INVESTIGATIVE REPORT

ALLEGATIONS OF UNPROFESSIONAL
CONDUCT BY
and
STATE OF THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN
PRINCIPAL

AND HIS MANAGEMENT TEAM

February 23, 2016

The Bodine Group

15320 Wolf Ridge Court
Grass Valley, CA 95949

(916) 801-0471

Meetings14 and rarely talked about struggling kids. He was not student-centered and
provided little guidance. The counseling staff was left to figure out how to solve those
problems on their own.

Decision-making
It was reported that
appeared to have difficulty making decisions. He avoided
unpopular decisions and often would not stand by decisions he made. For example, the
Management Team set a deadline for purchasing tickets for the Homecoming Game.
When parents complained to
about the deadline, he waived the deadline without
consulting with the Management Team. The result was that oftentimes parents began to
go directly to
for decisions and bypassed the
. When the Management
Team decided something,
sometimes
backwards.15
If an
was responsible for an item, it was accomplished in a few days. If
was
responsible, it could be delayed for weeks, if not months. He put nothing in writing and
often did not answer emails.
One of the Management Team reported that
decisions were not always in
support of kids. For example, if the administrative staff decided to move a teacher to an
area where he or she had more strength,
would overrule it when the teacher
complained.
At the end of last year,
led a group book study on the Five Dysfunctions of a
Team. People were reserved and not candid in the discussions. The group came up with
a set of commitments and norms for the coming year.
sensed that there was
tension between him and his management team. So, after the book study was complete,
he asked one of the
what the elephant in the room was. The
told
that it
was his decision-making and his unwillingness to make tough decisions. The
also told
him that the team did not trust him. Mr.
response to the conversation was to say
that he would take care of things, but he did not and nothing changed.

Other Leadership Issues

was responsible for managing the school based on a budget with the assistance
of the
However, Foundation money was never booked in
the schools budget. As an example, when they got $12,000 to $13,000 in unbudgeted
bills,
told her the Foundation would pay for it. He did not check with her or add

14

said that the addition of management issues to the guidance meetings was deliberate because with the
retirement of the very experienced
, he wanted the counseling team to take on more managerial
responsibility. He later decided it was a mistake because it took them out of their comfort zone.
15

said that he told the

that they should think of themselves as principals in their own areas. They had
autonomy. The
felt quite differently because he often overruled their decisions.
said he could not think
of one decision he had overridden.

REACTION TO THE PROSPECT OF THE RETURN OF

Of the ten members of the Management Team, eight do not want him to return. The other
two are new to the District and have no objection to his return. The three administrative
support staff interviewed do not want him to return either. Besides their lack of confidence
in his leadership and the alienation caused by his behavior, the primary reason given for
not wanting
to return was his destructive behavior since his placement on
leave.
The Management Team got feedback that over winter break that
had invited
teachers to his home, engaged in conversations with staff, and used social media to
communicate with both staff and the community.17 In these meetings and conversations,
claimed that none of the allegations were true and pointed to issues with the
Management Team18. According to the feedback received from Administrators,
blamed them for his situation, called the Management Team liars and said they did not
know what they were doing.19 He even told administrators in the
School District
that one of his
was out to get him and he was the victim of a witch hunt by the
District administration.
By inviting and talking to some teachers and coaches and not others, and denying the
allegations to those he spoke to,
caused a lot of friction and division in the staff.
Some people felt compelled to choose sides. 20 His actions created rifts within the faculty
and between his supporters and the Management Team. Staff became disheartened and
do not know who they can trust. Some people who were friends wont speak to each other.
Many teachers have become isolated and stay away from each other. The family
atmosphere once prevalent at the school has been destroyed. Before
started
talking to people, the staff was neutral. The staff is so fractured now that the District will
need to figure out how to pick up the pieces.
Many management staff that live in the community have stopped going to the local grocery
store and other businesses because people accost them either with questions or tell them
17

Of the 32 teachers interviewed, 12 had direct contact with

Of those, 7 want him to return and 5 do not .
2 of the 5 came away from the meeting not believing him. Of the 7 who want him to return, 5 are in the athletic
department or coach.
18

told people in January that the allegations about unprofessional conduct had been dropped, so the only
problem was the Management Team.
19

said that he never badmouthed the management team. Some teachers who attended those meetings
confirmed that he only said that he needed to do some work with the management team. However, other teachers
who spoke to him said that he badmouthed the management team to them.
20

Of the 32 teachers interviewed, 12 want

set in their positions and opinions.

to return, 17 do not and 3 are unsure. Most people are strongly

12

CONCLUSIONS22
1.

is a high energy, committed and charismatic individual who came to Oak

Ridge with the best motives, intentions and plans to add to the already established
highly successful high school.

