The Issue Whether Petitioner's actions on December 13, 1994, were in violation of Section 231.17(3)(c)6, Florida Statutes (1997), which requires the holder of a Florida Educator's Certificate to be of good moral character. Whether Petitioner has been guilty of gross immorality or an act involving moral turpitude, in violation of Section 231.28(1)(c), Florida Statutes (1997). Whether the Petitioner committed an act which would authorize the Education Practices Commission to revoke his teaching certificate, pursuant to Section 231.17(10)(a), Florida Statutes (1997).
Findings Of Fact On or about September 9, 1997, Petitioner filed an application for Florida Educator's Certificate. Petitioner taught a drop-out prevention class at Cypress Lake High School in Ft. Myers, Florida, for approximately half of the 1997-98 school year. After the Notice of Reasons was issued in February 1998, Petitioner continued to work at Cypress Lake High School. He was transferred to a non-instructional position in the in-school suspension program, where he worked for the remainder of the 1997-98 school year. Petitioner returned to that position for the 1998-99 school year. Both before and after the Notice of Reasons was issued, Petitioner worked as a coach for football and baseball at Cypress Lake High School during the 1997-98 school year, and during the 1998-99 school year. Petitioner has a Bachelors of Arts Degree in English Education from Wright State University in Ohio. He completed the Beginning Teacher Program in Florida while working at Cypress Lake High School. All other requirements for certification have been completed by the Petitioner. After Petitioner applied for his Florida Teachers' Certificate, he was informed by Respondent's investigators that he needed to provide additional information regarding an arrest that had occurred in Key West, Florida, in 1994. Petitioner provided the Respondent's investigators with a letter explaining that he was arrested in Key West on a domestic battery charge involving his girlfriend at that time, Dory Catahan. Petitioner entered into a Pre-trial Intervention agreement with the local State Attorney's office. At the end of his probation term, on or about November 30, 1995, the State Attorney filed a Nolle Prosse dismissing the charges against him. Petitioner has not been convicted of a crime or had adjudication withheld in any jurisdiction in the United States. On or about December 13, 1994, Petitioner came home from work to the apartment he shared with his live-in girlfriend, Catahan. Catahan was angry at Petitioner because a young lady, whose name was either Stephanie or Carolyn, had called the apartment looking for him. Catahan was jealous, and she began yelling and screaming at Petitioner, accusing him of cheating on her. Petitioner tried to ignore her to get her to calm down, but instead Catahan became more enraged, and began pushing and hitting Petitioner. She tried to kick him in the groin area, and he took steps to hold her back, in an attempt to protect himself from being hurt by her attack. One of the steps Petitioner took to protect himself was to hold her arm and try to keep her from kicking him. He also had one hand on her neck area to hold her off as she repeatedly tried to kick him in the groin. On one of her kicks, he caught her foot, and told her, "Stop this or I'll break your damn ankle." Petitioner used that threat to try to get her to stop kicking before she hurt him. He did not do any harm or damage to her ankle, letting go after holding on to it for a minute or so. Catahan became even angrier when he pinned her against the wall to stop her attacks. Petitioner was still trying to get her to calm down. She finally said she was going to call the police. Petitioner dialed the police for her. When the police arrived, Petitioner was arrested and charged with Domestic Battery against Catahan. He spent the night of December 13, 1994, in jail, and was released the following day. Subsequently, Petitioner moved out of the couple's apartment for a few weeks. After a few weeks apart, Petitioner and Catahan resumed their relationship without further incident, until they broke up when he left Key West and moved back to Ohio in 1996. Petitioner felt responsible for Catahan becoming angry at him because he knew she was a jealous and possessive woman. He felt he should not have been trying to "cheat" on her. When he went to court Petitioner was assigned a public defender. His attorney advised him that the State's Attorney was willing to offer him a Pre-Trial Intervention as a disposition of his case, if he was willing to undergo a period of probation, community service, and attend an anger management class. Petitioner accepted the Pre-trial Intervention because he was informed that he would not have any permanent record and would not go to jail. Petitioner's testimony relating to the incident on December 13, 1994, is credible. No witness testified contrary to the version of the events provided by the Petitioner. The evidence failed to prove Petitioner battered his girlfriend or make any threat to do bodily harm to her in an offensive or aggressive way on December 13, 1994. The only touching or threats made by Petitioner to the shoulders and neck of Catahan were defensive in nature, and designed to prevent his girlfriend from harming him. Back in Ohio, Petitioner was a substitute for a short period of time. He then moved to Ft. Myers, Florida, in June of 1997. In August of 1997, Petitioner was hired as a teacher and coach at Cypress Lake High School, in Ft. Myers, Florida. Petitioner had been pursuing a career in teaching since his graduation from college, with a degree in English Education. In fact, when he moved to Key West in 1994, he was trying to find work as a teacher, but the job market was very difficult in Monroe County, and he ended up working in a marina. Petitioner is dedicated to teaching. He wants to make it his career. Petitioner cares about children; he feels he can make a difference. He believes he is a good teacher. His co-workers and peers at Cypress Lake High School have given positive references and reported that Petitioner is a good teacher, with a good demeanor with children, including those students who have difficult discipline problems at school. Two vice-principals at Cypress Lake High School were very supportive of Petitioner. They had positive recommendations about his character, his teaching skills and aptitude, as well as his demeanor around children. Petitioner has been recommended for a permanent teaching position at Cypress Lake. Through the efforts of persons in the administration, Petitioner has stayed on at Cypress Lake in the non-instructional position in the In- School Suspension program. David LaRosa is the Athletic Director at Cypress Lake High School. He hired Petitioner as a football and baseball coach. LaRosa was also the teacher whose class Petitioner took over during the 1997-98 school year. In his dealings with Petitioner, he found him to be very competent, and trustworthy with freshman football players. They are a very special group of athletes which require coaches with special abilities. In spite of his knowledge about Petitioner's arrest in Key West, LaRosa had no misgivings whatsoever about Petitioner's character and abilities as a teacher and coach. Rose Marie Bobbs is a parent of a student that was on Petitioner's football team. She is also an employee at Cypress Lake High School. She was active in the booster program at Cypress Lake and was very comfortable and satisfied with Petitioner's work as a football coach of her child. She had no qualms about having her children in Petitioner's classes or athletic teams. Michael Cooper, a Sergeant with the Sanibel Police Department, with 14 years experience in law enforcement, has known Petitioner since they were coaches together for the Cypress Lake High School freshman football team during the 1997-98 school year. Through his dealings with Petitioner, he found him to be a very honest person, and one who was very caring for his students. Petitioner did not engage in any acts of moral turpitude that should prevent him from teaching in the State of Florida. Petitioner did not engage in any acts that would justify or authorize the Commissioner to deny his teaching certificate. Petitioner is competent and morally fit to teach students in the State of Florida.
