Petrilli v Silberman: Day 4

This from Jim Warren at the Herald-Leader:

Witnesses deny that they

worked to oust principal at Booker T.

A call for a new principal at Lexington's Booker T. Washington Academy apparently was raised during a July 2007 meeting of parents to discuss issues concerning the school, according to testimony Tuesday in Fayette Circuit Court.

Parent Jessica Berry, who took notes at that meeting, testified that a call for a new principal was made, but that she didn't know who made it. Berry said, however, that she put the matter in her notes and later included it on a 21/2-page list of concerns that parents submitted to Fayette County Schools Superintendent Stu Silberman on Aug. 22, 2007.

The list of comlaints included:

• the use of disciplinary tactics not approved by the school council, including "kids being grabbed by the arm, cheeks squeezed, fingers pointed in faces."

• meager funding for special education and low-income students.

• poor teacher retention and high teacher turnover.

• low numbers of African-American and Hispanic teachers to reflect the diversity of the student population.

• inappropriate cultural comments and phrases, including the use of "gigolo man" and "these people."

• concerns about grant allocations, "misappropriation of funds" and a failure to involve the school's site-based decision-making council in budget decisions.

• poor-performing students being held in a grade to keep them from testing in the next year.

• school officials standing over students while being tested.

• retaliation against parents for coming forward with complaints.

The letter asked for a curriculum and financial audit, a test-score investigation, an evaluation of teacher turnover at the school, and a new principal "who will encourage greater ethical, moral, and educational standards as well as cultural appreciation toward all of our families."

Peggy Petrilli resigned as Booker T. Washington principal a few days later. Now,
Petrilli alleges in a civil lawsuit that Silberman forced her to resign to
placate a group of Booker T. Washington parents who wanted a black principal and
were threatening to picket the school or complain to the news media if Silberman
didn't act. Petrilli further alleges that Berry and two other Booker T.
Washington parents — Buddy Clark and his wife, Alva Clark — led the campaign to
oust her.

Petrilli claims that Silberman wronged her in four ways:
He wrongly retaliated against her; He discriminated against her racially; He violated her constitutional rights to due process, equal protection and he improperly exercised absolute and arbitrary power over her life, liberty and property interests; and He violated Kentucky’s whistleblower law in the process.

These violations allegedly occurred as a result of her “constructive discharge” immediately following a “secret meeting” on August 22, 2007, that included Silberman and Director Carmen Coleman, along with an unidentified number of unidentified individuals, only one of whom was Caucasian according to Jessica Berry. Petrilli claims the purpose of the meeting was to oust Petrilli from her principalship.

Silberman and the county school board contend that Petrilli resigned voluntarily
because she had lost the support of Booker T. Washington parents through her own
actions.

Silberman contends that rather than being “an innocent victim of a racial conspiracy to oust her” the true source of Petrilli’s problems was “her ongoing inability to foster relationship among the staff at BTWA…the community…and even among the agencies which were attempting to partner with BTWA.” It was the consequences of that conduct on the part of Peggy Petrilli which resulted in her voluntary resignation on the night on August 23, 2007, Silberman argues.

During questioning by Petrilli's attorney, J. Dan Golden, Berry denied that she and the Clarks worked to "undermine" Petrilli.

Berry acknowledged, however, that she and Alva Clark helped organize the July 2007 parents' meeting at the West End Empowerment Center. The session was to gather parents' concerns about the school and present them to Silberman, Berry said.

Golden led Berry through a list of concerns in her meeting notes covering items such as "cultural sensitivity" and "inappropriate cultural comments" at the school. Golden has suggested that such items are indicative of parents' interest in replacing Petrilli with an African-American.

Berry acknowledged that her meeting notes included a call for a "new principal" who
would "encourage greater ethical, moral and education standards" at Booker T.

