IN RE DALLAS INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT:

INVESTIGATION REGARDING

ALLEGATIONS OF BOARD POLICY VIOLATIONS BY A TRUSTEE

Presented by:

Paul CogginsKip Mendrygal

Brendan GaffneyLocke Lord LLP

2200 Ross Avenue, Suite 2200Dallas, Texas 75201

Confidential and Privile~

LockeLord">Attorneys & Counselors

SCOPE OF INVESTIGATION

The Dallas Independent School District ("Dallas ISD" or the "District") Office of Legal

Services ("Legal Services") engaged Locke Lord LLP (the "Firm") to investigate three written

statements by District employees regarding alleged interactions with Dallas ISD Trustee

Bernadette Nutall. We were asked to determine whether any violations of Dallas ISD Board

policy had occurred. l

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

As detailed below, we made the following findings:

1. Regarding the written statement by Tonya Sadler Grayson, we found insufficient

evidence to support a fmding ofany Board policy violations by Trustee Nutall.

2. Regarding the written statement by Officer Freddie Jackson, we made no finding

because Officer Jackson informed us that he was not making an allegation of any Board policy

violations by Trustee Nutall, and asked us not to conduct any investigation or take any action in

connection with his written statement.

3. Regarding the written statement by Dr. Karon Cofield, we made no finding

because Dr. Cofield informed us that she was not making an allegation of any Board policy

violations by Trustee Nutall, and was not requesting an investigation, but rather wanted us to be

aware of certain interactions with Trustee Nutall that she considered "unprofessional." We

determined that Dr. Cofield's allegations primarily raised governance issues (i.e. the authority of

Trustees to request or direct personnel actions) that are outside the scope of our investigation.

I On January 30,2015, we received from the District more than 2,000 instant messages from or to individuals whohad been interviewed by us. We reviewed the messages but determined either that they did not relate to issues wewere asked to investigate or, ifthey did, we had already covered them in our interviews.

2

~TTENSTATEMENTBYTONYASADLERGRAYSON

A. Statement and Interview of Tonya Sadler Grayson

Ms. Grayson is an Executive Director in Dallas lSD's Human Capital Management

("HCM") department, and has been with the District since January 2014. On October 28, 2014,

Legal Services received a letter signed by Ms. Grayson and dated October 22, 2014. Her written

statement is attached to the report as Exhibit "I." We also conducted an interview with Ms.

Grayson to get additional details on the matters raised by her written statement.

During our interview, Ms. Grayson described what she called a "hostile encounter" with

Trustee Nutall during the June 2014 Board meeting. Ms. Grayson alleged that Trustee Nutall

approached her in the hallway outside the Board auditorium and accused her of "treating people

like trash" and warned her to watch her back. During this alleged encounter, Ms. Grayson

learned that Trustee NutaJl was referring to employees who were terminated as part of the

District's recent athletic scandal. After Trustee Lew Blackburn ("Dr. Blackburn") intervened,

Trustee NutaJl allegedly told Ms. Grayson, "You are one of them."

A few hours later, Ms. Grayson, Dr. Blackburn, and Executive Director of Board

Services Denoris Harris ("Harris") were in the executive dining area. Trustee Nutall allegedly

approached the group and told Dr. B1ackbum that she thought he (referring to Dr. Blackburn)

would be wherever Ms. Grayson was, and that Ms. Grayson and Dr. Blackburn must be "doing

sometbing.,,2 Trustee NutaJl then allegedly referred to Ms. Grayson and other HCM employees

as "new news." When Ms. Grayson stated that she did not know what a "new new" was, Trustee

Nutall allegedly stated, "do you know what a Trick is-it's like you." As Dr. Blackburn

2 In our interviews, Ms. Grayson and Dr. Blackburn both denied any inappropriate relationship.

3

attempted to intervene, Trustee Nutall allegedly stated, "You must not hang out in the hood" and

"You ain't black - you are one of Miles' people." When one of Ms. Grayson's employees

entered the room and directed a question towards Ms. Grayson, Trustee Nutall allegedly said,

"Nobody wants to talk to Tonya - you see, Tonya and I don't see eye-to-eye - she ain't one of us

sister girls."

Ms. Grayson alleged that these interactions with Trustee Nutall constituted race

harassment and bullying3

On November 18, 2014, Ms. Grayson contacted us and stated that, a few days after our

interview with her, she had been contacted by the Office of Professional Responsibility ("aPR")

and notified that she was under investigation in connection with alleged false statements made in

her employment application. Ms. Grayson expressed suspicion about the motive and timing of

the investigation, and asked us to look into aPR's investigation as a possible act of retaliation

against her. We informed Ms. Grayson that we could not consider the new allegation unless it

was put in writing and given to Legal Services. Legal Services would then decide whether to

refer the additional allegation to us, or to handle it in some other manner. As of the date of this

report, to our knowledge, Ms. Grayson has not done so and, thus, we have taken no action with

regard to this allegation.

As a final matter, we asked Ms. Grayson about the timing of her written complaint and

specifically why she had waited until October to raise concerns over an alleged encounter at the

June Board meeting. She stated that she initially had a conversation with Superintendent Miles

3 Ms. Grayson told us that she heard Trustee Nutall had previously assaulted two other District employees, and thatthese rumors contributed to her concerns about interacting with Trustee Nutall. We interviewed the two employeeswho were allegedly assaulted and whose names had been provided to us by Ms. Grayson. Both informed us thatthey had encounters with Trustee Nutall during their time at the District that were aggressive in nature, but neitheralleged they had been assaulted, and neither intended to file complaints regarding the incidents. In her interview,Trustee Nutall denied ever assaulting a District employee.

4

about the incident shortly after it occurred, but then she became involved with an investigation

into her background.4

According to Ms. Grayson, she raised the issue for a second time with Superintendent

Miles in August or September of2014. She stated that she also had a conversation with a friend

who works in the legal department at American Airlines, who explained that Trustees should be

subject to the same rules regarding bullying and harassment as District employees, and

encouraged her to file a written complaint. Ms. Grayson stated that her complaint was made

voluntarily and that no one associated with the District influenced her to put the complaint in

writing and submit it to Legal Services.

B. Interview of Denoris Harris

We interviewed Mr. Harris about the alleged encounter between Ms. Grayson and

Trustee Nutall at the June Board meeting. Mr. Harris stated that he had been at the meeting, and

recalled being in the dining area, but did not recall witnessing any exchange, heated or otherwise,

between Ms. Grayson and Trustee Nutall.

