Can This Possibly be Legal?

At the November board meeting I submitted a complaint against Joseph Hunter. I didn't hear anything for an entire month (in violation of board policy regarding public complaints) and when I made further inquiries at the December meeting, I was told that the complaint had been forwarded to the board's legal counsel who had hired an investigator to look into the matter. I did hear from the investigator within a few days and we had a number of communications over the next couple of weeks. He indicated he would also be talking with staff in the district office. I was impressed with his professionalism and commitment to being thorough and unbiased. He told me at the time that he hoped to have his report ready for the board by Christmas. He did not discuss the results of his investigation with me at any time; he was working for the board and prepared his report for them. I don't know what the report says but the way it has been handled by Susan Stoops would suggest that it is bad news for Hunter.

Given the time line he indicated, I was expecting some kind of response from the board by now. On Monday, I asked a couple of board members when I might hear something and they said that they hadn't seen the report and didn't think it was ready yet. So today I contacted the investigator to see if his report was done. Imagine my surprise when he let me know that he had turned in the report to the board's attorney on December 30. The investigator was very surprised that board members had not seen the report and that I had not received an official response. He said it was "very peculiar to have a complaint response delayed this long." The normal procedure would be for the attorney to forward the report to the board chair and there is certainly no reason to suppose that he failed to do so.

It would appear that Susan Stoops has been in possession of that report for nearly a month! And that she has been withholding it from other board members! This kind of thing happened when I was on the board - the chair and the superintendent would consult and decide what the rest of the board needed to know. It was infuriating then and it is infuriating now. The board as a whole is legally responsible for this district. How can board members make informed decisions without information? But maybe that's the whole point.

I wonder what's in it that she doesn't want them to see - it can't be very flattering to Hunter. She gives every appearance of having allied herself with him against other board members. If so, she has abused her authority as board chair and should be removed immediately. It is not up to the chair to decide what other board members will be allowed to know. This is especially true in this instance - I certainly hope she did not share the report with Hunter before the board got to read it. But it wouldn't surprise me if she did. In the case of complaints against the superintendent, the attorney and the investigator work for The Board - not the board chair and certainly not the superintendent.

Unbelievable? Manipulative? Shameless? Unethical?