THE SCHOOL BOARD OF BROWARD COUNTY, FLORIDA ROBERT W. RUNCEE, as Superintendent of Schools, Petitioner, Vv, ANN MORGAN, Respondent. ee ADMINISTRATIVE COMPLAINT Petitioner, Robert W. Runcie, Superintendent of Schools (“Petitioner”), files this Administrative Complaint against, ANN MORGAN (“Respondent”), The Petitioner secks 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 6B-1 and 6B-4 of the Florida Administrative Code. Petitioner, in support thereof, states the following: IURISDICTIONAL BASIS J. The agency is the School Board of Broward County, Florida (“SBBC”), which is located at 600 Southeast Third Avenue, Fort Lauderdale, Broward County, Plorida 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 enforce any violation thereof, together with recommending the. appropriate disciplinary action against any instructional personnel employed by the SBBC. 4, Respondent has been employed by the School Board of Broward County since 2005, and holds a Professional Service Contract, issued in accordance with Section 1012.33(3)(a), Florida Statutes, Respondent, at times material herein, was assigned as an Autism Cluster Teacher at Wilton Manors Elementary School. MATERIAL ALLEGATIONS 5. Respondent, an autism cluster teacher at Wilton Manors Elementary School, has committed misconduct in office pursuant to Rule 6B-4,009(3), F.A.C. 6. On October 10, 2011, Respondent received a written reprimand for failing to adequately supervise her students when she failed to report a missing student. As an autistic cluster teacher, Respondent's students require constant supervision. Failure to properly provide this supervision greatly increases the risk of harm to her students. 7. Respondent's conduct toward the parents of her students as well as her colleagues is in direct contravention of the Rules governing the Education Profession in Florida. On May 25, 2011, Principal Narkier provided a letter summarizing their meeting earlier that day. The meeting was in response to Respondent's referring to a six (6) year old autistic student as | “obnoxious” in the child's daily notes. The reference upset the parents to the point where the mother provided a written request to Respondent to refrain from referring to her child in such a ~ manner. Respondent refused to refrain from making such references, During the meeting andin the summary thereof, Respondent was instructed to comply with the Code of Ethics at all times as well as refrain from disparaging any children in remarks on daily notes. 8. Respondent also sent an inappropriate letter to another parent regarding insurance information for their child. Respondent's letter was patronizing and belittling to the parent failing to maintain the respect and confidence of the parent and was well outside of the scope of the highest degree of cthical conduct to be maintained by educators. 9. As a result of Respondent’s inappropriate letter, a pre-disciplinary meeting was also held on January 6, 2012, during which time Respondent failed to recognize the issues with the letter to the parent. As a result of Respondent's inability to discern the inappropriateness of her correspondence, Respondent was instructed that all notes sent home must be reviewed by the ESE Specialist, Autism Coach, Assistant Principal, or Principal Narkier. 10, Joann Boyer is the Reading Specialist who acted as the Sunshine Fund - Coordinator at the school. On January Sth, 2012, The Coordinator was angrily confronted by the Respondent in the front office because flowers were not sent when Respondent’s mother passed away in September. The Coordinator quickly left the front office to avoid an escalation of the confrontation. Following the encounter, the Coordinator sent a cordial e-mail to explain the reason that no flowers were sent was that the Respondent had not paid her dues for the year. Respondent responded by e-mail and stated “I’m not upset with you.” 11. During a meeting with Principal Mark Narkier regarding the issue with Ms, Boyer, Respondent became insolent toward Mr: Narkier. Respondent’s conduct became so unprofessional that he hed to advise her of her behavior in order for her to regain control of herself. 12, Thereafter, during a pre-disciplinary meeting with Principal Narkier, Respondent admitted to yelling at a paraprofessional (Ms. Darius) in front of students upon receiving notice of the meeting. Respondent failed to recognize how this conduct was inappropriate and in violation of the Rules governing the Education Profession. Specifically, Respondent asserted it was “okay” because the paraprofessional “does it to her.” 13. The conduct exhibited by Respondent adversely affects the efficient and effective operations of Wilton Manors Elementary School. More importantly, such behavior is in violation of the Rules of Professional Conduct and Ethics governing the Education Profession in Florida, As such, on January 12, 2012, Respondent was recommended for a suspension of three (3) days without pay. 14. Despite the problems Respondent was experiencing and the recommendation for a three (3) day suspension without pay, Respondent’s behavior did not improve. Since January 12, 2012, there have been no fewer than seven (7) instances of additional conduct in violation of the tules governing the education profession and directives of her supervisors, aggravating the charges against her. 15. Specifically, on January 17, 2012, Respondent left her classroom prior to her assigned break time to attend an IEP meeting scheduled during her break. More importantly, Respondent left class leaving two (2) paraprofessionals in charge despite a student being in crisis. Respondent’s actions violate both safety rules and contract provisions. 