BISD TO ISSUE RFQS TO REPLACE COUNSEL BALTAZAR SALAZAR

"XII.A.9. Discussion and possible action to issue a Request for Qualifications (RFQ) for general attorney legal services": Agenda for today's BISD board meeting.

By Juan Montoya

The last time the Brownsville Independent School District took proposals for board counsel it was in April 2013.

At the time, current board counsel Baltazar Salazar was chosen from among eight law firms which submitted a reply for the Request For Qualifications to the district. Salazar and his firm firm failed to provide their qualifications for 17 of the 51 categories of basic legal services listed by the district. 

Even the most ardent defenders of the BISD's board majority winced when they (Otis Powers, Enrique Escobedo, Hector Chirinos and Minerva Peña) move to replace the district's legal counsel without so much as a workshop to compare firms, or even a ranking of the firms that submitted their answers to the RFQ.

Without much discussion, the majority, in the blink of an eye, chose to terminate its contract with Thompson and Horton, L.L.P. and gave the firm a thirty (30) day grace period of transition.

Then they opted to hire Salazar, the Houston attorney who put in a sorry performance defending the BISD during the time that the controversy over the mold problem at Besteiro and Aiken elementary schools erupted.

No wonder Salazar addressed the board in such familiar terms. 

"I have been in touch with some of you before," he said at the meeting. "I know some of you personally. I grew up with some of you," nodding pointedly toward board member Minerva Peña.

But if that was a faux pas on his part, of the eight law firms which submitted a reply for the RFQ to the district, Salazar and his firm firm failed to provide their qualifications for 17 of the 51 categories of basic legal services listed by the district. For example, they "Did Not Disclose" their qualifications on:

1. Competitive bidding
2. Copyright Issues
3. Election Law advice
4. Employee Health Insurance Matters
5. Federal Voters Right Advice
6. Fiber Optic Communications System
7. Freedom of Religion Issues
8. Governmental Tort Claims
9. Intergovernmental Agreements
10. Intergovernmental Relations
11. Liability for Asbestos
12. Preventive Law
13. Public Utility Commission
14. State Whistle Blower Act Compliance
15. Texas Teacher Retirement System
16. University Interscholastic League
17. Utility Law Regulation

Could it have been some other factor that led Powers, Escobedo, Peña and Chirinos to opt for the mediocre firm which is lacking in such important qualifications?Of the eight firms, Salazar came in sixth in terms of years of public education experience.

Other firms such as O'Hanlon, McCullom and Demerath listed 75 years, Thornton, Biechlin, Segrato, Reynolds and Guerra listed 40 years, Gustavo Acevedo listed 45 years, Rogers, Morris and Grover listed 20 years, etc...But the kicker here is that in the category of school districts represented by the differing firms, Salazar ranked seventh of the eight with only 3 years.

At the top of the list was O'Hanlon, McCollum and Demerath with 102 districts, Thompson and Horton with 90 school districts, Rogers, Morris and Grover with 51 school districts, Thornton, Biechlin, Segrato, Reynolds and Guerra with 15 school districts, etc...

Clearly, the two firms that would have scored better on a ranking of the district by basic legal services provision ( of 51 listed as required by BISD), number of years in public education experience, and school district represented would have been O'Hanlon, McCullom and Demerath.

They had all 51 categories provided, 75 years of public education service, and 102 school district represented followed by Thornton, Biechlin, Segrato, Reynolds and Guerra, with all 51 categories provided, 40 years of public education experience and 15 school district represented, and Rogers, Morris and Grover with 34 categories of services provided, 20 years in public educations services and 51 school districts represented.

Compare this with Salazar's 43 categories provided, 18 years of public education services and three school districts represented.

Why did the board majority back ten choose the mediocre firm when they knew that O'Hanlon, McCullom and Demerath has among its clients the Texas Education Agency and the Texas Association of School Boards?

"What's going to happen is that Salazar will be referring BISD cases to other law firms because the firm doesn't have the qualifications to handle it in-house," said BISD administrator then. 

And sure enough, Salazar has farmed out cases he cannot handle to a number of firms, with, we assume, a referral payment made to his firm apart from his BISD salary.

Peña – his protector for the eight years that Salazar has been board counsel – has been a recipient of Salazar's campaign support. 

In 2013, his salary was $20,000 a month ($240,000 a year), and now stands at $25,000 a month to $300,000 a year, more than any other BISD employee aside from Superintendent Dr. Rene Gutierrez.

Salazar has embroiled the district in controversies over his alleged felony conviction, his financial support against board members he considers his enemies, his formation and support of PACs to attack certain candidates, and his animosity toward others. 

The new board which will receive the RFQs will have to decide whether political considerations will continue to guide their selection of  board counsel, or whether they will choose a firm that provides solid qualifications that will benefit the district.