Minnesota Governor Tim Walz is facing questions after reports revealed that his office spent approximately $430,000 in public funds to hire outside legal counsel ahead of a congressional hearing related to sanctuary city policies. The decision has drawn criticism from some lawmakers who view the expense as excessive, while the governor’s team maintains it was necessary due to the nature of the inquiry.
According to documents obtained by the Star Tribune, the state enlisted the services of international law firm K&L Gates from early April through mid-June. The firm assisted Governor Walz in preparing for a June appearance before the House Oversight Committee. Records show that more than $232,000 of the total was billed in May alone, with hourly rates averaging around $516. The funding came from a transfer approved by the Legislative Advisory Commission, using money from Minnesota’s general fund.
While the Minnesota Attorney General’s office had offered legal guidance, the governor’s staff opted for attorneys with specialized experience in congressional proceedings. This decision has sparked debate among some members of the legislature.
Representative Jim Nash expressed concern about the cost, suggesting that the state already employs qualified legal experts. Representative Harry Niska echoed this sentiment, questioning whether the additional spending was necessary.
In response, Governor Walz’s office defended the decision, stating that the hearing was politically charged and required preparation beyond routine legal counsel. His staff argued that the hearing itself did not produce new findings and characterized it as a challenging environment for state representatives.
Minnesota is not alone in navigating the costs of legal preparation for congressional hearings. Earlier this year, Boston Mayor Michelle Wu approved up to $650,000 in similar legal expenses, while Denver’s mayoral office reportedly spent around $250,000. These comparisons have fueled broader discussions about how government offices use taxpayer resources for legal support during federal proceedings.
As a result, some Minnesota lawmakers are now considering proposals that would limit the use of outside counsel in such situations, particularly when public funding is involved. The goal, they say, is to create clearer guidelines around when and how external legal services should be used in the interest of transparency and fiscal responsibility.
Governor Walz has stood by the decision, emphasizing that it was made with the intent to protect the state’s interests during a complex and high-profile hearing. As public conversation continues, the issue highlights the ongoing balance between effective governance and responsible spending.
