Nueces County commissioners approve limited payment for consultant invoices and appoint outside counsel in DA removal matter after hours of public comment

NUECES COUNTY — The commissioners court on Tuesday moved to split a months‑long dispute over consultant invoices and to address growing public pressure about the county’s handling of District Attorney Mark Gonzales’s legal defense. After public comment from scores of residents both supporting and criticizing Gonzales, the court voted to pay an undisputed portion of outstanding consultant bills and to appoint outside counsel for the removal proceedings.

The court approved payment of $72,413, identified by county staff as undisputed billing from Hagerty Consulting related to ARPA administration, and instructed county attorneys and finance staff to work with Hagerty to produce backup and reconcile about $112,000 in disputed charges before returning those items to the court piecemeal for payment. County staff said the split was intended to pay vendors for verified work while preserving the county’s ability to question unclear invoices.

That vote came after more than an hour of public comment in which speakers urged opposing outcomes. Supporters of Gonzales asked the court to confirm the DA’s choice of private counsel Chris Gayle and to authorize the county to pay his fees. Opponents pressed commissioners to scrutinize the DA’s record and to limit public spending on his defense.

"I hope that you'll vote to allow him, his own counsel, Chris Gayle, to represent him and and pay for that," said Becky Moeller, a public commenter (public record). Another speaker, Sean Flanagan, told the court the recall petition reflects alleged failures by Gonzales in handling felony cases: "The record clearly shows that Mark Gonzalez has released 1,000 of people who have committed acts of felony level criminality," he said.

After the court recessed into executive session, commissioners returned with motions on legal representation. The court appointed Matt Manning as outside counsel for the county in the removal matter, pending negotiation of a reasonable hourly rate and a required budget from the attorney for court review and approval.

The court’s approach aimed to balance two priorities articulated by commissioners: paying what the county definitively owes while protecting taxpayers by insisting on supporting documentation for other charges; and ensuring the county has experienced outside counsel available to handle complex removal litigation.

What’s next: Staff will continue reconciling disputed Hagerty invoices and will bring undisputed items back for payment as they are verified. Outside counsel must submit a budget before work proceeds under the court’s direction.

Quotes in this story come from the commissioners court transcript and public speakers' remarks during the meeting.