Starting work in 2024, the Crossley firm will continue to represent the district, and mainly spend their time in court acquiring funds from bond forfeitures (last year, NHCS received $1.6 million), attending board meetings and employee and student hearings, and counseling on open lawsuits against the district. Sometimes they prep district staff who are called upon to testify in child custody battles. They also consult on redactions for public records requests.
In a previous WHQR analysis of four months of legal bills, the Vogel firm had billed for 516 hours for a total of $108,444, compared to Tharrington Smith’s 515 for $104,832. For the school district’s current firms — they billed collectively for 404 hours for $82,652. While the Sink Law Firm was providing guidance to NHCS for exceptional children services (the district is now contracting with Poyner Spruill LLP for this), Crossley McIntosh et al. covered most other services. Brian Kromke and Blanchard serve as the district’s two main attorneys from Crossley. If they attend meetings together, then they only charge one billing at $250 an hour. Sink charges $235. Tharrington and Vogel charged $235 at the partner level. Poyner Spruill will charge $310 at that level.
Related: NHCS attorney posts inflammatory comment online, issues apology
Main spending items
There were about ten bills from Crossley over $1,000 over the course of an eight-month period. The way in which Blanchard and Kromke write the itemized bill is often to couple together several types of work and advice from the same day.
For example, for one of the highest billings at $1,375 on March 4 for 5.3 hours, included “conference and correspondence with D. Brinson [NHCS Assistant Superintendent] regarding software vendor contract; conference with Chair Mason about closed session items/Board governance issues to be discussed prior to meeting; met with Chair Mason, Ms. Justice, and Dr. Merrick prior to regular meeting; attended regular meeting, with closed session.”
For the Sink Law Firm, they only had two bills over $1,000. One was on February 26 for an IEP [individualized education plan] meeting and travel time for $2,350 for ten hours of work. The other was for representing the district through a Department of Public Instruction mediation at the Spencer building on May 28 for 15.5 hours of work.
‘Board issues’ billing
The phrases ‘board issues,’ ‘board governance issues,’ ‘board matters,’ ‘board conflict issue,’ and ‘censure hearing’ came up at least 38 times throughout the bills over an eight-month period. The main members discussing this with the attorneys were former board chair Melissa Mason, former vice chair Josie Barnhart, and Pat Bradford. There were also meetings where Mason and Superintendent Dr. Christopher Barnes were discussing these issues in concert with the attorneys.
Last year, the board had to navigate several disagreements with members over the proposed state legislature’s artificial intelligence security grant, censure hearings for Democrat Tim Merrick and Republican David Perry (Merrick ended up being censured), and Barnhart’s proposed censure.
A bill from March 17 shows how the debate over the AI security grant and Merrick’s censure were happening simultaneously.
“Conference with M. Mason about board governance related to censure motions; research on procedural requirements; conference with Davidson County School Bd. attorney regarding school safety grant/AI software issues," according to the invoice.
Earlier in March, Mason was again talking with the attorneys regarding “board issues” and emails were exchanged with Barnhart “regarding [an] individual defaming her.”
WHQR asked Barnhart for details, but hasn't heard back.
In July, when Perry was accused by some of his colleagues of disclosing closed session material, Blanchard had to “conference and [provide] correspondence with P. Bradford about issue of whether/when disclosure of closed sessions might be criminal infraction.”
Last October, Blanchard voiced his concerns that some of the members, who weren’t named, were putting himself and Kromke in the middle of some of their disagreements. This, he said, put him in a “difficult spot” and gave him “heartburn.”
In response, the board updated its policy in December around how members interact with the attorneys (2610). The latest version includes these additions: “Every board member must be informed of the question and response by the requesting board member within 24 hours or prior to any board or committee meeting, whichever comes first,” and “Unless requested by the chair or directed by a vote of the board, the board attorney will not provide legal advice or legal opinions regarding the actions or conduct of board members.”
