Trustees secretly discussed Keller ISD split as early as May 2024, lawsuit says
Keller school board trustees who tried to split the district earlier this year began discussing the proposal as early as May 2024, according to a lawsuit filed Thursday in a Tarrant County district court. They previously held that the earliest they discussed the split before it became public was Dec. 19.
Former school board president Charles Randklev announced during an executive session on Dec. 19 that the board would vote on the proposal as early as Jan. 16 “in order to rapidly implement” the plan, the lawsuit states.
A judge ruled in May that the trustees would have to answer questions and produce documents related to the proposal in response to an earlier lawsuit. The lawsuit filed this week states its allegations are based on the information obtained in this phase known as discovery, but it does not specify which documents or testimonies yielded the details outlined in the petition.
The lawsuit seeks the removal of Keller school board president John Birt, former president Charles Randklev and vice president Heather Washington on grounds they violated the Texas Open Meetings Act and board policy when they discussed and took other actions related to the proposed split last year.
The lawsuit was brought by two residents, former Fort Worth City Councilmember Cary Moon and Heritage HOA President Brian Black, who in March filed as intervenors in the previous lawsuit against the school board. For the new suit, they used a statute in the Texas Government Code that allows them to file in the name of the State of Texas to prompt a jury trial for the trustees’ removal.
The previous lawsuit sought the removal of trustee Chris Coker as well, but he is not mentioned in the new petition.
“At a time when our school district faces critical decisions regarding financing, programming, and the overall education of our children, transparency and honesty from the board are essential,” Moon said in a written statement. “Our mission is clear: to ensure that Keller ISD leadership acts with integrity, accountability, and transparency in service to our students and our community.”
Birt, Randklev and Washington did not immediately respond to emails seeking comment.
A state statute provides a mechanism for the removal of public officials due to incompetency, official misconduct or drunkenness both on and off duty.
Lawsuit traces orgins of discussion of Keller school split
The lawsuit indicates the origins of the plan to split Keller ISD may trace as far back a June 2022, with the hiring of attorney Tim Davis “to advise the board in connection with ‘various legal matters.’” Davis invoiced the district nearly $172,000 in the first five months of this year.
Davis declined to comment.
Davis, Randklev, Birt, former trustee Micah Young and former Superintendent Tracy Johnson were emailed a revenue impact report about the split on Dec. 19, 2024, by Josh Haney, a financial analyst with the Austin-based school finance consultancy Moak Casey. That date was the earliest any of those involved had publicly stated they had discussed the split proposal.
Haney declined to comment for this story.
The discovery phase of the earlier lawsuit revealed that in May 2024 “Randklev and Birt took the first of a series of actions that would be hidden from the public as their plan to separate KISD took shape,” the new lawsuit states.
That same month, they also discussed hiring the Chicago-based RSM consultants to conduct a forensic audit of the school’s finances with the intent of using the report to bolster their case for detachment, the lawsuit states.
Birt told the Star-Telegram in June that the RSM report, which cost the district over $92,000 paid via expenses on invoices submitted by Davis, “had nothing to do” with the split.
Secret meetings alleged
In the fall, Randklev, Birt and Young “began to meet in secret” to discuss the proposal, and they involved Washington in the plan around that time, which constituted a quorum, the lawsuit states.
The petition states that these four discussed hiring Moak Casey during executive session on Oct. 24, without revealing their plan to the public.
The idea to hire the firm had been suggested by Grant Anderson of Texans for Excellence in Education at a special training session on Oct. 10, the lawsuit states. Texans for Excellence in Education is a nonprofit that bills itself as a conservative alternative to the Texas Association of School Boards that is “committed to delivering all children in Texas a high-quality education.”
Texans for Excellence in Education did not immediately respond to an email seeking comment.
“For the next several months, Randklev, Birt, Young and Washington continued to keep Moak Casey’s engagement a secret,” the lawsuit states, adding that they invited a Moak Casey representative to “conduct school financing training and speak about the ongoing work” the firm was doing for the district during a closed session on Nov. 13.
The lawsuit states that Randklev, Birt and Young met Davis at his Southlake office on Nov. 22 to discuss the legal process for splitting the district.
“Specifically, the group used this meeting to discuss whether it was legally possible to split the district, the authority for doing so, and whether such action required a vote,” the lawsuit states.
Before the plan could be implemented, however, the Star-Telegram published news of the split that had leaked online in early January, and the proposal was called off in early March after weeks of controversy.
The decision to kill the split may have also have been made in violation of the Texas Open Meetings Act, according to lawyers specializing in the law.
The petition filed Thursday is the first of three planned actions by the plaintiffs, according to Moon. The Heritage Legal Task Force, which he and Black formed in response to the split proposal, will host a public meeting on Aug. 12 to discuss this and two other legal actions the group plans to take.
