After much looking, I've only found one article which addresses the school board's response. I would like to know if the board's claimed reasons for firing Lacey were anywhere in her file prior to this incident. I've not read any claims from the board that their complaints appeared in Lacey's file prior to the suspension, leading me to believe that the board created this statement after the fact to cover their butts. Here's what the board claims is the reason for the firing............."failure to fulfill her duties, incompetence or inefficiency, inability to maintain discipline, insubordination and failure to meet professional conduct standards".
Where these things in her file prior to suspension, or where they created after the fact? I would like to see her performance reviews.
Quote
Originally posted by: friedmush
On the surface it seems outrageous. But somehow I can't help believing there is more to this story. So I Googled and found this information not included in the Washington Times article. "The formal notice of termination Lacey received from the board listed eight reasons for not renewing her contract. Those included failure to fulfill her duties, incompetence or inefficiency, inability to maintain discipline, insubordination and failure to meet professional conduct standards."
To Muskeg's point, I don't point to things that agenda-driven media or personalities like Rush Limbaugh or Rachel Maddow or their print brethren as reliable, objective information.
Because it's a personnel issue and the employer can't talk, we'll probably never know the real story, just the views of the disgruntled ex-employee.
