Monday, May 07, 2007

Judge Eisele reads Pat Lynch's column

Well, I am not sure of that, but he certainly reached the same conclusion. The school board must be more precise in listing the alleged offenses of Superintendent Roy Brooks. Here is the crox of the Democrat-Gazette update.

U.S. District Judge G. Thomas Eisele ruled Monday that the board hearing scheduled for tonight must be delayed until attorneys compile a clear, concise list of grievances against Superintendent Roy Brooks and until a hearing officer can be present at the suspension hearing.

The earliest the hearing can occur will be five days from Wednesday.


My quick read is that the district is NOT restricted from buying out Brooks's contract.

Stop This Outrageous Petulance.

Comments:
Mr. Lynch,

Unless you are employed by the district, as I am, then you should be offering no instructions to "Stop This Outrageous Petulance." The fact is, Dr. Brooks is guilty of the proposed charges, and more. On more than one occasion, he has attended faculty meetings at my school, as well as others, and made the comment "If you are caught making negative commments about this school district in public, you will be fired on the spot." Other "infractions" that apparently warrant his intimidation and bullying of employees includes joining, or belonging to the teachers' union and questioning policy or procedure.
It is a fact that he did direct the school district's testing coordinator to falsify district test scores in an attempt to influence the court desegregation case, and when she refused to compromise her, AND the school district's integrities, he fired her. Dr. Brooks then committed the alleged insubordination by not immediately hiring DeJarnette back as the school board instruted, instead following his own timeline.
Your editorial in today's Democrat-Gazette mentions an abuse of power. You are certainly right about that, but you are looking in the wrong direction. Brooks uses his position of superintendent to intimidate his subordinates, and that, Sir, is no way to lead a company, much less a school district in which he should be the highest example of citizenship for the students.
You say that the superintendent deserves to know the exact charges against him; trust me, he knows EXACTLY what he has done. Personally, I really don't care if his departure is "dignified" or not; he just needs to leave.
 
This is pure garbage and I promise to answer point-by-point later in the day.
Pat
 
"On more than one occasion, he has attended faculty meetings at my school, as well as others, and made the comment "If you are caught making negative commments about this school district in public, you will be fired on the spot." "

How about specifics. If you have the kind of inside information you claim, why don't you provide specific dates and times. More than the Mitchell crew can do.


"It is a fact that he did direct the school district's testing coordinator to falsify district test scores in an attempt to influence the court desegregation case, and when she refused to compromise her, AND the school district's integrities, he fired her."

Once again proof? I'm sure that Chip would have included it in the list if there were any proof. Sounds like "he said, she said" and that doesn't rise to the level of firing.

I wonder if you are one of the ones in a non-teaching role whose jobs Mitchell was so concerned about (as quoted in the NY Times).

I keep hearing about all of the things that Brooks has done, but very few specifics. Sounds juvenile to me.

Oh, and by the way, if Lynch pays taxes to the LRSD (which all of Arkansas does) then he absolutely has a dog in the fight.
 
Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link



<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?