Here’s how much Keller school board lawyer charged taxpayers during split talks
While the Keller school board attempted to pull off a largely unpopular move to split the district earlier this year, lawyers were charging hundreds of hours for work to represent trustees. And the nature of that work is not available to the public.
An invoice submitted by the law firm Jackson Walker in late May comes out to $172,000.
The bill, which the Star-Telegram received through an open records request, is for 347.8 hours of work running from Dec. 2, 2024, to May 14. The invoice also includes $8,810 for expenses.
The Star-Telegram reached out to the lawyers who are primarily listed in the list of hours charged, Tim Davis and Ali Williams, as well as a Jackson Walker spokesperson, for comment on the latest invoice, but did not get an immediate response.
What legal services did the lawyers charge Keller ISD for?
As with the majority of the invoices submitted by Davis and Williams for work representing the school board — not the district — the descriptions of the services rendered are redacted.
But the timeline and particular dates charged correspond to the board’s attempt to split the district. On Jan. 16, for example, when Keller residents expressed overwhelming opposition to the proposal during a marathon school board meeting, Davis charged the district for 12.9 hours of work.
This and other invoices from Jackson Walker do not display Davis’ and Williams’ hourly rates, but invoices from their previous firm Cantey Hanger show they charged the district $350 and $300 per hour.
On Jan. 30, the day another school board meeting that ran late into the night, during which local and state elected officials added their voices to the opposition, Davis charged the district 11.2 hours.
On Dec. 19, the day that some Keller trustees said they were “blindsided” by the split proposal when it was brought up during executive session at a school board meeting, Davis charged 9.2 hours.
Lawyers specializing in open government law told the Star-Telegram that the board likely violated the Texas Open Meetings Act with that closed-door discussion. (And most likely did so again on the way out.)
When questioned about previous redacted invoices, a Jackson Walker spokesperson told the Star-Telegram the firm redacts the service descriptions because of attorney-client privilege. While the school district pays his fees, the school board is his client. Thus, the district is not entitled to see the services he provided to the board.
This is a valid justification of attorney-client privilege, according to Charles Silver, a law and civil procedure professor at UT Austin.
“But that doesn’t mean that the school district necessarily is precluded from seeing the entries,” he said in an interview. “That depends upon the school district’s relationship with the board of trustees.”
It is unclear who on the board is allowed to view unredacted invoices. Board President John Birt, Vice President Heather Washington and trustee Charles Randklev, who was president during the split proposal, did not respond to emails asking if they had seen unredacted invoices.
Trustee Chris Coker told the Star-Telegram he has not seen unredacted invoices.
Trustee Chelsea Kelly and former Trustee Joni Shaw Smith said they likewise have never seen unredacted invoices, despite having requested to see them.
Former Trustee Micah Young did not respond to an email asking about the invoices.
District spokesperson Bryce Neiman did not respond to multiple requests for comment on the invoices.
This story was originally published June 12, 2025 at 12:31 PM.
CORRECTION: An earlier version of this story misstated the time period of the invoice.