C. Interview of Dr. Blackburn

We interviewed Dr. Blackburn about Ms. Grayson's allegations. Dr. Blackburn generally

recalled the June Board meeting and that Trustee Nutall and Ms. Grayson had been engaged in a

"debate" that "might have sounded heated to some people." However, he said that Trustee

Nutall spoke to Ms. Grayson in a similar tone and demeanor that she uses with other employees

and in Board meetings, and nothing he witnessed had been "out of line." Dr. Blackburn did not

recall any interaction between Trustee Nutall and Ms. Grayson in the hallway outside the Board

auditorium, but did recall an exchange between Trustee Nutall and Ms. Grayson in the executive

4 According to Ms. Grayson, HeM personnel conducted an investigation into her employment application duringJuly 2014, which was months before she was contacted by OPR in November 2014.

5

dining area. Dr. Blackburn did not recall Trustee Nutall telling Ms. Grayson that she was

"treating people like trash," that she should "start watching [her] back," that "you're not black,"

that "you're one of Miles' people," or referring to her as a "Trick." He did recall Trustee Nutall

using the term "new new," which he said is a term she uses often to describe employees new to

the District. Dr. Blackburn recalled intervening several times to say "that's enough" because it

became clear to him that Trustee Nutall and Ms. Grayson would not resolve whatever issues they

were debating.

Dr. Blackburn saw the incident as two people having a disagreement, and asswned that

the matter had been forgotten after he intervened. Dr. Blackburn could not recall any interaction

between Trustee Nutall and Ms. Grayson that he considered bullying or race harassment.

D. Interview of Superintendent Miles

We interviewed Superintendent Miles about his conversations with Ms. Grayson.

Superintendent Miles generally recalled "sometime during the Summer [of 2014)" hearing from

a District employee that Trustee Nutall had an encounter with Ms. Grayson and had used words

to the effect of "you're not black enough" or "you're not a black person." Then, "sometime in

the Fall," Ms. Grayson told him that she had been harassed by Trustee Nutall. He said that he

did not encourage or discourage Ms. Grayson from putting the complaint in writing; rather, he

believes she had already decided to put the complaint in writing by the time she approached him

about the alleged harassment. Superintendent Miles did not witness, and has no personal

knowledge of any of the alleged encounters between Ms. Grayson and Trustee Nutall.

E. Interview of Trustee Bernadette Nutall

Finally, we interviewed Trustee Nutall about Ms. Grayson's allegations. Regarding the

June Board meeting, Trustee Nutall recalled only a single conversation with Ms. Grayson in the

6

dining area, not an additional, prior conversation in the hallway. Regarding the conversation in

the dining area, Trustee Nutall said that Ms. Grayson "got real snappy" with her and that she

"got snappy back with her." Trustee Nutall denied accusing Ms. Grayson of "treating people

like trash." Trustee Nutall said that, in reference to the terminations in the Athletic Department,

she asked why Ms. Grayson was "treating people disrespectfully." Trustee Nutall also denied

telling Ms. Grayson that she needed to "start watching [her] back" or otherwise threatening Ms.

Grayson's job.

Trustee Nutall recalled using the phrase "new new" to describe employees who do not

understand how to treat people properly-specifically, with respect and dignity. However,

Trustee Nutall denied calling Ms. Grayson a "Trick" or stating that "you must not hang out in the

hood," that "you're not black; you're one of Miles' people," or that "nobody wants to talk to

Tonya ... she ain't one of us sister girls."

Trustee Nutall stated that she has not spoken to Ms. Grayson since this encounter, and

denied ever having an encounter with Ms. Grayson that could be reasonably interpreted as

bullying or harassing.

WRITTEN STATEMENT BY OFFICER FREDDIE JACKSON

On October 29,2014, Legal Services received a written statement dated October 21, 2014

and signed by Officer Freddie Jackson. The statement is attached to this report as Exhibit "2."

Because the statement could be interpreted to involve an act of racial harassment or

discrimination, pursuant to Board policy DIA (LOCAL), Legal Services referred the statement to

us for investigation.

7

Officer Jackson's written statement recounts an encounter with Trustee Nutall on October

15,2014, two days after she had been removed from Billy Dade Middle School.s According to

the statement, Trustee Nutall asked Officer Jackson why he, "as a black man," did not come to

her aid when she was being physically removed from the school. Officer Jackson responded that

he could not have lawfully interfered. Trustee Nutall stated that she was disappointed with

Officer Jackson for "not coming to the aid of a black woman who was being treated that way."

When we contacted Officer Jackson for an interview, he told us that his written statement

was true and accurate. However, he said that he did not give his written statement to Legal

Services, did not intend for it to be treated as a complaint, and did not want an investigation to be

conducted, or any action to be taken. Officer Jackson stated that he did not believe he had been

bullied or harassed by Trustee Nutall, and that he considers her a friend. Officer Jackson stated

that, shortly after the Dade incident, Superintendent Miles asked him to draft a written statement

for his [the Superintendent's] file. Officer Jackson complied and gave the statement to

Superintendent Miles.

We also interviewed Superintendent Miles about Officer Jackson's complaint. He stated

that, a day or two after the Dade incident, Officer Jackson came to him and stated that he had had

an uncomfortable face-to-face discussion with Trustee Nutall, in which she criticized Officer

Jackson for his behavior during the Dade incident. Superintendent Miles told Officer Jackson

that, if he felt bullied or harassed, "per Board policy," he should put the complaint in writing.

Superintendent Miles noted that Board policy encourages employees to bring forward legitimate

concerns about harassment, and recalled, in other instances, instructing employees who came to

him with such complaints to put them in writing.

5 We have not been tasked witb investigating any of the circumstances surrounding the events at Dade on October13,2014, except those contained in Officer Jackson's statemen!.

8

Although Officer Jackson made clear that he was not seeking any investigation or other

action, we interviewed Trustee Nutall and gave her a chance to comment on the incident

described in Officer Jackson's written statement. Trustee Nutall objected to the statement that

she was being "loud and disorderly" at Dade. She acknowledged telling Officer Jackson that,

"as a man" and a friend, she felt that he should have intervened instead of watching her be

physically removed from Dade.

WRITTEN STATEMENT BY KARON COFIELD

On October 29, 2014, Legal Services received an unsigned written statement from an

anonymous employee that recounted several encounters with Trustee Nutall. The statement is

attached to this report as Exhibit "3." Legal Services referred the unsigned statement to us for

investigation.

We determined that the statement was prepared by Dr. Karon Cofield ("Dr. Cofield"), the

Assistant Superintendent for Divisions 2, 4 and 5. We conducted an initial interview with Dr.

Cofield, who confmned that the written statement was hers, and that it was true and accurate.

However, Dr. Cofield expressed reservations about submitting a signed document and

participating in an investigation. She stated that she was not making a formal allegation that

Trustee Nutall racially harassed or bullied her, and was not seeking a formal investigation on

these matters; rather, she wanted us to have this information as background material. Because it

was not clear that we could take any action on an anonymous complaint, we gave Dr. Cofield

time to consider whether to sign the written statement.

9

On or around December 3, 2014, Legal Services received a written statement signed by

Dr. Cofield. The statement is attached to this report as Exhibit "4." We conducted an interview

with Dr. Cofield to explore the matters raised by her written statement.

