Witch hunts. Ambushing. Playing both ends against the middle.

No, it's not a soap opera. It's the management of Houston's Metro system.

The public transit agency in America's fourth-largest city has some pretty heady internal politics going on -- or at least that's what Texas Watchdog could glean from a review of e-mails sent and received by the agency's ousted top lawyer.

Pauline Higgins, Metro's general counsel, was fired in February following allegations that Metro documents may have been shredded -- documents that had been requested by someone under the state's Public Information Act.

Higgins has since hired one of the city's top defense lawyers, Rusty Hardin, as her lawyer. Hardin has said that, instead of sparking the record-shredding, Higgins had pushed Metro to institute policies on how long the agency should keep or archive records. Meanwhile, Metro has released records indicating that Higgins was overly demanding of other employees and had an "offensive and divisive" management style, including calling one employee a "blond bitch."

Texas Watchdog sent Metro requests on Feb. 25-26 for several sets of records, including Higgins' personnel file, Higgins' e-mails from the weeks prior to her Feb. 23 departure, e-mail and text message records for Metro CEO Frank Wilson, copies of public information requests received by the agency, and other documents. The records were sought in hopes that they would shed light on why Higgins was abruptly fired, how Metro handles routine public information requests, and whether the agency improperly shredded records that were subject to the state's open records laws.

While none of Higgins' e-mail traffic appears to directly address or mention any kind of shredding, the e-mails do suggest that Higgins had been pushing Metro on the issue of records retention. Texas Watchdog is publishing several dozen of the e-mails, and various attachments to them, online today.

The records retention issue is mentioned in the e-mails as early as Jan. 22, when Higgins was told via e-mail that Metro's internal video-recording system had overwritten a video file someone had sought to copy -- as it had been programmed to do on a routine basis. "Do we have a record retention issue?" Higgins said in an e-mail to two other Metro staffers, asking them to talk further.

The e-mails also indicate that Higgins personally approved two Metro staffers travelling to Austin in late January for training on records retention.

"Thank you, for allowing Reginald and I to attend classes at the Texas State Library and Archives Commission," one of the Metro legal staffers e-mailed Higgins after the training. "The classes were extremely beneficial to us. I will send you a summary of what we were taught later today."

The e-mail went on to say that Metro was not keeping up with state law on records retention, and that the two newly trained employees had learned how to fix that: "According to the Texas State Library and Archives Commission and the Record Retention EDD we submitted, there should be a position titled Records Management Officer (RMO), which the President should be appointing. ... Those classes really gave me a very good insight on the role of a RMO, what’s needed to get METRO in compliance with the State and directions to make that happen."

On Feb. 1, Higgins sent another e-mail to one of Metro's newer employees, former Metro Board member Terence Fontaine: "I need to speak with you regarding the statutorily-required Record Retention Policy. Thanks!"

The same day, she also e-mailed George Smalley, Metro's vice president for communications, "George: Thanks for your support in wanting to do what is STATUTORILY right. It is mandatory by statute. Hope all is well." The e-mail had the subject line of "Thanks! Record Retention."

UPDATE, WEDNESDAY AFTERNOON: We e-mailed Smalley and he e-mailed us back:  "Ms. Higgins was terminated because of a continual pattern of bad management practices. She was absolutely not terminated for reasons related to Metro's document retention program. That's all I can give you on this." (We've also left a phone message with Hardin. When we can talk to them, we'll update our readers with what they have said.)

A Feb. 3 e-mail mentioned that Higgins had planned to do training for Metro staff on records retention.

However, another e-mail suggests Higgins wasn't too thrilled that people were able to go through her Metro personnel records. When notified by e-mail on Jan. 27 that former City Controller Lloyd Kelley had requested numerous records from Metro, Higgins e-mailed, "Wow! This is unbelievable. I was pissed when I got mine; it is such a violation. Why do people do these things? It disrupts people’s life." (It was Kelley who would later say he had been told Metro officials had shredded records he had requested.)

