JUAREZ VS. BISD: A SORDID TALE UNFOLDS IN AMENDED COMPLAINT OF BID RIGGING AND RETALIATION

By Juan Montoya

As one reads through the 21-page amended complaint in the lawsuit filed by former Brownsville Independent School District Chief Financial Officer Tony Juarez, it becomes apparent that the majority on the board back in 2008 when his contract was not extended did not want to hear the recommendation that the insurer that best served the district's employees was not the one whose agent was Johnny Cavazos.

Juarez, after comparing the bids for the district's Stop-Loss insurance with at least three or four different consultants – including Kent Whittenmore – came to the conclusion that AAG insurance offered the district a better value for its employees coverage than did Mutual of Omaha, the company for which Cavazos was the agent of record.

But, unlike Mutual of Omaha, AAG's offer was recommended by Lance Pendly the district's insurance consultant who cited the company's "net of commissions and no agent of record" as factors in his recommendation.

Then, on Sept. 16, 2008, Juarez who had only been with the district for only three months, gave the board members his recommendation to contract with AAG and faced the wrath of the majority on the board, specifically Ruben Cortez and Joe Colunga. Not only did they object to the choice, but also accused Juarez of "misinforming" them on the best value. Adamant that Cavazos' company be awarded the contract, they send superintendent Hector Gonzalez to either fire Juarez or face the consequences himself.

At that meeting, both Cortez and Colunga "questioned (Juarez) redundantly about his recommendation. This culminated in the board launching an investigation and discussing Juarez's employment in violation of the Texas Open Meetings Act, his attorneys assert.

The lawsuit sates that: "By this time, and unbeknownst to Juarez, a conspiracy existed by and between various board members and others employed , and others not employed, by BISD. Co-conspirators included Joe Colunga, Rolando Aguilar, Rick Zayas, Miguel Saldana, Tony Resendez, Kent Wittenmore, Elizabeth Brito-Hatcher, and Otis Powers."

"The purpose of this conspiracy appears to have been, among other things, to coerce BISD employees to file false grievances and perform other coercive acts against BISD employees who chose not to engage in the illegal activities of the co-conspirators, and to prevent and/or discredit information about the conspiracy from reaching the public," Juarez's complaint states.

In fact, Wittenmore himself filed two grievances against Juarez, even though evidence shows that he had also recommended that AAG was the best value for the district.

Later, after board members learned that Juarez had gone with his lawyers to the FBI charging that they had conspired to rig the insurance contract, his contract was not extended.

"Instead of following the defendant trustees' illegal instructions to terminate Juarez, the superintendent allowed Juarez to "resigning" so he could be reassigned to other duties within the district," the complaint states. "When the defendant trustees learned that the superintendent had done this, they were outraged. Upon discovering this reassignment, trustee Aguilar and trustee Cortez went to the superintendent's office outraged. They both screamed, "why didn't you fire Tony? Why didn't you terminate him?"

Among the illegal acts reported by Juarez to the FBI were included some of the following criminal violations:

"A. Coercion of public servant, Gonzales, to illegally terminate (Juarez) in violation of his rights of due process in violation of the Texas Penal Code;

B. Coercion of a public servant, Juarez, to falsify a grievance against Gonzales or face nonrenewal of his contract, i.e. "constructive termination.

C. Bribery of a public official, regarding $500 paid to then sitting trustee Otis Powers...

D. Exercising improper influence over the Wittenmore grievance by then sitting trustee, Otis Powers ...

E. Participating in a closed meeting without the keeping of a certified agenda or recording of closed meeting in violation of the Texas Open Meeting Act (TOMA)...

F. Conspiring to circumvent TOMA by participation in illegal deliberations with less than a quorum in violation of TOMA...

G. Participating in a closed meeting not permitted by TOMA in violation of TOMA...

Juarez also alleges in his amended complaint that after the defendant trustees learned he had gone to the appropriate authorities and reported the alleged criminal acts he charges that they "thereafter engaged in additional, numerous acts of retaliation against him, including acts specifically intended to destroy his reputation in the community and in the education professions. (His) reporting of the boards' illegal activity bagan a whole new drive by the co-conspirators to do further damage to his career, reputation and job. The defendant trustees' goal was reached when they succeeded in nonrenewing Juarez' contract."

The amended complaint was filed at the direction of federal judge Andrew Hanen who gave his attorneys until April 13 to amend his original complaint and file it to include the alleged conspiratorial acts by the defendant trustees and others.

Earlier, Hanen's ruling that the four defendants were denied qualified immunity and would have to defend themselves as individuals as a violation of Juarez' First Amendment rights when they retaliated against him for going to the authorities. The defendants appealed his decision to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans and Hanen's order was upheld. The appeals court later refused a motion for rehearing of the same order.

Gonzales has filed a lawsuit against the district in a state district court.