STATE OF FLORIDA
DIVISION OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS
LEE COUNTY SCHOOL BOARD, | ) | |||
) | ||||
Petitioner, | ) | |||
) | ||||
vs. | ) ) | Case | No. | 08-6220 |
CHRISTOPHER RASMUSSEN, | ) ) | |||
Respondent. | ) | |||
) |
RECOMMENDED ORDER
Pursuant to notice, the final hearing was conducted in this case commencing on March 5, 2009, and continued until March 31, 2009, in Ft. Myers, Florida, before Administrative Law Judge
Bruce McKibben of the Division of Administrative Hearings.
APPEARANCES
For Petitioner: Robert Dodig, Jr., Esquire
School District of Lee County 2855 Colonial Boulevard
Fort Myers, Florida 33966
For Respondent: Robert J. Coleman, Esquire
Coleman & Coleman Post Office Box 2089
Fort Myers, Florida 33902 STATEMENT OF THE ISSUE
The issue in this case is whether Respondent's employment contract with Petitioner should be terminated for violation of School Board policies.
PRELIMINARY STATEMENT
On November 13, 2008, James W. Browder, Ed.D., Superintendent of Schools, Lee County School Board (the "School Board"), issued a Petition for Termination of Employment directed against Respondent. The Petition cited misuse of School Board property and unauthorized activity during work hours as the basis for termination of employment.
Petitioner then forwarded the Petition to the Division of Administrative Hearings ("DOAH") on December 15, 2008, citing Respondent's request for a formal administrative hearing. At the final hearing, Petitioner called the following witnesses: Robert Hingson, west zone service manager for the School Board; Victoria Ramina, coordinator of the maintenance department for the School Board; Donald Easterly, director of Maintenance Services for the School Board; George Cornwell, electronics supervisor for the School Board; and William Moore, executive director of School Support. Petitioner's Exhibits 1 through 8 were accepted into evidence. Respondent testified on his own behalf and called Sheryl Reed, maintenance helper; and Garry Tinny, assistant supervisor of the electronics department.
Respondent Exhibits 1 through 6 were offered and accepted into evidence. (All hearsay evidence was admitted subject to corroboration by competent, non-hearsay evidence. To the extent
such hearsay was not corroborated, it will not be used as a basis for any finding herein.)
The parties advised the undersigned that a transcript would be ordered of the final hearing. They were given ten days from the date the Transcript was filed at DOAH to submit proposed recommended orders. The transcript was filed at DOAH on May 14, 2009. Petitioner thereafter moved for an extension of time until June 5, 2009, to submit proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law. The motion was granted. The parties timely submitted Proposed Recommended Orders, which were given due consideration in the preparation of this Recommended Order.
FINDINGS OF FACT
Petitioner is the local school board responsible for hiring, firing and overseeing all employees working for the School Board and/or within the Lee County Public School system (also called the "School District" herein).
Respondent is an employee of the School Board, serving as an electronics field technician in the School Board's maintenance department. Respondent has worked for the School Board off and on since 1996, when he was a school bus driver. He has been an electronics technician since 2000. In that position, Respondent oversees the maintenance and repair of clocks, alarms, intercoms, scoreboards, sound and lighting
systems, burglary systems, and the like for all schools within the School District.
Respondent has never received any form of discipline from the School Board. His record is clear, and he has been commended for his work. His work ethic was viewed by others as consistent with that of similarly-situated employees (although Respondent may take more breaks than others).
School District maintenance workers work an eight-hour work day, commencing at 7:00 a.m. (per provisions of the SPALC Contract and Collective Bargaining Agreement). Each worker is expected to arrive at the maintenance area on Canal Street (hereinafter "Canal Street") and be ready to commence work by 7:00 a.m., each morning. The work day generally starts with a briefing of sorts to make sure each worker is aware of his/her tasks for the day. After the briefing, workers pick up tools and supplies from various locations around the Canal Street area and then proceed to the first school site requiring performance of an assigned task. A work day for Respondent could involve driving to any one of the numerous school campuses within the School Board's jurisdiction.
Workers are given 30 minutes for lunch each day, including the time it takes to drive to and from the lunch site. In addition, workers are allowed two 15-minute breaks, one in the morning and another in the afternoon. Again, the break time
includes the time taken to drive to a break site, if the employee decides to take a break at other than the place he/she is working at that time. Employees are not permitted to do personal business or make unauthorized stops during the work day without prior permission from a supervisor.
