School Board Attorney to make $295,000 + + +

Issue: On Monday the Douglas County School board will consider a contract for Sherrod & Bernard to be paid $295,000+ as General Counsel. This is in addition to the approx.$200,000 Mr. Bernard is paid as County Attorney!

Action Requested: This decision should be delayed to perform due diligence and ascertain the salary commensurate with actual responsibilities.

Context: This is not a question of legality nor a black mark against Sherrod & Bernard. Companies exist to make money, including law firms. It is a question of what a person elected to the School Board should consider reasonable, necessary and not excessive in adhering to their fiduciary responsibility within the context of their mission: Provide a quality education for all students in a safe, supportive environment.

Please call your school board member to express your support of their acting on the best interests of the tax payers, educators and our children…

Mike Miller, District One; James Bartlett, District Two; Larry Barnes, District Three; Sam Haskell, District Four; and Jeff Morris, District Five.

I posed several questions, to School Board member, Mr. Miller, NONE of which was he able to answer.

We need the board to give us answers!

1. What are attorneys paid in similar metro Atlanta school districts?

2. When was the last time the School Board performed a comprehensive review of the year's cases to understand the demands incumbent upon the attorney?

3. What percent and amount of money has the school board attorney made from past bond issues?

4. What amount has the School Board paid to outside legal counsel in addition to Mr. Bernard's salary and for what reason?

5. What additional cost does the School Board incur for legal representation as a result of Mr. Bernard representing both the School Board and County?(Certainly Mr. Bernard recuses himself from any discussion or contracts between the County and School Board given the obvious conflict.)

6. I understand there is a 3 year contract in place for Mr. Bernard. Is it legal for a past School Board to have agreed to a 3 year contract that places a burden or mandate on the current school board? Why is Mr. Bernard creating a new contract if he has another year remaining on the current contract?

Here are answers to the questions he did have...

1. Does the attorney provide any documentation?
ANSWER: Yes, a monthly invoice with a total sum owed and an explanation as follows:“For services rendered.” That’s it.

2. What accounting exists of Mr. Bernard’s actual time and responsibilities from the past 12 months to use as a basis for assessing value and appropriateness of salary for the next 12 months?
ANSWER: None

3. Are you aware of any other school board attorney contracts that guarantee the balance of the contract be paid in full in addition to a 6 month severance should the contract be terminated or NOT RENEWED. Essentially to hire a different attorney the School Board would have to pay Sherrod & Bernard $147,500 for the privilege to hire a different law firm.
ANSWER: No, I’m not aware of any other clauses that are so stringent.

4. Does the School Board have any mechanism or set of criteria by which to decide compensation for the attorney? Is it incumbent upon Sherrod & Bernard to present any defense of their fees or do they just say,“This is what I think I should be paid,” and you just decided yes or no.
ANSWER: They present their contract and the board votes yes or no with some limited discussion in executive session. No documentation or history has been presented thus far.

I understand Carrollton actually pays “Per services rendered” which amounted to about $40,000 last year. Paulding pays an hourly rate of $150 up to 20 hours per week. Any time over that is paid at a higher rate and requires pre-approval on a case by case basis by the board.

In all fairness to Mr. Miller, I should state that he claims to have asked for certain information since being elected to which he has not been provided and in my dealings with him I have no reason to doubt him. In fact, I helped with his campaign specifically because I believed we needed an honest dealer on the School Board. 1 or 2 honest dealers doesn’t get the job done on a board of 5.

Please call your School Board member and let them know they have your support to research the solution that is in the best interest of tax payers, educators and students and one based on an acceptable standard of reasonableness.

This appears to be a rip off of the taxpayers dollars yet again in Douglas County. There are so many ways the BOE could save money without having to resort to letting teachers and other staff go. Some county, I believe Fayette, saved $40K by having the 12 month employees only work 4 days a week during the summer. The savings came from utility costs. Others have saved money with supplies such as copy paper, they can only do double sided copies. What about the lunch room, stop offering so many choices, you can buy in greater bulk quantitites that way. We had one choice when I was in school and you ate what was given to you. They need to start thinking outside the box more and be more creative. There are only so many "cuts" that you can make, they need to think about other ways to save.

