Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Legal Settlement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Lancaster ISD board approves settlement to resolve lawsuit with former trustee Stevenson
Summary
The Lancaster Independent School District Board of Trustees voted to settle a pending lawsuit with former trustee D. Stevenson, directing counsel to draft an agreement with mutual releases and each party to bear its own costs after trustees debated costs and enforcement options.
The Lancaster Independent School district Board of Trustees voted Thursday night to settle a pending lawsuit with a former trustee, directing district counsel to prepare a settlement agreement that would include mutual releases and require each party to pay its own costs.
Board President Jones introduced the motion in open session after the school board reconvened from closed session to discuss “a legal matter regarding one of our former trustees and Lancaster ISD,” and asked for a motion. Trustee Klooz moved that the district settle the pending suit with “Mr. Stevenson with mutual releases and dismissals” and directed the district attorney to draft a settlement agreement for signature by the board president; the motion was seconded by Secretary Morris. Attorney O'Hannon was directed to prepare the settlement paperwork.
The motion prompted several trustees to speak about costs and the district’s options. Secretary Morris said the board should weigh the cost of continued litigation against the potential recovery, noting the district has “opportunity to go after $350,000” but that pursuing it could require additional legal expense and possibly mediation. Trustee Whitfield said publicly available records indicate the district has already spent “thousands of dollars” on the case and questioned spending more district funds to pursue the claim; she also cited, without providing documentation at the meeting, Texas Education Code 11.1512 in describing her concerns about the matter. Trustee Hamilton said he opposed the motion because he believed the district should pursue recovery of funds but acknowledged the cost of litigation could outweigh potential recoveries.
Board President Jones called for the vote. The secretary reported four votes in favor, one opposed and two abstentions; the board president announced the motion passed.
The board did not announce settlement terms or the dollar amounts involved during the meeting. Attorney O'Hannon was directed to draft the settlement agreement and submit it to Board President Jones for signature.
Why this matters: The board’s vote ends a contested legal matter with a former trustee and shifts the district away from continued litigation. Trustees who spoke in favor cited staff and buildings needs as reasons to limit legal spending; trustees who opposed or abstained cited concerns about accountability and recovering district funds.
What was not stated: The board did not provide specifics of the settlement amount, the dates by which documents will be executed, nor the precise legal claims being resolved. Trustee Whitfield referenced state law (Texas Education Code 11.1512) during debate; the board did not present evidence on that claim at the meeting.
Provenance: The board moved to discuss the matter in open session after a closed-session recess; the motion and debate appear in the meeting transcript beginning when the board reconvened and raised the legal matter through the roll call on the motion.