Recommendation Upon the foregoing findings of fact and conclusions of law, it is RECOMMENDED that a Final Order be entered by the Education Practices Commission granting the Petitioner a Florida Teacher's Certificate. DONE AND ENTERED this 23rd day of October, 1998, in Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida. DANIEL M. KILBRIDE Administrative Law Judge Division of Administrative Hearings The DeSoto Building 1230 Apalachee Parkway Tallahassee, Florida 32399-3060 (850) 488-9675 SUNCOM 278-9675 Fax Filing (850) 921-6847 Filed with the Clerk of the Division of Administrative Hearings this 23rd day of October, 1998. COPIES FURNISHED: David Brooks Kundin, Esquire 906 Thomasville Road Tallahassee, Florida 32302 Charles T. Whitelock, Esquire Whitelock and Williams, P.A. 300 Southeast Thirteenth Street Ft. Lauderdale, Florida 33316 Kathleen Richards, Executive Director Professional Practices Services Department of Education 224-E Florida Education Center 325 West Gaines Street Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0400 Jerry W. Whitmore, Program Director Professional Practices Services Department of Education 325 West Gaines Street, Suite 224-E Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0400 Michael H. Olenick, General Counsel Department of Education The Capitol, Suite 1701 Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0400
Findings Of Fact Respondent, Moses Green, holds Florida Teaching Certificate No. 232099, Graduate, Rank II. He served as dean of students at Boca Ciega High School during the 1976-1977 school year. Thereafter he was reassigned as one of three deans of students at Pinellas Park High school, and he served in this capacity during the 1978-1979 school year. Moses Green has been in the field of education since his graduation from Florida A & M University more than 21 years ago. After teaching several years in South Carolina and Georgia he came to Boca Ciega High School in Pinellas County in 1964 where he started as a teacher. He served as dean of students at Boca Ciega High school from 1974 until 1977 when he was transferred to Pinellas Park High School as a dean of students. In October 1976 enroute from his home to school in a vehicle described both as a van and a motor home, Respondent stopped to give a ride to Jacqueline Blackshear and Stephanie Bellamy, two ninth grade students at Boca Ciega High School. When they entered the van Jackie sat on the housing covering the engine between the two front seats facing the rear of the van and Stephanie sat in the front right-hand passenger's seat. Enroute to school Respondent commented that Jackie was growing up and placed his hand on the inside of Jackie's thigh. At the time, Jackie was enroute to school for cheerleader practice and was wearing shorts. Jackie looked and moved towards Stephanie and Respondent removed his hand. Before arriving at school Respondent again placed his hand on Jackie's thigh and removed it when she moved. Upon arrival at school Respondent told Stephanie to get out as he wanted to talk to Jackie. When Stephanie left the van, Respondent was standing facing Jackie whose back was to the closed door. Respondent grabbed Jackie and attempted to kiss her. She pushed away, opened the door and left the van. When she left the van, Jackie was upset and Stephanie suggested she tell her parent. Near noontime Jackie went to Gail Weston, a physical education teacher at Boca Ciega High School and told her about the incident in Respondent's van. Stephanie accompanied Jackie on this visit. Ms. Weston described Jackie as nervous and upset. After a few minutes of conversation Ms. Weston realized that it was not something she could handle and she told Jackie and Stephanie that they needed to tell their story at the Dean's office and she took them to Jean Johnson, a dean of students at Boca Ciega High School. There both girls told their story to Ms. Johnson who prepared a statement for them to sign. The story repeated to Ms. Johnson was essentially the same told to Ms. Weston. After typing up their statements, Ms. Johnson told Mr. Demps, the principal. He had the girls brought to him, where the story was again repeated. Demps called Respondent in and confronted him with the story. He also advised his area superintendent and the director of personnel, who investigated the allegations made by these two girls. Demps also arranged for a meeting with Jackie's and Stephanie's parents the following day. Following the investigation, Green, on October 19, 1976 was issued a letter of reprimand (Exhibit 1) for his role in the events that had come to the school's attention regarding the two girls noted above and warned that a recurrence of such conduct would result in dismissal. By letter dated 9 November 1976 Respondent was sent another letter (Exhibit 2) regarding a reported and inappropriate remark made by Green to another female student, which Respondent had denied, and the letter suggested Respondent and the girl take lie detector tests. By letter dated December 29, 1976 (Exhibit 3) the Superintendent of Schools advised Respondent that the results of the polygraph test he had voluntarily taken indicated his answers were deceptive, while the girl's polygraph test indicated her responses were honest. Respondent was placed on probation for the remainder of the 1976-1977 school year and for all of the 1977-1978 school year. Although his principal at Boca Ciega High School, Mr. Demps, considered Respondent's effectiveness at Boca Ciega High School seriously impaired by the notoriety given to the events involving Respondent in 1976, he remained at Boca Ciega High School for the remainder of that school year. For the school year 1977-1978 Respondent was transferred to Pinellas Park High School as dean of students. Upon his transfer to Pinellas Park High School, Demps gave Respondent a good evaluation report. During Respondent's first year at Pinellas Park High School, no incidents were reported to form the basis of any of the charges here considered. This school year 1977-1978 included the probation period set by Exhibit 3. The school year 1978-1979, while Respondent was dean of students at Pinellas Park High School, produced the majority of complaints and testimony at this hearing regarding improper comments made to female students by Respondent, improper contact of a sexual nature with female students by Respondent, and corroboration of this testimony by other witnesses. Ten female students who attended Pinellas Park High School during school year 1978-1979 testified against Respondent regarding incidents between Respondent and these students of a sexual nature. Some of these incidents involved contact or attempted contact such as hugging, kissing or attempting to kiss, touching breasts or attempting to do so, and rubbing the front of his body against students' backsides when passing them when adequate room for passing without contact existed. Several testified to improper comments made to them by Respondent such as "You have a nice set of tits," "I'd like to get in your pants," "You have a nice pair of legs," "Why don't we go to a motel," "You drive an old man crazy," "You have a nice butt and look good in those pants," "One of these days it's going to be you and me," and similar comments regarding female students' anatomy. Much of this testimony was corroborated by other witnesses who overheard the remarks or observed the bodily contact. Additionally, some of the witnesses had complained to their parents or to other faculty members shortly after the incidents. Others first came forward with their complaints when they learned the police were investigating Green's conduct at the school and they became convinced their isolated incidents wouldn't appear unbelievable. Some of these students tolerated and perhaps encouraged the comments to provide them leverage to insure a cover-up for numerous "skips" of classes. Some of these witnesses skipped classes without punishment due to Respondent's position as dean and to whom their infractions were referred. Respondent denied each and every testimonial utterance of misconduct on his part while admitting the situation described by the witnesses, in which the improper actions of Respondent were said to have occurred, were real. During his testimony Respondent referred to school records which would corroborate his testimony, but he made no effort to produce these records or to account for their non-production. Respondent was subjected to three criminal trials on charges stemming from allegations of fact similar to those testified to in these proceedings. He was acquitted on charges alleging battery and false imprisonment and convicted of the offense of attempting to contribute to the delinquency of a minor. Those trials resulted in considerable publicity and the allegations became well-known throughout the Pinellas County School System. Several witnesses testified that Respondent's effectiveness in the Pinellas County School System was totally destroyed by virtue of the notoriety gained by Respondent due to this adverse publicity.