This has got to stop! How can it be ethical to pay an attorney $300,000 and not be able to state what this money does for our county school system!! There needs to be an investigation as to why this is happening and how long this has gone on. Sounds like a "good ole boy" system of "you pat my back and I'll pat yours". I am also in District One. Mike Miller- what are you/ we going to do???

Yes, he is over paid. But, if you compare to other counties, he's not. Paulding and Carroll are not exactly a good comparison. Try comparing to Fulton or Cobb. He has a staff that can handle the work load, whereas, in the past our attorney's didn't have proper staff to handle things properly.

Bernard isn't part of the good ole boy system. He's from Lithia and has no "family" ties to Old Douglasville. If he did, it wouldn't matter. He's actually a good attorney. He's better than what we had in the past and probably saves the county money in lawsuits.

The good thing about your comparison being in a public job is you can look up the salary. He would be getting paid over three times that of the Paulding County attorney.

And Bernard not a good ole boy HA!- He is the puppet master of the good ole boys. He has his hand in so many pockets and up so many skirts he should be a freak octopus.

Here is another conflict for ya - school board attorney and county attorney. Let's look into the land deals between the county and the school board.

Not Even Close wrote:

The good thing about your comparison being in a public job is you can look up the salary. He would be getting paid over three times that of the Paulding County attorney.
And Bernard not a good ole boy HA!- He is the puppet master of the good ole boys. He has his hand in so many pockets and up so many skirts he should be a freak octopus.
Here is another conflict for ya - school board attorney and county attorney. Let's look into the land deals between the county and the school board.

I agree with you, being an attorney for the county and school board is a conflict and that should be changed.

ANON ME: "If you compare to Fulton & Cobb."

I think that is a fascinating statement considering members of the school board I called yesterday were not able to tell me what other attorneys made. I called other school districts who invited me to file a Open Records Act Request. How again, do you know what other school board attorney's make? And do you really think Fulton is comparable to Douglas? How do you know, if Kenney has never had to produce proof of what he actually does. Its a rubber stamp.

As far as having a staff to handle things, how many other attorneys in addition to Bernard were paid either directly or through Sherrod & Bernard.
- I understand Mr. Bernard doesn't handle real estate matters. That's Hartley Rowe & Fowler.
- He doesn't handle contracts for school vendors. The Board office staff do that without an attorney's oversight.
- He doesn't handle bonds himself. He charges to farm them out to someone else, though.
- He doesn't even show up at all the tribunals. He hires a former associate to do that.

Soooo, what again are we paying for? His 2 houses at the beach, perhaps.

Interesting that his contract states all the terms of what is owed to him and nothing of his obligations to the school. He hasn't ever been asked to produce any evidence as to what he actually does. Man, I wish I could have that job!

Update: Rec'd a call from my rep, Mr. Miller. He has requested Chairman Bartlett to allow him as Finance Chairman to convene an investigation through the finance committee prior to putting the matter on the agenda, including considering other options for providing legal representation to the school system. This should be interesting...

Thanks Mike! About time someone got balls. Where's the rest of the peanut gallery. Jeez. I wish someone would give me $295K with no review and where I get $140,000 if they don't renew my contract. The CEO of Chrysler must have written that contract.

Scott wrote:

ANON ME: "If you compare to Fulton & Cobb."
I think that is a fascinating statement considering members of the school board I called yesterday were not able to tell me what other attorneys made. I called other school districts who invited me to file a Open Records Act Request. How again, do you know what other school board attorney's make? And do you really think Fulton is comparable to Douglas? How do you know, if Kenney has never had to produce proof of what he actually does. Its a rubber stamp.
As far as having a staff to handle things, how many other attorneys in addition to Bernard were paid either directly or through Sherrod & Bernard.
- I understand Mr. Bernard doesn't handle real estate matters. That's Hartley Rowe & Fowler.
- He doesn't handle contracts for school vendors. The Board office staff do that without an attorney's oversight.
- He doesn't handle bonds himself. He charges to farm them out to someone else, though.
- He doesn't even show up at all the tribunals. He hires a former associate to do that.
Soooo, what again are we paying for? His 2 houses at the beach, perhaps.
Interesting that his contract states all the terms of what is owed to him and nothing of his obligations to the school. He hasn't ever been asked to produce any evidence as to what he actually does. Man, I wish I could have that job!

