Charges Against Liverpool School Administrator Dismissed

ALBANY, NY (03/04/2009)(readMedia)-- Liverpool Director of Computer Education and Services Bonnie Ladd's disciplinary charges have been dismissed in their entirety prior to a single witness even testifying.

Today, at the third pre-hearing conference, Hearing Officer Stuart M. Pohl dismissed the charges because of the school district's failure to notify Ms. Ladd of its proposed penalties. According to state law and the Commissioner of Education's regulation, a board of education charging a tenured educator with disciplinary charges pursuant to 3020-a must, after voting on probable cause relating to the charges, take further action in recommending a penalty against a tenured administrator if a hearing is held or is waived. The proposed penalties must be served on the tenured educator at the time the charges are served to comply with the educator's constitutional and statutory due process rights to notice.

In this case, the Liverpool Board of Education took no action in regard to penalty and Ms. Ladd never received notice of the board's recommended penalties. In October 2008, Ms. Ladd had filed an omnibus motion to dismiss the case. Last month, the hearing officer ruled that slightly over 50% of the case was subject to dismissal on other grounds, and, in fact dismissed about 33% of the charges in whole or in part. At that time, Hearing Officer Pohl provided the district with one last opportunity to offer evidence of its compliance with the law to avoid dismissal based on this jurisdictional defect. The district's papers failed to refute the fact that the board had not recommended a penalty with or without a hearing and that Ms. Ladd was given no notice of any proposed penalty.

After two years, the district has spent over three quarter of a million dollars in trying to discipline Ms. Ladd and another administrator for blowing the whistle on financial improprieties occurring within the school district. The hearing officer's decision today further illustrates the ineptitude of certain district officials in retaliating against Ms. Ladd and another administrator. The district's ill-advised rush to judgment will only strengthen Ms. Ladd and the other administrator's whistle blower retaliation case against the school district, which is pending in the United States District Court of the Northern District of New York, according to Arthur. Scheuermann, general counsel for School Administrators Association of New York State who represents Ms. Ladd and the other administrator.

###