This behavior seems to be the new "in fashion" for school districts. For example...
We have noticed a high number of districts who use legal representation to reply to simple open records requests. I think we all know that legal representation isn't always cheap. The services obtained by school districts are no different. Last year we did a records request to obtain Laurel County Schools check register. So when we received a letter responding to the request for the superintendent's performance review from the district's attorney, we searched our database and found out how much they spent with this attorney in fiscal year 2009...
That's a lot of money. Now, granted, an organization the size of a school district is bound to employ attorneys at some point but isn't it a bit excessive to be paying an attorney thousands of dollars a month to respond to records requests when the request could easily be filled in-house?
Oh, I forgot to mention - This attorney also represents the Pulaski Board of Education.
Is this a good use of tax-payer money?
2 comments:
No. School districts do not need to engage an attorney to respond to open records requests unless they have something to hide. Maybe the next step is to ask for the documentation supporting the fees paid to the attorney to see exactly what the school district is paying for versus what they should have in-house capability to do. It is our money.
Anon,
You are correct. In fact we have already begun to request this information. Stay tuned for more info coming shortly!
Post a Comment