By Juan Montoya
Someone close to Texas Southmost College trustee Dr. Rey Garcia, DDS. (retired), should tell him that as someone the people elected to the board of the community college he is entrusted to protect the property and interests of that institution.
Why do we say that?
TSC is currently embroiled in a lawsuit in federal court where former president Lily Tercero on May 2016 sued TSC for unlawful termination. She was terminated for at least nine reasons, including her renewal of the windstorm insurance policy without board approval that exceeded $1 million in costs for the coverage.
Trustees Reynaldo Garcia and Art Rendon voted against the motion for dismissal, while Chairwoman Adela Garza, Vice Chairman Trey Mendez, and Trustees Ruben Herrera, Ramon Champion Hinojosa (since passed), and Tony Zavaleta voted for dismissal.
Tercero’s employment contract was set to expire May 1, 2019. She received an annual base salary of $228,228, according to the lawsuit.
Tercero is requesting her salary, compensatory damages and punitive damages in an amount to be determined at trial, an award of reasonable attorney fees and costs, and an order to direct the board to open their illegally closed deliberations. If she prevails, that could easily amount to millions TSC and its insurers will have to pay.
Tercero’s employment contract was set to expire May 1, 2019. She received an annual base salary of $228,228, according to the lawsuit.
Tercero is requesting her salary, compensatory damages and punitive damages in an amount to be determined at trial, an award of reasonable attorney fees and costs, and an order to direct the board to open their illegally closed deliberations. If she prevails, that could easily amount to millions TSC and its insurers will have to pay.
As the case winds its way through federal court, the Tercero and the trustees have to go through depositions by the opposing counsel. In the Tercero deposition, she was asked whether she knew of the report on the windstorm insurance renewal that was presented to the board members in executive session.
TSC's attorneys asked Tercero whether she had seen a copy of the confidential report.
"Yes," she answered."
"Who gave it to you?," she was aksed.
"A board member," she answered.
"And what board member was that?," the lawyers asked.
"Dr. Rey Garcia,"" she answered.
Now, Tercero is suing TSC and asking the court to award her millions from the college coffers.
Garcia – whose fiduciary (that word again) duties include protecting the college's assets and keeping information that might harm the TSC's interests confidential – has betrayed that responsibility by releasing information to an adversary.
And he is asking TSC voters to reelect him May 2018?
16 comments:
Just a couple of point.
1. At the time the report was given to her, she was President of the college and not an adversary.
2. Garcia could argue that giving the President all the facts was in the best interest of the college.
I worked at TSC and was not and am not a fan of Tercero, but still things are not as black and white as you paint them.
At Anon November 17, 2017 12:15 PM
If the board wanted her to be aware of the report they would have given her a copy . It was not up to Rey Garcia to decide on his own that she should be given a copy. If he felt so righteous about it he should have brought it up during the board meeting and not been underhanded about leaking it.
Garcia is madly in �� with Tercero
Dr. Tercero requested that her deliberations be in open session but board illegally went into close session disregarding her right to open deliberations as requested. Now Montoya is crying foul.
Why was the report presented in Executive Session? This involves millions of our tax dollars where's the transparency why not show the report to the President of TSC? If you're going to hold her accountable she needs to know Why?
Bottom line she is the ultimate responsible for the operations of this institution. These board members shouldn't be micro-managing! Where are their fiduciary duties?
Dr. Tercero requested that her deliberations be in open session but board illegally went into close session disregarding her right to open deliberations as requested. Now Montoya is crying foul.
If the report had factual and valid reasons to terminate her, why is the board so concerned she has a copy? After all, these are the reasons for firing her. Board can rest easy they will win.
How did Montoya get the information from executive session? Was it leaked by Garza, Herrera, Mendez or all of the above? Talk about fiduciary duty while under litigation, dah!!! Just saying!
A copy of what she rightful should have. Those who failed to notify her were not giving her due process and they will find out when they have to sign the check for Dr. Tercero, so she can sit back and laugh at all of them. Adela is suppose to be the leader and so what happened to her? Same mess she had in Los Fresnos. What happened to your ploy to fire Lily to hire Atkinson? Obviously, the rest of the board were smart enough to know not to mingle with people like her - selfish, vindictive, sore loser, shit-doesn't-smell, queer. Go Lily
and go Dr. Garcia. Make things right and get your well deserved settlement.
"Much ado about nothing!" to quote Bill Shakespeare. The minute following TSC lawyers filing an answer to Tercero's law suit, Tercero's lawyers would have filed discovery motions to produce the document in question. The motion would be granted without question.
Garcia just saved the College some attorney's billable hours. In layman's terms, Garcia's actions does not make a shit of difference.
Garcia's loyalty and duty should not be to any person or board, but to the taxpayers and he has betrayed that. Garcia should resign, he has no business on the board if he does not understand that Tercero is out to bleed the taxpayers. Garcia's misplaced loyalty is sad and shameful. Garcia is a nice man, but I will not vote for him again.
To 11:24am above: For your information, the board majority loyalty is to Adela and not to the college or taxpayers. The board majority ignorance of the law opened the door for Tercero “to bleed the taxpayers” as you put it. The inexperienced board majority invited litigation by disregarding the impact to the taxpayers. Like they say “ignorance is bliss”. Next time you vote, please make an informed decision otherwise you’ll be “bleeding the taxpayers”even more. And yes I know you are a nice person.
It has nothing to do with Adela or anyone, it has to do with protecting taxpayers in the lawsuit filed by Tercero. The fact is, Garcia needs to defend TSC and not be assisting Tercero. Garcia was put their by the taxpayers and not Tercero.
Change your diaper!
Tercero had to go for many valid reasons. If the Board had just terminate her, they would have to buy out her contract. The Board chose to terminate her for cause, to save the cost of a contract buyout, hoping their "cause" would stand up in court. Everybody knew that a lawsuit would follow the termination for cause and hoped they could settle it for less than the cost of a contract buy out.
If there was a Board mistake in all of this, it would have been the choice, not to buy out her contract. It would probably proven to be cheaper in the long run. If my sources are correct, it was Tony Zavaleta that was the moving force in that decision. His principal campaign talking point was Tercero's head on a platter. He wanted to be the all knowing college administrator who would replace Tercero and the next President of TSC. It didn't work out that way and neither has the decision to terminate Tercero for cause. What ever Zavaleta had going for him in the past, isn't working well any more.
I am enjoying reading all the comments and back and forth between the current board members and past board members. They are the only ones who care about this. Bottom line is that the former president sucked. The board made a decision and they got sued. Predictable. Lets see how it plays out. Im not going to fault the board for firing an inept president. And presumably, they have some type of insurance to defend them on this lawsuit. Not paying from tax coffers, which they would have done via buyout.
Post a Comment