Let’s look at the position summary for the city attorney’s department according to the fiscal year 2020 budget.
They have:
- a city attorney
- a deputy city attorney
- a legislative attorney
- four senior assistant city attorneys
- a trial section supervisor
- fifteen assistant city attorneys
Compare that with EPISD that has a general counsel and an assistant general counsel.
We deserve better
Brutus
elpasospeak 
Seems we might be a little over-medicated…
LikeLike
And Then the EPISD hires lawyers from around Austin all the time. I guess Cabrera’s old friends need the work.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Before Cabrera came to EPISD they didn’t have any attorneys; they just hired them as needed. Does the in-house counsel save EPISD money or are they just lawyered-up because JC, a lawyer, values lawyers?
LikeLike
Wrong! They just weren’t in-house. Do an open records request on fees associated with the law firm who represented the district prior to Cabrera compared to in-house counsel. Please share your results with all.
LikeLike
Prove it!
LikeLike
With that much of a legal staff, why does the city constantly hire high-priced outside help?
LikeLike
Dan should be able to provide insight into how much EPISD spent on lawyers when he was on the Board and if they had in-house counsel or hired outside representation.
LikeLike
And they seem to always have to hire and “outside” attorney for court litigation – what good are they?
LikeLiked by 1 person
But rarely do those outside attorney fees stay in El Paso.
LikeLike
Each city department is assigned an attorney who vets contracts. POs, etd. When I ran the broadband Program we purchased software licenses and executed contracts with vendors, all of which had to be approved in the attorney’s office. You don’t just do this stuff on your own.
LikeLike
Then why bother having and paying that size of a staff? Just have the city attorney and a few executive assistants to do the hiring of outside attorneys when needed.
LikeLike
And a partridge in a pear tree (popular Christmas tune).
LikeLike
If you check the Dec. 9 special agenda item #5 you will notice that the city is going to ask for $46,026,015.50 in another Certificate of Obligation. It says it is to match the Montana RTS project grant money. But that is not the case because if you look at the accompanying chart it doesn’t show that amount in there. And if you check out the Nov. 12 budget update you will see where the city is using debt to get around the 3.5% on the property tax. Because the cap is only on the O&M and not on the debt side. So by raising the debt level they can go beyond the 3.5% rate cap. Also you will see where they are also going to restructure the debt management policy.
LikeLike
That’s what the City Attorney told City Council, but she lied.
From the Texas Tribune:
But the measure includes one controversial provision that requires many cities, counties and other taxing units to hold an election if they wish to raise 3.5% more property tax revenue than the previous year. The growth rate excludes taxes levied on new construction and can be averaged over three years, allowing taxing units to exceed the 3.5% threshold in some of them.
https://www.texastribune.org/2019/06/12/abbott-signs-property-tax-bill-sb2/
You know, her husband is the minister at Abundant Living. I think it says something in the bible about lying.
LikeLike