The Issue Whether Ms. Lindstrand violated section 1012.67, Florida Statutes (2012), or whether there is just cause to terminate Ms. Lindstrand.
Findings Of Fact The School Board is charged with the duty to operate, control and supervise all free public schools within Broward County, Florida. At all times relevant to this matter, the School Board employed Ms. Lindstrand as a math teacher at Cypress Bay High School. Ms. Lindstrand had started her employment with the School Board in 1996. In June 2011, Ms. Lindstrand was arrested for driving under the influence (DUI). She hired an attorney and contested the charge. Her trial was scheduled for February 27 and 28, 2013. Ms. Lindstrand requested and had been approved for leave from February 26 through March 1. She requested the leave for February 26 through the 28th due to the trial, and the leave on March 1st was for the intended purpose of attending her grandfather’s 90th birthday party. She never informed the school or her parents that she had a trial; rather, she requested the leave for “personal reasons.” Ms. Lindstrand did not anticipate that she would be found guilty of the DUI charge, or that she would, upon being found guilty, be sentenced immediately to a period of incarceration. She had made no plans for that possibility. On February 28th, in the evening, Ms. Lindstrand called her father, Thomas Lindstrand, notifying him that she had been through the DUI trial, had been found guilty, and had been immediately incarcerated. Mr. Lindstrand informed his wife, and told her to call the school the next morning. Ms. Lindstrand’s mother called the school the morning of March 1st, and spoke with Ms. Estripeaut, an assistant principal at Cypress Bay High School. She informed Ms. Estripeaut that Ms. Lindstrand was in jail, and would remain in jail for a period of six weeks. Because Ms. Lindstrand was responsible for teaching seven math classes, which included classes where students are required to pass end-of-year tests in order to graduate, Ms. Estripeaut was tasked with the responsibility of finding a certified substitute teacher, with a math background, who could serve for a lengthy period of time. Once a qualified substitute teacher was selected, Ms. Estripeaut and the substitute teacher met with parents and students in order to reconcile grades in the grade books. Students reported that they had turned in assignments that were missing from the grade books, and parents were concerned about the students’ preparation for the end-of-year tests. On March 5th, Mr. Lindstrand called the school and spoke with Rebecca Johnson, who works as a Leave Specialist for the School Board. Ms. Johnson sent Mr. Lindstrand a leave request form, which he properly completed and filed on March 6, 2013. On approximately March 7th, Ms. Estripeaut contacted Mr. Lorenzo Calhoun, an Employee Relations Specialist for the School Board, and informed him that Ms. Lindstrand had been absent from work for three days without approved leave. Mr. Calhoun recommended that Ms. Lindstrand’s name be sent to the School Board for termination, because being absent from work for more than three days without approved leave constitutes abandonment under School Board policy. Prior to making his recommendation to Ms. Estripeaut, Mr. Calhoun confirmed with the Leave Department that Ms. Lindstrand had not been approved for leave for the three or more days that she had already been absent from work. When he called the Leave Department, she had not been approved for any leave. On March 7, 2013, a letter from the school, signed by the principal but prepared by Ms. Estripeaut, informed Ms. Lindstrand that her name was being forwarded to the School Board with the recommendation that she be terminated. It also informed her that her name would be placed on the meeting agenda for the School Board’s meeting on March 18, 2013. The letter was sent to the following address: “1408 NE 5 Ct. #4, Fort Lauderdale, Florida, 33301.” Ms. Lindstrand had lived at this address until August of 2012, at which point she moved to a different address, but never informed the school. Although Ms. Lindstrand had asked the post office to forward her mail to her new address, she never received this letter. On March 8, 2013, an almost identical letter was sent to Ms. Lindstrand from the Staffing Department, letting her know that her name was being forwarded to the School Board for termination, and that the School Board would meet on March 18, 2013. This letter was also sent to the only address on record for Ms. Lindstrand--an address where she no longer resided. According to Ms. Lindstrand, she never received this letter either. The Chief Human Resources Officer, Gracie Diaz, supervises the staffing department, leaves department, and employee relations department. On approximately March 7th, Ms. Diaz was informed that Ms. Lindstrand was incarcerated, and that the Cypress Bay High School principal and the staffing department were moving forward with the termination process. She was also informed that Ms. Lindstrand had requested personal leave. Ms. Diaz spoke with the School Board’s general counsel, and together they reviewed the collective bargaining agreement between the Broward Teachers Union and the School Board, which contained the following provision: Length of Leave: An employee who has been employed for more than three (3) years in Broward County may be granted upon request, personal leave without pay for a period not to exceed two (2) years for reasons not provided elsewhere in this Agreement. The employee shall be returned to duty at the beginning of the next school year following the leave. Such leave shall require the approval of the Superintendent. Ms. Diaz took the leave request form, as well as the letters from the principal and the staffing department regarding the termination process to the Superintendent. Given that the collective bargaining agreement leave provision is permissive in nature, Ms. Diaz recommended to the Superintendent that he deny the leave request, because she felt it was inappropriate to grant personal leave due to incarceration. She also recommended that the School Board go forward with termination. The School Board met on March 18, 2013, and voted to terminate Ms. Lindstrand’s employment. By letter dated March 22, 2013, the Leaves Department notified Ms. Lindstrand that her request for personal leave had been denied by the Superintendent. By letter dated April 9, 2013, Ms. Lindstrand was notified that the School Board had met and had approved the recommendation for her termination. Ms. Lindstrand was released from jail on April 6, 2013. She received these final two letters at the post office, a few days after being released.
