ACCOUNT OF THE KATY COPPERHEADS COVER-UP:

The Katy Arena

KISD's Latest Management Fiasco Uncovered

From a post on one of the Watchdog's web sites in 2006

George Scott, owner and publisher of The New Katy News, is at it again. He

helped to expose the fiasco involving KISD’s mismanagement of its outsourced

Information Technology company, Xpediant and now he’s going after the district

for the Katy Copperhead fiasco.

The Katy Area’s first foray into the world of professional sports ended in May

2006 as a black eye on the management of the Leonard Merrell Center, or LMC.

The Katy Copperheads of the National Indoor Football League held its inaugural

season in Katy and left behind a trail of mismanagement and a comedy of errors.

What the heck is a major independent school district in Texas doing by renting

space to a professional sports team in the first place?

The team paid for one game in the amount of $5,718.50. But it seems the district

gave out a coupon for buy one, get six free. As the Copperheads slink off to

Cy-Fair’s Berry Center with their proverbial snake tail between their legs, they

owe the district at least $26,000.

Scott reports that the Copperheads paid an invoice on March 11, 2006 for just

under $6,000 for use of the facility for their first game. On March 18, the

Copperheads sent a check for $7,313.95 to cover the facility use for their

second game. It seems that LMC management held the check until May 3 when it

was sent on to the district through intra-district mail. The check never made it to

the district’s business office. The district claims it was lost in the mail.

Where did this check go? Was it ever cashed?

Scott reports that it does not appear that the Copperheads issued another check

to cover the $7,000 check it lost.

On June 2, the LMC management received three checks totaling about $19,500 for

the next three games played between April 8 and April 30. These checks were

held in the facility’s safe until June 22 when the district’s business office

deposited them into a district account. On June 24, the Copperheads played their

last game at LMC.

Then the bungling begins: The bank informs the district that the three previous

checks bounced on June 29, five days after the last game. The alarm bells start

going off. Scott reports that in a June 29 email from a district official to

LMC’s general manager, the GM is urged to advise Leonard Merrell, for whom

 the LMC is named, that the checks bounced and that the district “lost” a check. The

GM responded by saying, “Thanks – I will do so.”

When did the GM inform Dr. Merrell what was happening? What was Merrell’s

reaction? When did Merrell inform the Board? If the Board knew prior to the

November 2006 bond election, why did they not make this public? Why didn’t

Merrell make this public?

To this date, the Copperheads have not reissued checks for the one lost, the

ones that bounced nor for the last two games played after April 30.

Once again, the management of this district smells like three-day-old fish. It

has no problem doing business with firms on no-bid contracts when those firms

contribute to PACs that support the passage of district bonds – these same bonds

that we, as taxpayers are on the hook for and that pay, in my opinion, the

contractors inflated fees for services rendered.

Now, it looks like the district may have misappropriated funds (lost check),

failed to practice fiscal responsibility (letting checks sit for a month before

cashing them), and failed to reveal this vital public information until after

the November Bond election. It also appears that once again, our School Board

has failed to properly oversee the management of this district.

Radio Free Katy has called for the resignation of Leonard Merrell. We reiterate

this call.

Would disclosure of this information have altered the election results? Who

knows? But because the election was near, one could see the temptation to

withhold information until after this election.

You should remember that the campaign for the November bond election was

paid for by special interests – primarily by developers of area master planned

communities that need the new schools to attract new homebuyers – to the tune 

of $100,000. We’re no longer talking about what’s best for the community: This is

about protecting investments and, what seems to me to be a casual partnership

between the district and special interests. This is no longer a game of Go Fish;

it’s become No Limit Texas Hold‘em.

And we don’t have the chip count to compete.

Editor’s Note: George Scott should be commended for relentlessly chasing this

story. Mr. Scott unabashedly sings the district’s praise when they do well and

with equal aplomb calls them to the mat when they are managing-challenged.

The taxpayers are well served by his independent voice, and I urge you to pick up

a copy of his newspaper at area businesses, if you do not receive one in your

driveway, to help keep yourself informed of all the good, bad, and ugly this

district has to offer.

© 2006 by Fred Hink. All rights reserved.

Fred Hink, Katy Citizen Watchdog$Date: 12/18/2006

This blurb appears on the Wikipedia web site