The former treasurer of the Jordan-Elbridge school district sued the district Tuesday, claiming he was fired in a secret, illegal session of the school board in retaliation for his criticism of a district administrator. Jordan-Elbridge school board meets tonight Group issues 58 questions and concerns they want the board to address Anthony Scro contended the school district fired him partly...
The former treasurer of the Jordan-Elbridge school district sued the district Tuesday, claiming he was fired in a secret, illegal session of the school board in retaliation for his criticism of a district administrator.
Jordan-Elbridge school board meets tonight
Group issues 58 questions and concerns they want the board to address
Anthony Scro contended the school district fired him partly for his reporting an auditor that Director of Operations Paula VanMinos has failed to reimburse or justify expenses for a trip to New York City last for a conference.
State Supreme Court Justice Donald Greenwood denied Scro's request to be put back on the job immediately. Instead, the judge scheduled a hearing for Nov. 4.
The distric's lawyer, Frank Miller, argued Scro’s claim of an open meetings law violation was moot. Scro’s termination was legal because he failed to file an oath of office within 30 days of his appointment to the job on July 1, Miller said. Scro filed the oath Aug. 9, Miller said.
Scro’s lawyer, Dominic D’Imperio, said Scro filed the oath the same day he received it. D’Imperio questioned whether other employees appointed July 1 got the oath of office before Aug. 9.
Scro’s lawsuit is the third against the district filed by current or former employees. William Hamilton, assistant superintendent for business and finance, and J-E high school Principal David Zehner each sued over their suspensions over the past three months. Greenwood found in those cases that the school board had violated the state open meetings law and the state Freedom of Information Law.
Scro’s lawsuit said he got a phone call from Superintendent Marilyn Dominick on Sept. 16, telling him the board had voted in executive session to fire him the night before. She later sent him a letter saying the board had decided to fire him, effective immediately. Her letter was attached to Scro’s court papers. In it, Dominick said the board fired Scro partly because he’d “made inappropriate attacks on other staff members.”
In his lawsuit, Scro said that soon after he started in July, he reported to the school district’s external auditor that VanMinos had failed to reimburse the district for expenses she’d charged to the district credit card last year, or to provide documentation showing the expenses were legitimate. The expenses involved a trip she’d taken to New York City for a conference on workers’ compensation, D’Imperio said. She had assured the board that the entity holding the conference would reimburse the district for her expenses, but never has, D’Imperio said.
VanMinos said all of Scro's allegations about her are false. It's up to the state workers' compensation board to reimburse the district, she said. She travels three times a year to meetings on workers compensation, she said. One of her claims to workers' compensation for reimbursement has not been paid, she said. Someone else in the school district is responsible for following up on that, she said.
Scro said in a written statement that the district has never "given a coherent answer'' for firing him.
Greenwood also dismissed Hamilton’s lawsuit against the district over the way his administrative charges had been filed. The district improperly gave Hamilton three reprimands without giving him a hearing – a requirement under state law for a tenured employee.
Hamilton contends the reprimands were given to him in retaliation for criticizing the legal bills of the district’s lawyer, Danny Mevec, three weeks earlier.
The board contended the reprimands were actually counseling memos, and that Mevec’s use of the word “reprimand” was a mistake, according to court papers. The three written reprimands have been removed from Hamilton’s file, court papers said. As result, Hamilton’s request to the court is moot, Greenwood wrote.
The board filed charges against Hamilton Aug. 25 – after he sued and nearly two months after he was suspended. The board said the delay was because of the complexity of the investigation, court papers said.
“This is not a valid defense to the deprivation of (Hamilton’s) rights under the statute,” Greenwood wrote. The district’s 128 charges against Hamilton will be decided by the state Education Department.
Hamilton said he got what he went to court for on the initially improper reprimands.
“The board ignores the law until someone calls them on it ...,” Hamilton said in a written statement.
Greenwood denied Hamilton’s request to have the district pay his legal fees.
John O’Brien can be reached at jobrien@syracuse.com or 470-2187.