THE SCHOOL BOARD OF BROWARD COUNTY, FLORIDA ROBERT W. RUNCIE, as Superintendent of Schools, . Petitioner, v. VIVIA BROMBFIELD, Respondent, D) Tr A Petitioner, Robert W. Runcie, Superintendent of Schools (“Petitioner”), files this Administrative Complaint ageinst, VIVIA BROMPIELD (“Respondent”). The Petitioner seoke the termination of Respondent’s employment with the School Board of Broward County. (“SBBC”), pursuant to Chapters 120, 1001 and 1012 of the Florida Statutes and Chapters 6Be1 and 6B-4 of the Florida Administrative Code. Petitioner, in support thereof, states the following: , JURISDICTIONAL BASIS 1. ‘The agency is the School Board of Broward County, Florida (‘SBBC”), which is located at 600 Southeast Third Avenue, Fort Lauderdale, Broward County, Florida 33301; "2, Petitioner is the Superintendent of SBBC. . 3, Petitioner is statutorily obligated to recommend the placement of school personnel and to require compliance and observance with all laws, rules and regulations. Petitioner is authorized to report and eriforce any violation thereof, together with recommending the apptoptlate disciplinary action against any instructional personnel employed by the SBBC. 4 Respondont, was employed, at all times material herein, as a elementary school teacher at Stirling Elementary School, pursuant to a Professional Services Contract, issued in accotdance with Section 1012,33(3)(a), Florida Statutes. MATERIAL ALLEGATIONS 5, D.V. is anine (9) year old special needs student who was under Respondent's supervision, D.V.’s Individual Educational Plan (“IEP”) does not roflect a prescribed Rifton chair, A Rifton chair is used in tho classroom setting for physically disabled students (wheelchalr bound), D.V. is ambulatory and oan sit ina yegular olassroom chair and desk,. 6. On April 4, 2012, at 11:00 a.m., Respondent placed D.V. in the Rifton chair. Normally, a student would be placed in a Rifton chair for a period of time not to exceed fifteen’ (15) minutes, during which time the student would be engaged in a supervised activity, A few minutes afterwards, Respondent took D.V. out of that chair and belted him in to a second Rifton chair with a tray, locking the student in the chalr. The child was left in the chair until after 1:00 p.tn., when an assistant removed the child from the chair. Respondent provided a written explanation the next day claiming D.V, was “temporasily” placed in the Rifton: Chait so she could work one to one with him on his coloring activity. 7 Berlier in the school year, Respondent had previously placed another student in the Riftoi chair under sinallar oltoumstances, Also on another occasion, two (2) students wore left in their standers for over seventy (70) minutes by Respondent, One of the students was not positioned correctly and suffered a. mild seizure, Prior to the April 4" incident, Respondent was "provided both written and verbal notice that it was inappropriate to have any student in a non-prescribed Rifton chair, 8. During the 2011-2012 schoo! year, Respondent.also failed to adequately monitor the students in allowing access to improper utensils, leaving hot beverages on tables, providing crayons to students who could consume thom, and providing sippy cups to students who were incapable of using them. 9 Respondent, in accordance with the distrot’s progressive discipline policy, has reosived discipline for other acts of misconduct, including: (a) = May 20, 2010.- _ Respondent was issued a memo for her pattern of fate arrival on a regular and frequent basis, . (b) October 11,2010- — Respondent was issued a reprimand for her failure to properly supervise students. In one incident the Respondent was unaware that a student was missing from her olass. (9) October 20, 2010- Respondent was given a one (1) day suspension for her failure to provide adequate supervision when a student swallowed staples during her class. The student had three (3) staples stuck in the roof of his mouth, - Resoue transported the student to the hospital where x-rays showed the student swallowed two (2) staplés satlier that morning, Respondent had earlier left an open-stapler on a table, ADMINISTRATIVE CHARGES 10. Inst cause oxlsts for the requested relief, pursuant to Fla, Stat, §§ 1012,33(1)(@). Respondent’s employment contract and School Board niles and regulations, including but not limited to the following: . COUNT Li IMMORALITY 11. Respondent has violated Fla, Stat, § 1012.33, and Rule 6B-4,009(2) of the Florida Administrative Code. Respondent's acts constitute acts of immorality, that is, conduct inconsistent with the standards of public conscience and good morals, Respondent's conduct is sufficiently notorious to bring Respondent and/or the educational profession into public disgrace or disrespect, and impair Respondent's service in the community. COUNT 2. MISCONDUCT IN OFFICE 12, Respondent has violated Fla, Stat, 1012.33 and Rule 6B-4,009(3) of the Florida Administrative Code, Respondent’s acts are defined a3 a violation of the Code of Ethics of the Educational Profession as adopted in Rule 6B-1.001 F.A.C, and of Principles of Professional Conduot for the Educational Provisions in Florida, as adopted by Rule 6B-1,006, F.A.C., which are go serious so as to impair the individual’s effeotiveness in the school system, which includes the following: ; (3) Obligation to the student requires that the individual: (2) shall make reasonable effort to protect the student form conditions harmful ons and/or to the student’s mental and/or physical health and/or (b) shall not unreasonably restrain a student ftom independent action in pursuit of learning. : (a) shall not intentionally suppress or distort subject matter relevant to a student’s academic program. (@). shall not intentionally expose a student to unnecessary embarrassment or disparagement, (© shall not intentionally violate or deny a student’s legal rights. 13. Respondent has violated Fla, Stat. § 1012.33 and Rule 65-4.009(4) of the Florida Administratlve Code. Respondent's acts constitutes acts of gross insubordination or willful neglect of duties as defined as a constant or continuing intenttonal refusal to obey a direct order, reasonable in nature, and given by and with proper authority, COUNT 4: MORAL TURPITUDE 14, —_ Respondent has violated Fla, Stat. § 1012.33 and Rule 6B-4.009(6) of the Florida Administrative Code. Respondent’s acts constitute avts of motal turpitude, that is, acts of baseness, vileness or depravity in the private and social duties, which, according to the accepted standards of the time, a person owes to his fellow human or to soctety in general, and the doing of the act itself and not its prohibition by statute fixes the moral turpitude. | DEMAND HOR RELIEE WHEREFORE, based upon the foregoing, Petitloner, Robert W. Runoie, Superintendent of Schools, recommends the dismissal of the Respondent, VIVJA BROMFIELD, from her employment with the School Board of Broward County, based upon the foregoing facts and legal authority, Petitioner further, recommends the immediate suspension of Respondent without further pay ot benefits in the event the Respondent should challenge the School Board’s recommendation of the termination of her employment. EXECUTED this_.3 day of Deoniber 2 2. ) Te GE] rg a Superintendent of Schools, Broward County Charles T. Whitelock, Esq. Cadre Attorney

Docket for Case No: 13-000031TTS