Aside from trying to manage conflict among board members, the attorneys also supported the board and district staff in handling difficulties with the public. The Sink Law Firm charged NHCS $258 to consult with EC leadership “re: abusive parent advocate,” and helped draft an email to an “inappropriate parent advocate.”
Consultation on DEI, books, and public records
The topic of ‘diversity, equity, and inclusion’ or DEI is mentioned at least seven times in the bills; in February, it cost the district over a $1,000 for attorneys to review policies to identify “DEI language” and to review the ‘Dear Colleague’ letter regarding compliance with a federal mandate over DEI.
Prior to that, in January, attorneys were reviewing school board policies on “display of flags”. The board controversially banned student art and family photos but then reversed the decision; however, it’s still against policy to display international flags unless they are part of the curriculum.
Named in regard to concerns over DEI are Perry, Bradford, and Barnhart. In one bill from March, they had to review “two emails from Barnhart regarding DEI in a program at Masonboro Elementary and studied information regarding the program.”
WHQR asked Barnhart for details about the unnamed program and her issues with it, and has yet to hear back.
The request for materials around the book, Blended by Sharon Draper, was mentioned 13 times throughout the bills, starting in April.
One issue was the identity of an elementary school parent, who later turned out to be Barnhart, who wanted the book out of Wrightsboro Elementary.
In the original school-level request to review the book, the parent's name was redacted. It was WHQR’s contention that this name would be public, as it wasn’t a part of a specific student record, and the removal would affect all other students and families at the school. The attorneys disagreed, saying that parent names on book removal forms that affect the school should remain private because of FERPA. School districts across the state have different interpretations on this — some have made parent names public, others redacted them.
On April 14, the attorneys were consulting with Barnhart on this: “Called board’s Barnhart to discuss FERPA considerations.”
Another disagreement over whether certain records were public or private concerned draft plans for New Hanover High School.
On June 26, attorneys billed $250 for “conferences (multiple) with Barnes and [Anita] Baggie about WHQR’s request for New Hanover HS facility study and letter from attorney consulting around the release of the draft study of NHHS; conferences with Barnes and Chair Mason consulting about board governance issues.” (WHQR had to get legal support from the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press to send a legal demand letter for the plans.)
Earlier in June, the attorneys had already “exchanged emails with Anita Baggie and Rob Morgan regarding the reply about NHHS facility study.”
Other issues
In addition to DEI and books, in February, the district spent $500 for the attorneys to review the Stepping Stones curriculum or middle school sex education curriculum. The curriculum, which is now called ‘Family Life,’ was eventually changed to eliminate references to gender roles and LGBTQ+ identities.
In other contentious issues facing the district, the attorneys had conversations about the changes to federal procedures allowing ICE officers on campus. They also spoke with members about the PowerSchool data security breach.
Additionally, a personal injury lawsuit brought forth by a student against the board and Coastal Horizons was referenced at least 18 times throughout the bills starting in March. A bill noting attorneys had “reviewed subpoena from Horton and Mendez regarding WHAT [Coastal Horizons’ Wilmington Health Access for Teens] clinic accident,” was the first time it was referenced. Through WHAT, Coastal Horizons helps provide counseling and other services in the district’s high schools.
According to the suit, in 2023 an Ashley High student fainted and sustained significant injuries after taking a TB test. The suit claims negligence by NHCS and Coastal Horizons employees, alleging they didn’t provide proper aftercare. The district and Coastal Horizons deny these allegations.
Notably, the attorneys who have provided legal services for the district have all provided itemized bills, which help ensure the board and superintendent understand the work those lawyers are performing (and, by extension, the public can also get a clear idea of how taxpayer money is being spent). That’s not always the case; for example, Cape Fear Community College’s legal representatives, Ward & Smith, P.A., stopped itemizing their legal bills, leaving it unclear exactly what is being billed.
- To view NHCS’ legal bills from December - July 2025, click here
