Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Legal Services topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Tangipahoa Parish board approves $250-an-hour engagement with attorney Danny Garrett III after debate
Summary
On March 11 the Tangipahoa Parish School Board approved a letter of engagement with attorney Danny Garrett III at $250 per hour to advise on assault pay, workers’ compensation accommodations and restitution for property damage. The vote passed with one member voting no and one abstention.
The Tangipahoa Parish School Board on March 11 approved a letter of engagement with attorney Danny Garrett III at a rate of $250 per hour to advise on three matters: policies for assault pay, procedures for accommodating employees on workers’ compensation, and processes for obtaining restitution when district property is damaged.
Board counsel and staff described the work as targeted legal assistance rather than a retainer. District staff said the engagement will be billed only for work performed; the district will not pay a standing monthly retainer for Garrett’s services. The board discussed whether existing counsel could perform the same work and whether the district was maximizing services already paid for through other contracts. Board members asked whether the association attorney or the district’s retainer counsel could provide the requested work; staff said the retainer primarily covers attendance at meetings and that out-of-meeting work is billed separately.
The motion to approve the engagement was made by Board Member Dominguez and seconded by Board Member Westmoreland. After discussion, the motion passed. The board recorded that Board Member Duncan voted yes, Board Member Piazza voted no and Board Member Moore abstained.
The engagement document presented to the board lists Garrett’s hourly rate; the board recorded that the scope would cover the three topics described to the board: assault pay policy, a procedure for accommodations tied to workers’ compensation, and restitution for damaged district property. Staff identified the district’s risk manager as having requested assistance on those three items.
Board members who spoke said they have no objection to Garrett’s qualifications but expressed concern about adding another outside attorney when the district already uses multiple counsel and a policy-service vendor. Staff replied that some existing advisors charge for out-of-meeting work and that the district would pay only for the time Garrett works on the specified matters.
No financial ceiling for the engagement was specified at the meeting.
(Ending) The board adjourned after completing its agenda. No further formal actions about this engagement were recorded in the public portion of the meeting.
