Bond lawyers and bond sellers

Key facts

• Bond lawyers now: Norton Rose Fulbright US LLP, on every sale since 2020.¹
• Before that: McCall, Parkhurst & Horton (2003–2014), Andrews Kurth (2015–2016), two firms together (2017A), Underwood Law Firm (2019).¹
• Sellers’ cut on the latest sale (2026A): $672,862.62, about 39 cents per $100 borrowed (our math).²
• Other sale costs on 2026A: $870,000 for lawyers, advisers and others, all paid from the loan money.³

In short

Lawyers, banks and an adviser help the district sell its loans. The banks keep a cut of each sale: $672,862.62 on the latest one.² Other sale costs were $870,000.³ All of it comes out of the loan money.²³

Why it matters to your tax bill: sale costs are paid from borrowed money, which the debt tax repays with interest.

Related: bond adviser · os 2026a · how bonds work

Layer 1: Who they are

When the district borrows, it sells bonds. Three outside groups help:

• Bond lawyers (bond counsel) say in writing that the loan is legal and that the interest is tax-free for buyers.
• Bond sellers (underwriters) are banks. They buy the whole loan from the district and resell it to investors.
• The bond adviser works for the district and plans the sale. It has its own page.

The sellers keep a small cut of every sale. It is called the “underwriters’ discount.”

Layer 2: How they are paid and checked

• The sellers’ cut comes out of the loan money. It is not a separate bill in the regular budget.²
• The lawyers’ and advisers’ fees are lumped into “costs of issuance.” The bond papers do not split them by firm.³
• The board approves each sale. We have not found a board vote that picks the bond lawyers or the sellers for each sale.

Layer 3: The record, sale by sale

Sale	Bond lawyers	Sellers’ cut	Cut per $100 borrowed (our math)
2003	McCall, Parkhurst & Horton	$487,716.70	about 65¢
2004	McCall, Parkhurst & Horton	$673,307.83
2007	McCall, Parkhurst & Horton	$1,179,300.78
2008	McCall, Parkhurst & Horton	$1,716,550.42
2016A	Andrews Kurth Kenyon	$1,380,201.49
2023	Norton Rose Fulbright	$1,011,821.30	about 39¢
2023A	Norton Rose Fulbright	$141,813.12
2025A	Norton Rose Fulbright	$1,937,816.25	about 45¢
2026	Norton Rose Fulbright	$124,396.53	about 38¢
2026A	Norton Rose Fulbright	$672,862.62	about 39¢

Source for every row: each sale’s bond papers (official statements).¹²

The 2026A sellers were J.P. Morgan and Siebert Williams Shank, with FHN Financial Capital Markets, UMB Bank and TD Financial Products.²

The other side

• Every Texas district uses outside lawyers, advisers and banks to sell bonds. Their work is checked by the state Attorney General.
• Underwriters are paid through a spread that is shown in each official statement.

Questions to ask

• Will the district post the costs of issuance for each sale, by firm?
• How does the district pick the bond sellers for each sale?

Changes to this page

• Nov. 2, 2026: Added questions to ask.
• Nov. 2, 2026: Added the steps behind the figures to the notes.

What you can do or watch next

• Watch each new official statement for who was hired (see os 2026a).
• See bond adviser for the adviser’s contract.

What we don’t know yet

• The cut for every sale. Some papers cover two or more loans at once, and we have only pulled the first loan’s figure.
• How much of each sale’s “costs of issuance” went to the bond lawyers.
• How the sellers were picked for each sale.

Numbers marked “our math” are our estimates, not official figures. The notes show the inputs and the steps.

Footnotes

1. Official statement covers, Series 2003 to 2026A (bond counsel named on each cover). ↩ ↩² ↩³

2. Official statements, “Underwriting” section, for each sale shown. Cents per $100 is our math: cut ÷ amount borrowed × $100. 2003: $487,716.70 ÷ $75.2 million = 0.65%, about 65¢. 2023: $1,011,821.30 ÷ $260.9 million = 0.39%. 2025A: $1,937,816.25 ÷ $435.3 million = 0.45%. 2026: $124,396.53 ÷ $33.0 million = 0.38%. 2026A: $672,862.62 ÷ $174.8 million = 0.39%. ↩ ↩² ↩³ ↩⁴ ↩⁵ ↩⁶

3. Series 2026A official statement, sources and uses: $870,000 costs of issuance, including the co-advisers’ fees. ↩ ↩² ↩³ ↩⁴