School district to hire general counsel | News | Palo Alto Online |


School district to hire general counsel

In-house attorney to provide proactive guidance, monitor legal spending

After years of debate over the merits of a general counsel and concern on the school board and in the community about legal compliance and outsized legal spending, the Palo Alto school board voted Tuesday to hire an in-house attorney.

The trustees approved moving forward with filling the position, which a previous board approved three years ago, in a 4-0 vote, with board member Terry Godfrey abstaining.

Godfrey, who voted for the position in 2015, argued the district's leadership has since improved and suggested instead waiting a year to see if an in-house attorney is still necessary. In a tight-budget year, she has said she would prefer to spend the money to support students directly.

The general counsel will report directly to the board, with a dotted line to the superintendent. The attorney will provide proactive legal guidance on board governance, public meeting laws, the California Public Records Act, special education law and federal civil-rights law Title IX, among other topics. He or she will also "review and monitor billing of outside law firms" with the goal of cutting down on legal expenses, which have grown sharply in recent years.

The attorney will be asked to report monthly billing totals from outside law firms on board agendas, provide legal training to staff and administrators and identify ways to reduce the district's significant backlog of Public Records Act requests, among other duties.

Godfrey made a failed amendment to require that the attorney have experience in special-education law, given three-quarters of the district's legal budget this year is in that area.

Other board members said the in-house attorney is supposed to be a generalist and didn't want to limit the hiring based on specific experience.

The board did decide to require the general counsel provide periodic recommendations on special education-related legal issues, as well as Title IX, the U.S. Department of Education's Office for Civil Rights and investigations.

They also directed the board's policy review committee to take up a policy that states only the board president can communicate directly with district attorneys, since all board members would be able to speak with the general counsel.

The general counsel's estimated salary range is $171,000 to $188,000.

Superintendent Don Austin said the district believes the position "should be easily cost-neutral to savings."

Deputy Superintendent Karen Hendricks has also taken on a role "equivalent" to an ombudsperson, Austin said Tuesday, a role that was included three years ago in the general counsel position.


How would the candidates vote?

As part of the Palo Alto Weekly's election coverage, we will be asking the candidates who are running for the Palo Alto Board of Education how they would vote -- and why -- on significant issues that the board takes action on before November.

This week, the Weekly asked the five non-incumbent candidates how they would vote on the general counsel position. Candidates Christopher Boyd and Kathy Jordan did not respond, but public comments they made at the board meeting are below.

Stacey Ashlund

Per board discussion last night that a significant portion of the cases requiring legal advice in our district pertain to special education, it would be a mistake to hire a general counsel who doesn't have at least some expertise in that area. I would have voted 'yes' for hiring the general counsel if the job description were amended to include expertise in that area. Since it was not, I would’ve voted 'no.'

Chris Boyd

Hiring a general counsel is a defensive measure when you need a much greater offensive of caring and understanding what is happening to special education students and many other students as well … getting a general counsel won't solve the problem. It really takes an institutional change …to get rid of the cause of all the litigation.

Shounak Dharap

I would vote in favor of hiring an on-site general counsel. As a litigator, I know that proactive compliance is the best way to protect our students and our district's financial future. Hiring a general counsel who will advise the board, train district staff, review reporting procedures and reduce billing from outside law firms is crucial to building the culture of compliance that has been absent in the district for far too long.

Kathy Jordan

(Jordan urged the board to approve the position.) Certainly I would hope this position would be able to help Palo Alto Unified with compliance rather than what some people fear, which would be to assist Palo Alto Unified with evading compliance. I'm optimistic that a general could help increase compliance, and compliance is cheaper, which could then allow Palo Alto Unfied to hopefully reduce its legal expenses and devote that money to our children's education.

Alex Scharf

In general, I support the position. ... However, I would have voted 'no' because ... the requirements and skills sections of the job description are inadequate. I would have asked that the staff revise the requirements and skills section to be more specific on what the necessary qualifications are to accomplish the responsibilities outlined for this position. This might include a minimum of 10 years experience and knowledge of pertinent federal, state and local laws and court decisions relating to K-12 education including but not limited to IDEA (Individuals with Disabilities Education Act) and knowledge of the authority and responsibilities of the Board of Education. 


Follow the Palo Alto Weekly/Palo Alto Online on Twitter @PaloAltoWeekly and Facebook for breaking news, local events, photos, videos and more.

What is community worth to you?
Support local journalism.


11 people like this
Posted by Truth and Reconciliation
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Sep 27, 2018 at 8:31 pm

I am worried that the in house counsel will act as the CYA shield that prior administrations have used attorneys for, as if they were their own personal attorneys. I would have liked to see clarity on how in house counsel will act and what the responsibility will be in relationship to students. If the counsel is supposed to be helping with compliance, then there should be specific ways that in house counsel will prevent district legal from being so adversarial against families.

I would like to see an ombudsman with teeth who can advocate for families, because we have had and will likely still have a situation in which only those wealthy enough to hire special ed attorneys and advocates can enforce access to accommodations they are entitled to under the law. This is inherently in violation of state equal access rules and federal civil rights rules.

I would like the candidates to explain how they would ensure that district legal does a better job serving families of the district, especially where there is a complaint, and avoiding being like personal legal services for administrators? How should legal counsel handle a complaint of civil rights violations? Should they always defend the district even when an apology is due (like they have been) or try to be impartial and figure out how the district can best work with the family to solve problems?

I am still very concerned that I see no mechanism to feed a culture of truth, reconciliation, and problem solving, and certainly no mechanism to stop things if they go bad again. How would the board prevent the legal counsel from taking us back to a culture that treats special needs families like the enemy? It seems like they haven’t come to terms with that.

Don't miss out on the discussion!
Sign up to be notified of new comments on this topic.


Sorry, but further commenting on this topic has been closed.

Stay informed

Get daily headlines sent straight to your inbox.

Anne Le Ziblatt, formerly of Tamarine and Bong Su, is back with a Vietnamese noodle bar in Redwood City
By Elena Kadvany | 8 comments | 3,723 views

Local Pols Debate Climate
By Sherry Listgarten | 11 comments | 3,043 views

Truth Matters (and so does good beer)
By Laura Stec | 5 comments | 1,333 views

You Can Help: Scents and Migraines
By Chandrama Anderson | 0 comments | 1,127 views

The E.R.A. – no real equality yet. Why not?
By Diana Diamond | 15 comments | 1,056 views