Shannon Erickson vs. Montgomery County Schools

Transcription

1 University of Tennessee, Knoxville Trace: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange Tennessee Department of State, Opinions from the Administrative Procedures Division Law January 2015 Shannon Erickson vs. Montgomery County Schools Follow this and additional works at: This Initial Order by the Administrative Judges of the Administrative Procedures Division, Tennessee Department of State, is a public document made available by the College of Law Library, and the Tennessee Department of State, Administrative Procedures Division. For more information about this public document, please contact administrative.procedures@tn.gov

2 BEFORE THE TENNESSEE STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION Mailed On: IN THE MATTER OF: SHANNON ERICKSON, DOCKET NO: J Respondent. INITIAL ORDER This matter was heard on August 19, 2014, at the Offices of the State Board of Education in Nashville, Tennessee, before Administrative Judge Kim Summers assigned by the Secretary of State, Administrative Procedures Division, to sit for the Tennessee State Board of Education (the Board). The Board was represented at the hearing by Staff Attorney Joanna Collins, Esq. The Grievant was represented by William Wooten, Esq. The issue presented in this matter is whether the Respondent Tennessee teacher s license is properly suspended. After consideration of the evidence and argument of the Parties, it is determined that the Board has failed to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that the license should be suspended. This decision is based upon the following Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law. SUMMARY OF EVIDENCE The following individuals presented live testimony at the hearing Donnie Wallace, Maintenance Supervisor for Tipton County Schools; Dr. John Combs, Director of Instruction, Tipton County Schools; Christi Huffman, Principal, Brighton High School; Peggy Murdock, Board of Education Supervisor for grades 6 to 12, Tipton County Schools; Margarette Alsbroke, Assistant Principal, Brighton High School; Gary Pinner, School Security Coordinator, Tipton County Schools; the Respondent; Christopher Todd, the Respondent s Pastor; Brian Oswalt, Teacher, Brighton High School; and Michael Craig, Brighton Family Medicine.

3 The Respondent provided the following testimony he did not intend to bring alcohol to school; he typically brings a non-alcoholic beverage with him to school every day and believes that, on the day in question, he accidentally picked up a cup left on the counter from the night before. The following fourteen exhibits were entered into evidence EXHIBIT 1, Footage from Security Camera; EXHIBIT 2, Director s Report; EXHIBIT 3, Tipton County Board of Education Drug-Free Workplace Policy; EXHIBIT 4, Board Policy Manual, Page 20; Collective EXHIBIT 5, Color Photographs; EXHIBIT 6, Witness Statement from Christi Huffman; EXHIBIT 7, Witness Statement from Gary Pinner; EXHIBIT 8, Witness Statement from Margarette Alsbrook; EXHIBIT 9, Suspension Letter; EXHIBIT 10, Resignation Letter; EXHIBIT 11, Letter from Christopher Todd; EXHIBIT 12, Affidavit from Christopher Todd; EXHIBIT 13, Affidavit from Brian Oswalt; and EXHIBIT 14, Progress Note from November 21, 2013 doctor s appointment. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The Respondent began his employment with the Tipton County School System in 2000 where he was most recently employed as an Assistant Principal at Brighton High School. 2. On November 21, 2013, the Respondent arrived at the school before 7:00 a.m. for an early morning staff meeting. 3. Several of the Respondent s colleagues, also present at the meeting, observed that the Respondent s demeanor / behavior were out of the ordinary, including glassy eyes, compromised speech, and general incoherence. 4. After the staff meeting, the Respondent went to his office, carrying a twenty ounce stadium cup about ¼ full of a reddish beverage. The Respondent placed the beverage on a bench outside of his office while he attempted to unlock the office door. After the Respondent entered his office, the cup was left in the hallway unattended for about 10 to 15 minutes. 2

4 5. Concerned that the Respondent was medically unwell, Ms. Huffman checked on the Respondent during first period and decided that he should go home. After the Respondent left the school, Ms. Huffman went back to secure his office, at which time she noticed the stadium cup. 6. The contents of the cup were not scientifically tested but were observed by several members of the school faculty / staff to smell and taste strongly of alcohol. 7. On December 2, 2013, the Tipton County School System suspended the Respondent pending an investigation of the incident, and, thereafter, the Respondent submitted his letter of resignation. 8. The Tipton County Board of Education Drug-Free Workplace Policy requires suspension for possession or use of alcohol on school property. 9. The Respondent had gastric bypass surgery at the end of 2009 and is extremely hypoglycemic. Gastric bypass exacerbates the effects of alcohol consumption which exacerbates the Respondent s hypoglycemia. 10. Prior to the incident, the Respondent was consuming alcohol at home on a daily basis. 11. On the day of the incident, the Respondent did not smell of alcohol and was not tested for alcohol consumption. 12. Symptoms of hypoglycemia cannot be easily distinguished from the symptoms of alcohol consumption. 13. The Respondent had no conduct or performance issues prior to the incident in question. The Respondent was considered to be a good administrator by his colleagues. RELEVANT LAW 1. The Tennessee State Board of Education, as the party seeking to change the present state of affairs, has the burden of proof, pursuant to TENN. COMP. R. & REGS (7), to 3