At the same time, other e-mails indicate that Higgins removed herself on ethical grounds from internal Metro discussions regarding a public information act request that had been filed seeking information about Higgins herself.

But it sounds like Kelley wasn't the only person having trouble getting public records out of Metro: The city of Houston had some troubles, too.

An e-mail from a lieutenant of Houston City Attorney Arturo Michel indicates that the city attorney's office filed a public information act request with Metro on Feb. 3 for its agreements with Harris County and the cities of Humble and Katy. Metro e-mailed her back, saying they would respond by Feb. 17 -- that's 10 business days, as specified by the state public records law.

On the morning of Feb. 17, the city attorney wrote back that she still hadn't gotten the records she'd sought from Metro. In the meantime, she'd already gotten the contracts from Harris County and the city of Humble.

A Metro public records official apparently called the city attorney's office on Feb. 17. Higgins wrote the lawyer, "Call me anytime! It is about partnership and collaboration."

On Feb. 6, Higgins e-mailed one of her top lieutenants, Jakki Hansen, who was also fired in the wake of the Metro ShredderGate uproar: "Jakki: Please see me Monday regarding the handling of the TPIA that was sent for [Frank J. Wilson], et al, the handling with Paula Alexander as the coordinator and reviewer of the requested records, and the style for the drafting of the letter, and our review process since the handling of this not the norm. Our meeting on this matter Monday is necessary and urgent!"

Outside the issue of public records, the e-mails show that Higgins had some real problems with Metro CEO Frank J. Wilson.

Here's one from Feb. 18, about five days before she was fired:

"Frank: I do not like what you have done to me (and my remaining [Office of General Counsel] staff), what you have already done, and are currently doing, to subvert, misrepresent (including what transpired today in Executive Session regarding your knowledge of METROPLEXCORE), and undermine the Office of the General Counsel, which is here to protect the best interest of the Authority, the client.

"Further, in light of all that is transpiring to disrespect me, humiliate, defame, slander, investigate (by your 'employee' advocate), and libel me and my reputation through unsavory actions, all of which have been and are currently taking place behind my back, I have retained Rusty Hardin as my personal legal counsel to advise me through these witch hunts. Mr. Hardin is copied on this email. I will be happy to discuss the two e-mails that you presented to me today in the presence of my legal counsel, Mr. Hardin. I am experiencing, and this is, a hostile and discriminatory work environment."

Higgins later forwarded the e-mail to Gene Locke, one of Metro's top outside lawyers, also a former Houston city attorney and candidate for mayor last year. She and Locke had e-mailed about having lunch together, and Locke invited her to join Facebook. On Feb. 3, they had exchanged e-mails about trying to talk by phone: "I WILL CALL YOU TODAY. IT IS IMPORTANT. POLITICS!" Higgins wrote.

It was not immediately clear from the e-mails what had transpired or been discussed in the Metro board's closed session regarding Metroplexcore. The private firm has sued Metro and Parsons Transportation Group, which is one of Metro's major contractors; a top Parsons official in Houston working on Metro's light rail systems, and who figures prominently in Metroplexcore's lawsuit, is married to a Metro executive.

Here's another one from Feb. 18, sent to Wilson, Metro's top human resources official and one of Metro's executive vice presidents:

"For the Record, as a result of the unilateral movement of [Office of General Counsel] personnel to 'other areas' during my absence and without the appropriate and respectful discussion and consultation with [Higgins], my staff has been traumatized and have expressed such displeasure with the actions that were taken. As a result, some of my staff have advised me that the situation is too disruptive and that they are seeking employment elsewhere and will eventually leave. They do not like how I am being treated and have expressed such to me.

"Further, our not been able to fill open positions, when we are in dire straits, while other 'privileged areas' have been allowed to hire or take spots, has been viewed as punitive, counterproductive and as 'I'll show you who is in charge'. It has compromised the [Office of General Counsel's] ability and efficiency.