Recommendation Based on the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, it is RECOMMENDED that the Broward County School Board issue a final order terminating Ms. Lindstrand’s employment. DONE AND ENTERED this 17th day of October, 2013, in Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida. S JESSICA E. VARN 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 17th day of October, 2013. COPIES FURNISHED: Robert F. McKee, Esquire Kelly and McKee, P.A. Suite 301 1718 East Seventh Avenue Post Office Box 75638 Tampa, Florida 33675-0638 Adrian Alvarez, Esquire Deborah Klauber, Esquire Haliczer, Pettis, and Schwamm, P. A. Seventh Floor One Financial Plaza 100 Southeast Third Avenue Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33394 Matthew Carson, General Counsel Department of Education Turlington Building, Suite 1244 325 West Gaines Street Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0442 Robert Runcie, Superintendent Broward County School Board 600 Southeast Third Avenue Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33301 Pam Stewart, Commissioner of Education Department of Education Turlington Building, Suite 1514 325 West Gaines Street Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0442
Findings Of Fact Luis Ortiz was a seventh grade student at Nautilus Junior High School during the 1984-85 school year until his assignment to the alternative school. Ortiz is 13 years old and was born on March 11, 1972. Prior to his enrollment in junior high school in 1984, Ortiz was an A and B student who exhibited good behavior. He did not adjust well to the new school at which he began junior high school. Ortiz was involved in eight incidents of misbehavior at Nautilus. On October 29, 1984, Ortiz was rude, discourteous; failed to complete an assignment and engaged in general disruptive behavior. He was placed on indoor suspension for general disruptive behavior and defiance of school authority on December 6, 1984. On January 11, 1985, Ortiz was referred for discipline for general disruptive behavior, use of provocative language and defiance of school authority. He was referred for counseling for general disruptive behavior, being rude and discourteous, and cutting class on January 25, 1985. Ortiz was placed on outdoor suspension for general disruptive behavior and defiance of school authority on January 28, 1985. Ortiz' behavior appeared to improve and he was not involved in further disciplinary incidents until April 2, 1985, when he was again placed on outdoor suspension for general disruptive behavior end defiance of school authority. He was recommended for assignment to opportunity school for general disruptive behavior and defiance of school authority on May 15, 1985. Before he was reassigned to opportunity school, Ortiz was reprimanded for general disruptive behavior, use of provocative reprimanded for general disruptive behavior, use of provocative language, defiance of school authority, and being rude and discourteous. Ortiz has been somewhat unsuccessful academically in his first year in junior high school. He was failing three classes before his last outdoor suspension and assignment to opportunity school. He then failed all of his subjects because he failed to complete his course work and failed to take his final exams. Ortiz must repeat seventh grade. The School Board failed to present any evidence of efforts made to provide assistance to Ortiz regarding this lack of success in academics. In fact, the school board's only witness had no knowledge of Ortiz' grades or behavior prior to beginning seventh grade at Nautilus. Additionally, the school board's witness provided no details about the actual misbehavior of Ortiz. Instead, Smith merely read from a computer printout, without specifying the nature of the acts which lead to the disciplinary referrals. It is therefore impossible to determine if Ortiz' acts were of a major or minor nature. Dennis Segall, a teacher who knew Ortiz from elementary school, has continued to work with Ortiz in the last year. According to Segall, Ortiz was successful and well-behaved prior to the 1984-85 school year. He recognizes that Ortiz' behavior changed at Nautilus and states that Ortiz knows he "messed up" at Nautilus and is ready to change his attitude. Mrs. Ortiz moved during the summer of 1985, and now resides in a different school district. If Ortiz is allowed to return to the regular school program, he would attend Citrus Grove Junior High School.
Recommendation Based upon the foregoing Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law, it is RECOMMENDED that the School Board of Dade County enter a Final Order assigning Luis Ortiz to the regular school program. DONE and ENTERED this 26th of September, 1985, in Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida. DIANE K. KIESLING Hearing Officer Division of Administrative Hearings The Oakland Building 2009 Apalachee Parkway Tallahassee, FL 32301 (904) 488-9675 FILED with the Clerk of the Division of Administrative Hearings this 26th day of September, 1985. COPIES FURNISHED: Jackie Gabe, Esq. Suite 800, 300 Executive Plaza 3050 Biscayne Boulevard Miami, FL 33137 Mrs. Maeva Hipps School Board Clerk 1450 N.E. 2nd Avenue Room 401 Miami, FL 33132 Dr. Leonard Britton Superintendent of Schools Dade County Public Schools 1450 N.E. 2nd Avenue Miami, FL 33132 Ms. Esther Ortiz 1255 S.W. 1st Street Apartment 403 Miami, FL 33135
The Issue The issue in this case is whether Respondent is guilty of absence without leave from her teaching duties, willful neglect of duties, and misconduct in office, and, if so, what penalty should be imposed.
Findings Of Fact Respondent is a teacher certified by the State of Florida to teach French and German. Her teaching certificate is endorsed with Gifted education. Gifted education is a special category within Exceptional Student Education (ESE) in which students with superior aptitudes receive academic enrichment. Respondent has taught for several years in the Highlands County School District. For the 1992-93 school year, she was on continuing contract. She was paid $33,630 annually at a rate of $24.50 hourly during the 1992-93 school year. On or about April 8, 1993, Petitioner terminated Respondent after determining that she had been absent without leave from her teaching duties and had willfully neglected her duty to teach a physical education class beginning at 3:45 pm daily. Prior to the 1992-93 school year, Respondent had been an itinerant teacher for several years. For the most part, she had traveled among various elementary and middle schools teaching in the gifted program. Now a gifted education teacher at an elementary school, Diane Lethbridge was, at all material times, the Program Staffing Specialist for Exceptional Student Development. At the end of the 1991-92 school year, Ms. Lethbridge informed Respondent that her current position as a gifted teacher would not be available for the following school year. Ms. Lethbridge offered Respondent two alternatives. She could exercise her seniority rights to displace another teacher at three elementary and middle schools or she could teach older students at Trout Lake. Trout Lake is a residential ESE facility operated by Tri-County Addictions, Inc. Consisting of 43 acres, the facility includes residential and school buildings, which are not within sight of each other. It takes about 10 minutes to walk between the residences and school building. Trout Lake serves an average of 18-24 students ranging in age from 13 to 18 years. The students have all been classified as Severely Emotionally Disturbed (SED) and often suffer from drug addiction. In general, the students present difficult management problems. Petitioner is contractually responsible for educating the Trout Lake students. Toward that end, Petitioner has routinely assigned one or two teachers to teach the students at the school building located on the Trout Lake campus. Immediate responsibility for the teachers rests with the principal at Avon Park High School, which is about five miles from Trout Lake. During the 1991-93 school years, the principal was Barbara Dean. Given the nature of the students, however, considerable responsibility for the success of Petitioner's involvement with the Trout Lake program rests with Petitioner's District ESE staff. After Respondent agreed to take the Trout Lake position, and shortly before the end of the 1991-92 school year, Ms. Dean contacted Respondent and told her that she would need to teach summer school at Trout Lake. Respondent reported to the facility and team-taught a vocational