Dr. Cofield's written statement contains two allegations that, if true, could implicate the

race harassment and discrimination provisions in DIA (LOCAL). First, Trustee Nutall allegedly

told Dr. Cofield that "[Dade Middle School] needs a Black principal." Second, Trustee Nutall

allegedly told one of Dr. Cofield's subordinates during a community meeting that "If your

people would allow some of my people to go to your schools, we would be doing better."

In addition to these allegations, Dr. Cofield described two incidents involving alleged

aggressive or unprofessional behavior by Trustee Nutall. First, when Trustee Nutall had been

requested by Dr. Cofield to participate in the principal selection process, she allegedly said

"Don't know why you're calling me - you're going to do what you want to do anyway, and tell

me what time it is and I will show up." In addition, Dr. Cofield recounted a meeting at Dade

Middle School, where Trustee Nutall unfairly chastised her for failing to return a phone call that

she had returned the prior day.

Finally, Dr. Cofield referenced a number of alleged incidents where Trustee Nutall made

recommendations or demands for certain District employees to be transferred or terminated that

Dr. Cofield thought were out of bounds.

During her interview, Dr. Cofield told us that she was not making a formal allegation that

Trustee Nutall racially harassed or bullied her, and was not seeking a formal investigation on

these matters. Rather, she wanted us to have this information as background material.

10

A. Interview of Superintendent Miles

When we asked Superintendent Miles about Dr. Cofield's written statement, he stated

that he did not have personal knowledge of any of the encounters described in the statement. He

noted that Dr. Cofield had approached him and complained that Trustee Nutall frequently pushed

her to make personnel decisions based on race. He told Dr. Cofield that, if she had a complaint

against Trustee Nutall, she should put it in writing. Superintendent Miles said that Dr. Cofield

told him she was reluctant to say anything bad about Trustee Nutall out of fear of retribution.

Superintendent Miles said that he welcomes input and recommendations from the Trustees on

personnel matters, but he considers demands to be improper if made directly to District

employees, particularly if a Trustee threatens action against the employee if the demand is not

met.

B. Interview oflsaac Carrier

We asked Mr. Carrier (who is mentioned by name in Dr. Cofield's signed statement)

about whether Trustee Nutall told him that "You need to send that coach back to Skyline" in

reference to an instructional coach. Mr. Carrier generally recalled Trustee Nutall making the

statement, but could not recall the specifics.

We also asked Mr. Carrier if Trustee Nutall ever told him and/or Dr. Cofield that "I'm

gonna get y'all fired." Mr. Carrier recalled Trustee Nutall using words to this effect in the

stairwell at Dade Middle School on October 13, 2014, but understood that Trustee Nutall was

referring to the Dallas ISD "Administration" in general and not to any particular individual. Mr.

Carrier stated that he had never been racially harassed or bullied by Trustee Nutall, either in

connection with the alleged events in this statement or at any other time.

11

C. Interview of Tracie Fraley

We asked Ms. Fraley (who is mentioned by name in Dr. Cofield's signed statement)

about whether Trustee Nutall told her that "If your people would allow some of my people to go

to your schools, we would be doing better." Ms. Fraley did not recall Trustee Nutall making

such a statement.

D. Interview of Trustee Nutan

We interviewed Trustee Nutall about Dr. Cofield's signed statement. Trustee Nutall

denied ever advising a former Principal to sue the District.

With regard to Dr. Cofield's allegation that Trustee Nutall once said "Don't know why

you're calling me - you're going to do what you want to do anyway, and tell me what time it is

and I will show up," Trustee Nutall recalled saying something to this effect, but explained that

Dr. Cofield had given her less than 24 hours' notice of a meeting, and that she had insufficient

time to locate the proper people to attend the meeting.

With regard to Dr. Cofield's statement about the alleged "mental grooming" between a

coach and player, Trustee Nutall said that the allegation was false and that she did not know what

"mental grooming" meant. Trustee Nutall stated that she "would never make those allegations"

and denied ever demanding that a coach be fired.

With regard to the allegation that Trustee Nutall commented to a group of people at

Skyline that "I know Mr. Miles has money for this item, because we have money for the Fellows

program," Trustee Nutall described the statement as partially accurate. Trustee Nutall said that

the statement was made to about twenty people and in reference to a water leak on the gym floor.

Her actual words were that "I'm sure we have money for this item because we have money for

many things in the District." Trustee Nutall said she would have emphasized that the District has

12

a $1.6 billion dollar budget, and that she was certain the District had money to spend. Trustee

Nutall denied singling out any particular program, such as the Fellows Program.

With regard to Dr. Cofield's allegation that Trustee Nutall chastised her for failing to

return a phone call that had been returned, Trustee Nutall stated that she had researched her

phone records and determined that she did not have any conversation with Dr. Cofield during the

timeframe in question. Trustee Nutall denied any such encounter had taken place, and stated that

she generally does not speak to Dr. Cofield by telephone.

With regard to the allegations that she stated "I'm gonna get all y'all fired," Trustee

Nutall denied this occurred, and noted that she did not have the power to fire any District

employees. Similarly, Trustee Nutall denied telling Isaac Carrier "You need to send that coach

back to Skyline" or telling Dr. Cofield that Dr. Alecia Cobb and Isaac Carrier need to be fired.

Trustee Nutall also denied saying that Dr. Cofield should "Get rid of Dr. Cobb - not the right

person."

Trustee Nutall denied stating, in reference to Dade, that "This school needs a Black

principal." Trustee Nutall recalled that, at a Board meeting, Superintendent Miles said Dade

needed a "male, African-American principal," and that she likely verbally agreed with that

statement.

Finally, Trustee Nutall denied telling Tracie Fraley that "If your people would allow

some of my people to go to your schools, we would be doing better."

Trustee Nutall and her counsel provided us with a written statement and requested that

we attach the statement to our report. A copy of the statement is attached as Exhibit "5."

13

RELEVANT DALLAS ISD BOARD POLICIES

Dallas ISD Board PolicvBBF(LOCAL)Board Members - Ethics

DIA(LEGAL)Employee Welfare-Freedom fromDiscrimination,Harassment, andRetaliation

Relevant ExcerptRACIAL, ETHNIC, RELIGIOUS, GENDER, SEXUALORIENTATION HARASSMENT PROHIBITED:Board members shall not engage in conduct constituting racial,ethnic, religious, gender, or sexual orientation harassment of anemployee or other Board member. Employees or Board memberswho believe they have been harassed because of their race, ethnicity,religion, gender, or sexual orientation are encouraged to comeforward with complaints.

District officials or their agents shall promptly investigate allcomplaints of racial, ethnic, religious, gender, or sexual orientationharassment to detennine behaviors that are prohibited by Title VII ofthe Civil Rights Act and reportable to the Office of Civil Rights.

