Our County contracts wtih the City of Plainview for things such as housing prisoners on municipal court charges and also things such as animal control, fire, and ambulance services out in the County.

I have been approached with the idea that perhaps the County and City could enter an agreement to exchange these services with each other rather than each pay the other as the services are used.

According to rough figures that I have seen, such an agreement would put the County providing about $14,000.00 more services than the County would receive.

Does anyone, off the tops of your heads, know why this would not be possible to do, assuming we can work out an agreement? Does the inequity in cost of services provided work against this idea?

We are in the same position with Sweetwater. If we redid the contracts (which I think we are supposed to do)the County would be the loser. So - I sit back and keep my mouth shut. We can't afford it. Periodically the City makes the offer to go with payment rather than exchange, and we graciously ( ) decline.....

Lisa

The Texas Supreme Court has said (in one of the intergovernmental risk pool cases, if memory serves me correctly) that article 3, section 52(a) only requires that the expenditure of public funds or resources result in a public benefit, not that it be a "good deal." The AG has added the qualifier that the governmental entity expending the public funds must retain some measure of control to assure that a public benefit is, in fact, being realized. But the AG, too, has stopped short of requiring that the governmental entity get "the most bang for its buck" under article 3, section 52.

If your county is going to pay money under the arrangement, the Interlocal Cooperation Act, at section 791.011(e) of the Government Code, requires that the contract amount be such as would "fairly compensate" the parties for the goods or services provided. If it's a pure exchange of services, though, that provision arguably may not apply.

Thank you very much

I must admit to great distress when the concept of giving unequally to a city comes up as a topic. I will edit this response later. But I think it remains bad policy whether I can find law to support my position when the taxpayer of the County is supporting the taxpayer of the City. I recognize the adage that the City taxpayer pays County taxes also. But the fact remains that the County taxpayer does not until we enter into an unequal trade with the City.