The Board of Education voted 7-1 last week to cut ties with its legal firm.
School board chairwoman Rose McKinnon said the law firm of Durant, Nichols, Houston, Hodgson and Cortese of Bridgeport were too expensive and gave input on an issue when should have stepped aside.
McKinnon said she recently held back payments from the Bridgeport law firm after discovering what she characterizes as “questionable time charges” on billing statements.
“Our bills are quite high based on the number of phone calls we make to them,” McKinnon said.
McKinnon said the school district was charged every fifteen minutes of service.
According to attorney Donald Houston, his law firm represented the school district for 21 years — and charged $210 an hour.
McKinnon was also upset over the fact a Feb. 18 executive session of the school board was tape recorded.
Executive sessions are meetings closed to the public. They are legal in certain circumstances under state law, such as when governments bodies are talking about legal strategy, a real estate deal — or a specific employee.
No votes can be taken during these closed-door sessions — and an agenda must be provided so the public knows what the elected officials are talking about.
The school board met in February to discuss firing an unnamed employee.
Upon learning the meeting was taped, residents asked the school board for a copy.
The school board then asked their lawyers if they had to hand over the tape — which they were required to do, under state law.
“We got lucky because we were not discussing anything out of the ordinary,” McKinnon said. “Fortunately this time it didn’t impact the board adversely.”
McKinnon said the Bridgeport law firm should have recused itself, since one of its attorneys was present at the executive session.
Houston dismissed this charge, saying the law firm was doing what the school board requested.
The board made the change at its March 16 meeting — the same day members hired the law firm of Sullivan, Shoen, Campane and Connon of Hartford as its new legal guns.
The new firm’s rate is comparable to the old law firm, McKinnon said.
This Board has an agenda and it is to do more harm then good! Instead of placing blame on an attorney for a recorded meeting, place blame on the person who recorded it! And let’s not play games, Queen McKinnon has never liked this attorney because she had a run-in with him last year and the Republicans did not like that the attorney voiced an opinion, when specifically asked a question, about an issue in front of the Board of Finance.
Now this Republican Board is trying to do away with the PTO by supporting a new organization called STRIVE, one of whose organizers just happens to be the wife of a Republican nominee to the BOE that was not appointed by the Board of Selectmen.
I really feel bad for the children of Oxford that Republican parents and BOE members want to do more harm then good, especially when the economy is struggling and people are having a hard time paying their taxes.
This was a personnel attack by the republicans on this law firm. Mr. Houston spoke out about issues with the BOF and a possible conflict and now he is gone.
His job was to represent the BOE and he did his job. The article comments about costs high from Atty Houston’s firm yet Mrs. McKinnon comments that the new firm will cost the same. Also she comments about a situation that Atty Houston should have stepped aside. That involved an ethic investigation the board requested based upon a letter to the editor from a strong republican supporter against the prior business manager. See the political theme yet.
The BOE has a lawyer as a member and if there was a question about the taping, why did he not speak up? Great Job Oxford BOE. You again make choices for political reasons not for what is best for the district.
The BOE members should see if this new law firm was hired appropriately, apparently it was a done deal before the 3/16 meeting took place, orchestrated by McKinnon, Neary and Lavin. Typical Palmer Republican style. Vindictive, Abusive and Self-Centered. Way to go Oxford voters, your stuck with them now. Maybe the private schools will become more popular now that the Queen and her 1)court jester, 2)henchman and 3)puppet with the occasional 4)blonde attendee are in power.
What I find interesting is that if you read the BOE minutes on-line, NONE of them contain any discussion about possibly getting a new Board Attorney. The only thing discussed is that McKinnon was holding off on paying one of Houston’s bills because it was expensive and it supposedly didn’t have enough descriptive backup to support the price. Why wasn’t the full Board informed of this “investigation” before it was done? I guarantee the Republican members knew all about it beforehand though because the only one to question this action was Guillet and Reid who are both Democrats. Clearly, this is political.
McKinnon doesn’t like Houston because Houston asked BOF members Burke and Kelly to abstain from voting on the BOE budget last year because Burke’s wife works for the BOE and Kelly’s wife was/still is on the BOE clearly creating a conflict of interest. When the BOF Chairman told them they couldn’t vote, that ticked Burke and Kelly off and they never got over that. Hence, Houston you’re fired!