but Cal said in his article he DID get the invoices from the BOE.

No, he didn't say that. How many times are you going to post something that is totally opposite of what is written for all to see?

No invoices of legal services. No details of legal hours billed.

It is a bare-bones collection of checks written with no specificity whatsoever.

cancelled checks are NOT invoices. Duh.

Even the headline of the article states he didn't get to see any invoices at all. Maybe we need a SPLOST instead for continuing adult education more than one for K-12 schoolchildren.

You want to split hairs or see the answer to the question. Seems that the checks are the very best way to determine how much money was spent. So how much was it?

several people have told you, and you can go re read what Cal wanted and why. How much money to the lawyers, and why, meaning what was this amount billed for. If you just have the ...amount...and not the ...for.. you have nothing.

If you went in a car dealership and priced a car, and wanted to know how much is was with or without the air conditioning, you would expect an answer. Not, someone keep repeating the total. This is no different. How much money has been spent on lawyers when parents or citizens asked to see records? How much of the total was spent for lawsuits?

Anybody anywhere asks for a breakdown of the cost of services and it is explained, or referenced, in all bills, or people just don't get paid.

Everyone keeps telling you this is a half the answer, which it is.

Still want to see the BOE legal fee total. Put it out there? Let people react to it. And while we're at it Tami, put your info out there. Seems you guys have plenty of time to gather the info but no desire to publish it. It's beginning to make some suspicious of your motives. Having spent a good deal of time reading back over things today, somebody was going to post the doc about astroturf. Nothing there yet either. Whoever you are, let's see it!

and you have been trying to play dumb since we suggested who you were. Earlier in the day you could go way back and quote the goodness of Smola and then all kinds of things we don't have privy to about the BOE and jumped on the Tyrone blog as well. Who cares, 1999, when you started your quest for SPLOT/SPLAT OR WHATEVER, it came out what a chunk someone was going to get this for writing the SLOST gizmo and that the developers would do well and the kids would get in line behind. It is now 2008, tell me what has changed, except a devlopers wife on the BOE?
"We never sold land to the BOE"....maybe the question should have been, have you ever bought land from the BOE?

I'm sure once he has to force the BOE to release the public records that by law they are required to, he'll publish a nice detailed breakdown of how much attorney fees were spent on responding to open record requests. Since he asked for and they didn't provide the invoices, he can't at this point. wow, he instead knows total legal costs with zero explanation.....that isn't what he requested!

I imagine the legal costs to responding to open records requests is going to get much higher since the BOE has decided instead of being forthcoming and complying with the law, they have to be drug into court to get the public's information.

With this going on and SPLOST coming up,the BOE obviously have no clue on PR despite paying someone to do nothing but pass out public information. How many different BOE's is it going to take to realize the public has a deep distrust of how they try to conduct business under the table and away from the public? How many SPLOST defeats will it take to get the message?

It's not splitting hairs. Every entity gets invoices and those invoices should have some detail. They are also public records.

I've seen several governments legal invoices and they don't just have one line that says "services.....amount owed $XXXX" It's not about only what was paid or the total paid, but for WHAT. That was the request and it still hasn't been fulfilled by the BOE.

A cancelled check doesn't tell you how many hours were spent doing anything or what it was for. I don't believe even the BOE blindly takes any amount on an invoice as OK and strokes a check for it without looking at what the invoice was for.

I don't know why Cal didn't give us a total figure, but he didn't get a description of what the legal fees were. That's what he wanted. If you go on the government's website, you can get the adopted budgets for the last two years. If Cal will tell us the total fees, I think we'll find out that the figures don't match. That's what happened in Tyrone. When Cal gets the description, we can put out the rat poison.

He apparently has the freedom to not share his information or findings with his readers. In his article he says "I became curious about how often a high-priced lawyer gets involved with requests to the school system for records that belong to us, so I filed the following Open Records request with the school system Aug. 28."

In his actual request he states he requires "information about legal services and attorneys’ services paid for or billed to the school system and board of education from the officially designated attorney for the school board and any and all other legal services billed to or paid for by the school system and/or board of education for the period beginning Jan. 1, 2007, to the present date."

So why'd he ask for it, if not to provide us with the tally? Just to waste the school system's (otherwise known as taxpayer's) money? Please tell me that's not the case. Now that I look more closely at this he actually asked for 20 months of bills. What the heck did they total? I wonder if the only way for us to get this information is for me to file a FOI with the school system. Wouldn't that be a shame. I guess Cal tells you just what HE wants you to know. Maybe spyglass is right, maybe this is just a witchhunt.

They could have simply photocopied 20 months of invoices received for legal work they contracted for. Instead, they get bogged down with trying to circumvent the Open Records Act and not releasing what was requested, hiding behind an attorney who seemingly has no understanding of the Open Records Act. Or, they lied/completely misunderstood about what the attorney told them. Either way, the end result is that they didn't fulfill a simple request to have the legal invoices examined, making the mole hill become a mountain by appearing to be hiding something and also woefully ignorant of one of the simplest laws to follow you'll ever see.

"I became curious about how often a high-priced lawyer gets involved with requests to the school system for records that belong to us, so I filed the following Open Records request with the school system Aug. 28."

what he got back was

"All I really got was copies of checks written to Harben, Hartley & Hawkins, LLP of Gainesville, Ga. with only invoice numbers listed on the checks, dating back to January 2007.

The file contained a few letters from HHH with notification of unspecified services related to “due process” hearings, deductibles and a couple of bond refinancings statements.

No invoices of legal services. No details of legal hours billed."

I bet lawyers don't get involved in other normal request. That is the point. Why did the lawyers step in and stone wall Tammi Morris in this case?

Why was Cals question not answered? What were the lawyers asked to do in reponse to these questions, by some on the BOE?

There has been a largely unspoken distrust of the FCBOE for years in this town, let's all admit it. What Mr. Beverly is doing is for everyone's best interest in Fayette...I am very glad he is being agressive in this matter. There are many issues involved here... this is just the tip of the iceberg.

I say kudos, and let us know how we as citizens can help the truth come out. Then let's clean house over at the BOE, starting at the top 2 spots.