Respondent is a member of the U.S. Naval Reserve and currently holds the rank/level of E5. He attends regular weekend drills each month and also spends two weeks each year on temporary active duty. Respondent has been in the reserves throughout his tenure with the School Board. There has never been an issue between Petitioner and Respondent concerning Respondent's military status or his taking two weeks each summer to attend to his military duties. Respondent is proud of his military service, as evidenced by the fact that he wore his military uniform during both days of the final hearing.1
In May 2008, Respondent spent 17 days on active duty, serving in Bahrain. This was Respondent's active duty requirement for calendar year 2008. However, he then volunteered for an additional period of active duty in
July 2008. This second active duty stint was done in furtherance of his military career and at the suggestion of a superior officer. It was strictly voluntary, but Respondent felt somewhat compelled to "volunteer" based on his superior's comments.
Respondent then did his second active duty stint beginning June 28, 2008, and ending July 27, 2008. This period of time coincided with the maintenance department's busiest time for its electronics technicians. The maintenance department annually used the time in between school terms to get various maintenance items completed while it would be the least disruptive to students in the classrooms. The summer period is used to "clean up" things that remain pending from the school year. It is clear that Respondent's supervisors were not happy that Respondent had volunteered to be absent during this busy time, but Respondent was allowed to go on active duty anyway. This left the School Board short-handed as to its needed electronics technicians for that period of time.
Respondent's supervisor expressed concern to Respondent about this second period of active duty, specifically that it was occurring during the summer break. Respondent recognized the strain this additional leave put on his co-workers and apologized for that fact. Respondent assured his supervisor it would not happen again.
Upon his return from the voluntary active duty, Respondent was told that he was being placed on "suspension of driving privileges," meaning that he could not drive School Board vehicles until further notice. This suspension was based on information gleaned from review of data generated by a new
tracking system being used in School Board maintenance vehicles (which will be discussed below). Respondent is of the opinion that the suspension was some sort of retaliation for his having gone on the second active duty tour during June and July.
The Global Positioning System--Background
Beginning in May 2008, the School Board decided to install global positioning system (GPS) devices in all of its maintenance vehicles. The installation began with 50 randomly selected vehicles of the 150-vehicle fleet. The purpose of the GPS devices was to track School Board vehicles and assure that all vehicles were being utilized properly and in accordance with School Board policies. This measure was prompted by repeated complaints from the public about maintenance vehicles being seen involved in non-school activities or at non-school locations.
The GPS system in Respondent's maintenance vehicle was installed on May 22, 2008. The signal from the GPS was instantaneous, but required calibration and installation of certain software before it could be effectively utilized. The GPS became fully functional on June 20, 2008, at 10:07 a.m.
The GPS system tracked the location, speed, and duration of stops for the vehicle. This data was maintained on a computer server which could print maps showing a vehicle's movements on any given day or time. The maps could be annotated
with the vehicle's speed, length of stay at any one location, and actual driving route.
On or about June 27, 2008, William G. Moore, director of School Support for the School Board, was being given a course on the use of the new GPS system and how it worked. During his training, Moore randomly selected some vehicles to review, solely for the purpose of ascertaining how the system tracked and recorded information. One of the vehicles Moore randomly selected was vehicle No. 423, which turned out to be Respondent's work van. Moore did not know Respondent personally and did not know to which of the 150 or so School Board vehicles any one person was assigned. Moore then selected June 26, 2008, randomly as a record to review as part of his training.
The June 26, 2008, record for vehicle No. 423 immediately raised red flags in Moore's mind. He observed that the vehicle was at a non-school site for over three hours (although it was later determined to be a training site and a legitimate stop). The vehicle was also shown entering a residential community (although again it was later determined that the driver had permission for that trip). However, based on his initial determination that something was amiss and not having any explanation for those instances, Moore decided to more fully examine the route history for vehicle No. 423. First, he determined that this vehicle was assigned to
Respondent. (The vehicle will hereinafter be referred to as the work van.)
Moore's further investigation turned up a number of questionable stops and trips by the work van during the period June 20 through June 27, 2008. The findings of his investigation will be set forth in pertinent part below on a day-by-day basis, coupled with explanations from Respondent as to each day's activities.
Friday, June 20, 2008
At 10:07 a.m. (when the GPS first started working), the work van was departing from Ft. Myers High School ("Ft. Myers High") en route to Estero High School ("Estero"). Upon arrival at Estero, the van remained parked for five minutes, then left the parking lot and drove around the building to the front entrance of Estero for a period of one minute. Leaving Estero, the work van headed to a residential neighborhood known as the Bimini Circle Subdivision, where it stayed for 11 minutes. The work van then proceeded to a 7-11 Store where it remained for 35 minutes. The next stop was back at Estero where the work van remained for one hour and 46 minutes. At 2:00 p.m., the work van left Estero, stopped briefly at the 7-11 Store, then returned to Canal Street at 2:59 p.m.
