Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Legal Counsel Contracts topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
San Benito CISD trustees debate special-counsel contract for Salazar; no final action taken
Summary
The San Benito CISD Board of Trustees discussed whether to retain or terminate special counsel Miguel Salazar during its February 2025 meeting; motions to retain and to terminate failed to secure the majority needed for final action. Public commenters both criticized legal spending and praised Salazar’s recent recoveries for the district.
SAN BENITO, Texas — The San Benito Consolidated Independent School District Board of Trustees at a February 2025 meeting in Riverside Middle School debated whether to continue a special-counsel services agreement with attorney Miguel Salazar but left the matter without a board-level decision.
The topic came under agenda item 8.1, described at the meeting as “discussion of possible action regarding special counsel services agreement” for Salazar’s firm. Trustees discussed the contract in open session, several board members spoke for and against retention, and two formal motions were made: one to retain Salazar and one to terminate his services. The motion to retain received no second and died. The motion to terminate was seconded and received three affirmative votes during a show-of-hands but did not reach the number required for a board decision, and the board’s presiding officer stated that “no action is taken.”
Why it matters: the district’s use of outside counsel has drawn public attention because speakers at the meeting linked legal work to a large financial recovery and to construction litigation. Board members said they had debated the matter for months and differed on responsiveness and communication from counsel.
Public comments at the meeting framed the dispute. A resident, Lupita, praised the attorney’s work, saying he “got the school district $13,300,000” and that the district now holds tens of millions in funds; Rosalina Garcia urged trustees to scrutinize check disbursements and legal fees. Trustee discussion cited concerns about response times and clarifications from counsel as reasons for continuing internal debate.
Attorney Miguel Salazar addressed the board after the failed motions. He summarized his approach in the meeting as “loyal, faithful, and aggressive representation,” and said his stated goal remains to hold responsible parties financially accountable for damages in the district’s litigation. Salazar also noted he previously taught in the district and said he appreciated the board’s past support.
The board later recessed for a closed session under the Texas Government Code (Chapter 551) and returned to open session; no public action on the special-counsel contract was adopted during the open meeting. Trustees indicated the issue remains under discussion and tied to matters previously considered in executive session.
The district’s agenda identified the item as possible action regarding “special counsel services agreement” for Salazar; the board’s deliberations produced no contractual change at the open meeting.
Quotes used in this article are drawn from the public meeting transcript and were attributed only to speakers listed in the meeting record.
