Is former Tarrant water district GM entitled to $300K payment? His lawyer thinks so

The lawyer representing the former general manager of the Tarrant Regional Water District says the $300,000 post-retirement compensation granted his client in March is a protected benefit, despite the board’s vote earlier this week to revoke the payment.

At a Tuesday special meeting, the board announced that former board president Jack Stevens had unilaterally granted outgoing general manager Jim Oliver an exception to the water district’s paid time off policy. That exception, confirmed in emails obtained under a Texas Public Information request, would have allowed Oliver to bank three times the usual maximum of unused paid time off.

The extra compensation would have amounted to about a year’s salary for Oliver.

On Tuesday, board president Leah King described the arrangement as unwise and potentially illegal, and the board voted unanimously to revoke the planned payment.

But Jason Smith, the Fort Worth attorney representing Oliver, told the Star-Telegram on Thursday it appears the additional compensation was arranged in an appropriate manner. In Smith’s view, that means the board can’t just walk back the arrangement.

“It appears that the board policy was followed with advice from legal counsel and the Texas constitution protects employee benefits that were granted to employees,” Smith said.

In arguing that Stevens was permitted to make the arrangement with Oliver, Smith pointed to a clause at the end of the district’s paid leave policy. That clause states that “Exceptions to this policy may be made by the General Manager, Deputy General Manager, Assistant General Manager, or Board Members at any time.”

In a March 8 memo obtained by the Star-Telegram, Stevens also cited the district’s policy, writing that he was directing Oliver’s exception under “the authority granted by the Tarrant Regional Water District Paid Leave Policy.”

King, the board president, declined to comment on Smith’s involvement or the contention that the planned payment was protected. The water district, through a spokesperson, also declined to comment.

But King has raised concerns that Stevens did not bring the compensation arrangement before the board as a whole.

Lawyers for the district are conducting an “inquiry” into the situation, King previously told the Star-Telegram. She said it was not clear when it would be complete.

Smith, who said Thursday was his first day on the case, said he plans to arrange a meeting with the water district in a few days.

“We’re looking forward to the opportunity to reaching a positive solution with the water district over this situation,” Smith said.

‘A financial dilemma’

Less than a month before the compensation arrangement, internal emails obtained by the Star-Telegram show that Oliver had originally intended to remain as the water district’s general manager for an additional year.

Oliver, who led the water district for 35 years, officially stepped down from the role on Wednesday. That allowed then-deputy general manager Dan Buhman to step into the top job after the board voted unanimously in May to hire him.

On Feb. 11, Oliver wrote an email to the district’s board members, announcing his impending retirement in June 2021.

“Isn’t that 2022,” Stevens, then-board president, wrote back.

In response, Oliver explained that two other board members had thought it best to hire a new general manager in 2021 and then allow Oliver to remain and assist with the transition for a year.

“Would you consider a shorter window for being senior advisor than June 2022 if the Board chooses that?” responded board member Marty Leonard.

In a several-paragraph response to Leonard’s message, which he actually sent to an email address with his last name and first initial, Oliver explained that he was stepping down in 2021 in order “not to lose Dan [Buhman] and give him a shot at the general manager’s position.”

In stepping down a year early, Oliver wrote, he had thought he would be able to remain with the water district — potentially under the title of senior advisor — until summer 2022.

Parting with the district earlier “leaves me in a financial dilemma,” Oliver wrote, pointing to the district’s change in retirement plans. “My retirement scenarios work if I retire June, 2022.”

Documents from the water district show that Oliver was earning about $325,000, after his salary was increased in fall 2020.

“I’ve devoted 35 years to the district. I believe I’ve contributed to TRWD today having the reputation in the water community statewide and nationwide as being one of the best of the best,” Oliver wrote. “My last year, under whatever title’ will continue to be productive.”

‘My door is open’

As the water district’s board grapples with the compensation arrangement to the former general manager, a new leader took the reins on Thursday.

Buhman said in a Thursday interview that he plans to use his new position to redouble efforts toward openness.

“I think we have a great opportunity here, going forward,” Buhman said. “I think that’s an opportunity to look forward, to not look back and to say ‘How can we be the best organization we can be?’”

But while Buhman has stepped into the district’s top role in the middle of a controversy, he said that he isn’t directly involved in the matter except when the board asks him to be. For instance, he said, the board asked him to recommend and hire a law firm to conduct the inquiry into the Stevens-Oliver arrangement.

Buhman said he recommended and then hired the firm Thompson & Horton, which is not the district’s typical law firm, because of a desire for a “fresh set of eyes” and “somebody totally independent.”

So far, Buhman said, his involvement has ended there.

“Really this is an issue for the board of directors. As staff, I just provide support where they want it or they need it,” he said.

Nevertheless, Buhman said he’s intent on creating a culture of transparency and openness.

The new general manager said he plans to start by reviewing the water district’s policies and narrowing in on areas that need to be updated or rewritten. He also plans to build rapport with community leaders and residents.

“I’m committed to open, transparent communication,” Buhman said. “My door is open to people who want to understand what the water district does and why.”

He added that, by revoking the Stevens-Oliver arrangement on Tuesday, the board of directors sent a message that it is also intent on transparency.

“I would say, let’s look to the future and you’ll see our commitment to openness and transparency will become a reality. You’re seeing that already signaled and now we’re going to do the hard work to make sure it comes true,” Buhman said.