HARASSMENT OF EMPLOYEES:Harassment on the basis of a protected characteristic is a violation ofthe federal anti-discrimination laws. The District has an affirmativeduty, under Title VII, to maintain a working environment free ofharassment on the basis of sex, race, color, religion, and nationalorigin. 42 U.S.C. 2000e, et seq.; 29 CFR 1606.8(a), 1604.11

Harassment violates Title VII if it is sufficiently severe andpervasive to alter the conditions of employment. Pennsylvania StatePolice v. Suders, 542 U.S. 129 (2004)

HOSTILE ENVIRONMENT:Verbal or physical conduct based on a person's sex, race, color,religion, or national origin constitutes unlawful harassment when theconduct:I. Has the purpose or effect of creating an intimidating, hostile,or offensive working environment;2. Has the purpose or effect of unreasonably interfering with anindividual's work performance; or3. Otherwise adversely affects an individual's employmentopportunities.

CORRECTIVE ACTION:The District is responsible for acts of unlawful harassment by fellowemployees and by nonemployees if the District, its agents, or its

14

DIA (LOCAL)Employee Welfare-Freedom fromDiscrimination,Harassment, andRetaliation

supervisory employees knew or should have known of the conduct,unless the District takes immediate and appropriate correctiveaction. 29 CFR 1604.1 I(d), (e), 1606.8(d), (e).

When no tangible employment action is taken, the District may raisethe following affirmative defense:I. That the District exercised reasonable care to prevent andpromptly correct any harassing behavior; and2. That the employee unreasonably failed to take advantage ofany preventive or corrective opportunities provided by the employeror to avoid harm otherwise.

PROHIBITED HARASSMENT:The District prohibits discrimination, including harassment, againstany employee on the basis of race, color, religion, gender, nationalorigin, age, disability, sexual orientation, gender identity, genderexpression, genetic information, or any other basis prohibited bylaw.

DISCRIMINATION:Discrimination against an employee is defined as conduct directed atan employee on the basis of race, color, religion, gender, nationalorigin, age, disability, sexual orientation, gender identity, genderexpression, genetic information, or any other basis prohibited bylaw, that adversely affects the employee's employment.

HARASSMENT:Prohibited harassment of an employee is defined as physical, verbal,or nonverbal conduct based on an employee's race, color, religion,gender, national origin, age, disability, sexual orientation, genderidentity, gender expression, genetic information, or any other basisprohibited by law, when the conduct is so severe, persistent, orpervasive that the conduct:

1. Has the purpose or effect of unreasonably interfering with theemployee's work performance;2. Creates an intimidating, threatening, hostile, or offensive workenvironment; or3. Otherwise adversely affects the employee's performance,environment, or employment opportunities.

Examples of prohibited harassment may include offensive or

15

DI(LOCAL)Employee Welfare

derogatory language directed at another person's religious beliefs orpractices, accent, skin color, gender identity, or need for workplaceaccommodation; threatening or intimidating conduct; offensivejokes, name-calling, slurs, or rumors; physical aggression or assault;display of graffiti or printed material promoting racial, ethnic, orother stereotypes; or other types of aggressive conduct such as theftor damage to property.

INVESTIGATION OF THE REPORT:The District shall request a written report from the complainant. If areport is made orally, the District official shall reduce the report towritten form, and require signed confirmation by the complainingemployee.

Upon receipt or notice of a report, the District official shall deter-mine whether the allegations, if proven, would constitute prohibitedconduct as defmed by this policy. If so, the District official shallimmediately request or undertake an investigation, regardless ofwhether a criminal or regulatory investigation regarding the same orsimilar allegations is pending.

If appropriate, the District shall promptly take interim actioncalculated to prevent prohibited conduct during the course of aninvestigation.

When appropriate, the campus principal or supervIsor shall beinvolved in or informed of the investigation.

The investigation may consist of personal interviews with the per-son making the report, the person against whom the report is filed,and others with knowledge of the circumstances surrounding theallegations. The investigation may also include analysis of otherinformation or documents related to the allegations.

PHYSICAL ASSAULTS OR THREATS TO SCHOOLEMPLOYEES:The District shall provide every employee with a workingenvironment free from verbal intimidation, physical assault, andoutside interference. Every precaution shall be taken to ensure thateach employee is afforded the full protection of the legal shieldprovided by the District. The Superintendent of Schools shallestablish rules and procedures that define the precautionarv and

16

DH(LOCAL)Employee Standards ofConduct

Board of TrusteesOperating Procedures(Adopted April 25, 2013)

remedial steps to be taken to ensure the protection of Districtemployees.

BULLYING DEFINED:While acting In the course and scope of their employment,employees shall not engage in bullying. Bullying is a fonn ofworkplace aggression, which includes incivility, rudeness, anddiscourteous verbal and non-verbal behaviors. The behavior isunrelated to the employer's legitimate business interests. The intentof the behavior is to demoralize, intimidate, and/or humiliate aperson or group. Bullying does not include the legitimate exerciseof employee management, including assigning tasks, coaching, andtaking work-related disciplinary actions against an employee.

CONCERNS ABOUT THE PERFORMANCE OF EMPLOYEESOTHER THAN THE SUPERINTENDENT OF SCHOOLS:

When a Board Member becomes concerned about the perfonnanceof District employees he/she must bring hislher concerns directly tothe Superintendent of Schools and infonn the Board President. Suchconcerns may include but are not limited to:

a. Actions which are illegalb. Violations of Board Policyc. Actions which are hannful to the District's or Board's reputationd. Issues of safety

Board Members must remain cognizant that District personnel arethe responsibility of the Superintendent of Schools, not the BoardMembers.

The Superintendent of Schools is obligated to listen to suchconcerns, review the matter and notify the Board Members of theresolution of the matter to the extent allowed by policy and law.

17

AUTHORITY FOR INVESTIGATION

Trustee Nutall raised a concern about the District's authority to investigate Trustees

regarding alleged Board policy violations. We believe Trustee Nutall's concern raises two

questions. First, did the District have the ability (or mandate) to conduct an investigation?

Second, was Trustee Nutall required to cooperate with an investigation? Taking the second

question fIrst, we could not identify any authority that would allow us to compel Trustee Nutall

or any Trustee to participate in an investigation; nor do we think the District would have any

such authority if this matter had been investigated internally. Although Dallas ISD employees

can be compelled to participate in an investigation, a Trustee is an elected offIcial, not an

employee. Nonetheless, Trustee Nutall voluntarily submitted to our interviews and cooperated

fully with our investigation.

Regarding the fIrst question, we reviewed Dallas ISD Board policy to determine whether

the District had authority to investigate the subject matters raised by the three written statements.

