Cobb School Board rejects taking bids for attorney fees
by Hannah Morgan
October 11, 2013 12:47 AM | 2966 views | 4 4 comments | 7 7 recommendations | email to a friend | print
Kathleen Angelucci is the new Post 4 school board member. <br> Photo by Anthony Stalcup
Kathleen Angelucci is the new Post 4 school board member.
Photo by Anthony Stalcup
slideshow
MARIETTA — The Cobb Board of Education brushed off a proposal Wednesday to discuss taking bids for the district’s legal services, which has remained in the hands of the same law firm for two decades.

The district pays $75,409.10 each month to Marietta-based Gregory, Doyle, Calhoun and Rodgers LLC to represent Cobb County schools on all matters, except litigation, specialized discrimination matters and bonds.

The firm changed its name from Brock, Clay, Calhoun and Rogers LLC to its current name earlier this year, and has been the legal representation for the district since 1989, when Cobb County schools had about 60,000 students, an enrollment that has risen to 106,262 students.

It appears they are here to stay.

When Kathleen Angelucci, who represents north Cobb on the board, introduced the discussion at Wednesday’s work session, her colleagues on the board appeared disgruntled by the discussion.

“I wanted to discuss giving a contract with a law firm to show the public how we are spending their money,” she said.

The board does not have a long-term contract with Doyle’s firm, said Chairman Randy Scamihorn.

Each month, the agreement rolls over, allowing the board to continue to work with Doyle’s firm, without any formal discussion or agreement, Scamihorn said.

The board has never placed its legal services out for bid, according to the district.

Board attorney Clem Doyle sat through the discussion Wednesday and directed the board members’ legal concerns as they were asked.

Board members Scott Sweeney and Angelucci said they were in favor of looking into the district’s relationship with its legal services when they ran for office in 2010.

Sweeney was quoted in the MDJ in June 2010, during his run for a seat on the school board, as saying, “All contract evaluations, including legal services, should be done in the public view. An honest evaluation of the service will be conducted provided there are enough votes on the board to support this initiative.”

At a board meeting on Nov. 9, 2011, Sweeney said the board, which was then under the direction of former chairwoman Alison Bartlett, had a lengthy discussion and reviewed its relationship with Gregory, Doyle, Calhoun and Rogers.

The board compared its legal fees with other counties, including Atlanta, DeKalb, Fulton and Gwinnett, and, “we actually did see comparable expenses compared to neighboring districts. Cobb’s was among the lowest legal fees,” Sweeney said.

In 2010, DeKalb, which had about 7,000 more students than Cobb County, was paying $6 million annually for legal fees, nearly three times Cobb’s $1.8 million, according to previous MDJ reports.

The Cobb district paid $1.9 million for its legal representation in 2012.

The firm has 13 lawyers focused on representing Cobb County Schools, as well as Marietta City Schools and Clayton County Schools, Doyle said.

The school board’s policy requires that the board solicit bids for any services over $10,000, but excludes legal services, according to district staff.

At Wednesday’s work session, Sweeney compared the relationship between the firm and the school district to a family’s relationship with their pediatrician.

Other board members shared his opinion, taking turns speaking in opposition to Angelucci’s concerns.

Superintendent Michael Hinojosa didn’t think the current relationship between the firm and the district needed to be looked at, unless there was some sort of legislation passed that required the school to contract out its legal services, he said.

Board member David Banks said, “If it’s not broken, don’t try to fix it.”

Angelucci responded, “So how do we show the public what we get for their money?”

Doyle responded, “You all have broad leeway in how you handle this,” and leaned back from the table.

Brad Johnson, the district’s chief financial officer, said he would send board members a report of the district’s recent legal fees, but that they were budgeted in the general fund annually.

Johnson said this year’s budget is expected to have a deficit of nearly $80 million.

The district has paid Doyle’s firm nearly $5 million for its legal services in the last three years, according to the district.

“We are a big customer, so we deserve a bargain price,” said Scamihorn, who said he has researched other attorney’s fees, and is happy with his relationship with Doyle, as well as the amount of money the district pays Doyle’s firm.

The board eventually concluded that it was content with its current services, and board member Tim Stultz suggested that the group take a “vote of affirmation” to continue with its current law firm at its Oct. 24 meeting.

With board member David Morgan out of the room, the board voted 5-1, with Banks opposed to the suggestion.

“Everybody is satisfied with the services we are receiving,” Sweeney said.



Comments
(4)
Comments-icon Post a Comment
BobRobert
|
October 11, 2013
Given the amount of "bad" and downright wrong legal advice that has been given by the law firm over the years, you indeed wonder what the backroom relationship is between the board and the firm. Just because other counties are also cozy with their legal reps for exorbitant fees (Gwinnett should be investigated for sure), doesn't mean we should be too.

However, given the bad leadership by the board and superintendents for years, we've needed more representation than should be necessary, just not for the millions we've paid.
Just Wait
|
October 11, 2013
Over $75,000 a month in legal fees. Exactly what is the school board doing that requires this kind of expense each month? Is it just for oversight? Is it to have a lawyer at every meeting? Is the board being sued that much? And these fees do not cover all legal expenses. Now some on the board want to add another tax to us but they don't want to put legal services out to bid! This doesn't make sense.
JVD
|
October 11, 2013
The CCSD Procurement Org needs a Procurement Transformation.......
rjnsh
|
October 11, 2013
It is always fiscally prudent to compare costs for products and services. It is especially so when the "spender" is using someone's else's money. And, it should be an absolute responsibility if that "spender" is an elected official, using taxpayer money and concerned with public trust. There would be no requirement to change products or service providers but it would be smart to know how what you are paying stacks up against competitors. It is simply dumb not to know. Periodically all costs should be evaluated, its that simple....if, you are not in anyone's pocket.
*We welcome your comments on the stories and issues of the day and seek to provide a forum for the community to voice opinions. All comments are subject to moderator approval before being made visible on the website but are not edited. The use of profanity, obscene and vulgar language, hate speech, and racial slurs is strictly prohibited. Advertisements, promotions, and spam will also be rejected. Please read our terms of service for full guides