By Juan Montoya
The well-paid attorneys for the Gang of $4 on the Brownsville Independent School District looked long and hard to find any hook upon which to base their petition before a federal judge to stay what will probably be a standing-room only trial where their scheming and conniving will be laid bare for the world to see.
In the end, their only hope to delay the opening of the trial lay in their claim that former BISD Chief Financial Officer Tony Juarez had not asked Judge Andrew Hanen to deny the four – Rick Zayas, Ruben Cortez Jr., Rolando Aguilar and Joe Colunga – qualified immunity. That is, that Juarez had not specifically complained in his lawsuit that the four not be immune from prosecution if in the course of their activities as trustees that had violated his constitutional rights.
Let's make sure we got this right.
They're not saying they didn't violate them. They're just saying that even if they did, they should be held immune for their actions because Juarez's lawsuit did not specifically state he wanted the immunity denied.
Because Hanen told the four – and the school district – that he was denying the previous motion for a stay of the trial until the defendants could find an appealable issue upon which to petition for the stay, that opened the door to their petition which he granted the second time around.
The four are already appealing his order that found Juarez had shown enough evidence to go to court where he alleged that he was fired in retaliation for not going along with a scheme to use the grievance process to fire former Superintendent Hector Gonzales.
The court also found that evidence presented by Juarez – including tape recordings and other documentation – indicated that the four had refused to renew his contract as a result of Juarez engaging in protected speech. That is, because instead of going along with the scheme to get rid of Gonzales, Juarez instead went to the FBI with evidence allegedly showing that the majority was attempting to manipulate the bidding process in the granting of a million Stop-Loss insurance contract worth potentially some $38 million.
The moral and political bankruptcy of the majority on the board cannot be more obvious.
Listen children and you shall hear...
Once upon a time (two years ago in 2008) there was a school district in South Texas that was $8 million in the black, had just been awarded one of the most coveted and prestigious academic achievement prizes (the Broad Award), and its school board was also declared the winner of the CUBE Award.
Enter new board members Rick Zayas (who defeated Pat Lehman) and Catalina Presas-Garcia (who defeated Herman Otis Powers).
In no time at all, Zayas, Cortez, Colunga and Aguilar teamed up to become the formidable Gang of $4. Cortez and Zayas were already business partners in a corporation that provided commissary services for the county jail. They received that contract without bidding the first time. After a public firestorm ensued over the issue, the contract was put out for bids and they again received it. The pair claims that the fact that a chief deupty is Cortez's cousin had nothing to do with them getting the contract.
The well-paid attorneys for the Gang of $4 on the Brownsville Independent School District looked long and hard to find any hook upon which to base their petition before a federal judge to stay what will probably be a standing-room only trial where their scheming and conniving will be laid bare for the world to see.
In the end, their only hope to delay the opening of the trial lay in their claim that former BISD Chief Financial Officer Tony Juarez had not asked Judge Andrew Hanen to deny the four – Rick Zayas, Ruben Cortez Jr., Rolando Aguilar and Joe Colunga – qualified immunity. That is, that Juarez had not specifically complained in his lawsuit that the four not be immune from prosecution if in the course of their activities as trustees that had violated his constitutional rights.
Let's make sure we got this right.
They're not saying they didn't violate them. They're just saying that even if they did, they should be held immune for their actions because Juarez's lawsuit did not specifically state he wanted the immunity denied.
Because Hanen told the four – and the school district – that he was denying the previous motion for a stay of the trial until the defendants could find an appealable issue upon which to petition for the stay, that opened the door to their petition which he granted the second time around.
The four are already appealing his order that found Juarez had shown enough evidence to go to court where he alleged that he was fired in retaliation for not going along with a scheme to use the grievance process to fire former Superintendent Hector Gonzales.
The court also found that evidence presented by Juarez – including tape recordings and other documentation – indicated that the four had refused to renew his contract as a result of Juarez engaging in protected speech. That is, because instead of going along with the scheme to get rid of Gonzales, Juarez instead went to the FBI with evidence allegedly showing that the majority was attempting to manipulate the bidding process in the granting of a million Stop-Loss insurance contract worth potentially some $38 million.
The moral and political bankruptcy of the majority on the board cannot be more obvious.
Listen children and you shall hear...
Once upon a time (two years ago in 2008) there was a school district in South Texas that was $8 million in the black, had just been awarded one of the most coveted and prestigious academic achievement prizes (the Broad Award), and its school board was also declared the winner of the CUBE Award.
Enter new board members Rick Zayas (who defeated Pat Lehman) and Catalina Presas-Garcia (who defeated Herman Otis Powers).
In no time at all, Zayas, Cortez, Colunga and Aguilar teamed up to become the formidable Gang of $4. Cortez and Zayas were already business partners in a corporation that provided commissary services for the county jail. They received that contract without bidding the first time. After a public firestorm ensued over the issue, the contract was put out for bids and they again received it. The pair claims that the fact that a chief deupty is Cortez's cousin had nothing to do with them getting the contract.