Golden then turned to the parents' Aug. 22 meeting with Silberman, suggesting that its purpose was to convince the superintendent that parents would picket the school or go to the news media unless he "gave in" to their demands.

"No, that was not the purpose of that meeting," Berry said.

For Petrilli to prevail on the racial discrimination claim, the jury is going to have to believe that references to cultural sensitivity in BTWA council and PTA documents are actually code words for hiring more African American teachers. Golden has argued that Buddy Clark and Berry “used racial manipulation to keep [their] power and promote a program of “racial sensitivity and cultural competence” at the school, and “thwart any and all efforts of Ms Petrilli to better the school.

But Berry testified that the discussion of cultural sensitivity was part of a larger effort in cooperation with the Prichard Committee and that five BTWA parents were participating in Prichard's Commonwealth Institute for Parent leadership. The PTA had organized a session called PT3, formerly know to school folks as Parents and Teachers Talking Together. According to the Prichard Committee, PT3 "is a meeting where teachers and parents discuss goals for children in their school and actions to achieve those goals."

Berry testified about BTWA's involvement with the Commonwealth Institute for Parent Leadership saying the participants "...went through parent training…you write a proposal, that the principal must agree with, on how you were going to improve test scores…Part of it was a PT3… bringing parents and teachers together…showing everyone that you are on the same page…come up with your comments on your own…" Myself and Mr Clark...were not an actual part of the PT3, Berry said.

Under cross examination, defense attorney John McNeill asked for Berry's perspective on cultural sensitivity training.

McNeill: For the Prichard Committee, was cultural sensitivity and cultural traininig…were those things seen as adverse….or was that a good thing?

Berry: Yes, because it's all a part of open communication training...that’s all a part of inclusion…

McNeill: Would the parents have received that same cultural sensitivity training?

Berry: Yes

Earlier Tuesday, Golden questioned William "Buddy" Clark as to whether he and his wife had worked against Petrilli. Clark insisted that they didn't want to oust Petrilli.

"I think she may have had trouble relating to some in the community, and there were some in the community who may have had trouble relating to her," Clark said. "That was not the case with me and my wife."

Golden also questioned Clark about an incident in which Petrilli "turned in" the Clarks' son to the county schools' pupil personnel department for living outside the Booker T. Washington attendance zone. Their son, who is disabled, is a student at the school.

Petrilli contends that she had to turn in the Clarks' child under school district policies, but that the Clarks blamed her and retaliated against her for it. She claims that it was the key event in sparking the parents' campaign against her.

Buddy Clark, however, insisted that his wife didn't learn that Petrilli had turned in their son until after Petrilli resigned. Clark admitted that he offered advice on gathering parental complaints against Petrilli, but he denied that he and his wife "went after" her.

McNeill: In this whole scenario about your son…what I never heard was…that you had a beef with Peggy Petrilli

Clark: No, we didn’t…

McNeill: It was with central staff…or Mr Hayes…or with the superintendent...he’s central staff…so nothing, to your knowledge, nothing had to do with Petrilli…you had no prior knowledge that the person who initiated the investigation...was Petrilli?

Clark: I had no specific knowledge until she was gone…We heard rumors...from one teacher…

Clark said his wife had been "excited" when Petrilli arrived at Booker T. in 2005, because of her reputation for raising student achievement. He noted that the principal Petrilli replaced was black, denying that he and his wife opposed Petrilli because of her race.

"We had nothing against Ms. Petrilli," he said.

Also testifying late yesterday were former Civil Rights Compliance Officer Barbara Connor and former Director of Pupil Personnel Gary Wiseman.

Connor testified that she had been called in several times to investigate complaints regarding a 2/3 split class, children not being able to afford field trips (the district provides some amount of money to off set expenses for poor children), the implementation of Individual Education Plans for special needs students, and a child who had been retained.

Golden spent several minutes trying to get Connor to admit that any and all prior complaints were resolved and that whatever had happened had been remedied to the district's satisfaction, and therefore, played no part in Silberman's decision to remove Petrilli from her principalship.

