THE SCHOOL BOARD OF BROWARD COUNTY, FLORIDA

ROBERT W. RUNCIE, as Supel')ntendent of Schools,

Petitioner,

v.

SARENA STEWART,

Respondent.

------------·'

ADMINISTRATIVE COMPLAINT

Petitioner, Robert W. Runcie, Superintendent of Schools ("Petitioner"), files this Administrative Complaint against, SARENA STEWART ("Respondent"). Th.e Petitioner seeks the termination of Respondent's employment with the School Board of Bl'oward County ("SBBC"), pursuant to Chapters 120, 1001 and 1012 of the Flol'ida Statutes and Chapters 6B-1 and 6B-4 of the Flotida Administrative Code, Petitioner, in suppol'l thereof, states the following:

JURISDICTIONAL BASIS

1. The agency is the School Board of Broward County, Flol'ida ("SBBC"), which ls located at 600 Southeast Thit'd 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 authol'ized to report and enforce any violation thereof, togethe1· with recommending the appropriate disciplinary action against any Instructional personnel employed by the SBBC.

4. Respondent has been mployed by the SBBC since 2006 as a teacher, pursuant

   to a Professional Sel'vices Contmct, issued in accordance with Si.iction 1012,33(3)(a), Florida

   Statutes. Respondent was assigned to the New River Middle School for the 2011/2012 school year.

   MATERIAL ALLEGATIONS

5. On Janum·y 24, 2012, Respondent entered the Media Center while another colleague (1'.M.) was making copies, Another volunteer and foUI" (4) to five (5) students were present when Respondent stmted yelling and screaming profanities, including "fucking bitch" and "fuck," about the school administration. Respondent's angry, loud tone, and profanity made

   T.M. feel intimidated and threatened. The Respondent's principal had submitted a personnel investigation request on January 23, 2012 regiu1ding the Respondent's arbitrary changing of grades for more than seventy percent (70%) of her students, which evidently precipitated Respondent's outburst.

6. On January 25, 2012, Respondent entered T.M.'s occupied classroom without

   pet-mission and interrupted the students who were preparing for a test. Resp.ondent loudly demanded the person who removed a student's cell phone from her desk to bring it to bet· now, Respondent stat1ed yelling and screaming at one student, threatening to call the police and have him atrested. Respondent then called the student a bum. One or more students then t·etot1ed,

   "No, you're the bum." A student got up and gave the Respondent his phone. When the student inquired how would he call home to get a ride, Respondent t·espCJnded, "You have two feet," or words to that effect. Respondent continued to loudly argue with the student in a loud and

   boisterous manner in the presence of the other students for an extended period of time before leaving the classrooin,

   
   

7. T.M. was intimidated by the Respondent's actions and treatment ofN.D. in the

   
   

   • presence of the other students. The students were upset and unable to complete their assignment (FCAT practice) due to Respondent's disruption. Meanwhile, Respondent failed to attend a scheduled team meeting. By the time Respondent appeared, the meeting had concluded requiring the chairperson to repeat all of the information to the Respondent.

8. Two (2) days later on January 27, 2012, Respondent confronted T,M._, who was accompanied by a student, in the hallway. Respondent, in a loud and angry tone, demanded to know what he said to the administration about the January 25th incident. Respondent demanded that T.M. lie and tell the administration that t)te January 25th classroom incident was caused by the student, not her. T.M. felt harassed and frightened by Respondent's confrontational and angry behavior.

9. On one or more other occasions during the school year, T.M. felt bullied and harrassed by Respondent, fearing physical aggression by her. T.M. ·purposely avoided Respondent for fear of more confrontations with or further harassment by the Respondent.