A. Race HarassmentIDiscrimination

Because portions of the written statements potentially implicated allegations of race

harassment/discrimination, the District was obligated by DIA (LOCAL) to conduct an

investigation, make fIndings, and issue a written report. Board policy BBF (LOCAL) prohibits

race harassment by Trustees, and policies DIA (LOCAL) and DIA (LEGAL) obligate the District

to maintain a working environment free of race harassment. Thus, it appears that the District not

only has the authority but also the obligation to conduct an investigation into subject matters

covered by DIA (LOCAL), regardless ofwho had allegedly committed the acts.

However, the obligation of the District to investigate does not entail an obligation by a

Trustee to participate in or cooperate with that investigation. Moreover, Board policy does not

18

identify any sanction if a Trustee or other non-employee violates this policy; nor is it clear that

the District would have the power to impose any such sanction against anon-employee.6 Thus,

the District may wish to revisit Board policy to determine what, if anything, should trigger an

obligation by a Trustee to participate in an investigation and what, if any, sanctions should be

available should a Trustee be found in violation of Board policy.

B. Bullying, Non-Race Harassment, and Personnel/Governance Matters

Allegations involving bullying and/or verbal intimidation, as well as acts by a Trustee

that relate to personnel matters (including the transfer and termination of employees) are outside

the scope of DIA (LEGAL) and DIA (LOCAL). The District's anti-bullying policy, found in

DH (LOCAL), prohibits only employees from engaging in bullying, and does not mandate an

investigation into allegations of bullying. However, Board policy DI (LOCAL) requires the

District to "provide every employee with a working environment free from verbal intimidation,

physical assault, and outside interference." It is not clear that this policy applies to Trustees or, if

it did, the nature of available sanctions, if any. Based upon the obligations placed upon the

District and the Superintendent by DI (LOCAL), the District has the authority to investigate

allegations of bullying or other verbal harassment; however, an investigation is not mandatory,

nor does the District have the ability to compel participation in that investigation by a non-

employee, such as a Trustee.

Similarly, although the Board of Trustees Operating Procedures require Trustees to bring

personnel complaints to the Superintendent, and make the Superintendent responsible for

personnel matters, the Operating Procedures do not mandate an investigation into complaints

involving violations of the Operating Procedures, and provide no sanction if a Trustee violates

6 Depending on the specific harassment/discrimination that occurred, the victim may have a private cause of actionagainst the perpetrator.

19

them. We found no Board policy requiring the District to provide a working environment free of

personnel complaints made in violation of the Operating Procedures, unless those complaints rise

to the level of verbal intimidation or harassment. Thus, it is not clear that the District has the

authority to investigate a Trustee for complaints involving this subject matter.

FACTUAL FINDINGS

A. Findings Regarding Written Statement of Tonya Sadler Grayson

The statements allegedly made to Ms. Grayson by Trustee Nutall at the June Board

meeting arguably fall within the race harassment prohibitions of Board Policy DlA (LOCAL).7

Regarding the June Board meeting, we interviewed the two individuals (Mr. Harris and Dr.

Blackburn) who allegedly witnessed the encounter, but neither corroborated Ms. Grayson's

recollection of the alleged statements. Moreover, Trustee Nutall denied making these

statements. Thus, there is insufficient corroborating evidence to find a violation in connection

with the alleged encounter at the June Board meeting.

Similarly, regarding her allegations of bullying and verbal intimidation by Trustee Nutall

during the June Board meeting, for the reasons stated above, there is insufficient evidence to find

a violation of the anti-bullying policy in Board Policy DH (LOCAL).

B. Findings Regarding Written Statement of Officer Freddie Jackson

Officer Jackson told us that his written statement was not a complaint, that he did not

intend for it to be submitted to Legal Services, and that he did not want any investigation to be

1 On or around November 18,2014, Ms. Grayson contacted us to express additional concerns about possibleretaliation in the form of an aPR investigation into her background. We informed her that we could not consider thenew allegation unless she put it in writing and submitted it to Legal Services. In December 2014, Ms. Graysoncontacted us again and expressed her intent to supplement her allegations to include the aPR investigation as apossible act of retaliation. However, as of the date of this report, she has not to our knowledge supplemented herallegations.

20

conducted. He said he created the written statement at Superintendent Miles' request, and

believed it would become part of the Superintendent's file. Officer Jackson stated that he has

never been bullied or racially harassed by Trustee Nutall in connection with the Dade incident or

at any other time, and did not believe any violation of Board policy had occurred.

Thus, we found insufficient evidence to support a violation of any Board policy in

Officer Jackson's written statement.

C. Findings Regarding Written Statement of Dr. Karon Cofield

Dr. Cofield told us during her interviews that she had several encounters with Trustee

Nutall that she considered to be unprofessional and/or that involved Trustee Nutall giving

personnel directives outside the scope of a Trustee's powers and duties. However, she also told

us that she did not intend for her written statement to be considered a complaint, and denied that

she had been racially harassed or bullied by Trustee Nutall.

Notwithstanding Dr. Cofield's position that her written statement should be viewed solely

as background information, we gave Trustee Nutall the opportunity to respond to her allegations.

Trustee Nutall generally denied making the statements that were attributed to her by Dr.

Cofield.8 We interviewed Isaac Carrier and Tracie Fraley, both of whom were mentioned in Dr.

Cofield's signed statement. While Mr. Carrier generally recalled the alleged encounters with

Trustee Nutall as described by Dr. Cofield, Ms. Fraley did not corroborate the alleged statement

that Dr. Cofield attributed to Trustee Nutall. Both stated that they had not been bullied and/or

harassed by Trustee Nutall.

Thus, we found insufficient evidence to support a violation of any Board policy in Dr.

Cofield's written statement.

8 To the extent that Trustee Nutall admitted making statements similar to those set forth by Dr. Cofield in her writtenstatement, see pp.12-13 herein, we do not believe these statements constitute a violation of any Board Policy.

21

Tonya Sadler Grayson2827 England ParkwayGrand Prairie, Texas 75054

October 22, 2014

Dear Mike Miles,

A few months ago, I briefly mentioned to you one of the hostile encounters I had with TrusteeNutall. Although all of my interactions with her have been unpleasant because of her falseattacks of me, my experience in June was particularly uncomfortable. Since we haven't madethe time to discuss, I wanted to be sure that at the least I provide you details of this incident.

During the June Board Meeting, I was approached by Trustee Nutall in the hall, outside theBoard Auditorium. She was visibly upset and spoke fast and loudly. It was unexpected, but IqUickly realized that her anger was towards me. Trustee Nutall continuously accused me of"treating people like trash". She told me that I was no better than anybody and would probablynot be working at the District long. Trustee Nutall advised me to start watching my backbecause people should be treated with dignity, not like I treat them. She went on to say thatmost of the folks in HCM don't know whatthey are doing because they are new, like me.

