Gonna be lots of payouts before this is done.

Meanwhile teachers supplies are being rationed.

Well, the Board just set the bar. 4 months (effectively) of severance. Anyone in the past (or future) who was (is) terminated for similar offenses has a massive case of discrimination. They just have to have evidence they were treated differently for the same issue. The confidentiality clause would make that difficult unless someone subpoena's a Board member.

The letter of recommendation is a pretty veiled letter. Anyone reading it would have a fair amount of information from a standard google/NEXIS search and know what it means. And they would know it was a legally required letter per the agreement.

Pretty standard agreement. Not the first one, nor the last one.

Shady is about the only thing I can come up with.

Over the last 5 years, the teacher turnover rate is as follows:

Bryan ISD
11-12 15%
12-13 21.4%
13-14 25.6%
14-15 27.2%
15-16 27.6%

CSISD
11-12 10.6%
12-13 17.7%
13-14 17.5%
14-15 16.6%
15-16 16.3%

These statistics were obtained with a single email request to TEA. Bryan ISD continues to have a comparable Salary and superior Benefit package. Again, easily verifiable. The state average hovers around 16%. Healthy businesses do not turn over 1/4 of their professional staff annually.

Also, three Bryan school board members are up for reelection this November, including the current board president. All are running unopposed. Those who are rightfully concerned about the future of BISD need to start stepping up. If I was a resident of one those districts, I definitely would have.

Was the other BISD staff member fired as well?

Bigfoot In Aggieland said:

---

Was the other BISD staff member fired as well?

---

No, but another administrator was forced to resign last week for the same (unrelated) infraction. They were not offered the same deal.

There is an audio clip on WTAW where the Board President clearly states it is not related to the rumors in town, so not the same circumstances. Definitely not the same type of contracts.

We went through this a few years ago in my hometown in East Texas. Superintendents are not at will employees in Texas and have special protections and procedures that even other school employees dont have. They get paid leave, hearings etc. Bet anything this was the fastest and cheapest way to do this.

We need to get the Texas Legislature to correct this situation and prevent bad superintendents from being passed around. Supt contracts should be similar to those of teachers and principals.

While reading his letter of reference, I noticed one part that read "During Dr. Wallis' tenure, the District earned the highest possible FIRST financial integrity rating for seven consecutive years". He wasn't here for 7 years.

Supers have contracts so they are not "at will" but you can still be terminated on the spot for violating your contract. The same is true for teachers. Their contracts just are not as strongly worded in their favor. Both have grievance procedures that have to be followed. The advantage the Super would have is he or she can get more controls and bennies in their contract because of that level. But thats true of anyone in a business at the highest level. You don't fire people at that level. You negotiate settlements and golden parachutes.

I would agree that this was a quicker, probably cheaper solution than a termination for cause. Certainly less public in that the reasons are being kept locked down. At least for now.

I have tried to find out what I can with little luck. No one can talk about it. The FOIA requests may shed some light once that information comes out but we are just going to have to wait a little while.

Math guy, a Super cannot be terminated on the spot in Texas, even for cause. "Involuntary Termination During the Contract Term. Termination for good cause proposed by the board at a properly posted and convened meeting of the Board. Superintendent is entitled to due process protections and to protection pursuant to provisions of the Texas Education Code."

In other words there is a lengthy process of notifications, hearings and appeals that they are entitled to by law. This also includes paid leave during the course. This is what happened in my home town. It was a long and drawn out. Regular teachers and principals have some similar protections at the local level but they are much more limited and faster time lines.

Oh. I see what you meant. Yes, correct. Technically a Superintendent is (the only) employee of the public Board. As such they have to terminate him/her and they have to meet to do so and that means publishing the agenda 72 hours out of the meeting. So yes, you cannot be fired on the spot. However there are some things you can do that get you fired right then right there. It just takes 72 hours for the paperwork to catch up to you.

If (for example) you walk in one day and start shooting a gun at everyone in the office, or embezzle $5,000,000 and take a plane ride to Argentina, you are getting suspended immediately pending termination in 72 hours. That's the fancy legal talk for "your fired" .

But point taken. The legal side of a Board action does take time to run its course.

Yes but in your scenario with embezzlement the board would have to have a posted public meeting to announce suspension and investgation (this suspension is paid leave by the way). At the end of the investgation they have a meeting to announce intent to terminate. The Super then has up to 60 days to prepare for a hearing with the TEA if they desire.

So in your scenario, if the embezzler runs with no communication you are looking at 7 to 10 days to fire if you do not need a thorough investigation. If embezzeler maintains innocence and wants to exhaust all options you are looking at 3 months plus. Not exactly on the spot.

In the shooter situation, about a week. 72 hours for first meeting to announce intent to terminate and notify the party. Then post for another meeting to terminate. 72 hours minimum between each.

Back on point - who was the other admin let go? Why did they muzzle 4 top admins in the agreement, and why would those admin agree to be muzzled?

Did the other admin who was let go get 4 months of severance pay as well? If not, will any lawsuit from the other voluntarily separated admin seeking similar treatment be public knowledge?

Other administrator was forced to resign prior to Wallis' deal. I would hope a lawsuit would be filed.

You can't sue over severance or lack there of if you resign. You are also making a big assumption that the cases are relate or similar when the Board President clearly stated these rumors are not the basis.

TXCAV said:

---

You are also making a big assumption that the cases are relate or similar when the Board President clearly stated these rumors are not the basis.

---

Riiiight.....because an elected official would never make any half-truth or outright false statements to the public, would they?

We're being told the narrative they want us to believe. I personally don't buy it. By all outward appearances the board was very satisfied with Wallis's job performance. They just extended his contract. Something untoward happened to change that. So they paid him to leave quietly. Joe Public will likely never know the real reason for his departure.

There are wild assumptions and narratives here without any basic understanding of available documents, contract law, TEA regulations, and how these situations are normally handled.

Maybe it would be helpful if our local media sought out a school legal expert to add to their depth of coverage.

It appears to me this is how it works when a district wants a superintendent to leave, which I think is what happened here.

The rub arises from the lack of explanation offered by the BISD board. Whether by choice or outside limiting factors on them, at this point the only narrative offered is that Wallis decided to resign. Would you disagree? Has another plausible explanation been put forth? I missed it if it has.

Im curious what circumstances you think resulted in his dismissal?

EDIT: TXCAV edited his/her post so I'm editing mine to remove quoted comments no longer posted.

http://www.kbtx.com/content/news/Attorney-says-Bryan-ISDs-secret-deal-with-former-superintendent-is-ridiculous-397021451.html