Lubbock County is asking the Texas Attorney General whether it can withhold records Lubbock Lights requested concerning payments to attorney Kristen Vander-Plas LaFreniere, who represented former Precinct 2 Commissioner Mark Meurer.
The county says the records relate to a pending criminal investigation into the nearly $70,000 paid to Meurer.
Lubbock Lights reported Sept. 13 that the county continued paying Meurer for approximately nine months after District Judge Patrick Pirtle ordered Jason Corley restored to the Precinct 2 commissioner’s seat.
The county later stopped Meurer’s salary.
Meurer has said he set the money aside and intends to return approximately $70,000. Commissioner Michael Dalby said the county would seek to recover the money.
In a statement issued Sept. 16, Meurer also said he had repeatedly raised the issue of the payments with County Judge Curtis Parrish and would withdraw from the legal proceedings challenging Corley’s position.
The county says the records relate to a pending criminal investigation into the nearly $70,000 paid to Meurer.
The records could help answer a basic question:
Who authorized the county to pay Meurer’s attorney?
Lubbock Lights filed a Texas Public Information Act request Sept. 16 seeking records showing payments to LaFreniere, what those payments were for, who authorized them and whether Commissioners Court approved them.
The request seeks payment records, invoices, contracts, approval documents, Commissioners Court records, communications and budget information concerning LaFreniere’s work and compensation. It also seeks all communications between LaFreniere and Judge Curtis Parrish. Lubbock Lights is advised by its counsel that those communications should not be privileged since LaFreniere was not representing Parrish.
The financial questions expanded when Lubbock Lights obtained an email from LaFreniere to the county demanding payment of past-due invoices and said she had been assured Lubbock County would pay her bills.
“I specifically did not request a retainer from Lubbock County because I was assured that my invoices would be paid as they came up.”
LaFreniere also said she would not continue certain appellate work without payment of outstanding invoices and a guarantee of future payment.
Her email did not identify who made the commitment.
How the Precinct 2 dispute began
The underlying legal fight began in December, when Parrish declared that Corley had automatically resigned from the Precinct 2 position after becoming a candidate for Congress. Parrish then administered the oath of office to Meurer.
Corley challenged the move in court. The State of Texas subsequently became involved, and a Lubbock judge restored Corley to the commissioner’s seat.
The dispute continued through appeals and proceedings involving the Texas Supreme Court and the Seventh Court of Appeals.
The Seventh Court of Appeals in Amarillo had been scheduled to hear oral arguments Oct. 13. Parrish previously said the hearing could provide additional legal clarity over who should occupy the Precinct 2 seat.
That hearing became unnecessary after Meurer announced he would withdraw from the case.
Parrish said Sept. 17 that Meurer’s withdrawal resolved the questions before the appeals court and that the salary would be returned.
The Sept. 16-30 chronology
The records request came shortly after Lubbock Lights reported the continued salary payments to Meurer.
On Sept. 21, Commissioners Court approved a resolution supporting an independent Texas Rangers investigation into the apparent payroll irregularities. Judge Parrish recused from the vote.
That same day, Lubbock Lights reported the previously undisclosed dispute over LaFreniere’s legal bills and her statement that she had been assured the county would pay them.
On Sept. 29, Lubbock Lights reported that Criminal District Attorney Sunshine Stanek had recused herself and her office from the investigation.
One day later, the Lubbock County DA’s Office said it had referred the matter to the Midland County District Attorney’s Office.
The county’s Attorney General letter does not name the criminal investigation by name.
No public document reviewed by Lubbock Lights suggests that LaFreniere is accused of any wrongdoing. LaFreniere’s own email states she was acting on someone’s authority. Lubbock Lights wants to know whose authority?
In its Sept. 30 letter to Attorney General Ken Paxton’s Open Records Division, Lubbock County asked to withhold portions of the records requested by Lubbock Lights.
The county cited several Texas Public Information Act exceptions, including Government Code §552.108(a)(1), which can apply to information held by law enforcement or prosecutors when disclosure could interfere with the detection, investigation, or prosecution of a crime.
The county wrote:
“The requested information relates to a pending criminal investigation. Release of this information would interfere with further investigation and prosecution of this offense.”
Read the Sept. 30 letter to the Texas Attorney General
The county also cited Sections 552.101, 552.107, 552.117, 552.130 and 552.136.
Importantly, the Attorney General has not ruled that the records are confidential. The Sept. 30 document is the county’s request for the Attorney General to decide about which records may be confidential. By sending that letter now, while all responses are on hold while the Midland DA conducts a criminal investigation, the Lubbock County attorney has helped expedite the process when the hold for the criminal investigation is lifted.
Lubbock Lights is seeking these records because the public record does not currently address these questions: Who authorized those payments? Under what authority? And was the required county process followed?
Related
Related posts