Trustee Nutall spoke continuously as I listened, aIJd finally I asked about the nature oftheaccusations. She said that I should have let the folks that were fired for recrUiting athletes quitor retire. She elaborated more by saying they have been with the District longer than me and Ididn't have the right to just fire them. I listened respectfully, but looked around repeatedly forassistance because I was unsure of Trustee Nutall's intentions. Previously, I heard that TrusteeNutall hit a DISD executive, and I didn't want to be her next target.

About four minutes expired when Dr. Blackburn intervened and inquired about the nature ofTrustee Nutall's and my conversation. Trustee Nutall informed Dr. Blackburn that she wanted toknow why I was walking around treating people like trash, like I was better than them. TrusteeNutall then turned to me and requested that I answer the question. I advised Trustee Nutallthat I am a professional and do not treat people like trash. She sighed and stated, "You are oneof them".

A few hours later, I was sitting with Dr. Blackburn and Deno Harris in the "Chief and ExecutiveDirector" dinner area. Trustee Nutall walked into the dinner area and commented to Dr.Blackburn that she thought he would be wherever I was. She then accused Dr. Blackburn andme of "doing something". Trustee Nutallsat in the chair directly in front of me and began toverbally attack me. She stated that she didn't believe that I answered her question earlier as towhy I treated people like trash. Without a pause, Trustee Nutallsaid she also heard I was tryingto get rid of all the people in HCM so I could hire some more "new news". I asked what was a"new new". Trustee Nutailiooked at me, sighed and responded, "You don't know what a newnew is - do you know what a Trick is - it's like you". 1was very offended by her comments, butsaid nothing, out of respect. Dr. Blackburn interjected and suggested that Trustee Nutall calm

down. Trustee Nutall turned to me and said, "You must not hang out in the hood".1 assured herthat I did not "hang out" in the hood. She then made a sound and said, "You ain't black - Youare one of Miles' people".

Trustee Nutall continuously made comments about me being new and stated that I was hungryfor power. As one of my Directors walked in the dinner room, Deno Harris dismissed himself.Dr. Blackburn started a conversation with my Director, and my employee addressed thequestion to me. Trustee NutaJi inserted herself by stating, "Nobody wants to talk to Tonya - Yousee, Tonya and I don't see eye-to-eye - She ain't one of us sister girls". Dr. Blackburn suggestedthat we all get back to the Board Meeting.

As you can imagine, I never expected to be treated like Trustee NutaJi treated me at the JuneBoard Meeting. Again, Trustee Nutall has repeatedly made snide, unkind comments to me bothbefore and after the June Board Meeting; however, I continue to try to avoid her whenpossible. I understand as an executive, I must interact professionally with the Board Members,but it should also be expected that Trustee Nutall would' also be professional at all times.

Again, since we were unable to speak about this situation I want to be sure I share my concernswith you, in the instance I am verbally or physically attacked by Trustee Nutal!. Honestly, I fearcoming in close contact with her.

As always, I appreciate your support and time. If you have any questions or would like todiscuss further, please let me know. Thanks.

Sincerely,

Q~f.-~~~Tonya Sadler GraysonExecutive Director - HR OperationsHuman Capital Management

REe dYEDOfFICE OF

LEf'.H SERVICESDA~~.A$ I,S.. D.

l011 un 28 PP1 5 12

To: Whom it may concern (lFrom: Freddie lJackson, Driver !Security Dallas ISDj::\~-Subject: Trustee Brenadette Nutall

Date: 10-21-2014

On Wednesday 10-15-2014 at around 8:30 am, I was asked to meet with TrusteeNutall concerning an incident that occurred between her and SuperintendentMike Miles at Billy Dade Middle School earlier in the week. Upon meeting withthe trustee, she wanted to know why, as a black man, I did not come between herand Mr. Miles to prevent the uniformed Police officers from physically removingher from the school. I told Mrs. Nutalll could not have interfered with the lawfulduties of the officers without being arrested myself. I also work for theSuperintendent, and was not asked by him to say or do anything to Mrs. Nutall. Ifelt that it was not a racial incident and that the action taken was appropriate fora person who was acting loud Clnd disorderly in a school. Mrs. Nutall went on tosay she was disappointed and had lost some respect for me not coming to the aidof a black woman, who was being treated that way by anyone, not just police. Itold Trustee Nutall that if the situation had been different, being, if she was beingtreated that way by just anyone I would have come to her aid as I would for anywoman. At the time, r thought it was unusual for a Trustee to question anemployee concerning this type of incident. This statement was made by mevoluntarily.

HECEiVEOOFFICE OF

LEGAl SERVICESDALUS r.s.. o.

Mr. MFm~, u:'T 29 Prl 5 12

INFORMATION

Several incidents and observations have occurred with Trustee Bernadette Nutallduring my tenure at Dallas Independent School District. Most of thoseoccurrences have resulted in her attempting to badger and bullying me and mystaff with harassing and racist statements that are in violation of BBF Local (BoardMembers Ethics). She continuously involves herself in activities the Board hasdelegated to the Superintendent of Schools, particularly related to staffing.

A few instances are shown below:

A former Principal was advised to sue the district by Trustee Nutal!. During the principal selection process for 2013-14 school year, Trustee

Nutall commented to me when I reached out to her requesting communityparticipation in the process "Don't know why you're calling me - you'regoing to do what you want to do anyway, and tell me what time it is and Iwill show up". She had previously been informed by the Chief of Schoolsthat Trustees were not involved in the process; however, she would bullyher way into the process.

She assumed that "mental grooming" was occurring between a coach and aplayer and demanded that the coach be fired. The allegations were basedon gossip in the community that was never confirmed. Her reaction anddemands were not based on fact.

She commented to a group of people regarding an incident at Skyline andtheir need for funds to replace/repair something costly at Skyline that "Iknow Mr. Miles has money for this item, because we have money for theFellows program". This comment does not promote the best interest ofthe district.

Recently at Dade M.s. during a 6:30 A.M. meeting with Mr. Miles and theDade staff, she did the following:

? Invaded my space, and displayed inappropriate conduct andcharacter. She chastised me because she stated that I had notreturned her call, when I actually had called her the daybefore and spent at least a half-hour or more on the phonewith her, primarily listening to her complaints and criticism onhow wrong we were in our decision-making that she heardwhat was occurring at Dade. I felt she was attempting tobullying me.

? She also stated "This is on you and I'm gonna get all ya'ilfired".

She stated to Executive Director Isaac Carrier, "You need to send that coachback to Skyline" referring to an Instructional Coach.

Trustee Nutall commented to me this past year that Dr. Alecia Cobb needsto be removed as well as Isaac Carrier.

Recently due to the Dade restructuring, she told me that both Isaac Carrierand I should be fired. She made this statement to me over the phone aswell as in person. Last year she also stated "Get rid of Dr. Cobb - Not theright person 1"

In reference to Dade MS, she also said that "This school needs a Blackprincipal" .

Last year, during a community meeting, she stated to Executive DirectorTracie Fraley "If your people would allow some of my people to go to yourschools, we would be doing better". This is a racist comment.

