(News release) – The St. Joseph School District Board of Education has taken another step toward concluding several years of turmoil and investigations. During a meeting on November 21, 2016, the Board authorized the issuance of a statement regarding requests for the vote connected to the release of completed investigative reports.
During late 2014 and early 2015, the Board of Education retained the law firms of Freeman & Fowler and Spencer Fane to investigate HR issues arising out of allegations made against and by the School District’s former Chief Financial Officer. After their investigations were completed, the law firms provided confidential, attorney-client privileged reports to the Board of Education which contained not only findings from the investigations, but legal advice to the Board of Education based upon those findings. The Board relied upon that advice as it attempted to resolve the multitude of difficult problems it faced.
Recently, in conjunction with the sentencing of former Superintendent Dan Colgan, it was suggested that the Board of Education should make those privileged investigative reports public. Doing so would have required the Board to waive the attorney-client privilege under which the investigative reports were written and provided to the Board.
On the advice of the Board’s legal counsel, the Board voted against a motion to waive the attorney-client privilege. Board President Martin Rucker, Board Vice President Lori Prussman, and Board members Dennis Snethen, Bryan Green and Tami Pasley voted not to waive the attorney-client privilege, balancing transparency with the legal interests of the school district. Board members Chris Danford and Kappy Hodges voted to waive the attorney-client privilege, based on their view that releasing the reports promoted total transparency.
“The Board is allowed to receive confidential legal advice in just the same way as anyone else who hires a lawyer,” said attorney Joseph Hatley with Spencer Fane LLP. “The Missouri Sunshine Law reflects that Board meetings and communications in which that advice is given are entitled to strict confidentiality.”
Additionally, the law firms’ investigative reports were based in large part on interviews conducted with School District employees who were told that, insofar as possible, their accounts would be kept confidential. On the basis of this commitment, School District employees came forward, and betraying that commitment would make it less likely that employees will cooperate in future investigations. In the same way that the news media protect their confidential sources to promote cooperation with their work, the Board believes it is critical to honor the commitments that were made to School District employees.
Ultimately, a majority of the Board concluded that it is in the best interest of the School District to move forward, and to focus on efforts to improve educational opportunities for the children in the School District, instead of reopening old wounds and running the risk of yet more litigation.
“The Board of Education has wrestled with this decision for several months,” said
Superintendent Dr. Robert Newhart. “I believe they have made the best decision for all involved and they are ready to move forward with community engagement.”