LITTLE ROCK — The Little Rock School Board voted 4-3 Thursday to buy out the remaining two years of Superintendent Roy Brooks' contract, an abrupt move that negates the need for Wednesday's hearing on whether to fire Brooks but will cost the district about $500,000 in severance pay.
Board member Mike Daugherty made the motion to "terminate the contract" on the basis ofa contractual provision that allows the board to unilaterally sever its relationship with Brooks by giving the superintendent at least 90 days' notice and all the salary and other compensation he would receive if he were to continue to serve as chief of the 26,700-student district, the largest in Arkansas.
As a result of the vote, Brooks could remain in the district as superintendent until late August, at which time the 90 days' notice would expire.
The School Board has been deeply and racially divided over Brooks in recent months, with the board's four black members pushing for his removal and the three white members supporting Brooks, who is black.
Besides Daugherty, those voting for the buyout were board President Katherine Mitchell,Charles Armstrong and Dianne Curry. Those voting against it were Larry Berkley, Melanie Fox and Baker Kurrus.
"Yes, it's going to be costly to buy Dr. Brooks' contract out," Mitchell told more than 100 district employees, parents and community members at the meeting, "but it will be more costly to keep him here because it is making a negative impact on our schools, our entire district and our community."
Mitchell, who has been onthe board for more than 18 years, questioned what Brooks has done in his three years "that demands we keep him forever." She urged people to visit schools outside the city's more affluent neighborhoods, saying that conditions in some schools are not conducive to teaching and learning.
"Go to Washington and Franklin and Chicot and Watson and Stephens, and you will see the kind of atmosphere thatexists in those schools," she said. "We are not carrying out our mission, and we're not fulfilling our obligations to the children of this district. It is difficult to work in the situation in which many of our people work in these buildings."
The board voted 4-3 on April 11 to give Brooks notice of charges that, if proven, would warrant his firing from the district without any severance pay. Brooks was accused of giving pay increases and stipends to some employees without board approval, being insubordinate to board members and disrespectful to employees, and failing to show satisfactory student achievement gains during his tenure.
A hearing was set for Wednesday before an impartial hearing officer who was to determine the facts of the dispute, identify the applicable regulations and laws, and make recommendations on Brooks'future employment.
A move by the board's majority to suspend Brooks pending the termination hearing was derailed at the eleventh hour on May 7 by a federal judge, who said Brooks was not given proper notice of the grounds for his possible suspension.
"I regret that the board took this action," Brooks said about the buyout after sitting through the special board meeting Thursday. "Certainly we had all these allegations. It is unfortunate we didn't have the opportunity to really go forward with the process to determine whether these things are true," he said.
"I was confident that these are not true."
Brooks questioned the fairness of the situation and why, if the allegations were so serious and his accusers were so confident they could win, they would now be willing to spend the money to buy him out.
"We are one week away from the termination hearing, and they say, 'Oh, no.'" he said. "Why didn't they do this in the beginning? I am sorry that the taxpayers of this wonderful city have to foot such a bill because of the failure of what I consider to be the fiduciary responsibility of those people who were elected."
Brooks, who came to Arkansas after a long education career in Florida - most recently in Orlando - said he intends to keep working in the Little Rock district for as long as he can.
"Nothing is going to distract me," he said. "I'll be in the office at 6:30 in the morning, and I'll be leaving late at night. I'm going to be focusing on the job I was sent here to do until the last second of the last minute. I'm going to work hard for these kids, for this community, for this city."
Board members who support Brooks and opposed the buyout questioned the legality of Thursday's special meeting, which preceded the 5:30 p.m. regular monthly meeting of the board. They also questioned where theestimated $500,000 will come from to pay off Brooks.
And they quizzed Morgan "Chip" Welch, the board's attorney, and Mitchell on the reasons for opting now for the buyout versus the termination hearing. Welch advised the board to pursue a buyout.
Berkley pleaded for what he called a "third option" - a negotiated settlement that would not include Brooks' immediate termination but would build in a reconciliation process.
"There are very many moderate-minded people ... who have begged for that opportunity," he said.
"This is throwing that down the drain."
