The latest legal bills for the Breckenridge (Minn.) School District show the district has exceeded its 2007-08 budget for legal expenses by $3,942.
The revelation comes as animosity between the School Board and community members continues in the wake of allegations of illegal activity among board members.
Since July 1, the beginning of the district's fiscal year, Breckenridge schools spent $18,942 on legal services, Superintendent Greg East said Monday.
The district's total budget for legal expenses in fiscal year 2007-08, which ends next June, is $15,000, said Neil Kusler, the district's business manager.
A Sept. 1 statement from Minneapolis-based Ratwik, Roszak and Maloney shows the district was billed $6,740 for services in August, including $3,024 in charges related to open meeting law violation issues.
ADVERTISEMENT
The new charges - released Monday - add to the $24,618 for legal services the district has incurred since March, according to billing statements requested and analyzed by The Forum.
Many of the charges show hours billed for examining issues related to allegations of open meeting law violations against the district.
A Forum investigation found the School Board violated the state's Open Meeting Law and Data Practices Act through e-mail exchanges and a school survey where private information about school employees was made available to the public.
Several community members have called for the board to resign and said at a public forum earlier this month they're concerned about legal expenses related to the allegations.
The district is trying to pass a $700-per-pupil operating levy referendum Nov. 6 to boost its general education revenue. East projects $410,368 in budget cut this year and a $803,163 reduction in 2008-09 if the initiative fails.
Scrutiny over the district's legal expenses reached a boiling point earlier this month when a School Board member questioned colleagues on how often they're contacting the district's attorney, Amy Mace.
Board member Tom Rittenhouse questioned whether board members were contacting the attorney on their own after East said he didn't know what some of the charges from the law firm were or who authorized them.
He and East said they weren't aware Mace was invited to attend the district's School Board meeting earlier this month.
ADVERTISEMENT
School Board President Bruce Fronningauthorized Mace's visit and the expenditures to bring her to Breckenridge from Minneapolis.
The board this month created a new policy stipulating who can contact the district's attorney and spend district money on legal services, allowing the board president to do so, East said.
No policy existed before this month.
No cap on the amount of legal expenditures board members can authorize was set, however.
East said that may pose challenges for the district as it tries to stick to a budget and anticipates cuts if the referendum fails.
It's unclear what services the district is receiving from Ratwik, Roszak and Maloney. The firm heavily redacted its latest legal bill, citing attorney-client privilege.
Entries such as "continue redacting" and "review, analyze and revise letter" are followed by blank spaces where information about the service provided is removed.
Mark Anfinson, an attorney for the Minnesota Newspaper Association, said it is suspect that the district won't fully disclose exactly what they're purchasing in legal services with public money.
ADVERTISEMENT
The Data Practices Act states that a law firm's billing records for government entities are public, he said.
"A routine legal invoice that is that heavily redacted must be approached with skepticism, in terms of whether it could possibly be privileged to that degree," Anfinson said.
Readers can reach Forum reporter Melinda Rogers at (701) 241-5524 Legal bills still growing Melinda Rogers 20071016