The School Board perceived several violations of policy gleaned from the information on the GPS for the work van during the June 20, 2008, work day:
First, the work van was at Estero for a total of
two hours and 13 minutes on this date. The total time at Ft. Myers High for this date is not detailed by the GPS, but would presumably be approximately two and a half hours, i.e., allotting time for driving from Canal Street up until the GPS turned on at 10:07 a.m. Respondent's daily activity log indicates five hours at Estero and three hours at Ft. Myers High.
Respondent took two unauthorized stops at a store, presumably for personal reasons, and then spent 11 minutes at a residence during work hours.
Respondent took in excess of 30 minutes for his lunch hour (35 minutes at a location, plus an undisclosed amount of time driving to and from that location).
Respondent took a longer route back to Canal Street than necessary, presumably wasting time. (Employees were expected to work the entire day, then return to Canal Street precisely at 3:00 p.m. A 30-minute
debriefing session, return of tools, etc., would occur and then employees would be released from duty at
3:30 p.m. Employees were told repeatedly NOT to return to Canal Street until 3:00 p.m.)
Respondent explained his actions and refuted the School Board's concerns as follows:
Upon leaving Canal Street that morning, Respondent went directly to Ft. Myers High and remained there until 10:07 a.m.
The rest of his day, approximately five hours, was dedicated to work at Estero, but included travel time, breaks, and lunch. The two hours and 13 minutes actually at Estero should be supplemented by driving
time to the school from Ft. Myers, driving time to his breaks and lunch, driving time to and from his personal errand, and driving time back to Canal Street.
Respondent remembers asking for and receiving permission to stop by his wife's house (the residence in the Bimini Circle Subdivision) to retrieve his wallet.
The stops at 7-11 Stores were for lunch and two allowable breaks.
The longer route back to Canal Street was taken in order to avoid an accident on the shorter route.
During June of 2008, technicians would fill out their daily work logs using rounded estimates of time. They made no attempt to precisely state exact periods of time spent at any one job site. Rather, the daily logs were a very general statement of which job sites had been involved in the employee's work that day. (This procedure has subsequently changed, but was extant at all times relevant hereto.)
It is clear Respondent took a longer than allowable lunch break on this date. Further, the time taken for breaks, if drive time was included, was in excess of the allotted amounts. It is clear Respondent was actually at Estero for only about half the time recorded on the daily work log. However, under the procedures in place at that time, the work log time entry was not dispositive of his actual time at the site.
Monday, June 23, 2008
On this date, the School Board gleaned the following violations of policies from its review of the GPS log:
Respondent was at Estero for two hours and nine minutes, but his daily work log indicates six hours at Estero and two hours at Gateway Elementary.
The work van made stops at McDonalds and Bank of America on the way to Estero, then at the Bimini Circle address for eight and a half minutes after leaving Estero. Petitioner says any stops for
personal business are strictly prohibited while in a School Board vehicle.
After a 47-minute stop at Dairy Queen, the work van then proceeded to Gateway where it stayed for approximately two hours.
Upon leaving Gateway, the work van stopped at Home Depot--an unauthorized stop--for about 18 minutes.
Respondent provides the following explanation and rebuttal concerning the School Board's concerns for that day:
Again, his work sheet indicates the correct amount of time actually at Gateway. The remainder of his day, including all travel, breaks, and lunch, was allocated on this time sheet to Estero no matter how long he was actually there.
The stops at McDonalds and Bank of America were simply to allow his co-worker (Sheryl Reed) to get an iced tea and to get money for lunch. Respondent maintains that these types of stops were not specifically prohibited and were common practice.
Respondent maintains the stop at his wife's house was his break time (although a stop at McDonalds and Bank of America had already occurred that morning).
The 47-minute lunch hour was caused by Respondent simply losing track of time. That is, he admits that it was a longer lunch break than allowed, but it was not done intentionally.
The stop at Home Depot was to obtain a coaxial wire needed for the Estero job, but the wire was not available.
Employees are allowed to shop at local retail stores to acquire equipment or supplies not available through the School Board. However, all such purchases must be made by way of a purchase card (P-Card) so that purchases can be tracked. There is no P-Card receipt for the Home Depot visit on this date, but Respondent maintains that is because no purchase was made. That is, the coaxial wire he was looking for was not available.