16, Moreover, despite previously being directed to have all notes sent home reviewed for appropriateness, on January 18, 2012, Respondent sent another letter home without obtaining approval, Respondent's insubordinate actions resulted in another avoidable issue with a parent that administration had to resolve. 17. On January 25, 2012, while the occupational therapist was in Respondent’s classroom, the therapist accidentally hit a student in the head with a writing board. Respondent then walked up to the student and instructed the student to “make sure to let your mom know she hit you...maybe she can cause trouble for her too.” 18. Then on February 6, 2012, Respondent called in sick one (1) hour before her scheduled time to report to work. Additionally, Respondent failed to leave any lesson plan for the substitute pursuant to school policies and procedures governing substitute teachers and lesson plan books. 19. One week later, on February 13, 2012, the parent of one of Respondent’s students contacted Principal Narkier regarding their child being permitted to copy papers during physical education, This request stemmed from a photograph taken showing the student, who also happens to be disabled, lying on the blacktop with no adults assisting and no supervision or structured activity taking place. Aside from a clear supervisory violation, this also violates state law 2s students are required to have thirty (30) minutes of physical education per day in a structured environment. 20. Then on February 15, 2012, Respondent received notice scheduling a pre- disciplinary hearing on February 21, 2012, concerning her unprofessional and insubordinate conduct. Upon receiving the notice, Respondent retumed to her classroom and immediately 5 called the union whereby she proceeded to yell about the treatment she was receiving in front of her students. 21, Finally, on February 16, 2012, Respondent refused to deal with and/or help with a student in crisis upon their arrival at school. Instead, Respondent asserted that “I’m not dealing with this today. I am going to go to workman's comp because a student hurt my foot yesterday.” Respondent then proceeded to the office and left campus for three (3) hours after calling worker's compensation. Respondent never notified or reported any injury occurring on the previous day prior to this student’s arrival. 22, Respondent’s conduct has progressively gotten worse despite countless attempts by administration to correct the situation and provide guidance to Respondent on conducting herself in a professional manner. 23. The Coordinator sent out a group e-mail on April 20, 2012 soliciting a dollar donation to purchase a gift card for a teacher, who was moving out of state. Respondent sent a series of e-mails, culminating in a hostile and threatening e-mail which stated: “YOU HAVE A HELL OF A NERVE MAKING SUCH A BIG THING ABOUT NOT GIVING ME ANYTHING FOR THE DEATH OF MY MOTHER FROM SUNSHINE. I HAVE ALREADY SPOKEN TO A LAWYER ABOUT YOUR BEHAVIOR. I AM GOING TO FILE A COMPLAINT AGAINST YOU ALONG WITH MR. NARKIER. HOW DARE YOU SHOW HIM PERSONAL EMAILS THAT I SENT YOU ABOUT HOW UPSET I WAS BECAUSE OF YOUR UNSYMPATHETIC BEHAVIOR. YOU THINK THAT YOU SHOW EMPATHY!!! YOU DO NOT!!! GO AND SHOW HIM THIS, SO HE CAN PUT IT IN ANOTHER COMPLAINT. YOU AND YOUR NONSENSE! YOU ARE A BROWN NOSER THAT IS THE ONLY REASON WHY YOU CAN GET AWAY WITH EVERYTHING THAT YOU DO, YOU ARE SO UNPROFESSIONAL. YOU GIVE EVERYONE ELSE IN THE SCHOOL SOMETHING FOR ANY SHIT OCCASION BUT 6 WHEN IT COMES TO ME, NOTHING, PLEASE SEND ME A CHECK FOR $20.00 FOR A REFUND OF MY SUNSHINE DUES FOR THIS YEAR. ACTUALLY, YOU SHOULD SEND ME $60.00 CHECK FOR THE 3 YEARS THAT I CONTRIBUTED AND YOU HAD NO DECENCY TO GIVE ME ANYTHING WHEN MY MOTHER PASSED. I HAVE BEEN SICK AND IN NJ FOR 3 WEEKS. YOU TBLL ME YOU DON’T KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT IT BUT YOU ARE A LIAR. SCARLETT HALEY SPOKE TO ME. WHAT GOES AROUND COMES AROUND AND IT WILL COME AROUND TO YOU. AND YOU CALL YOURSELF A TRACHERITI!I!! This e-mail was hostile, threatening and unprovoked, The Coordinator, fearful of Respondent's actions, reported the matter to the principal. Later, Respondent sent two (2) e-mails on May 6, 2012 in response to the Coordinator’s group e-mail. The last one asked: “Is it mentally ill teachers week?” 24, Prior to April 2012, Respondent had on several occasions yelled at the principal and colleagues, once slamming the door during an emotional outburst. In one incident, Respondent verbally threatened, “If the principal makes my life hell, I'm going to make everyone else’s life hell around here,” 25. On April 9, 2012, Respondent sent an e-mail to a parent complaining about the administration and disparaging her colleagues, On April 10, 2012, Respondent sent a second e- mail to a parent complaining about the school’s administrators and violating a student’s confidential information. Respondent had previously been counseled and disciplined for inappropriate communications to parents, 26. On April 21, 2012, Respondent took medical leave and did not return until May . 