"I have been undermined and shown no respect whatsoever, clearly for all to see, and it has impacted my staff, the results of which are tragic for the Authority-- the very entity about which we should care.

"This remains a hostile and discriminatory work environment."

On Friday, Feb. 12, Wilson had asked Higgins to see him the following Monday afternoon so he could "explain an organization modification that has recently become necessary." The e-mail doesn't elaborate -- but it's also one of the very few e-mails Wilson appeared to have sent Higgins in the time period Texas Watchdog reviewed.

On Feb. 15, Higgins asked her executive assistant to file away a copy of official paperwork showing that Higgins had properly left a subordinate in charge when she had been away from the office on Jan. 29: "Pls save all of these and my documentation. There is a witch hunt regarding me, as you can clearly see!" Higgins wrote.

Some e-mails give little clue as to what was going on. But, whatever it was, it sure didn't sound good.

"Please don't villify the soldier when you hear what came down late last week," Smalley wrote to Higgins on Feb. 15.

"About what do you speak?" Higgins responded. "Please enlighten me. I am sure that the witch hunt continues and is that about what you speak?"

"Please accept that it's not my place to discuss before you hear from Frank," Smalley said. "I'm sorry."

Higgins wrote back: "So, why did you send me the first email? It is not a problem. I do NOT make it a habit to vilify and, actually, I ABHOR vilification, witch hunt, and participants who willingly engage in such. My ethics will NEVER allow me to do such for ANYONE and on ANYONE. Behind-the-back tactics are not preferred and those are the actions of cowards. As you mentioned to me on Wednesday while returning from the HBA, THE WITCH HUNT AGAINST ME IS THE WORST THAT YOU HAVE SEEN.

"So, from the sense of your first email to me, I am sure what has transpired is impacting me and may not be good for the [Office of General Counsel] or the Authority. I am sure that I will hear when I return."

Ouch.

On Feb. 3, Higgins e-mailed one of Metro's outside lawyers -- in all capital letters: "I DO NOT WANT BOTH ENDS AGAINST THE MIDDLE, WHICH IS THE NORM HERE. I AM A PROFESSIONAL AND WILL ONLY FUNCTION AS SUCH."

Higgins also had some disagreements with Metro staffers other than Wilson.

Also on Feb. 3, Higgins e-mailed David Couch, the head of the Metro Solutions program, which includes the multi-billion-dollar proposal to extend Metro's light rail lines. "Watch your back!" she began.

"At least you know where I stand even though you may not like me or my position," she wrote to Couch. "I am not here for a popularity contest. I get my love from friends and family. PEH'S RULE OF INTEGRITY: I NEVER go behind the back of a colleague. It is destructive!"

Couch wrote her back: "Pauline, We are on the same page. I also don't subscribe to behind the back tactics which is why I got everyone in the room yesterday. Wherever you got the impression I do not like you or your position that is incorrect."

Higgins responded: "Then you need to reprimand the biggest culprits in your group and your position of not negatively discussing colleagues and going behind the back you should, as I have done, tell my staff at EVERY staff meeting of no gossip and destructive talk about persons who work for the same organization ESPECIALLY when the comments are unequivocally false and destructive.

"I will, in person, give you samples that are coming from your people. And, please, for example, stop Kristen from ambushing Matt and bad mouthing [the Office of General Counsel]! IT ALL COMES BACK TO ME/US!"

The e-mail doesn't elaborate on who Kristen or Matt were.

The following day, Feb. 4, Higgins complained to Couch and to Metro's head of capital projects: "Someone overheard [one of Metro's chief contracting officials] telling one of my staff that he/she has joined the 'enemy', namely [the Office of General Counsel]. And, I am told that the staff did not appreciate the comment. NOW, THAT IS DESTRUCTIVE LANGUAGE, COMMENT, AND BEHAVIOR!

"Can you please get your staff to stop these destructive comments and unprofessional behavior? There has to (be) actions and consequences for these things.

"I am going to speak with [the employee] directly regarding this matter. Will you join me?"