Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Legal Counsel Retention topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

United ISD board approves special counsel retention after public objections about legal spending

United Independent School District Board of Trustees · October 9, 2024
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The United Independent School District Board of Trustees approved hiring Thompson and Horton LLP as special counsel for cases where district counsel is conflicted out; public commenters urged transparency over what the district has spent on outside attorneys.

The United Independent School District Board of Trustees on a voice vote approved retaining Thompson and Horton LLP as special counsel for claims where the district's counsel has a conflict.

Public commenters urged the board to explain the district’s legal spending before hiring another firm. Danielle Martinez told the board that United ISD "has paid more than $1,000,000 to a single law firm in 1 academic school year" and raised broader concerns that "taxpayer dollars are being used wisely." Victor Vasquez asked why the district would hire another law firm and questioned the hourly rates the public might be asked to fund.

At the open-session presentation, the district's representative said the engagement would not require an upfront retainer and "there is no upfront fee or retainer or money being expended," instead using hourly billing, and recommended approval for cases where the district is conflicted out. The presenter also noted Thompson and Horton previously handled the district’s former-employee termination matter and obtained a favorable written decision from an independent hearing examiner appointed by the Texas Education Agency.

Trustees moved and seconded approval in open session, and the Chair called for a voice vote; the motion passed with no opposition heard.

The board did not provide a roll-call tally in open session. The presenter said purchasing and facilities staff would report back on any engagement under the retention. The item followed a closed-session discussion of legal strategy; the board announced there was no action taken while in closed session and moved the retention item in open session.