course with another teacher, Harold Graves, who is the respondent in DOAH Case No. 93-2867. During the same summer, Respondent commenced coursework to become certified in SED. Respondent's schedule at the beginning of the 1992-93 school year required her services from 8:15 am to 3:45 pm. Her duties on Monday, Tuesday, Thursday, and Friday were different from those on Wednesday. Each weekday morning, the students began the day around 7:15 or 7:30 am with about an hour of peer counselling. Respondent was not involved in this activity, which took place at the residence. On weekdays except Wednesdays, the students were divided into two groups. One group went to school in the morning while the other group remained at the residence for counselling from the counsellors employed by Trout Lake. In the afternoon, the group that had gone to school went to the residence for counselling, and the group that had remained at the residence went to school. The students who went to school in the morning typically left the residence for school at about 8:30 am. At about 11:30, after four periods of about 45 minutes each of social studies, science and health, mathematics, and English, the morning students rejoined the others at the residence for lunch. At around 12:30 pm, the afternoon students arrived at the school building and attended the same four courses until about 3:30 pm. The Wednesday schedule was different. The Trout Lake counsellors needed one weekday during which they could counsel all of the students together. Thus, on Wednesdays, all of the students went to school in the morning and were taught in classes twice as large as normal. From 11:00 am to about 11:30 am, the counsellors met with various groups. Then, lunch took place at the residence from about 11:30 am to about 12:30 pm. Beginning at about 12:30 pm, the counsellors conducted a staff meeting at which they discussed the students and any problems that they were facing. Respondent typically attended the lunch at the residence each weekday, but she did not attend the Wednesday afternoon staff meeting. Instead, she had the remainder of the afternoon on Wednesdays to plan. This was the only time that she had available all week for planning. Sometime in late September, 1992, the Bartow Adolescent Facility closed. As a result, Trout Lake received another 10 students for whom it had not planned. During the first week of October, 1992, Petitioner conducted its district-wide Full Time Equivalency (FTE) count of students. The FTE count has two effects. If a district is not yet at its funding cap in a certain program, a greater FTE count than projected the preceding year may result in the receipt of increased revenues from the State Department of Education. Petitioner was at or near the cap at the time. The second effect is that an increased FTE count results in increased funding for the following year. The FTE count of non- Gifted ESE students, such as the SED students at Trout Lake, is particularly important because the allocated revenues are higher for non-Gifted ESE students than for non-ESE students. Sometime during the first week of October, Ms. Dean, Ms. Lethbridge, and Ms. Furnville, who was the director of Trout Lake, met and discussed the FTE count. They discovered that at least some of the students at Trout Lake were receiving only 1250 minutes weekly of SED classes, rather than the 1500 minutes that they thought that the students had been receiving. Ms. Dean approached Respondent about teaching a class from 3:45 pm to 4:45 pm, for which Respondent would be paid additional money. At the time, Ms. Dean thought that the additional class would be fine arts and so informed Respondent, who agreed to teach the class. Ms. Dean later discovered a problem preventing the offering of a fine arts class and informed Respondent that she would be teaching physical education during the same time period. Respondent is more artistically, than athletically, inclined and skilled. Respondent freely admitted her concerns about teaching physical education to Ms. Dean when Ms. Dean informed Respondent of the change in subject matter. Ms. Dean assured Respondent that she would not have to teach anything. Ms. Dean said that Respondent would merely supervise the activities of Trout Lake counsellors as they continued to conduct what had been a recreation period during the same time period. Ms. Dean told Respondent that she would not be required to have lesson plans for the class, but would only have to watch while the students played games. Respondent agreed to supervise the class for which her duties were essentially taking attendance and assigning grades. The 3:45 pm physical education class was in no way adapted to the special needs of the SED students, nor was Respondent in any way qualified to adapt the course. In fact, Respondent was capable only of taking attendance; she could not reasonably have been expected to assign grades to the students under the circumstances. These obvious shortcomings in the course and teacher were well known by Ms. Dean, Ms. Lethbridge, Ms. Furnville, Trout Lake employees, Petitioner's District ESE employees, and probably Trout Lake students. Prior to the creation of the 3:45 pm class, Trout Lake had provided a recreation period at 3:45 pm, during which Trout Lake residents could play softball or other sports while being supervised by counsellors. Petitioner merely overlaid the 3:45 pm class upon the recreational activities already taking place at 3:45 pm. The decision to create the 3:45 pm course was driven exclusively by financial, not educational, reasons. The 3:45 pm physical education class was not started until October 20, 1992. Despite this fact, IEP's for the students assigned to the new physical education class indicated that the class had begun October 6, which was when the FTE count took place. Respondent signed these forms at the direction of Ms. Lethbridge, who had prepared them. On October 30, 1992, grades were due for the first grading period. Because she had only seen the 3:45 pm physical education class for about two weeks, Respondent did not turn in any grades to Avon Park High School for the class. She was promptly contacted by an Avon Park High School guidance counsellor, who informed her that she had to give the students grades. So, she tried as best she could to grade them, largely on the basis of having seen them play around the campus at various times. Neither the grades for the first grading period nor any subsequent grades for the 3:45 pm class fairly measured the performance of ESE students in a physical education class. Regardless of Respondent's efforts, the class was by design not a physical education class, Respondent was ill-equipped to teach and grade a real ESE physical education class, and Respondent's participation by design had been reduced to taking attendance and assigning grades. Understandably, the Trout Lake students and staff treated the 3:45 pm class like it was simply the recreational period; from their perspective, nothing had changed. Presumably as had been the case before Petitioner's paperwork created the 3:45 pm physical education class, the students, who had returned to their residence after the end of their regular classes, did not always reappear for the 3:45 pm class. Sometimes, counsellors would require the students to stay and clean their rooms rather than attend the 3:45 pm physical education class. When attendance problems first arose, Respondent would go to the residence to find the students and a counsellor. The students were required to be escorted from the residence to the school building by a counsellor. On occasion, Respondent could not find a counsellor. Other times, not finding the students at the residence, Respondent would look for them on the courts or fields where they played, but sometimes could not find them there either. In January, 1993, Respondent learned from the shop teacher, who taught a 3:45 pm shop class, that Trout Lake had hired an art teacher to offer a 3:45 pm art class. Consequently, attendance at the 3:45 pm physical education further declined, as the students decided each day where they would go--shop, art, or physical education. One time, Respondent, who had gone to the residence looking for the students, waited 30 minutes while they debated where to go; they ultimately decided to go to art. These developments merely confirmed the obvious--the creation of the physical education class in October was a change of form, not substance. Shortly after the attendance problem first arose, Respondent told Ms. Lethbridge that students were not coming to the 