2.

had a very positive effect on the parents and students. He built a strong
school spirit and pride. He developed very positive relationships with parents, the
Foundation and the community. He gave great support to the athletic program and
projected a very attractive image of the school to the community.

3.

engaged in several types of unprofessional conduct:

a. He used profanity frequently in his office and in administrative meetings.
b. He periodically lost his temper in dealing with staff and reacted
unprofessionally by yelling, hitting things, flinging his arms around, swiping
papers off his desk with an angry sweep of his hands, using offensive
language, and storming out of his office.
c. He frequently made derogatory and demeaning comments to management
and support staff about teachers, parents and students. He also made at least
one
comment.
d. He frequently lied to staff and parents about decisions he made and
blamed others for his own errors. He countermanded other administrators
decisions and then denied that he had done so.

4. Because of his treatment of staff and his failure to show leadership or make
decisions,
has lost the respect and trust of his Management and Guidance
Teams as well as many Teachers on staff.
5. Because of his conduct while on administrative leave in addition to his prior negative
behaviors and actions with staff prior to his leave, we believe the relationship
between
and the Management and Guidance Teams to be irretrievably
broken.
6. Several administrative staff, including all of the
returns to his position as Principal.
7.

, will leave if

post leave conduct was improper, divisive, and showed poor judgment.
He effectively interfered with the ongoing investigation process and made an already
confused and volatile situation worse. We believe his action was an attempt to
influence staff and public opinion. His action had the opposite effect of making the
situation more divisive and poisoned the well for his return.

22

In reaching these conclusions, we did not rely on the documented allegations of

allegations are uncorroborated,

14

because much of her

8. Professional reparative support services to the teaching staff must be provided at

the high school to guide and support them toward the restoration of the previously
high levels of camaraderie, respect, loyalty, and support of their family lost during
the unfolding of these unfortunate circumstances. Concrete action by the District
toward that renewed vision and hope for the future has become a beacon for them
and a measure of forward progress.
9. Separate professional reparative support services must also be provided to the
Management and Guidance Teams and Teachers together to guide and support
them with and through their task of healing, reconciliation and provision of leadership
to all when decisions are made and the school returns to normal. Swift action to get
these wheels moving is critical to the continued success of Oak Ridge because of
the crucial roles they play in all aspects of the educational and business processes
of the high school.

OPTIONS
The Board of Trustees has several options about how to proceed at this point. Among
those options are:
1. Give
a March 15th letter and keep him on administrative leave until his
contract expires.
2. Offer

the opportunity to resign and help him find other employment.

3. Return
to his position as Principal with a Performance Improvement Plan.
That plan would include a clear statement of expectations about his changes in
conduct, a reentry plan, personal coaching, and intervention in the relationship
between him and the Management Team.
4. Contract for outside professionals to assist in relationship repairs within the teaching
staff and between the teaching staff and t he site administration.

RECOMMENDATIONS
Recommendation #1:
We recommend that the District give
a March 15th letter, keep him on
administrative leave until his contract expires, and offer him the opportunity to resign, with a
commitment to assist in finding other employment.
If the only findings were that
used profanity and lost his temper, we could readily
recommend that he be returned to his position with a warning letter, strong coaching and
15

mentoring, and time to improve. His practice of making derogatory comments about staff
and others and his habit of lying show deficiencies that would not be changed by a warning
letter. Additionally,
has so fractured his relationship with the Management Team
that we believe it to be impossible to adequately repair that relationship or regain their trust.
The knowledge that the District would lose very competent Administrators if
is
returned -- they made it clear during our time with them that most would immediately begin
making plans for their departure -- factored heavily in our decision.
For all of these reasons, we cannot recommend his retention.
Recommendation #2:
We also recommend that the District contract with a professional organization to develop
and implement a strong and organized process to repair the relationship rifts among the
teachers and between the teachers and the administrative staff that have become corrosive
and divisive to the cohesive delivery of educational support services to students.
We recommend this level of intervention because the staff we interviewed said they wanted
two things: closure to the process and some way to bring all the staff back together.

16