Trustee Nutall has treated me and my staff with disrespect and has shown a lackof integrity and character for matters that I have discussed with her. Shecontinues to be negative, and shows no respect for our Superintendent, whichdisrupts the flow of necessary work in our school district.

Mike MilesSuperintendent of Schools

OFFiCE OF

D,':'L.l_i~ S I.S.. D.

ZOIY Of0 J Arl 7 00

Dallas Dlnde~ndentSchoolDistrict

Educating All Students For Success

I InformationDate

TO:FROM:

SUBJECT:

December 3, 2014

Jack Elrod, Dallas ISO General CouncilKaron H. Cofield, Ph.D., Assistant Superintendent, 1)fJLSchool Leadership Division 4Information Concerning Trustee Bernadette Nutall

Several incidents and observations have occurred with Trustee Bemadette Nutall during mytenure at Dallas Independent School District. Most of those occurrences have resulted inher attempting to badger and bully me and my staff with harassing and racist statements. Ithas been observed that she continuously involves herself in activities the Board hasdelegated to the Superintendent of Schools, particularly related to staffing..

A few instances are mentioned below:

A former Principal was advised to sue the district by Trustee Nutall (Former Principalat Dade).

During the principal selection process for 2013-14 school year, Trustee Nutallcommented to me when I reached out to her requesting community participation forthe process "Don't know why you're calling me - you're going to do what you want todo anyway, and tell me what time it is and I will show up". She had previously beeninformed by the Chief of Schools that Trustees were not involved in the process;however, she stated she would become a part of the process.

She assumed or heard that "mental grooming" was occurring between a coach and aplayer and demanded that the coach be fired. The allegations were based on gossipin the community. Her demands were not based on fact.

She commented to a group of people regarding an incident at Skyline and their needfor funds to replace/repair something costly at Skyline that "I know Mr. Miles hasmoney for this item, because we have money for the Fellows program". Thiscomment does not promote the best interest of the district.

Recently at Dade M.S. during a 6:30 A.M. meeting with Mr. Miles and the Dade staff,she did the following:

~ Displayed inappropriate conduct and character. She chastised mebecause she stated that I had not returned her call, when I actuallyhad called her the day before and spent at least a half-hour or moreon the phone with her, primarily listening to her complaints and

3700 Ross Ave.Dallas. TX 75204(972) 925-3700www.dallasisd.org

Mike MilesSuperintendent of Schools

Dallas DIndependentSchoolDistrict

Educating All Students For Success

I Information

criticism on how wrong we were in our decision-making that sheheard was occurring at Dade. Her communication style is almostalways confrontational.~ She also stated "This is on you and I'm gonna get all ya'il fired', you

and Mr. Carrier.

She stated to Executive Director Isaac Carrier, "You need to send that coach back toSkyline' referring to an Instructional Coach.

Recently due to Dade restructuring, she told me that both Isaac Carrier and I shouldbe fired. She made this statement to me over the phone as well as in person. Lastyear she also stated "Get rid of Dr. Cobb - Not the right person!'

In reference to Dade MS, she also said that "This school needs a Black principal'. Last year, during a community meeting, she stated to Executive Director Tracie

Fraley "If your people would allow some of my people to go to your schools, wewould be doing better". This is a racist comment.

Trustee Nutall has treated me and my staff with disrespect and has shown a lack of integrityand character for matters that I have discussed with her. She continues to be negative, andshows no respect for our Superintendent, which disrupts the flow of necessary work in ourschool district.

3700 Ross Ave.Dallas, TX 75204(972) 9253700WW'N.dallasisd.org

STATEMENT ON BEHALF OFDISD TRUSTEE BERNADETTE NUTALL

TO BE INCLUDED IN ANY REPORT

January 21,2015

Over the past several days, we have been honoring the work and legacy of Dr. Martin

Luther King, Jr. It is poignant that it is at this time that the Dallas Independent School District is

preparing to receive a report about Trustee Bernadette Nutall. Dr. King's message was one of

advocacy, ofspeaking out for the disenfranchised, the ignored, the disrespected, and the

disheartened. It was a message that, although born out ofracial concerns, extended to economic

disparity, social divisions, and power inequity.

Dr. King's message was an insistence that each ofus use our talents and abilities to move

forward in addressing our social issues. His admonition that "ifyou can't fly then run, ifyou

can't run then walk, ifyou can't walk then crawl, but whatever you do you have to keep moving

forward" is particularly appropriate for those persons entrusted with the education of our

children. Trustee Nutall understands this responsibility: all she wants to do is move forward in

addressing the educational needs of the 160,000 children in the DallaS Independent School

District.

But there have been attempts to sidetrack Trustee Nutall's work and efforts. And so, this

statement is necessary to be certain that the right questions are being asked. It is needed to be

certain that those questions are not ignored nor dismissed. Many ofthese questions have been

posed by Trustee Nutall with a response that they would be addressed in the "report." Yet, these

questions, at a minimum, must be first answered before a "report" can have any suggestion of

legitimacy. Those questions are:

STATElv1ENT ON BEHALF OFTRUSTEE BERNADETTE NUTALL Page 1 of7

1) Authority: What is the authority for a District official(s) to arrange for an

investigation of a duly elected Board Trustee? When District officials take action that could

arguably impugn the integritY of one of its elected officials, they must do so only on the soundest

offooting. When those officials decide to order "an investigation," they have taken position that

they have such sufficient belief that a trustee has done something improper that an outside law

firm should look into the matter. What is the authority ofDistrict officials to make that

determination? This question has been posed to representatives ofthe DISD on multiple

occasions. The closest response to an answer was a statement that the question of authority

"would be addressed in the report."

2) Alleged impropriety:

What is the alleged improper conduct that warrants an investigation? What policy or

code of conduct is suggested to have been violated? District officials should be able to point to

specific rules and regulations that they believe may have been violated.

Again, this question was posed to representatives of the District. Again, there was no

answer.

3) Board Operating Procedures:

The DISD Board Operating Procedures sets forth a defiJ;led procedure for any concerns

about a trustee's compliance with Board Procedures. Why weren't those procedures used if

there were any concerns about Trustee Nutall' s actions? Ifthere were questions as to whether

she was inappropriate in her questions to administrative staff or her demeanor in interaction with

DISD personnel, why didn't the Superintendent and/or General Counsel to whom these "written

complaints" were apparently submitted, use these compliance procedures to have these concerns

STATEMENT ON BEHALF OFTRUSTEE BERNADETIE NUTALL Page 2 of7

addressed? What possible purpose existed in hiring a law finn to "conduct an investigation"

rather than follow these procedures?

. Those procedures set forth a primarily confidential and defined graduated approach:

Individual Board Members and/or the Superintendent ofSchools are encouraged to express their concerns about aBoard Member's compliance with Board Operating Proceduresdirectly with that member, verbally, followed by any writtencommunication.