The Gang had an agenda and it all revolved around getting rid of Gonzales as super and replacing him with a pliant sycophant who would act out their desires.
And they also set out to reward their supporters and political allies.
They found ground for their agenda along different avenues.
Gonzales had ordered an investigation into the activities of the former A.D. Joe Rodriguez. The investigation had produced two damning reports that indicated district policy (and perhaps criminal law) had been violated. They were lengthy tomes that specifically listed the alleged offenses.
The majority on the board was satisfied to sit on the reports and even went as far as to take the Texas Attorney General's Office to court after its ruling ruling that they were public information. They also stymied the local newspaper's efforts to get a hold of them.
It wasn't until the reports had been published on local blogs and copies found their way into the public arena that they relented and released the reports. When one of the board members felt it was her fiduciary duty to report suspected wrongdoing to Cameron County District Attorney Armando Villalobos, Rodriguez sued her. The depositions, etc., amounted to nothing. But not before the board members had accrued a sizeable legal bill (some say $3,000) which the majority – out of spite – voted not to pay.
Mando, of course, did nothing on the matter.
Rodriguez, whose golden parachute amounted to spending the better part of six months doing nothing for his pay, was allegedly also paid an additional $90,000 upon his "retirement" in June.
Another fertile avenue was the investigation that Gonzales launched into Special Services Department. That department had become a cash cow for consultants, attorneys, and the parents of some of the students in the department.
Art Rendon – a former Sheriff Department investigator – found whennhe took over in 2006 that the due process hearings had become the equivalent of an ATM machine for attorneys who would file a grievance, skip over the mediation part entirely, and move on to the settlement. During the gravy days, scores of lawsuits totalling $100,000s in settlements were paid out.
Rendon provided Villalobos with evidence concerning the suspected fraud and abuse in the due process hearing system for special education students.
And they also set out to reward their supporters and political allies.
They found ground for their agenda along different avenues.
Gonzales had ordered an investigation into the activities of the former A.D. Joe Rodriguez. The investigation had produced two damning reports that indicated district policy (and perhaps criminal law) had been violated. They were lengthy tomes that specifically listed the alleged offenses.
The majority on the board was satisfied to sit on the reports and even went as far as to take the Texas Attorney General's Office to court after its ruling ruling that they were public information. They also stymied the local newspaper's efforts to get a hold of them.
It wasn't until the reports had been published on local blogs and copies found their way into the public arena that they relented and released the reports. When one of the board members felt it was her fiduciary duty to report suspected wrongdoing to Cameron County District Attorney Armando Villalobos, Rodriguez sued her. The depositions, etc., amounted to nothing. But not before the board members had accrued a sizeable legal bill (some say $3,000) which the majority – out of spite – voted not to pay.
Mando, of course, did nothing on the matter.
Rodriguez, whose golden parachute amounted to spending the better part of six months doing nothing for his pay, was allegedly also paid an additional $90,000 upon his "retirement" in June.
Another fertile avenue was the investigation that Gonzales launched into Special Services Department. That department had become a cash cow for consultants, attorneys, and the parents of some of the students in the department.
Art Rendon – a former Sheriff Department investigator – found whennhe took over in 2006 that the due process hearings had become the equivalent of an ATM machine for attorneys who would file a grievance, skip over the mediation part entirely, and move on to the settlement. During the gravy days, scores of lawsuits totalling $100,000s in settlements were paid out.
Rendon provided Villalobos with evidence concerning the suspected fraud and abuse in the due process hearing system for special education students.
He said he discovered the alleged fraud and abuse made the department's billings for due process hearings shoot up during the 2007-2008 school year.
He also said he provided information concerning the district's need for additional licensed specialists in school psychology. Allegedly improper LSSP evaluations provided the basis for allegedly fraudulent due process hearings, which at one point were costing BISD $12,000 per day, according to a memo provided to board members prior to a Dec. 16 board meeting.
The lawsuits centered mostly around the use of unscientifically-supported evaluations of special needs students by unqualified testers.
The lawsuits centered mostly around the use of unscientifically-supported evaluations of special needs students by unqualified testers.
The law firm defending the school district at one time sent Rendon a letter which he shared with BISD counsel Mike Saldaña and Gonzales where legal counsel advised the district not to use the flawed evaluation tests because they were "legally indefensible."
The Gang of $4, who had promised their supporters to stop the meddling Rendon and Gonzales from killing the goose that laid the golden eggs, moved to remove Gonzales and Rendon from the picture.
So what if some normal children were labeled "special needs" incorrectly and vice-versa with some children in need of special services diagnosed as "normal?" The district had goog intentions, and the professionals administering these flawed test were "guena gente, no?"
The opportunity to can Gonzales would be provided by Juarez, they thought.
Here was a CFO just hired the previous fall who could be used to make Gonzales a scapegoat for the insurance contract that they wanted to award to local broker Johnny Cavazos.
Hanen traced the origins of the case to the recommendation by Juarez to the board that they grant the district's Stop-Loss insurance contract to American Administration General. Evidence indicated that at least three trustees - Colunga, Aguilar, and Cortez - objected strongly to his recommendation that ultimately culminated in them ordering former superintendent Hector Gonzales to terminate Juarez's employment with the district.