3:45 pm class and counsellors were not cooperating. Ms. Lethbridge merely told Respondent to check attendance and asked her how she would grade them. Ms. Lethbridge did not mention the matter to other ESE staff or Ms. Dean. Evidently feeling that Ms. Lethbridge would take care of the matter, Respondent did not again raise it with Ms. Lethbridge or anyone else apart from Mr. Graves and one or more school aides, except for one time--described below-- with Ms. Dean. One time, Mr. Graves told Ms. Furnville of the attendance problems. The students began to show up for the 3:45 pm class for the next few days, but then quit attending after that. Respondent understandably felt isolated at Trout Lake. She received no orientation from Ms. Dean or any of the ESE staff when first assigned to Trout Lake. She had to learn the customs from a paraprofessional and Mr. Graves, who himself had been assigned there only one year earlier and worked as the only teacher his first year. In addition, neither Respondent nor Mr. Graves was able or expected to attend faculty meetings at Avon Park High School. Ms. Lethbridge visited the facility once every week to three weeks. However, she visited Ms. Dean only once monthly. Ms. Lethbridge's supervisor, Connie Tzovarras, visited the Trout Lake only one time between September, 1992, and March, 1993. The Avon Park High School Assistant Principal responsible for Respondent's evaluations, Paul Gentz, visited Trout Lake only once in the same period--for Respondent's evaluation. From September, 1992, through mid-March, 1993, Ms. Dean visited Trout Lake twice. One time, she came when computers had been stolen. On this occasion, Respondent alluded to feelings of guilt over taking money to teach the 3:45 pm physical education class that the students were routinely not attending. Ms. Dean ignored Respondent's remark. The second visit of Ms. Dean was when she evaluated Mr. Graves. Respondent submitted her gradebook to Ms. Dean, who did not discuss with Respondent the grades for the first grading period of ten days. Petitioner's policy is that the attendance problems at the 3:45 pm class should have been addressed by Ms. Dean. Respondent could reasonably have expected Ms. Lethbridge to share Respondent's concerns with Ms. Dean. However, based on Ms. Dean's failure to respond to Respondent's single comment, Respondent may reasonably have assumed that Ms. Dean was not especially interested in the attendance problems. The other likely source of assistance for Respondent was Petitioner's ESE office, which demonstrated no interest in the matter. Ultimately, Ms. Dean received a letter of reprimand for her supervision of the Trout Lake teachers. The record is silent as to any discipline administered to Petitioner's District ESE staff. Petitioner's witnesses testified that Respondent should have contacted Ms. Dean before leaving the Trout Lake school. In general, these witnesses attributed the authority for this practice to courtesy or professionalism. However, no such practice had existed when Respondent traveled from school to school as an itinerant gifted teacher. In fact, Respondent was at first unsure of how she should handle signing in and out. She initially signed out at lunch. After awhile, she signed in once at 8:15 am and signed out once at 4:45 pm. The completed sign-in and sign-out sheets, which were kept at the school building at Trout Lake, were periodically submitted to the bookkeeper at Avon Park High School, who, as it turns out, was either not reading the sheets or ignoring all discrepancies. In any event, no one at Avon Park objected to the single sign-in and sign-out, and Respondent reasonably assumed that her practice was acceptable. Respondent began occasionally to leave the school early and sign out at 3:45 pm after it became clear to her around the end of November, 1992, that the 3:45 pm physical education class existed only as a meaningless entry in the students' IEP and Petitioner's FTE count. By this time, the students assigned to the class were no longer reporting to one of the places at which they had played before the creation of the physical education class and where, subsequent to its creation, Respondent was to take attendance and grade the students' "work." Respondent signed out early about nine times, which were all in December, 1992, and January, 1993. Again, no one at Avon Park said anything, probably because, unknown to Respondent, no one noticed the timesheet. However, there was not enough variation in the amounts of her paychecks to credit Respondent's testimony that she assumed that Petitioner might not be paying her for those days when she signed out early. Eventually, without signing out early, Respondent left school before 4:45 pm when the physical education class was scheduled. But she never failed to appear and perform her minimal duties on any occasion that the assigned students reported to the class. Respondent testified that she sometimes left the school early on Wednesday afternoons, during her planning time, to perform school-related duties, such as gathering supplies or meeting with school personnel at other locations. Undoubtedly, these are appropriate activities for which Respondent may leave the campus. Given the customs of Trout Lake, Respondent's past experience as an itinerant teacher, and the failure of Ms. Dean or any ESE staff to instruct Respondent differently, there was no requirement that Respondent advise anyone at Avon Park High School or the ESE District office of such departures for school business or that she sign out when leaving the campus on school- related business. The absence of a requirement of notice to someone at Avon Park High School or at least signing out before leaving campus on school-related business is crucial to Petitioner's case. There is considerable evidence that Respondent was not at the Trout Lake school building on Wednesday afternoons, as well as other weekdays between 3:45 pm and 4:45 pm. But, with one exception, there is no evidence that Respondent was not pursuing school-related matters during such times. Given the remoteness of Trout Lake and its relative lack of on-site resources, Respondent necessarily had to leave the campus to carry out normal planning activities. If Respondent's departures from campus had been accompanied by a violation of some clearly defined policy, it would be reasonable to infer that Respondent was pursuing personal business. However, Petitioner has proved that one of Respondent's absences had nothing to do with school business. On March 17, 1993, which was a Wednesday, Ms. Dean found no cars in the school parking lot at Trout Lake sometime between 2:00 and 2:30 pm. In fact, Respondent had left Trout Lake at 11:00 am to go volunteer at the annual Sebring Road Race. She appeared at the racetrack at about 1:30 pm where she relieved another volunteer, who was an ESE staffperson with approved leave. Although Respondent had obtained personal leave for the second and third days of the race--March 18 and 19--she had not done so for March 17, probably because she knew that she did not have enough leave left for three days. By letter dated March 26, 1993, Petitioner advised Respondent that she was charged with misconduct in office, willful neglect of duties, violation of School Board Policy 2.31, and violation of Section 231.45, Florida Statutes. The letter also cites a violation of Section 231.44, Florida Statutes, for absence without leave. The testimony of Dr. John Martin, Petitioner's Deputy Superintendent, explained that the allegation of willful neglect of duties, which is omitted in the case against Mr. Graves, is due to Respondent's failure to teach the 3:45 pm physical education class. The remaining allegations, which are the same as those asserted against Mr. Graves, involve Respondent's absences without leave. The March 26 letter further informs Respondent that the Highlands County School Board, at its next meeting on April 8, 1993, would consider the recommendation of the Superintendent that Respondent's employment be immediately terminated. In the meantime, the letter states that Respondent was suspended with pay. On April 8, 1993, Petitioner terminated Respondent. By letter dated April 14, 1993, Petitioner advised Respondent that it had determined that she owed the School District $3272.09 for monies paid for which duties were not performed and $343.14 in excessive sick leave taken. Petitioner recovered these sums from Respondent by withholding them from her final paycheck. By letter dated May 19, 1993, Respondent requested a formal hearing on her termination.
