LONG SPINS HIS TALE OF WOE, GIVES CORTEZ A SOAPBOX

By Juan Montoya
Reading the Brownsville Herald's Gary "Too" Long's report on the potential settlement of lawsuits filed by former superintendent Hector Gonzales and former chief financial officer Antonio Juarez against the Brownsville Independent School District, we were struck with how myopic he has become when things didn't go his way.

We remember that he used to mock and point four fingers at trustee Presas-Garcia when she was in the minority and he was content to suck up to the the majority formed by Rick Zayas, Ruben Cortez, Rolando Aguilar and Joe Colunga. Apparently, not being able to resign himself to the fact that that foursome and their hand-picked superintendent Brett Springsteen basically gutted the district financially and left a structural mess for the next group to handle after voters rejected them, he still is.

In outlining the lawsuits filed by the two men, he basically deems them worthless and interviews Cortez, the GED-challenged trustee who was known as the vendors' scourge when he was on the board. Now, after finagling his way to the Region One board, this tenacious unqualified underachiever is running in November for a place on the Texas School Board of Education.

In the lawsuits that may be settled today, he has been listed as one of the main perpetrators of the violations that spurred the lawsuit along with Colunga and the others in the former majority.

This is what one of the lawsuits (Gonzales') outline of Cortez's actions.

– February 2007: (Ruben) Cortez visited Gonzales and told him he did not want insurance provider Healthsmart as the new insurance carrier for the district. He told Gonzales that he and the other (co-conspirators) wanted Mutual of Omaha, or any other firm in which (the late) Johnny Cavazos would be the agent. Gonzales said he would not participate in this conspiracy.

– March 2007: Cortez approached Gonzales again on the same issue and insisted that Gonzales only recommend one of Cavazos' insurance firms for the upcoming insurance contract. Again, Gonzales refused to join the conspiracy.

– Dec. 2007 to February 2008: (Rolando) Aguilar Cortez, and (Joe) Colunga met with Gonzales to discuss their "concerns" regarding the upcoming health insurance contract. They made it clear that they did not want Healthsmart, but one of Cavazos' companies.

– Sept. 16, 2008: CFO Antonio Juarez recommended AAG/Berkley for the Stop-Loss Insurance contract which was not adopted by the board at that meeting. Afterwards, Cortez visited Gonzales in his office and told him he did not like the recommendation and didn't like "being lied to." Gonzales said he would have Tony Resendez, counsel with Walsh, Anderson, Gallegos, Brown and Schultze to look into the matter. Resendez recommended the matter be handled administratively with a warning to Juarez that perhaps he did "not communicate effectively" to the board.

– Oct. 21: Cortez requested a consent item on the agenda related to "apparent misinformation" directed toward board members on insurance contract. Another "superintendent evaluation" was placed on agenda but no action was taken. Aguilar. Cortez, and Colunga all met with Gonzales separately after the meeting regarding Juarez. Each conveyed to Gonzales that they wanted him to fire Juarez for "lying" to them regarding the Stop-Loss insurance contract they wanted to go to Cavazos. They all wanted Gonzales to fire him and then give a recommendation to Cavazos' company.

When Gonzales didn't fire Juarez, but instead reassigned him to a grant administrator position, Cortez's reaction was immediate.

– Upon discovering the reassignment, trustees Aguilar and Cortez went to Gonzales' office outraged. They both screamed "Why didn't you fire Tony? Why didn't you just terminate him?"

When Gonzales was fired and sought relief from the grievance process, the lawsuits claims that Cortez and his pals subverted the process so that it became meaningless.

The majority claimed that Texas Education Agency hearing examiner Victoria Guerra upheld their decision against Gonzales. Yet, the courts have found different and allowed Gonzales and his attorneys to develop their conspiracy claims against the majority. In other words, in contrast to what Long writes, the BISD sees the writing on the wall and is cutting its losses.

“I’m being told that it’s a business decision by the insurance company to settle rather than to continue paying law firms” to defend against the lawsuits, Cortez piously told Long. 

Sure Ruben, as long as it's public money being spent defending you, you're alright with that.
The case involving Juarez concerns a lawsuit he filed in January 2009 where he submitted evidence in federal court that board members conspired to force his participation in manipulating BISD’s multi-million stop-loss insurance contract. Instead he went to the FBI. That trial is pending to determine whether the non-renewal of Juarez’s employment contract was retaliation for going to the FBI.

His attorneys say they are prepared to go to trial if the settlement is not approved. In that case, the federal judge refused – and a federal appeals court upheld his decision – to deny Cortez and his pals qualified immunity, meaning they will have to pay any damages to Juarez out of their own pockets if they are not let off the hook. Depending on what decision is reached tonight, Cortez, Zayas, Clounga and Aguilar might have to start saving their pennies.

Do Cortez and Long know something the lawyers and state and federal judges don't? Or are they still nursing their wounded pride because neither the local voters nor the courts have seen things through their myopic viewpoints?