Golden: You had moved on, correct?

Connor: Yes, she said she was going to take care of it..

Golden: You never heard any more problems…

Connor: That’s right

Golden: After the initial investigation…the parent issue had been addressed properly…

Connor: Yes.

Golden: …SBDM were resolved and addressed properly…

Connor: Yes

Golden: …no record of any retentions for 05 -06

Connor: That’s correct. There was no record…

Golden: You were not investigating anything…all resolved…

Connor: When you say resolved... Do you mean that Peggy said she would take care of it, and I wasn’t looking into it any more…? I was not looking into it…

But much more time was spent before the jury enumerating a series of complaints and under cross examination Connor testified to other problems involving the use of para-educators and the lack of required policies at BTWA. Petrilli has argued that Berry and Alva Clark prevented policies from passing. Yesterday Berry testified that it was Petrilli's fault.

Connor: A para-educator is not a certified teacher. They’re not supposed to be without a certified teacher…I really didn’t investigate that issue…I was part of an investigation before that…I just happened to be there…it was the same complaint that the special education department was investigation

McNeill: Was she complying?

Connor: No. She was not complying.

McNeill: …my understanding of the findings was that there were paras hired for one position…but were being used differently…were there issues rlated to the IEP…?

Connor: Yes. …special education department investigates…where children had a specific amount of time on their IEP… where children were to received specially designed instruction. …Their children were all placed in collaboration.

McNeill: The problem was, what?

Connor: The children were placed in collaboration in the regular classroom…The special education department worked with Ms Petrilli and told her what she needed to do…hold ARCs…the IEP had to reflect what was actually happening…

McNeill: Can you just unilaterally change what was in somebody’s IEP…?

Connor: They were supposed to have a meeting…they eventually did…

McNeill: At the end of 2006 …you had continuing issues…

Connor: I did.

McNeill: Was it the same issue that was the subject in the 2005-06…?

Connor: She had talked about a parent… about home schooling … They were trying to fast-track him through the Highly Structured Classroom…the most restrictive environment…but he had not been in resource…they had called the grandmother to come pick him up…We had arc meetings…he had tutoring…compensatory education…

McNeill: So a kid wasn’t getting to go to school in contravention of what his IEP required?

Connor: Yes

McNeill: Did [comp ed] cost the district some amount of money?

Connor: Yes

McNeill: Was there other trouble…?

Connor: There was one child. ..because that mom and …Petrilli didn’t see eye to eye…We removed this child…We put him in a different school…

McNeill: Were there problems with his IEP?

Connor: No

McNeill: There was one student, but his mother filed a complaint with the state…PT…OT…Speech…was this required by his IEP?

Connor: Yes

McNeill: Had he just missed a few minutes…?

Connor: Especially with his speech....a substantial amount of time…

McNeill: Did the school have to make up whatever the arrears were on therapy for this child?

Connor: I believe they did.

Golden was more successful with Wiseman. The former DPP testified that the district policy on out of area attendance required a student to attend school based on their primary residence.

Wiseman: …all are reevaluated annually…should be …The policy says…reevaluated annually

Golden: You corresponded with Peggy…?

Wiseman: Yes

Golden: Investigated...did not live in district?

Wiseman: That was my finding.

Golden: Was Lexington Academy a magnet school…?

Wiseman: I believe that’s correct…Booker T Washington was not a magnet…but the original Montessori… behind central office was a magnet…

Golden: After you looked at all the information…you found that there was no out of area form for the child…and found that the child was out of area

Wiseman: Essentially what we did was evaluate the child’s home…home observation…look for child to come out of home…

Golden: [Are students required to] go to school where they live unless they have an out of area form…?

Wiseman: Yes…Out of area and magnets were two different areas…

Golden: Nobody had ever said anything to you about grandfathering…?

Wiseman: No