Recommendation Based on the foregoing, it is hereby RECOMMENDED that the Highlands County School Board enter a final order refunding to Respondent $3125.09 and reinstating Respondent, without back pay, to a continuing contract at her former rate of pay as of the first day of school after January 1, 1994. ENTERED on December 9, 1993, in Tallahassee, Florida. ROBERT E. MEALE Hearing Officer Division of Administrative Hearings The DeSoto Building 1230 Apalachee Parkway Tallahassee, FL 32399-1550 (904) 488-9675 Filed with the Clerk of the Division of Administrative Hearings on December 9, 1993. APPENDIX TO RECOMMENDED ORDER, CASE NO. 93-2866 Treatment Accorded Proposed Findings of Petitioner 1-20: adopted or adopted in substance. 21: rejected as unsupported by the appropriate weight of the evidence. 22-29: adopted or adopted in substance. 30: rejected as unsupported by the appropriate weight of the evidence. 31-33: rejected as irrelevant. 34: rejected as unsupported by the appropriate weight of the evidence. 35: rejected as irrelevant. 36-39: adopted or adopted in substance. 40-41: rejected as recitation of evidence. 42: rejected as irrelevant. 43: rejected as unsupported by the appropriate weight of the evidence and irrelevant in the absence of proof that Respondent was not off-campus pursuing school-related duties. 44: adopted. 45-52: rejected as subordinate and incomplete insofar as Respondent may have been performing school-related duties. 53-57: rejected as subordinate. 58: adopted to a limited extent. 59: rejected as irrelevant. 60-64: adopted or adopted in substance. Treatment Accorded Proposed Findings of Respondent 1-11: adopted or adopted in substance. 12-13: rejected as irrelevant. 14: adopted. 15, 18-19, and 22: adopted except for the occasions that Respondent was absent without leave. 16: adopted. 17: adopted as to oral instruction. Rejected as to the implication that no other sources of authority exist regarding absence without leave. 20: rejected as recitation of evidence and subordinate. 21: adopted. 23: rejected as recitation of evidence. 24: adopted. 25: adopted in substance. 26: adopted. 27: rejected as unsupported by the appropriate weight of the evidence. 28-31: adopted or adopted in substance. 32: adopted, although Respondent only indirectly alluded to the attendance problems with Ms. Dean when she mentioned that she felt guilty taking the money when she had no class to teach. 33: rejected as unsupported by the appropriate weight of the evidence. 34: rejected that Respondent invariably signed out as unsupported by the appropriate weight of the evidence. 35-36: adopted. COPIES FURNISHED: Gavin W. O'Brien Gavin W. O'Brien, P.A. 1806 Manatee Avenue West Bradenton, Florida 34205 Mark S. Herdman Kelly, McKee Post Office Box 75638 Tampa, Florida 33675-0638 Superintendent Richard Farmer Highlands County School District 426 School Street Sebring, Florida 33870-4048 Honorable Betty Castor Commissioner of Education The Capitol Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0400
Findings Of Fact From September 5, 1991, and at all times material to this case, Respondent Brenda Simmons was employed under an annual contract as a teacher's aide, a classified employee position, by the Lee County School Board. On January 29, 1993, the Cypress Lake High School women's basketball team played the Mariner High School team at the Cypress Lake gym. The Respondent was the coach of the Cypress Lake junior varsity team which played the Mariner team prior to the varsity team game. During the junior varsity game, the Respondent sat with the players while coaching them. During the varsity game, the Respondent sat with her sisters next to the Mariner cheerleaders and close to the playing area. The section within which the Respondent sat during the varsity game is an area where black students generally sit to watch the game. The Respondent is black. The Mariner cheerleaders who testified at the hearing are white. The Respondent and her sisters apparently were annoyed that the cheerleaders would occasionally block their sight lines during cheers. During the game, the Respondent made hand gestures ridiculing the cheerleaders movements. At one point during the game, the Respondent called one cheerleader a "fucking slut." She also called one particular cheerleader a "fat ass." The Mariner cheerleaders were disturbed by the Respondent's behavior and as the game was ending, notified their adviser of the situation. The adviser contacted her Cypress Lakes counterpart who identified the Respondent and informed the assistant principal of Cypress Lakes. In the lobby area of the gym, the Cypress Lakes assistant principal approached the Respondent and inquired as to the situation. The Respondent became loud and angry, at which point the assistant principal suggested that the discussion should be continued on the next school day. The Respondent stated that she did not "have to take this shit" and left the gym. The Respondent then went into the parking lot of the gym and confronted the Mariner cheerleaders as they were being escorted to their transportation. The Respondent threatened the cheerleaders, stating she would "kick your motherfucking asses." The assistant principal, notified of the parking lot incident, went to the scene in an attempt to calm the situation. The Respondent continued to threaten the Mariner cheerleaders and to respond to the assistant principal in an angry and hostile manner. The Superintendent of Schools directed that the matter be investigated. Subsequent to his inquiry, a meeting was conducted on February 5, 1993, at which time the Respondent was provided with an opportunity to respond to the allegations. The Respondent denied that she had acted inappropriately towards the Mariner cheerleaders or that she had been insubordinate to the assistant principal. The Respondent claims that the complaining witnesses in this case are unable to distinguish her from her sister and that her sister was the person who acted inappropriately. The evidence, which includes eyewitness identification from persons who worked with the Respondent on a daily basis fails to support her claim. Further, the Respondent's sister denied that she used such language as was alleged.
