Assistant principal appeals termination, claims retaliation

An assistant principal was proposed for nonrenewal and requested a hearing before the board of trustees, arguing that her proposed nonrenewal was in retaliation for her use of leave under the Family Medical Leave Act and that she had been illegally demoted following her return from leave. Following a hearing, the board of trustees voted to nonrenew the principal's contract and she appealed that decision to the commissioner of education.

The commissioner reviewed the facts of the case. In September 2023, the AP was working as a principal. Her supervisor met with her to discuss complaints about her leadership and a negative campus culture. He also addressed a failure to implement district initiatives on her campus and complaints that the principal made disparaging remarks about teachers.  

Later that month, administration received four complaints through its anonymous reporting system, including that the principal abused her professional privilege by asking an hourly employee to watch her child after hours during a school event; was verbally aggressive, accusatory, and insulting with staff; that staff feared and avoided interactions with her; and that she mistreated an assistant principal. 

In October 2023, the principal received four directives related to aligning her leadership with district standards. 

In November 2023, several parents complained to administration that the principal lacked engagement with parents and students and was creating a negative campus climate. Later that month, the district's chief of academics and director of curriculum and instruction met with the principal about academic decline at her campus and about reported concerns by district instructional coordinators and other personnel, including that the campus lacked adequate foundational practices and effective instructional strategies.

On Dec. 5, 2023, the principal began maternity leave pursuant to the Family Medical Leave Act.

When the principal returned from leave, she received an eight-page "Summary Memorandum of Concerns, Future Position and Directives" that documented performance and leadership issues that existed on the campus and summarized the ongoing issues with the principal's relationships with faculty, staff and parents. The principal was informed that because of those issues, she would be placed on paid administrative leave and reassigned as an assistant principal to another campus.

The following school year, the (now) assistant principal's new supervisor placed her on a professional intervention plan. Her evaluation for that year addressed several issues with her performance and listed her as "developing" or "needs improvement" in all domains. 

The next fall, the assistant principal received a "Memorandum of Concern Major & Minor Discipline Actions," reprimanding her for failing to follow a campus disciplinary flowchart by failing to call parents for major discipline issues. On the same date, she received a "Memorandum of Concern-Grade Submission" for allowing a teacher to submit late grades. Finally, she received a "Memorandum of Concern for Failure to Conduct LPAC Training" for her failure as the assigned LPAC administrator to oversee LPAC training. 

Her professional intervention plan was extended for insufficient progress and noted continued areas of concern, and the assistant principal continued to receive multiple memorandums regarding various performance deficiencies. On Dec. 18, 2024, the principal was again placed on paid administrative leave and later that school year the board voted to propose the nonrenewal of her term contract at the end of the contract's term.

The assistant principal argued that administration's actions against her were motivated by retaliation and that she was ultimately set up to fail. The commissioner of education rejected that claim, finding that even before her leave, parents and staff submitted complaints about her leadership and the negative campus climate. The complaints continued after she returned from leave. 

The commissioner found that the assistant principal's "personal views about the progressive discipline she received fails to show that that...the board erred in nonrenewing her term contract." The nonrenewal of her contract was upheld.