Reed said that Respondent made personal purchases from Home Depot and Lowe's on occasion during the summer of 2008 (because he was in the process of remodeling his house). He had purchased floor tiles and other items a couple of times a week that summer. However, she cannot remember whether he purchased anything on that particular date. Respondent admits that he did make purchases of home improvement products during work hours and transported the products in the work van to his house. He
does not remember making any such stops for purposes during the week of June 20 through 27, 2008.
Tuesday, June 24, 2008
On this date, Respondent's daily work log indicates three hours spent at Gateway and five hours spent at Island Coast.2 The GPS indicates the work van was at Gateway for three hours and at Island Coast for one hour and 40 minutes. The School Board also found the following other policy violations:
A stop at Weaver's Corner for 36 minutes and
40 seconds, presumably a long lunch made longer by travel time to and from the lunch venue.
An unauthorized visit for eight minutes and 40 seconds at a bank.
A visit to a gas station for eight minutes, then a short drive to another gas station for five minutes.
Respondent provides the following explanation and rebuttal to the School Board's findings:
As before, the extended period of time for the Island Coast job site includes travel, breaks, and lunch. However, it would have been more accurate on this day to have split the two job sites equally.
The stops at the gas stations were intentionally made so as not to return to Canal Street before the allotted 3:00 p.m., return time.
Respondent does not provide any explanation for the longer than allowable lunch break.
Wednesday, June 25, 2008
There were three stops on this date listed on Respondent's daily work log: Island Coast (4 hours), Dunbar Community (2 hours), and Ft. Myers High (2 hours). The GPS indicates the work van was at Island Coast for two hours and
11 minutes; at Dunbar Community for 11 minutes and 20 seconds; at Villas Elementary for one hour and 14 minutes; then at
Ft. Myers High for four minutes and 40 seconds.
Other perceived policy violations included:
A short stop at a bank in the Wal-Mart parking lot upon leaving Canal Street.
A lunch stop of 42 minutes and 30 seconds, not counting driving time to and from the restaurant.
Another stop at Bank of America for in excess of ten minutes.
A short, seven and a half-minute stop at a shopping center.
Respondent provided the following in rebuttal and response to the School Board's perceived violations of policy:
The quick stops at the banks were not prohibited and were common practice. They may have been part of Respondent's break time on that date.
The lunch hour ran over, but was not excessive or intentional. It may have also included part of a break he never took that day.
Thursday, June 26, 2008
This is the date that Moore initially reviewed in his training session that raised red flags concerning Respondent's time issues. On this date, the daily work log indicates seven hours in training and one hour at Villas Elementary.
The School Board's concerns about this date are set forth above, but would also include:
An authorized trip during the lunch hour for Respondent to retrieve a lap top which was being delivered by overnight delivery (so the computer would not be left sitting on the front porch). This trip
which took approximately 18 minutes, of which 30 seconds was spent stopped at his house. Respondent also took time for lunch before returning to the training site.
A circuitous, out-of-the-way route between the training site and the next job site (Villas Elementary).
A short stop at a 7-11 Store and then a longer-than- usual route back to Canal Street.
Respondent's explanation and rebuttal to the School Board's concerns were as follows:
Respondent had permission to make a quick visit to his home during the lunch hour to see why his home alarm had activated. (He does not remember anything about a lap top or a need to retrieve it.) Respondent says
that in the 30 seconds his work van was at the house, he exited the vehicle, walked to the house, unlocked the door and entered, turned off the alarm (which had been activated by his dog, who had escaped from his kennel), put his dog back in its kennel, re-set the alarm and left.
Respondent was able to do his personal errand and get to the restaurant and eat lunch with his co-workers within the time (one hour) allotted for lunch that day by the trainer.
The circuitous route was for the purpose of delivering some money to his daughter at her school. She was
waiting for him outside, and he didn't even have to stop the work van to hand off the money. Rather, his daughter reached out and grabbed the money as he rolled past.
The stop at the 7-11 Store was to use the rest room.
Respondent's testimony concerning the stop at his house is not entirely believable. It would seem to take more than 30 seconds to accomplish the things that he did. However, inasmuch as he made the stop and was still able to join his
co-workers in time for lunch, the reason for his home visit is immaterial. Also, the rolling delivery of money to his daughter is very unusual, but there is no evidence that the exchange did not take place in that fashion.
