The Pine Bluff School Board reviewed a draft letter written by district attorney Luther Sutter and set a date for an open hearing to give Superintendent Jerry O. Payne his due process rights during a two hour and 15 minute special called meeting Thursday night.
“We have used this special called meeting of the board to discuss the draft letter that Mr. Sutter was asked to prepare at our board meeting Tuesday night,” board president Herman Horace said in reference to board action taken Tuesday to have a letter prepared to give to Payne laying out the specifics of what the board deems good cause to terminate his contract.
Sutter addressed the board.
“I prepared a draft and will present this letter to the board and ask them to go into executive session to review it,” Sutter said. “Every line in this letter is important. Because I am not used to writing for school boards I ask that you check over each part of the letter carefully for grammar and for content. When the board comes out, under the law it must vote the letter up or down. I would like a revised letter when you come out. Remember that we need to respect the superintendent’s due process rights. The letter may be subject to FOIA but my position is that it is not subject to FOIA until it has been finalized. If a board member gets a FOIA request I will then ask for an Attorney General’s opinion. You may come out of executive session individually to talk to me.”
After a one hour and 20 minute executive session the board returned to open session.
Independent reporting for Pine Bluff & Jefferson County since 1879.
Letter of termination
“We were in executive session to review the letter the attorney drafted,” Horace said. “We are asking the attorney to take the letter back to correct errors and to make changes.”
Board member Ellen Nichol made the motion and the board approved.
“This is important because it is our foundation for cause,” Sutter said. “The board ratified the notice of termination without cause on Tuesday that was decided in the Feb. 28 board meeting. Whether this will be effective is a legal issue that is up in the air. The superintendent’s employment contract is susceptible to two or three interpretations. If this issue cannot be agreed upon by the superintendent and the board then a judge will have to determine the meaning of the contract.”
Sutter said that he was asked by the board to attend the open forum scheduled for May 23 at 6 p.m. in the administrative offices board room and that he will attend.
“I ask that at the forum the board take input from the community and keep an open mind,” Sutter said. “The superintendent will have the opportunity to present his side of things to the board. The superintendent has the opportunity to meet with the board in executive session.”
Sutter said that he will deliver the revised letter stating the reasons that the board has found good cause to terminate the superintendent’s contract to Payne’s attorney.
“I will also deliver the final letter to each of you,” Sutter told the board. “Don’t talk to each other about anything related to this or any other public business. My advice to the board is to listen more than you talk at the forum. There are an awful lot of people with a lot of talking to do. I understand that the board has a firmly held belief but no conclusion can be made by the board until the superintendent has had the chance to state his case. This proceeding is what our Constitution requires. It is what distinguishes us from the other nations. We all want the district and the superintendent to be treated fairly.
Hearing
“Mr. Payne has the option to present his side of things to the public,” Sutter said. “He is entitled to an open hearing. I encourage you to set a hearing for some time in the near future. It must take place by the end of this month in my opinion. I am turning over to Mr. [Keith] Billingsley [Payne’s attorney] all of the items I used to draft the letter and he has a draft copy of the letter.”
Sutter said that the hearing should be scheduled for some time after the forum is held May 23.
“Hold the hearing after the forum so that you are able to get a sense of the community,” Sutter said. “Listen to the community with your heart and mind.”
The board began to discuss potential dates for the hearing.
“I respectfully request that the board move the hearing to the next week,”Payne’s attorney Keith Billingsley said.
“Is the superintendent prepared to waive his rights under the contract?” Sutter asked Billingsley.
“I am not aware of any time constraint that would preclude moving the hearing to the next week,” Billingsley said.
“This lawyer has preserved an objection,” Sutter said. “That will cost this district money to address.”
Sutter said that the week that Payne’s attorney requested for the hearing was no good for him because he planned to be on vacation all that week.
“I believe we have certain rights,” Billingsley said.
“They are elastic,” Sutter answered.
“While they may be elastic due process issues particularly in light of what you say you will be giving me to review require that we have time to do so,” Billingsley said.
“We must give the superintendent a meaningful opportunity to be heard,” Sutter said.
Barnes interjected and said that she felt it to be in the best interests of the district if the hearing was held sooner rather than later.
“The board has been silent all this time because we have been preserving the integrity of the process,” Barnes said. “There have been a lot of low down things that have been said about this board.”
Billingsley said that he and his client would accept whatever date the board sets for the hearing and will make the appropriate arrangements to attend.
“The board is going to do what the board is going to do,” Billingsley said.
“I am allowing you the privilege of speaking or rather the board is,” Sutter said to Billingsley.
“The superintendent is not waiving any of his rights,” Billingsley said. “I would point out that we have not received the final letter which presents the board’s grievance against the superintendent.”
Barnes made a motion to hold the hearing on May 29 at 5 p.m. in the school board room.
The motion was approved by the board.
Job description
Sutter said that he would be offering his services free of charge to the district to allow district personnel to speak with him.
“I would ask the board for permission- I’m available to consult with district personnel. There is a belief in the district that you need a lawyer on call so I’ll be available free of charge.