WAITING FOR THE SHOE TO DROP ON DILLARD FOI REQUEST

By Juan Montoya
Last time the City of Brownsville recurred to the delay and evasion techniques of asking for a Texas Attorney General's Opinion on whether to release information concerning a local professional, its lawyers eventually honor the request and hand over the information.
Now we are at that crossroads again, this time involving the payments and invoices of vendor Diane Dillard, a real estate attorney allegedly hand-picked by Mayor Tony Martinez to assist him (and the rest of the city commission) to speculate in downtown real estate.
Some have alleged that Da Mayor steered the $250-per-hour gig to federal Diane Dillard, wife of federal judge Andrew Hanen as a quid pro quo for keeping supposed incriminating testimony under wraps that might have surfaced in the Abel Limas, Armando Villalobos cases against the mayor's son and attorney Trey Martinez.
The younger Martinez was treasurer to Limas and Villalobos during their last campaigns. Both men lost, Limas in 2010 and Villalobos in 2012.
This, like the mayor's downtown land purchases on behalf of the city, as far as we know is pure speculation. Unless there is someone willing to come forward and say they hear or saw Martinez and Hanen enter into a deal to steer business her way, it remains that, speculation.
What we do know is only that the city made payments to Dillard and now refuse to release the reason for the it paid for the invoices because they claim the Texas Information Act "provides no particular procedure" for obtaining the services for which she was paid $34,124 for the period from November 2011 to August 2013.

The information request from El Rrun-Rrun was for:
1. for "all disbursements to vendor Diane Dillard" and,
2. "all responses to city RFPs (Requests For Production(?) (sic) Proposals from vendor Diane Dillard."
According to the City Assistant Attorney Allison Bastian, "as the Professional Services Procurement Act does not apply to the solicitation of legal services, and state law provides no particular procedure for obtaining such services, the city has nothing in response to Item 2.
"The city does have invoices from Ms. Dillard which address item 1," Bastian wrote. "We are releasing those to you in redacted form; it is however, the city's position that portions of these items are subject to withholding exceptions pursuant to the Texas Public Information Act. The city is therefore seeking the opinion regarding the redaction of these portions. Should the Attorney General subsequently rule the items you seek may be released, we will do so at that time."
In other words, Bastian and the city are taking the position that the public does not have the right to demand to know how their money is spent and how much was paid and for what purpose to any vendor, specifically one for legal services. At most, this will only buy them time before the Attorney General overrules their objections and they order city attorneys to release the information.
It is noteworthy that the invoices handed by Dillard to the city were addressed "The City of Brownsville, c/o Mayor Tony Martinez" and not to the city's Finance of Legal Department for approval.
The invoices were approved by City Manager Charlie Cabler.
Both invoices submitted to the city by Dillard were dated August 1, 2013. The first covered the period from November 12, 2012 to July 31, 2013 for which she charged 44.25 hours and was paid $11,062. The invoices' section dealing with "services" was blackened out entirely and does not state the services she rendered for payment, although there were 32 instances for which she was paid.
The second invoice – also dated August 1, 2013 – covered the period from January 17, 2013 to July 31, 2013 and has 45 instances when she charged for work performed in as many days. Those 45 charges totaled 92.25 hours for which she was paid $23,062.50 for a total of both invoices of $34,124.50.
Both invoices have been blacked out in the spaces where Dillard describes the work she performed for the city payments.
In her letter to the Attorney General, Bastian says "Diane Dillard is a local real estate attorney representing the city on certain real estate matters."
There have been may questions regarding the binge of real estate speculation for which Martinez has been the driving force. Some of the purchases have included the Casa Del Nylon property for which the city paid $2.3 million and which belonged to Martinez political supporter Abraham Golonsky. Golonsky was represented in that negotiations with the city by Martinez's law firm partner Horacio Barrera.
As to the responses to city RFPs for the real estate transactions, the city holds the position that it does not have to provide that information.
To tell our four readers the truth, we don't believe that the city has any responses for RFPs from Ms. Dillard, and that it was probably Martinez steering the jobs trying to win favor from the federal bench. He, his son, and his law firm practice before Hanen and the rest of the judiciary.
Ms. Dillard is a top-flight real estate attorney in her on right. In fact, among one of her major accomplishments is the writing of a Conflict-Of-Interest section on real-estate ethic law. Can she, Martinez, and and the city live up to those convictions?