Friday, June 27, 2008
This day's daily work log indicates three work sites: Dunbar Middle School (4 hours), Ft. Myers High (2 hours), and Cypress High School (Cypress High)(2 hours). The GPS indicates
33 minutes and 50 seconds at Dunbar; one hour and 47 minutes at Ft. Myers High; and five minutes and 50 seconds at Cypress High. The work van then went back to Dunbar for one hour, 51 minutes and 30 seconds.
The School Board's other concerns about time and travel on this date are as follows:
After leaving Canal Street that morning, the work van made stops at McDonalds for three minutes and at Lowe's for 15 minutes.
There is a stop of one hour and eight minutes at a shopping plaza, presumably a long lunch hour.
Respondent's response to the allegations of policy violations for this day are as follows:
The McDonalds visit was again an allowable stop (as he understood the policies) for his assistant to get an iced tea.
The Lowe's stop was for the purpose of getting concrete anchors needed for a School Board job, but none were available and so no purchase was made on the P-Card.
The long lunch hour was just that; he was not thinking clearly because this was just one day prior to going on active duty and he was preoccupied with those thoughts.
The extra driving time was due to the fact that after leaving Dunbar, Respondent was called on the radio to go back there for an emergency job.
The daily work logs do not correspond exactly with Respondent's work day because that was not the purpose of the
logs. The logs were, at that time, simply an indicator of which schools had been visited on any given day. There was no effort by anyone to be exact or precise with the times recorded on the daily logs. The daily logs are essentially of no value in determining where an employee might have been at any point in time on any given day. There is no way to reconcile the GPS times with the daily work logs.
Each employee is expected to work a full day. If the number of tasks assigned during the morning meetings at Canal Street did not fill a technician's day, he/she was expected to locate additional work or do work on an on-going project to fill the day.3 Nonetheless, it is often difficult to coordinate a day's activities to make the assignments equate to the exact hours and minutes in a work day.
A large part of an employee's time during the work day is spent driving his/her vehicle. The driving time is supposed to be factored into the time spent on a particular work site. Thus, if it took 30 minutes to get to a work site, that time would be added to the time spent actually at the site. Then, when driving to a subsequent work site, the drive time would be assigned to that next site, etc.
Employees are on their honor to take breaks and lunch only when allowed and for the time allotted. There is no time clock, so each person must attempt to keep time themselves so as
to honor the allotted times. This is often difficult due to slow service at a restaurant, inability to take breaks at a particular time, or other factors.
The GPS system has provided the School Board with an effective tool for monitoring its employees' movements and location. However, at all times relevant hereto, the GPS system was in its infancy and the School Board was still learning how to assimilate and read the data generated by the system. Thus, Respondent's activities from June 20 through June 27, 2008, were examined in a way no other employee's had been looked at heretofore. It is, therefore, hard to make a comparative determination of Respondent's actions versus an established
norm.
Nonetheless, the School Board's findings are supported
by the GPS data. That is, the daily work logs are not consistent with time actually spent at particular job sites. Respondent's lunch breaks exceed the allotted 30-minute time period almost every day that was examined. There are stops at local establishments that are not part of the employee's work duties. Some of the routes taken by an employee are not the shortest routes, although it is impossible to ascertain whether they are the best routes based on other extraneous factors. The time spent on breaks, versus travel time, is hard to ascertain with any degree of certainty.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
The Division of Administrative Hearings has jurisdiction over the parties to and the subject matter of this proceeding pursuant to a contract with the Lee County School Board. The proceedings are governed by Sections 120.57 and 120.569, Florida Statutes (2008).4
The Superintendent of Schools for Lee County, Florida, has the authority to recommend to the School Board that an employee be suspended or dismissed from employment. § 1012.27, Fla. Stat.
Respondent is an "educational support employee" as defined by Subsection 1012.40(1)(a), Florida Statutes. The School Board has the authority to recommend to the School Board that educational support employees be suspended and/or dismissed from employment. § 1012.27, Fla. Stat. An educational support employee can only be terminated for reasons set forth in the Collective Bargaining Agreement which governs those employees.
§ 1012.40(2)(b), Fla. Stat.
The burden of proof in this proceeding is on Petitioner to prove, by a preponderance of the evidence, that just cause exists to suspend or terminate the employment of Respondent. McNeil v. Pinellas County School Board, 678 So. 2d 476 (Fla. 2d DCA 1996).