I do not know what the other lawyers make. I was saying that the other person had compared what our county pays to Paulding and Carroll county. I didn't think that was a fair comparison. I thought perhaps Cobb or Fulton would be a better comparison. We're not as large as either of those but we're much larger than Paulding and Carroll.

As far as Benard farming out work, do you know how much work he does? I see you've researched his net work. I've done no research myself, I only know what I see. I see him working very hard. I'm no friend of Benard's nor do I feel he's the best person for the job. I do think he is much better than what we have had in the past and he does care about his job.

I have no actual numbers to back up what I say.

Fair enough ANON ME. Thanks for your sensibility.

I've done a little research, but I've spilled everything I know. My concern is from what I've been told, the board is about to make a decision, as they did the previous 2 years, to approve what seems like a huge amount of money without any of the information you and I are talking about.

This is not about Bernard. Sherrod & Bernard are great attorneys. They both stay busy, but we don't have any way to know they are busy with the School Board's work, the County's work or the baseball association.

This is about a School Board who should be better stewards of our money. They have no information and are proposing to vote to give someone a whole lot more money than most people who pay taxes see in a year (or three).

Just because Bernard is a connected attorney at $295,000, doesn't mean there isn't another great attorney out of the 32,628 GA Bar members (GA Bar Website) who would get the job done as in-house counsel for $115,000. Why hasn't that ever been considered?

When I was a paralegal there was no way in heck we would have been paid based on a "services rendered" bill. We kept very precise records on hours and expenses for each case especially for any county government offices we might work for.

I generally had to call someone with the government entity with an estimation on billable hours that had to be approved before the work could begin, and woe unto us if we went over....

Scott wrote:

Fair enough ANON ME. Thanks for your sensibility.
I've done a little research, but I've spilled everything I know. My concern is from what I've been told, the board is about to make a decision, as they did the previous 2 years, to approve what seems like a huge amount of money without any of the information you and I are talking about.
This is not about Bernard. Sherrod & Bernard are great attorneys. They both stay busy, but we don't have any way to know they are busy with the School Board's work, the County's work or the baseball association.
This is about a School Board who should be better stewards of our money. They have no information and are proposing to vote to give someone a whole lot more money than most people who pay taxes see in a year (or three).
Just because Bernard is a connected attorney at $295,000, doesn't mean there isn't another great attorney out of the 32,628 GA Bar members (GA Bar Website) who would get the job done as in-house counsel for $115,000. Why hasn't that ever been considered?

You forgot to mention his duties with the Board of Regents too.

News Release
Douglas County Taxpayers Coalition
www.DouglasTaxes.com
June 12, 2009
For Immediate Release
Contact: info@douglastaxes.com
Tax Group Asks School Board to Postpone $295,000 Attorney Contract Vote
Douglasville, GA: The Douglas County Taxpayers Coalition (DCTC) has asked the Douglas County Board of Education to postpone the scheduled June 15th 7:00 PM vote for a $295,000 services contract for legal services with board attorney Ken Bernard.
In a letter dated June 12, 2008, James Bell director of DCTC called the proposed fees “excessive and extreme”. Bell asked that the school board postpone the vote scheduled next Monday night until the board can do their “homework” and determine what other counties are paying for comparable services.
“Our research indicates other counties are paying around $100,000 to $150,000 for legal services”, Bell said.“We feel $295,000 pre year for a part time attorney is excessive and grossly out of line with comparable school districts.”
According to Bell the contract was written by Mr. Bernard for Mr. Bernard and little research has been done by the school board as to what is reasonable to pay for such legal services.
Bell said “in hard economic times the school board should be looking for ways to cut expenses especially when they are considering raising our property taxes to meet their enormous budgets.”
Bell points out that the school board consumes over 70 percent of the property taxes collected in the county.
“We need a school board that that will look after the interest of taxpayers and this means providing the best service for the best price. Overpaying by one or two times the going rate for a part time lawyer accomplishes neither”, said Bell.
For more information visit www.DouglasTaxes.com
To: Chairman Jimmy Bartlett &
Douglas County Board of Education
From: James Bell
Douglas County Taxpayers Coalition
Dear Mr. Bartlett and School Board Members,
This concerns the proposed $295,000 services contract between the Douglas County School System and attorney Ken Bernard.
I respectfully request that the June 15th vote on this matter be tabled and postponed until the board has the opportunity to research the contracts and fees of other comparable school districts.
Based on the information I have obtained from other school systems, the proposed fees are extravagant and grossly out of line with acceptable fees being paid. Other counties report fees ranging from $100,000 to $150,000 for legal services.
In a time when taxpayers are struggling to keep pace and with the threat of high property taxes and millage rates, it is incumbent upon you to prove the best service at the most reasonable price.
We find this contact proposal to be excessive and extreme. We ask that you consider a more reasonable alternative to legal council.
Thank you for your service and consideration,
James Bell