Juarez had started working for the BISD as its CFO in the fall of 2008 and one of his duties was to make insurance recommendations to the BISD board of trustees.
On Sept. 16, Juarez recommended that the district select AAG as its Stop-Loss carrier. At the heart of the dispute is Juarez's claim that he was demoted and ultimately terminated from employment by the BISD and the defendants personally because he recommend that the board award Health Smart (AGG) the district's Stop-Loss Insurance policy instead of to Oklahoma-based Mutual Assurance Administrators, Inc.
On Aug. 12, trustees awarded that contract for the 2009-2010 to MAA for $181,275 per month.
At the time of the award, HealthSmart complained that its contract renewal efforts did not receive fair consideration by the district’s Employee Insurance Committee or the Board of Trustees.
Sources also said that the four votes on the majority – Aguilar, Colunga, Cortez, and Zayas – were acting in concert to award the lucrative contract to the company brokered by local insurance mogul Cavazos, who stood to make close to $4 million on commissions.
After an unsuccessful campaign by the conspirator trustees to get Juarez to file a grievance against Gonzales, the former CFO went to the FBI instead and complained abut the bid manipulation and retaliation by the four.
Today, a short two years after the gelling of the Gang of $4 majority, the district has had to dip into its reserves the last two years and is spending more than it takes in in revenues, has scrapped pay raises for teachers, and the district has indeed gone from "Broad to Broke."
Had enough of this fairy tale children?
The Gang of $4, who had promised their supporters to stop the meddling Rendon and Gonzales from killing the goose that laid the golden eggs, moved to remove Gonzales and Rendon from the picture.
So what if some normal children were labeled "special needs" incorrectly and vice-versa with some children in need of special services diagnosed as "normal?" The district had goog intentions, and the professionals administering these flawed test were "guena gente, no?"
The opportunity to can Gonzales would be provided by Juarez, they thought.
Here was a CFO just hired the previous fall who could be used to make Gonzales a scapegoat for the insurance contract that they wanted to award to local broker Johnny Cavazos.
Hanen traced the origins of the case to the recommendation by Juarez to the board that they grant the district's Stop-Loss insurance contract to American Administration General. Evidence indicated that at least three trustees - Colunga, Aguilar, and Cortez - objected strongly to his recommendation that ultimately culminated in them ordering former superintendent Hector Gonzales to terminate Juarez's employment with the district.
Juarez had started working for the BISD as its CFO in the fall of 2008 and one of his duties was to make insurance recommendations to the BISD board of trustees.
On Sept. 16, Juarez recommended that the district select AAG as its Stop-Loss carrier. At the heart of the dispute is Juarez's claim that he was demoted and ultimately terminated from employment by the BISD and the defendants personally because he recommend that the board award Health Smart (AGG) the district's Stop-Loss Insurance policy instead of to Oklahoma-based Mutual Assurance Administrators, Inc.
On Aug. 12, trustees awarded that contract for the 2009-2010 to MAA for $181,275 per month.
At the time of the award, HealthSmart complained that its contract renewal efforts did not receive fair consideration by the district’s Employee Insurance Committee or the Board of Trustees.
Sources also said that the four votes on the majority – Aguilar, Colunga, Cortez, and Zayas – were acting in concert to award the lucrative contract to the company brokered by local insurance mogul Cavazos, who stood to make close to $4 million on commissions.
After an unsuccessful campaign by the conspirator trustees to get Juarez to file a grievance against Gonzales, the former CFO went to the FBI instead and complained abut the bid manipulation and retaliation by the four.
Today, a short two years after the gelling of the Gang of $4 majority, the district has had to dip into its reserves the last two years and is spending more than it takes in in revenues, has scrapped pay raises for teachers, and the district has indeed gone from "Broad to Broke."
Had enough of this fairy tale children?
6 comments:
we've had enough of your brown ass, montoya. Get a job, vato!
BISD
The only problem is that this fairy tale does not seem to have an ending. It is a never-ending story of more corrupt and payoffs than the movie The Godfather. Like you say, they better start planning for a big enough room to hold the trial because you are going to have a wall-to-wall carpet of interested citizens and underpaid teachers and personnel attending. Like someone said before, let's sell tickets and give the proceeds to Presas-Garcia for her defense funds since the board decided not to help her with them. Que vuerguenza para las familias de estos cuatro ratas!
So who was the special services administrator during the 2007-2008 school year when the dept. billings for due process shot up??? does anyone know?
Anon
Fuck you, can't take the heat
Declaring bankruptcy is normally a difficult issue. Where really should one commence? What forms of bankruptcy should a person apply for? How the current bankruptcy regulations affect an individual's case? What are going to be the results of a bankruptcy declaring? You have only one opportunity, so it's in fact vital that you have it ideal at the primary try. This really is why selecting the suitable Bankruptcy Lawyers is necessary.
Was it Judy Higgens or Susan Fox?
Post a Comment