Ifthe issue isn't resolved after personal discussions between theindividuals involved, then discussion with the Board President isappropriate. The Board President shall discuss the concern withthe Board Member in question on behalfofthe individualconcerned, or the President shall moderate a discussion betweenthose involved.

Ifthe issue still isn't resolved, the Board President shall place anitem on the next meeting agenda for a Closed/Executive Sessionposted as "Deliberation ofDuties ofa Public Officer. "Alternatively, three Board Members can notifY the BoardPresident and request the item be placed on the next meetingagenda.

In Closed/Executive Session, the individuals with the concernshall state their concern andprovide specific examples tosupport that concern and the Board shall discuss the concern.Among other options to resolve the matter in Closed/ExecutiveSession, Board Members may encourage the Board Member toattend specific training related to the Board OperatingProcedures.

Is the difference between the use of these procedures and the hiring of an outside law the

public exposure that will result from hiring that law firm? Is the purpose to intimidate or

embarrass an elected official so a confidential private process would not achieve that purpose?

Questions about the determination to initiate this investigation and to hire an outside law

firm were put to District representatives. Again, these questions were not answered.

STATEMENT ON BEHALF OFTRUSTEE BERNADETTE NUTALL Page 3 of?

4) "Investigation" procedures:

Because this "investigation" of Trustee Nutall is unprecedented, there are not any defined

procedures that direct the manner in which it is conducted. In contrast to the well-defined,

graduated process set forth in the Board Operating Procedures, there are not any policies or

procedures to guide the gathering of information.

Trustee NutalI has been told that interviews of the complainants and selected witnesses

were conducted. She was also given the opportunity to meet with the appointed attorney.

But what are the rules governing those interviews? Are they recorded? Under oath?

What are the consequences if it is determined that the persons who authored the "complaints"

were less than totally truthful in their statements? Will they suffer any personnel action for

making false allegations against an elected official? Or is it simply expected that an elected

official must suffer the foul blows as part of the consequence of elected service?

Even more fundamentally, what are the requirements for a "complaint?" One of the

documents forwarded by the Districtofficial was an unsigned, undated written document.

Another document was a written note that gave a description ofevents but did not voice any

complaint. The third document was a statement authored after Trustee Nutall's removal by

DISD police officers from the Billy Dade Learning Center at the direction of Superintendent

Miles related to an incident that supposedly occurred months earlier.

Where are the procedures for the conduct of this investigation established? Is it required

that the law firm be an "independent" and "impartial" investigator or can there be simultaneous

service as "District Counsel?" Must any written "complaint" allege a violation of a code of

conduct or can it merely be a statement of an interaction? Must the complaint be signed and

dated? Why would a person be given days to decide whether to sign and date her "complaint?"

STATEMENT ON BEHALF OFTRUSTEE BERNADETTE NUTALL Page 4 of7

Can the complaint be based upon hearsay information or must it be made based upon personal

knowledge?

What rights and opportunities are accorded the person made the subject of this

investigation? Does Trustee Nutall or her representative have a right to question the supposed

complainants? Any witnesses to the subject incidents?

How can areport be drafted and a result determined before all of the information,

including Trustee Nutall's position, has been obtained with respect to all matters? How can any

conclusion be reached when there was never any definition of the investigative purpose?

All of these procedural questions revolve around this "investigation" because it is

unprecedented. No one has been able to identify another occasion on which the District has

undertaken an "investigation" of a sitting Trustee. Does that inability result because other

officials recognize the impropriety of-such action? Is this "investigation" unprecedented because

the potential for abuse and manipulation which could flow from District officials unilaterally

causing "investiations" of sitting Trustees could threaten the governance of a school district?

5) Results of the "investigation":

When the decision was made to forego the Board procedures and to instead receive a

written report from an outside law firm serving as District Counsel, what was the anticipated

purpose of that report? The District certainly does not have any authority to sanction or

otherwise issue a penalty upon Trustee Nutall. So what was perceived to be the objective behind

obtaining such a written report? How was it to be used? Would Trustee Nutall be given an

opportunity to review the report? Would the Board of Trustees be provided the report? Was it

hoped that a report might put a focus on relationships between the Board and District officials as

a corollary to the Home Rule debate? Was it an approach to target Trustee Nutall and perhaps

STATEMENT ON BEHALF OFTRUSTEEBERNADETTENUTALL Page 5 of?

subject her to select public comment? Various forms of these questions have been put to District

representatives. And again, there was no answer.

6) Timing:

It cannot be seriously claimed that the decision to forego Board procedures and initiate

this "investigation" is unrelated to the incident between Trustee Nutali and Superintendent Miles

where he instructed District police officers to remove her from the Billy Dade campus. Both the

procedural and substantive components of those "complaints" support such a conclusion. Each of

the two "complaints" was received after that incident. One complaint was held by the

Superintendent's office before it was forwarded to the Legal Offices. The other complaint was

received undated and unsigned. The author was given several days to decide whether she wanted

to date and sign the "complaint."

(Substantively, both "complaints" relate to alleged incidents that had occurred months and

even years before. There is no record of any contemporaneous or timely report of the supposed

distressing incidents. One complaint contains multiple assertions that are based upon conjecture,

rumor, speculation and/or hearsay. Yet, they are not only given credence but are deemed worthy

of "investigation."

7) The allegations:

To respond substantively to allegations is to give them credence. Having to explain

actions in a context that has been created and framed by accusations, gives those allegations an

undeserved power.

Trustee Nutall refutes the accusations by Tonya Grayson and Karon Cofield. She has, in

a spirit of moving forward, cooperated with the appointed law firm rather than publicly

STATEMENT ON BEHALF OFTRUSTEE BERNADETTE NUTALL Page 60f7

r.

contesting its legitimacy. She is confident that the impartial witnesses, if interviewed, likewise

refute those statements.

8) Conclusion:

Trustee NutaIl is well aware ofBoard procedures and responsibilities. It is to meet those

responsibilities that she has pressed for information. She has demanded equal consideration and

treatment for southern sector schools. This "investigation" does not implicate issues of

governance but rather it is a manifestation of disagreements. It is arguably more reflective of an

organizational lack ofrespect that is demonstrated by the failure to respond to legitimate

questions and requests but that unfortunately permeates many issues.

1bis "investigation" has been a most regrettable effort to silence her voice, to suppress

her criticism ofDistrict officials and to misdirect focus away from the issues that impact the

education of our children. Trustee Nutal1 is, and always will be, committed to the representation

ofher constituency and the education ofail children of the District. 1bis ordeal has only

strengthened her resolve and determination. If she cannot run, she will walk. If she cannot walk,

she will crawl. But she will always be working to move forward educational opportunities for

our children.

STATEMENT ON BEHALF OFTRUSTEE BERNADETTE NUTALL Page 7 of7