23, 2012. During this period, Respondent sent twenty-four (24) e-mails to the principal and his staff. Three (3) of the e-mails to the principal created a well founded fear for the principal and his son, who attended the school. In the first e-mail dated April 25, 2012, the Respondent, during her rant about a recent hire, threatened “your harassing days are over, because I’m going to take care of the situation and make sure that you never harass another teacher again.” On May 11, 2012, Respondent sent an e-mail in which she stated in capital letters: “. IAM NOT PLAYING GAMES WITH YOU PEOPLE.” “..LET ME MAKE MYSELF CLEAR, YOU CAUSED THIS, AND NOW YOU WANT TO SKATE OUT OF IT BY IGNORING ME, NOT GOING TO HAPPEN, NEXT, I WILL BE ON THE NEWS.” On May 16, 2012, Respondent sent a third e-mail stating: “SEE WHAT IS GOING TO HAPPEN TO YOU. ..YOU ARE GOING TO HAVE BIG PROBLEMS, BELIEVE ME. 27. On May 15, 2012, a teacher, who was the steward, sent an e-mail to union members notifying them of the upcoming steward election, Respondent responded with a negative and hostile e-mail, The teacher, fearful of a confrontation, removed the Respondent’s name from future e-mails to union members. Respondent later complained that this teacher/steward was one of the many teachers conspiring with the principal against her. 28. Respondent's actions and conduct created a well founded concer for the safety of the principal, faculty and staff members, and violates the School Board’s Anti-Bullying Policy 59. . 29. Respondent has engaged in a pattern of unprofessional behavior over the course of her employment, Respondent’s conduct towards her administrators, colleagues and parents were noted in several Summary Memorandums. Respondent, in accordance with the school district's Progressive Disciplinary Policy, has received discipline for other acts of misconduct including: (A) October 10, 2011 - Respondent was issued a written reprimand for her failure to report a missing student. (B) January 12,2012 - Respondent received a three (3) day suspension for an ethical violation. (C) May 1, 2012 - Respondent received a seven (7) day suspension for unprofessional behavior (appealed by Respondent). ADMINISTRATIVE CHARGES 30. Just cause exists for the requested relief, pursuant to Fla, Stat.§1012.33(1)(a), Respondent's employment contract and Schoo! Board rules and regulations, including but not limited to the following: 2 ATY 31. 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. co UCT FFICE 32. Respondent has violated Fla. Stat. 1012.33 and Rule 6B-4.009(3) of the Florida Administrative Code. Respondent's acts are defined as 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 Conduct for the Educational Provisions in Florida, as adopted by Rule 6B-1.006, F.A.C., which are sO serious so as to impair the individual's effectiveness in the schoo! =ystem, which includes the following: (3) ity) (h) @ @) (a) (>) 6) (d) (©) Obligation to the student requires that the individual: shall not intentionally violate or deny a student's legal rights. shall not exploit a relationship with a student for personal gain or advantage. shall keep in confidence personally identifiable information obtained in the course of professional service, unless disclosure serves professional purposes or is required by law. Obligation to the public requires that the individual: shall take reasonable precautions to distinguish between personal views and those of any educational institution ot organization with which the individual is affiliated. shall not intentionally distort or misrepresent facts concerning an educational matter in direct or indirect public expression. Obligation to the profession of education requires that the individual: shall not engage in harassment or discriminatory conduct which unreasonably interferes with an individual’s performance of professional or work responsibilities or with the orderly processes of education or which creates a hostile, intimidating, abusive, offensive, or oppressive environment; and further, shall make reasonable effort to assure that each individual is protected from such harassment or discrimination, shall not make malicious or intentionally false statements about a colleague. iT 3: SUB 33. Respondent's conduct.violated Fla. Stat.§1012.33, and Rule 6B-4,009(4) of the Florida Administrative Code. The Respondent’s actions were a constant or contiming refusal to obey a direct order, reasonable in nature and given by and with proper authority, 10 4: -BULL 34, Respondent's conduct violates the School Board Policy 5.9 entitled Anti-Bullying Policy. DEMAND FOR RELIEF WHEREFORE, based upon the foregoing, Petitioner, Robert W. Runcie, Superintendent of Schools, recommends the dismissal of the Respondent, ANN MORGAN, 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 or benefits in the event the Respondent should challenge the school board's recommendation of the termination of her employment. EXECUTED this 5 day of February, 2013. Attn: Charles T. Whitelock, Esq. Cadre Attorney Superintendent of Schools, Broward County 11

Docket for Case No: 13-000772TTS