Neighbor told me about this last night. Logged on when I got to work.

Unbelievable! Are School Board members listenting at all? Certainly they won't actually approve this contract!

Mad: I understand the Chairman of the Board believes discussion about the excessive bordering on unethical amount of money they are going to pay Sherrod & Bernard is just "political".

Also, in spite of NOT having any documentation to support whether Ken Bernard has done ANYTHING over the past year, let alone warrants $295,000, Chairman Bartlett thinks its more than appropriate. Who elected this baffoon? Is he your representative to the Board?

Concerned citizens,
I am currently at the Georgia School Board Associations conference as a representative of the Douglas County Board of Education. As such, I am responding to these comments via my cell phone so please excuse any typos.
When I ran for the Douglas County Board of Education (BOE) I monitored this forum to learn what the citizens really thought about Douglas County (DC) and its Government and its school system. What I came to learn was that the citizens (at least the ones commenting on the forum) generally did not trust the local government and were frustrated with the school system. In response, I communicated with here under my own name with no pretenses. During the campaign I assured my constituents that I would keep them informed on major issues and that I would keep the taxpayers of DC in mind when making decisions that affected them and our children.
When I was elected and began holding office I began attempting to gather information about the BOE's contractors, and vendors. I wanted to know what we were paying our attorney, and our superintendents. I was shocked to realize that the returning Board Members could not tell me what our Board attorney made for representing the BOE on a part time basis. In fact, the returning members, with exception of Mr. Barnes, seemed to have little knowledge or concern about any of the contracts pertaining to the Attorney, the Superintendent, or assistant superintendents. Consequently, I began to ask the central office for records such as invoices, contracts, billing records, etc.
At first, the central office complied with my requests and I received Mr. Bernard's contracts for the past several years, his 2007 and 2008 invoices, travel expense reimbursement records submitted by the Board Members and Board Member attendance records. All of which is available through open record requests. Once I reviewed the information provided, I realized that Mr. Bernard's contract was for three years and had been executed in 2007. I noticed several provisions, that as an attorney, I would never allow my client to agree to; including a provision that would have given Mr. Bernard an additional 18% raise at the end of last year. Yes, that is 18% in addition to the $295,275.00 that is in his current proposed contract. I believed that the attorney's fees provision was a bit much, nevertheless the previous Board approved the contract and apparently felt that he was worth this amount.
Being concerned about the amount of the contract, I addressed the issue with new BOE Chairman Jimmy Bartlett requesting that Mr. Bartlett research similar school districts and report to the Board what these similar districts were paying their Board Attorneys. Mr. Bartlett never provided the information I requested. However, concerns were voiced about the contract and in response, Mr. Bernard graciously agreed to forgo taking the 18% and graciously agreed to make other changes in his contract which favored the Board and are contained in his proposed contract.
In addition to my concerns with Mr. Bernard's contract, I had concerns with contracts involving three year contracts for certain central office staff that were executed in 2007 and then executed again in 2008. My concerns, however, are mostly centered around the process by which these contracts were developed and approved by the board, and less with the substance of the contracts. Consequently, in 2009 these contracts were redrafted, and the Board reviewed and approved these contract in generally the same form but the Board's action left no questions as to the process of review and consideration.