10. Respondent has been provided pl'Ogressive discipline and placed on a cycle of assistance for performance issue, including the following:

    1. Summllry Memo for high percentage of failures in the majority of her classes, (Jwte I0, 20I0).

       
       

    2. Suminary Memo for failure to arrive on time and sign out policy, (August 23, 2010).

       
       

    3. Verbal Reprimand for failure to return money to parents, (December I, 2010).

    4. Written reprimand for failure to obtain administration approval to leave campus, (March 23, 2011),

       
       

    5. Summary Memo regarding Respondent's tardiness and use of inappropriate comments/behavior towards students, (September 21, 2011),

       
       

    6. Summary Memo regarding Respondent's pe1ofo1-mance, (October 3, 2011) and sixty-five percent (65%) of students with "D" or "F" grnde avernge.

       
       

    7. One Day Suspension for 11Cts of intentionally e"posing students to embarrassment and disparagement. Respondent called a parent during class and commented that the mother was handicapped, Respondent

       · yelled and screamed at students during class time, Respondent also failed to provide coverage or was tardy (November 1, 2011), The suspension was approved by the board on December 6, 2011.

       
       

    8. Three (3) day suspension fo1• Respondent's continual failure to comply with school board policies and procedures and gross insubordination, (January 13, 2012), The suspension was approved by the school board on June 19, 2012. Respondent failed to timely appeal the board's decision.

       
       

11. Respondent's conduct on the dates above are unprofessional and violate the school district's Anti-Bullying Policy 5.9.

ADMINISTRATIVE CHARGES

12, Just cause exists for the requested relief, pursuant to Fla, Stat, §§ 1012,33(1)(a).

Respondent's employment contract and School Board rules and regulations, including but not

limited to the following:

COUNT l; IMMORALITY

1. Respondent has violated Fla. Stat. § 1012.33, and Rule 68-4.009(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 se1vice in the community,

   CQUNT 2 MJSCQNDUCT JN OFFICE

2. Respondent has violated Fla. Stat. 1012.33 and Rule 68-4.009(3) of the Florida Administrative Code. Respondent's acts are defined as a violation of the Code of Ethics of the Educational Professi11n as adopted in Rule 68-1.001 F.A.C. and of Principles of P1•ofessional 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 eff1:ctiveness in the school system, which includes the following:

   1. Obligation to the student requires that the individual:

      
      

      1. shall make 1·easonable effo1t to protect the student form conditions harmful to learning and/or to the student's mental and/or physical health and/or safety. ·

         
         

         1. shall not intentionally expose a student to unnecessa1y emban·assment 01· dispal'agement.

            
            

            1. shall not intentionally violate or deny a student's legal rights.

         1. Obligation to the public 1·equh·es that the individual:

            
            

            1. shall take reasonable precautions to distinguish between personal views and those of any educational institution or organization with which the individual is affiliated.

               
               

            2. shall not intentionally distort or misrepresent facts concerning an educational matte1· in direct or indirect public expression.

         2. Obligation to the profession of education requires that the individual:

         
         

         1. shall not interfere with a colleague's exercise of political or civil rights and responsibilities.

         2. shall not engage in· haras.sment or discriminatory conduct which unreasonably interferes with an individual's performance of professional or work responslbllitles or with the ordedy processes of education or which creates a hostile, intimidating, abusive, offensive, or oppressive environment; and tin'ther, shall make reasonable effort to assure that each individual is protected from .such harassment 01· discrimination.

         
         

         (f) shall not use coercive means or promise special treatment to influence professional judgement of colleagues.

         
         

         COUNT 3; ANTI-BULLYING

3. Respondent's conduct violates the School Board Policy 5.9 entitled Anti-Bullying Policy.

DEMAND FOR RELIEF

WHEREFORE, based upon the foregoing, Petitione1·, Robert W. Runcie, Superintendent of Schools, 1·ecommends the dismissal of the Respondent, SARENA STEWART, from her employment with the School Bo\lrd of Broward County, based upon the foregoing facts and legal authority. Petitioner further, recommends the immediate suspension of Respondent without further pay 01· benefits in the event the Respondent should challenge the School Board's recommendation of the termination of her employment.

EXECUTED this 3

doyofD '

Charles T. Whitelock, Esq. Cadre Attorney

,ROBrfTW.:: :.

Superintendent of Schools, Broward County

Docket for Case No: 12-004137TTS

Orders for Case No: 12-004137TTS