5 prove by a preponderance of the evidence that the Respondent s alleged conduct warrants a suspension of his Tennessee Teacher s License. 2. Pursuant to TENN. COMP. R. & REGS (9)(b), the State Board of Education may revoke, suspend, reprimand formally, or refuse to issue or renew a license for the following reasons: 1. Conviction of a felony, 2. Conviction of possession of narcotics, 3. Being on school premises or at a school-related activity involving students while documented as being under the influence of, possessing or consuming alcohol or illegal drugs, 4. Falsification or alteration of a license or documentation required for licensure, 5. Denial, suspension or revocation of a license or certificate in another jurisdiction for reasons which would justify denial, suspension or revocation under this rule, or 6. Other good cause. Other good cause shall be construed to include noncompliance with security guidelines for TCAP or successor tests pursuant to Tenn. Code Ann , default on a student loan pursuant to Tenn. Code Ann (d)(2) or failure to report under part (e). (Emphasis added). ANALYSIS AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. Under the rules of the Tennessee Board of Education, suspension of a teacher s license for possession of alcohol on school property is permissible but not required. 2. Because suspension of a license is not mandatory under the rules, the Board must prove by a preponderance of the evidence that Respondent was under the influence or in possession of alcohol on school grounds and should also consider whether there are any extenuating circumstances which would weigh against the proposed disciplinary action. 3. On November 21, 2013, the Respondent brought to school a cup possibly containing an alcoholic beverage. Notwithstanding the exact contents of the cup, the Respondent s behavior was noticeably compromised. 4

6 4. The Board has opined that the Respondent arrived at work both possessing and under the influence of alcohol. The Respondent has opined that he arrived at work under the influence of hypoglycemia, possibly resulting from his alcohol consumption the night before, and that he could have inadvertently brought to work the remains of an alcoholic beverage. 5. The school system did not attempt to test the Respondent s blood alcohol level or make a definitive determination of the contents of the cup. The taste test performed by school officials is neither a definitive scientific determination nor an exercise of good judgment. 6. The preponderance of the evidence has shown that the Respondent suffers from hypoglycemia; routinely drinks in the evening; and arrived at work on November 21, 2013, in a compromised state with a beverage that he brought from home, which is his usual practice. The preponderance of the evidence has also shown that the Respondent was an exemplary employee with no previous conduct or performance issues. 7. Based upon the preponderance of the evidence, it is probable that the Respondent s cup contained alcohol. 8. It would have been entirely out of character for the Respondent to intentionally possess and/or be under the influence of alcohol while on school property. The preponderance of the evidence in this matter regarding the Respondent s character and prior conduct supports the Respondent s proposed scenario the Respondent mistakenly and inadvertently grabbed the wrong cup from his kitchen counter when leaving for school. His failure to hide the cup from faculty and students also suggests that the Respondent had no awareness of any wrongdoing. 9. Other than the Respondent s compromised state, for which there is a plausible alternative explanation, there is no evidence that the Respondent had been drinking from the cup at any time during the morning and was, as a result, under the influence of alcohol while at school. 5

7 10. Although the possession of alcohol at school is sufficient grounds for suspension, disciplinary action is not required and, thus, should be supported by all the relevant facts and circumstances. 11. There is no evidence in the record to support a conclusion that the Respondent intentionally brought an alcoholic beverage with him to school. In fact, his past conduct and performance, along with his medical condition, support the opposite conclusion. 12. Because there is no evidence in the record to support disciplinary action for a solitary inadvertent mistake, the Board has failed to show by a preponderance of the evidence presented that the proposed suspension of the Respondent s Tennessee Teacher s License is appropriate. Accordingly, it is ORDERED that the proposed suspension is hereby DENIED. The policy reasons for this decision are to uphold the laws of the State of Tennessee while providing appropriate protections for its citizens. It is so ORDERED. This INITIAL ORDER entered and effective this the day of DKSummers KIM SUMMERS ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES DIVISION OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY OF STATE Filed in the Administrative Procedures Division, Office of the Secretary of State, this the day of J. RICHARD COLLIER, DIRECTOR ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES DIVISION OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY OF STATE 6