GREENVILLE — The ongoing legal battle between the City of Greenville and L-3 Mission Integration is costing taxpayers a lot of money.

More than $350,000 has been spent this year alone on legal fees and expenses, with at least another month to go before the dispute might be resolved in a state district court.

In response to an open records request from the Herald-Banner, officials with the City of Greenville provided a list of expenditures for which the city has been billed from City Attorney Brent A. Money and the Jackson Walker law firm, in connection with the suit filed by L-3 in February. The list also included an explanation that it covered all of the expenses for which the city had been billed through the end of June, although not all of the invoices had been paid as of last Thursday.

As of July 7, the city had been billed $250,423.11 by the Jackson Walker firm and $75,055 by the firm of Scott, Money, Ray and Thomas. The invoices also included $27,489.08 in productions fees and deposition services, for a total of $352,967.19.

Jackson Walker billed the city $46,724.71 for February and March, $76,210.48 in April and May and $120,487 for the month of June. The totals do not include a $135,000 amendment to the 2009-2010 budget, approved by the City Council in September to retain the law firm of Jackson Walker LLP for the purpose of advising city officials about the issue.

Scott, Money, Ray and Thomas billed the city $7,945 in February, $8,260 in March, $29,540 in April, $18,725 in May and $10,585 in June.

City Manager Steven Alexander said the expenses were in response to the city having to defend itself against L-3’s suit, seeking to prevent a proposed replat of Majors Field Municipal Airport.

“It is important that the public is aware that the City is the defendant in a lawsuit that is based on a plat that is null and void, a tax issue that has been resolved, and contract claims that are completely without merit,” Alexander said in a statement accompanying the expense figures.

“The City has worked diligently to try and resolve these issues before and during litigation, but our efforts have been unsuccessful. As a result of L-3’s threatened litigation, the City retained the services of Jackson Walker to represent the interests of the organization and ultimately the citizens of Greenville. The lawsuit has resulted in eight city officials being deposed and hundreds of hours in staff time expended in the production of hundreds of thousands of pages of discovery. The costs of the lawsuit are substantial in both time and money for the taxpayers of Greenville. It is unfortunate that these resources are not able to be spent on projects that would better benefit this community.”

The basis of the suit is a legal question which has been up for debate for some 20 months, even well before it made its way to a courtroom.

In November 2009, Hunt County Chief Appraiser Brent South and the Hunt County Appraisal District began a review of all of the properties listed on the Hunt County rolls as tax exempt.

The City of Greenville Municipal Airport, Majors Field, was among those properties. The airport’s largest tenant is L-3, leasing approximately 3 million square feet of improvements on 315 of the airport’s 1,500 acres from the City of Greenville.

Under the terms of a 1977 lease agreement, L-3 pays the city $71,172.36 in annual rental payments for the use of the property. The lease agreement is up for consideration again in 2017.

During the 24-year period of the lease agreement, the city has not imposed any ad valorem (property) taxes on the company.

The Texas Constitution maintains that in order to be classified as tax exempt, a property must be publicly owned and “devoted exclusively to a public use.”

State Senator Bob Deuell of Greenville submitted a request on July 1, 2010 , asking for an opinion on the matter from the Attorney General’s Office. The opinion came back in early December 2010, essentially referring the decision to South, who ruled the airport property leased by L-3 is being used for a public purpose and should retain its property tax exemption.

But about a month before South’s decision was announced, the City of Greenville began surveying the airport property for a proposed new plat, or replat.

A plat is a map detailing the borders and boundaries of a given tract of land. The airport tract had always been listed as a single tract since the initial plat was completed in 1992.

City officials said the proposed replat of the property, dividing the airport into four tracts, was designed to reflect the additional land the city had accumulated at the site since the initial plat was drawn up and also to protect some $10 million in grant funding awarded to the city which could have been forfeit if the land at the airport improved through the grants was not being used for a public purpose.

After first tabling a vote on whether to approve the replat on Dec. 20, 2010 — after an attorney representing L-3 objected to discrepancies he found with the document — the Planning and Zoning Commission voted Jan. 10, 2011 to approve it.

Before the replat was formally filed, L-3 filed suit against the city, asking for and receiving a temporary restraining order.

City officials have since explained the replat is moot and can no longer be filed at all, since too much time has expired.

But in the litigation, attorneys for L-3 have claimed city officials still plan to file a replat of the airport and are using the replat to circumvent South’s decision and find a way to make the land on which L-3 rests taxable.

Attorneys for L-3 have argued the city intends to default on the property taxes at the airport, if it is found taxable following the replat, and sell the facility at a tax foreclosure sale.

Since the suit was filed, both sides have filed multiple motions and requests for depositions and documents. The judge who is hearing the case has ordered the attorneys to submit every motion on which they plan to argue by August 1.

An August 9 session has been scheduled to determine two of the significant issues still pending, including whether 354th District Court Judge Richard A. Beacom has jurisdiction to make any rulings concerning the proposed replat.

Meanwhile, the temporary restraining order preventing the replat from being filed, which was due to expire Thursday evening, was also extended until Sept. 1.