Recommendation Based on the foregoing, it is hereby RECOMMENDED that the Lee County School Board enter a Final Order terminating the employment of Brenda Simmons. DONE and RECOMMENDED this 23rd day of February, 1994, in Tallahassee, Florida. WILLIAM F. QUATTLEBAUM Hearing Officer Division of Administrative Hearings The DeSoto Building 1230 Apalachee Parkway Tallahassee, Florida 32399-1550 (904) 488-9675 Filed with the Clerk of the Division of Administrative Hearings this 23rd day of February, 1994 APPENDIX TO RECOMMENDED ORDER, CASE NO. 93-2940 The Respondent filed a written closing argument which included no proposed findings of fact. The following constitute rulings on proposed findings of facts submitted by the Petitioner The Petitioner's proposed findings of fact are accepted as modified and incorporated in the Recommended Order except as follows: 5-6. Rejected, not supported by the greater weight of credible and persuasive evidence. 10. Rejected, not supported by the greater weight of credible and persuasive evidence. 11-12. Rejected, subordinate. 14-19, 24, 31. Rejected, unnecessary. COPIES FURNISHED: Bobbie D'Alessandro, Superintendent School Board of Lee County 2055 Central Avenue Fort Myers, Florida 33901-3988 Marianne Kantor, Esquire School Board of Lee County 2055 Central Avenue Fort Myers, Florida 33901-3988 John M. Hament, Esquire Kunkel & Hament Suite 785, 1800 Second Street Sarasota, Florida 34236 Willie Green Willie J. Battle 1971 French Street Fort Myers, Florida 33916
Findings Of Fact The Respondent Respondent holds Teaching Certificate No. 75756, covering the areas of physical education, health education and drivers education. The Certificate expires June 30, 1987. At all times material hereto, the School Board of Palm Beach County employed respondent as an assistant principal at Lake Shore Middle School in Belle Glade, Florida. Respondent was first hired by the School Board in 1956, as a physical education instructor at East Lake Junior High School, in Belle Glade. During the ensuing years, he served as athletic director, football coach, basketball coach, baseball coach and drivers' education teacher at three Belle Glade schools (East Lake Junior High, Lake Shore High School and Glade Central High School) until his transfer in 1971 to Lake Shore Middle School as Dean of Boys. In 1978 he was promoted to Assistant Principal. In 1982, the School Board suspended respondent on charges of "misconduct and immorality arising out of improper sexual advances made by [him] toward female students at Lake Shore Middle School during the 1981-82 school years." After an evidentiary hearing on October 25-26, 1982, the School Board, by mixed vote, found him guilty of the charges, cancelled his continuing contract (tenure), and terminated his employment. The Department seeks to revoke or otherwise discipline respondent's Teaching Certificate on charges substantially the same as those brought (and sustained) by the School Board. Prior to the complained of conduct, respondent had an unblemished school employment record. By all accounts he was gregarious and outgoing, a competent, caring, and dedicated teacher and administrator. He was popular with students, respected by faculty, relied on by school administrators, and generally considered a "pillar of the community." He had been raised in Belle Glade. Unlike most county school teachers in Belle Glade, who taught there but lived elsewhere, he considered Belle Glade his home. Improper Sexual Remarks or Sexual Advances Toward Female Students Count I: Advances toward T. E. T. E. was 14 years old and a student at Lake Shore Middle School, where respondent was Assistant Principal. On May 17, 1982, she entered his office and asked for a lunch ticket. He could not find an extra lunch ticket in this office so he told her to accompany him to the data processing office where lunch tickets were kept. She complied and they walked together to data processing. He unlocked the door, turned on the lights, and they went in. They both looked around the office, but could not find the lunch tickets. Respondent then told her to return with him to his office and he would give her a temporary lunch pass. As they reached the door of the data processing office, he turned off the lights, put his arm around her shoulder, and asked her for a kiss. She refused. He asked her again, and she again refused. During this exchange he reached down and touched her breast. She felt his touch and was afraid; he was not restraining her though, and she did not think he would try to hold her against her will. They then left data processing. He returned to his office and she began walking to her class. He came back out of his office and told her not to tell anyone about the incident. She agreed. A little later, he found a lunch ticket and gave it to her. Enroute to her class, she began to cry. A student friend asked her what was wrong. T. E. wrote her a note, explaining what had happened. The friend told a teacher, who--along with others--told her to tell her parents. When T. E. arrived home that afternoon, respondent was talking to her grandmother. She heard him say that T. E. had misunderstood something he had done, or said. At 8:15 a.m. the next morning, May 18, 1982, respondent reported to Principal Edward Foley's office for his routine duties. As they were conducting an inspection, respondent asked to see him when they returned to the office, stating he had a "serious problem" to discuss with him. He then told Principal Foley that he (respondent) was being "accused of feeling on a young female student," (Petitioner's Exhibit No. 1), and explained his version of the incident. He did not tell the principal that he had twice asked the student for a kiss, and had touched her breast. He said that he had put his arm around her shoulder as they left date processing. Later that day, a conference on the incident was held in the principal's office. The principal, an assistant principal, respondent, T. E., T. E.'s mother and grandmother, and several teachers were present. Shortly after the conference convened, respondent asked for and was given permission to talk to T. E.'s mother and grandmother in a separate office. Once there, respondent told T. E.'s mother that he thought he had done something to upset T. E.; that he was sorry; and that he could understand how the mother felt because he would feel the same if T. E. was his child. He then asked T. E.'s mother to have her daughter say that she made a mistake and that it was simply a misunderstanding. The mother refused. During this short discussion, T. E.'s mother asked him if he had asked T. E. for a kiss: he said, "yes." When asked, "Did you touch her breast?", he replied, "I might have. But . . . I'm sorry, I didn't hurt your daughter." (TR-112) 2/ Count II: Improper Sexual Remarks to C. D. C. D. was a 14 year old female student at Lake Shore Middle School during the 1981-82 school year. On one occasion during that school year, respondent approached her (during school hours) when she was walking to the school cafeteria. He told her she "had big breasts and he wanted to feel one." (TR-33) Count III: Sexual Advances toward C. C. C. C. was a 15 year old female student at Lake Shore Middle School during the 1981-82 school year. On one occasion during that school year, as she was leaving the campus (though still on school grounds) at the end of the school day, respondent, who was walking with her, put his arms around her and asked her for a kiss. Count IV: Improper Sexual Remarks to C. S. C. S. was a 14 or 15 year old female student at Lake Shore Middle School during the 1981-82 school year, when respondent approached her as she was leaving the gym. He remarked, "You have some big breasts." (TR-57) She kept walking. Earlier that year, respondent asked her, "Do you wish things wasn't (sic) the way they are." This remark had, and was intended to have, sexual connotations. (TR-56) Later that school year, respondent, while on campus and during school hours, approached C. S. and asked her "to come in his office and give him a kiss." (TR-57) She left, without complying with his request. Conflicts Resolved Against Respondent Respondent denied having made these improper verbal remarks to, or physical sexual advances toward the four female students. The students' testimony, although containing minor discrepancies, is accepted as more credible than respondent's denial, and conflicts in the testimony are resolved against him. The students showed no hostility toward respondent and, unlike him, had not motive to falsify. Reduced Effectiveness The allegations against respondent, involving these four female students, received widespread notoriety in the area. As a result, his effectiveness as an employee of the School Board has been seriously reduced.
Recommendation Based on the foregoing, it is RECOMMENDED that respondent's teaching certificate be revoked, and that he be declared ineligible for reapplication for three years following revocation. DONE AND ENTERED this 6th day of August 1984 in Tallahassee, Florida. R. L. CALEEN, JR. Hearing Officer Division of Administrative Hearings The Oakland Building 2009 Apalachee Parkway Tallahassee, Florida 32399-1550 (904) 488-9675 Filed with the Clerk of the Division of Administrative Hearings this 6th day of August 1984.
