’s a growing sense of concern regarding transparency. The council relied on the county attorney’s suggestions, which led to the expectation that outside legal counsel might be necessary to address the DOJ investigation. Yet, the lack of an official vote and vague communication about the specifics of the attorney’s tasks have left many feeling uneasy.
A Call for Greater Transparency
The situation is further complicated by Richland County’s assertion that the Freedom of Information Act does not allow council members to disclose discussions held during closed meetings. Attorney Jay Bender has strongly criticized this stance, arguing that such a claim does not hold water. He emphasized that while executive sessions allow for private discussions, participants are not prevented from speaking about what was discussed.
In light of this situation, Weaver is contemplating calling for a public vote on the attorney expenditures to clarify the situation and ensure accountability. “This is a serious matter, and we owe it to our constituents to be transparent about how their money is being spent,” he stated.
What’s the Legal Bill Tally?
According to documents obtained through public records requests, the legal fees incurred from November through April alone amount to $400,000. This figure only covers a fraction of the total expenditures, which leaves many wondering how much more the county could owe. Interestingly, Richland County code stipulates that spending over $30,000 must receive council approval, so what does this mean for the current arrangement?
The county’s recent news release tried to clarify some points, asserting that the county attorney does have the authority to hire outside counsel without needing council approval due to an exemption within the state’s procurement code. However, an official from the South Carolina State Fiscal Accountability Authority countered this by emphasizing that it’s up to each political subdivision to adopt its own procurement code; thus, they must adhere to their own requirements about hiring outside legal counsel.
Community Reaction and Next Steps
This situation has drawn attention not just at the county council level but also from the community. Questions regarding the source of the funds used for these legal services have arisen, with residents keen to understand where taxpayer money is going. A spokesperson from the county indicated they’d need more time to provide clarity on which part of the budget is being utilized for these expenditures, adding to the uncertainty.
Richland County has received around 32 lawsuits since 2021, which has necessitated external legal representation for various matters, but the ongoing DOJ investigation has heightened scrutiny. As the situation develops, residents will undoubtedly be watching closely to see how their elected officials handle this significant issue.
Conclusion
In summary, as Richland County navigates the complexities surrounding the DOJ investigation into the Alvin S. Glenn Detention Center and the looming question of legal fees, transparency and accountability will be paramount. With local officials contemplating their next moves, it’s clear that the community deserves a clearer picture of how their resources are being managed. Will there be more calls for oversight? Only time will tell.
