Texas House Bill HB3825

Texas 2009 - 81st Regular

Caption

Relating to legal representation for a county auditor.

Impact

The bill significantly impacts how county auditors are supported legally and financially when faced with lawsuits connected to their public functions. By granting this right to representation, the bill encourages auditors to execute their duties with greater confidence, knowing that they have access to legal counsel. Additionally, it mandates that the commissioners court must pay for the reasonable attorney's fees and costs of litigation should the auditor opt for private counsel, thus relieving county auditors from the financial burden of defending against civil lawsuits resulting from their official actions.

Summary

House Bill 3825 addresses the legal representation of county auditors in Texas. The bill amends Subchapter A of Chapter 84 of the Local Government Code by adding Section 84.010, which delineates the rights of county auditors to legal representation. Specifically, it establishes that county auditors are entitled to representation by the district attorney or criminal district attorney or may hire private counsel if such representation is declined. This provision aims to ensure that county auditors have the necessary legal support when involved in civil litigation related to their official duties.

Contention

One notable point of contention surrounding HB 3825 could stem from concerns about the potential financial implications for county budgets, particularly in counties with tight fiscal constraints. Critics might argue that providing this support could drain essential resources away from other necessary county services. Supporters, however, may counter that effective legal representation is vital for maintaining accountability and integrity in public office, thereby justifying the allocation of funds.

Implementation

The changes introduced by HB 3825 would apply only to causes of action that arise after the bill's effective date, which is contingent on receiving a two-thirds majority vote in each house. Should the bill not achieve this, it would still take effect on September 1, 2009. This provision could result in transitional legal frameworks depending on the timeline of litigation faced by county auditors.