"Just cause" is the standard of discipline applied to actions against support personnel. See Support Personnel Association of Lee County Agreement, Provision 7.10. That provision provides that "any discipline during the contract year, that constitutes a reprimand, suspension, demotion or termination shall be for just cause." Just cause is not defined in the Agreement. However, the Agreement requires "that in all instances the degree of discipline shall be reasonably related to the seriousness of the offense and the employee's record." Id. at 7.11.
The School Board has construed just cause relating to instructional staff in the same manner as that phrase is used in Subsection 1012.33, Florida Statutes.
School Board Policy 7.04, Driving and Replacing District Vehicles, requires employees to use School Board vehicles solely for approved District business.
The School Board has met its burden of proof that Respondent violated some policies relating to the prescribed work-day schedule. Respondent took lunches that exceeded 30 minutes in duration (although sometimes in conjunction with a break). He went to banks, fast food establishments, and residential areas during work hours. He drove around at times to avoid returning to the maintenance area before 3:00 p.m. He
shopped for personal items during working hours and transported goods in the School Board vehicle.
However, these are relatively minor violations when measured against the actions of other similarly-situated employees and do not constitute just cause for termination. They may warrant a period of probation and some remedial training, but absent a showing that Respondent's behavior and actions were inconsistent with established practices, they do not warrant dismissal.
Now that the School Board has tightened its procedures for record-keeping and has put its employees on notice concerning violation of "personal business" prohibitions, any further such violations would constitute grounds for termination for Respondent or any other employee.
The evidence does not support Respondent's contention that actions taken against him by Petitioner were based upon or related to Respondent's taking leave for military purposes.
Based on the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, it is
RECOMMENDED that a final order be entered by Petitioner, Lee County School Board, rescinding the notice of termination and imposing a less stringent penalty, e.g., a period of
probation, a letter of reprimand and/or some remedial training, against Respondent, Christopher Rasmussen.
DONE AND ENTERED this 22nd day of June, 2009, in Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida.
R. BRUCE MCKIBBEN Administrative Law Judge
Division of Administrative Hearings The DeSoto Building
1230 Apalachee Parkway
Tallahassee, Florida 32399-3060
(850) 488-9675
Fax Filing (850) 921-6847 www.doah.state.fl.us
Filed with the Clerk of the Division of Administrative Hearings this 22nd day of June, 2009.
ENDNOTES
1/ It is not clear whether Respondent was on active military duty during the two days of final hearing, so it is unclear as to why he chose to wear his uniform on those days.
2/ The job site at that time was actually called the West Staging Area, but it now is the site of Island Coast High School and will be referred to herein as Island Coast.
3/ Most technicians also had cell phones available to them. Respondent, in fact, had a school-issued cell phone for his use. It could have been used to find additional work when necessary.
4/ Unless specifically stated otherwise herein, all references to Florida Statutes are to the 2008 version.
COPIES FURNISHED:
Dr. James W. Browder Superintendent of Schools Lee County School Board 2855 Colonial Boulevard
Fort Myers, Florida 33966-1012
Dr. Eric Smith Commissioner of Education Department of Education
Turlington Building, Suite 1514
325 West Gaines Street Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0400
Deborah Kearney, General Counsel Department of Education Turlington Building, Suite 1244
325 West Gaines Street Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0400
Robert Dodig, Jr., Esquire School District of Lee County 2855 Colonial Boulevard
Fort Myers, Florida 33966
Robert J. Coleman, Esquire Coleman & Coleman
Post Office Box 2089
Fort Myers, Florida 33902-2089
NOTICE OF RIGHT TO SUBMIT EXCEPTIONS
All parties have the right to submit written exceptions within
15 days from the date of this Recommended Order. Any exceptions to this Recommended Order should be filed with the agency that will issue the Final Order in this case.
| Issue Date | Document | Summary |
|---|---|---|
| Jul. 29, 2009 | Agency Final Order | |
| Jun. 22, 2009 | Recommended Order | Petitioner did not prove, by a preponderance of evidence, just cause for termination of employment. Recommend a lesser penalty. |
MARION COUNTY SCHOOL BOARD vs PATRICIA STAHL, 08-006220TTS (2008)
MANATEE COUNTY SCHOOL BOARD vs TAMMY M. JOHNSON, 08-006220TTS (2008)
SHARON PENNINGTON vs LAKE COUNTY SCHOOL BOARD, 08-006220TTS (2008)
POLK COUNTY SCHOOL BOARD vs BRENDA BOHLINGER, 08-006220TTS (2008)
MONROE COUNTY SCHOOL BOARD vs ADALHIA DEMOLEE, 08-006220TTS (2008)
