Flagler school board has until Dec. 31 to reach employment agreement with attorney
If Superintendent LaShakia Moore and board attorney Kristy Gavin cannot reach a mutual agreement regarding Gavin's employment by Dec. 31, her contract as board attorney will be terminated, and the Flagler School Board will have to pay remaining expenses.
According to Jennifer Gimbel, the district's executive secretary, the board has not defined how much it could spend to pay Gavin and hire a new attorney, but at the Nov. 28 board meeting, board member Cheryl Massaro estimated expenses to be at least $150,000.
At that same meeting, a community member gave a public comment expressing her concerns surrounding the board’s eagerness to pursue termination.
“The fact that you guys are wasting the money and trying to fire her is completely unreasonable," Jessica Matthews said. "You can’t give cause. You refuse to give cause, and it’s inappropriate. We have amazing teachers, amazing bus drivers. And the teachers are leaving. The bus drivers are leaving. My daughter has had two bus drivers so far this year. She’s had two teachers quit this year. What are you doing about the stuff that we elected you to do? Because right now, all you’re concentrating on is her (Gavin), and I’m sick of it.”
The district's three newest board members — newly elected Chair Will Furry, Vice Chair Christy Chong and Sally Hunt — are spearheading the movement to terminate Gavin's contract. The three noted their distrust and dissatisfaction with the 17-year board attorney in evaluations this fall, but they have struggled to cite just cause evidence for her termination.
As stated in her contract, Gavin can be terminated from employment by mutual agreement between herself and the board. She can only be discharged for just cause, which is defined in her contract as either dereliction of duties, failure to report to work, misconduct in the office or violation of criminal law.
If terminated, Gavin could challenge the decision by filing a petition with the board. If the administrative law judge determines just cause did not exist and/or the parties settle a matter before a hearing, Gavin will receive 12 weeks of her $132,325 base salary without benefits as well as accrued sick and annual leave.
About the termination process
On Oct. 17, the school board asked Furry to meet with Gavin and discuss a potential mutual agreement terminating her contract.
Prior to this decision and on behalf of the board, Furry sought outside counsel, at a cost of $5,000, from Shutts and Bowen, gaining insight on the potential attorney termination.
The board scheduled a special meeting for Oct. 26 to discuss and vote on a proposed negotiation agreement; however, Furry did not reach a mutual agreement with Gavin prior to that meeting.
“He (Furry) told me that he wanted to terminate my agreement and failed to provide me any offer of compensation," Gavin said at the Oct. 26 meeting.
Furry eventually offered her 12 weeks' compensation, Gavin said, which she called "a slap in my face for the 17 years of service" and accused Furry of not meeting in "good faith."
"Things did get very heated," Gavin continued, "and Mr. Furry told me that I needed to understand that he did not work for me, that I worked for him, and you all (the board) were going to be terminating my contract one way or another.”
Board member Colleen Conklin made a motion that night to allow Superintendent Moore to negotiate with Gavin to act as a district counsel. If an agreement could not be reached, termination would then be 60 days. Chong seconded the motion, which passed with a 4-1 vote, Furry in the minority.
Conklin disagreed with terminating Gavin, who is slated to retire in 18 months. She said her fellow board members have not been able to provide just cause and that the termination would cause Gavin's retirement to decrease by $836 a month.
"I don't think that's fair," Conklin said that evening. "How is that possibly fair?"
At the Nov. 28 board meeting, Chong made a motion to approve the letters of interest for a school board attorney presented by Kris Collora, Flagler’s coordinator of purchasing. The motion was seconded by Massaro and carried with a 4-1 vote, Massaro in the minority.
While approving the letter does not bind the board to accepting someone for the position, Collora explained, if the board were to hire someone, the contract would be set for approval in February 2024.
Per the Dec. 5 school board workshop meeting agenda, Furry was supposed to provide an update on the interim board attorney services Tuesday; however, he had nothing to share.
“We have moved our business meeting to accommodate the Thanksgiving holiday, and so our window of time between now and this workshop was just not enough time to bring back anything for you today,” he said at the meeting.
Flagler sheriff: $719,583 stolen from Flagler Schools through electronic fund transfer
A divided board
According to her contract, each board member must evaluate Gavin’s performance annually by rating the attorney’s responsibilities, relationships with the board, communication skills, organization and personal qualities as either “outstanding," “effective” or “needs attention.”
All board members completed their evaluations between Sept. 11 and 13, except Furry, who dated his evaluation as Oct. 2.
The comments and ratings included in these evaluations showed a clear division among the board regarding Gavin. Long-time board members Massaro and Conklin shared their respect and appreciation for the board attorney, while Hunt, Chong and Furry noted trust issues and communication concerns, alleging that the attorney has a lack of legal competence.
“Ms. Gavin has demonstrated professionalism to school board members who have questioned her legal capabilities and school law expertise,” Massaro wrote in her evaluation.
Conklin, who rated the board attorney as “outstanding” or “effective” in all categories, also regarded Gavin highly.
“Kristy has always maintained high ethical standards for herself. She is honest and direct, and I have found her too (sic) always be professional," Conklin wrote in her evaluation. "Her personal standards are challenged by some, and this may create some internal conflict. She is knowledgeable of the law and works to effectively communicate this knowledge with others.”
Hunt did not give the attorney any “outstanding” ratings, and wrote that Gavin is "biased" and unprepared for meetings.
“I have not, as one equal board member, had access to a trusted attorney to provide the legal guidance I need to perform my duties as an elected board member,” Hunt wrote in her evaluation. “I have also felt compelled to preface conversations with my request for her to keep our discussion confidential as I work with her to navigate my thoughts and discussions on important school board matters and votes.”
Furry also did not give Gavin any “outstanding” scores. The evaluation stated that in giving a “needs attention” rating, the board member must also describe, in reasonable detail, specific instances of unsatisfactory performance. Of the 35 items to evaluate, Furry noted eight items that need attention, but he did not cite any specific instances of unsatisfactory performance.
Chong noted 13 items that need attention. She cited lacking communication in her evaluation and repeatedly stated she did not trust Gavin.
“I have not received any updates on the situation at Bunnell from our attorney, as well as many other legal matters we are not made aware of,” Hunt wrote.
The News-Journal contacted Gavin for comment on recent and potential upcoming board decisions to which she responded, "While I appreciate your reaching out to me, as a current district employee working for the school board it would not be appropriate for me to issue a comment."
This article originally appeared on The Daytona Beach News-Journal: Flagler County School Board divided on terminating attorney
