CITY CONTRACT LAWYER SOSSI: SNATCHING PAYOFFS FROM DEFEAT

By Juan Montoya

Guess who else made out last week after the city commissioners decided to settle the eight-year-old case between the City of Brownsville and Zimmerman Construction Co.?
Assistant City Manager Pete Gonzalez, also the city’s finance director, said that the city and Zimmerman ultimately settled the litigation for $500,000, which includes the $266,000 the city had retained relative to a city project pending litigation.
Zimmerman filed a lawsuit against the city in 2003 in state district court claiming the city's withholding of the funds and the alleged delays with an airport improvement project had cost the firm more than $2 million.
A jury in 2005 found that the city was liable for $729,000, and the city argued sovereign immunity, contending that Zimmerman redirected personnel to other projects.
Then, instead of paying the original $266,000 it withheld from the construction firm, the city took some bad legal advice and went into court to contest the ruling.
In the end, instead of paying the $266,000, it paid Zimmerman an additional $244,000 and then paid contract attorney Mark Sossi $137,760 over the course of the next five years.
Sossi's supporters on the commission could well argue that Sossi saved the city the difference between $729,000 and $500,000 ($229,000), but others contend that if the city hadn't followed bad legal advice, it could have saved itself the $229,000 and the $137,760 paid to Sossi ($366,000).
In fact, Soosi has been making a very good living representing the city in his capacity as contract attorney for the city commission.
The city has been paying Sossi (DBA as Good Government Law Firm) $120,000 a year since March 2009. That does not include another $5,000 monthly paid to him by the Greater Brownsville Incentives Corporation (GBIC) a city entity. That totals to $180,000 for part time work.
The contract penned by the city which laid out the obligations of the contract attorney to the city – at five paragraphs – was a rather straightforward document. The city will pay Sossi or any successor firm to which he belongs $10,000 a month as a retainer. As a contract attorney, he will not be entitled to any employment benefits including insurance or cell phones. There is also no mention of mileage reimbursement or travel.
Furthermore, Sossi "will continue to represent the city on all pending legal matters he was representing the City prior to his being retained...an any work which is performed after his being retained...shall be covered by the monthly retainer..."
The only exception to this, the contract states, "shall be the case of the City of Brownsville vs Zimmerman Construction Co. which shall not be included in the retainer."
Since the time that Sossi came on board as a city attorney (March 2009) until the settlement of the Zimmerman case, city records indicate that he invoiced the city to the tune of $72,295. This was paid to Sossi apart from his $10,000 monthly retainer and the $5,000 by the GBIC.
This is a situation that rankles some local residents. Argelia Miller, in a letter to City Manager Cabler and then to new Mayor Tony Martinez says the arrangement constitutes nothing more than letting the fox guard the henhouse.
"I did hear that Mr. Sossi was handling a case (City of Brownsville vs. Zimmerman Construction) and therefore got paid more because of this case. Research indicated this case was in bankruptcy and had been inactive since 2006," she wrote.
Now the question becomes: If the Zimmerman Construction Company had filed for bankruptcy, what possible work could have Sossi invoiced th city for?
And while the monthly invoices ranged between $1,410 in Aug. 28, 2008, the last payment before the settlement was on June 24, 2011, for a whopping $9,390.
"That just makes me wonder whether anyone in the city is verifying that the costs invoiced by this attorney are legitimate," said longtime critic Moses Sorola. "Who's minding the store?"
Miller repeated a story getting told more often relating to Sossi's strange relationship with the law firm of Willette and Guerra. Willette and Guerra brought a lawsuit against Sossi in 2002 that ended in a settlement in favor of the law firm and against Sossi in 2004 in the sum of $167, 363.00.
Sossi then was an employee of Willette and Guerra and the law firm charged he kept money that belonged to the law firm. The court documents filed by the firm indicate he took money from the firm. The settlement was still on record as of 03-09-2009.
At the time I wrote the letter," Miller continues, "he had given Willette and Guerra city contracts in excess of $37,000. Now in 2011, records indicate he has given them contracts for over $75,000 from January to March 2011."
It seems odd, Miller continues, "that some one who filed a law suit against you and still has a judgment against you, would now be receiving favorable treatment in obtaining contracts with the City of Brownsville. Is this odd or a good way to reduce what you owe?
Paying these huge sums to an attorney would make sense if heis track record would justify it.
But Sorola remembers that when Sossi advised the commission to go to court to fight the lawsuit Sorola and others brought to stop the commissioners from continuing to take benefits not accorded them inthe city charter. In the benefits case, the city lost.
However, Sossi came out smelling like a new bale of alfalfa. Sorola claims that the lawsuit cost the city $40,000 in attorney fees that they paid to Sossi.
In the benefits case, the city lost and Sossi made $40,000. In the latest settlement with Zimmerman, the city lost, yet Sossi walked off with a nice $137,760 payoff. In which other profession can a person continue losing and continue getting a chunk of the pie?
Now, as the Martinez administration gears up to make us Believe in Brownsville, guess who the mayor appointed to draft the vaunted Code of Ethics?
Would you believe Mark Sossi?