Kurrus noted that during Brooks' tenure, the district has reached a record-high student enrollment, that standardized test scores have inched upward and that community involvement in the system has increased.
"The money [for the buyout] will come out of the general budget," Kurrus said. "It will come out of the money we could have spent for kids. We don't have any extra money. We are broke. We are going to get broker if we lose enrollment because of the fact that we havenot settled this.
"We have divided our community. The next thing that happens is we dismantle our school district. As we lose enrollment because of this kind of precipitous, divisive action, we lose money, and we lose the ability to fund the programs that serve the kids with the greatest needs."
Kurrus warned that the district is going to have to pay a higher salary to any new superintendent.
Brooks earns a salary of $198,000 a year plus a $25,000-a-year payment to an annuity, a monthly car allowance of $916.67, as well as various insurance benefits.
There were questions Thursday about whether the district would also be obligated to pay legal fees that Brooks has incurred in fighting to save his job.
One provision in his contract states that if allegations against him aren't sustained by a majority of the board, the board shall reimburse him for attorneys' fees.
The amount of Brooks' fees owed to his attorneys at the Williams & Anderson law firm have not been disclosed, but the school district has received its first bill from the Welch and Kitchens law firm for that firm's work between May 1-15, and it totals more than $30,000.
Welch addressed the question of why the switch from termination to a buyout.
"Dr. Brooks, for better or for worse, has become a focal point," he said. "As long as he's here, he's a lightning rod for dispute and dissension on the School Board."
Welch, who said he had a personal opinion on whether Brooks should be fired but wouldn't reveal it publicly, said the move for the buyout is an attempt at a compromise among the factions of the board "to do something that was ultimately fair to both sides, to the district and to Dr. Brooks."
"When you deal with a school district with these kinds of sores and fissures and their backs are up and there are competing interests and business interests and everything else, it's hard to get together," he said. "My advice to you all that is it is time to do that. We can posture or we can move on."
Welch said the move for a buyout was the result of "two or three days of discussions between these board members" and was not as sudden as the short notice for Thursday's special meeting might indicate.
He said after the meeting that he did not meet with the board members in groups but called or met with them individually, which he described as laborious and time-consuming.
The Arkansas Freedom of Information Act requires advance notice of at least two hours to the public of any meeting of a governing board such as a school board.
Kurrus and Berkley argued Thursday that the board members did not receive adequate notice - at least two days - that a buyout was to be considered at a special meeting as required by board policies.
"I see a board that is poised to do something historical,"Welch told the audience.
"It is an African-American majority. We've never had that and what an appropriate time to have that at the time we are celebrating ... the Central High crisis. And I see the white minority on here, dedicated intelligent people who want to go forward. And everybody has their back up. That has got to stop."
Welch said the parties in the dispute have in recent days gone back and forth about a $2,500-a-day hearing officer from Chicago and on whether the hearing would be delayed.
"I can tell you that there would be litigation if this continued regardless of whether the hearing officer would find that Dr. Brooks had created a situation that meant he should be terminated," he said.
Jess Askew, one of Brooks' attorneys, said after the meeting Thursday that it is up to Brooks to decide how he might pursue saving his job.
"He has a lot of options available. There are serious questions about the legality of that meeting," Askew said. "There are serious questions about how the board can pursue termination, get right to the edge of the termination hearing and then suddenly switch horses whenthey realize the termination isn't going to go the way they want."
Teresa Gray, spokesman for the Little Rock Mothers for Progress in our Schools, who has been outspoken in support of Brooks, said after the meeting that her organization questions whether the board is properly upholding its fiduciary responsibility by funding the buyout.
"Dr. Mitchell talked about the schools in the inner city and southwest Little Rock that need these monies, but she is willing to throw away half a million dollars, and that doesn't count the legal fees," Gray said.
Katherine Wright Knight, president of the Little Rock Classroom Teachers who has been critical of Brooks, said a lot of people hoped the buyout would happen.
Joy Springer, who works for civil-rights lawyer John Walker and has monitored desegregation conditions in the district for many years, applauded the board for its decision on Brooks, thanking members for their hard work.
Information for this article was contributed by Stacy Hudson of the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette.
Front Section, Pages 1, 15 on 05/25/2007