Charlotte-Mecklenburg Schools Superintendent Crystal Hill has returned to her job after a two-month suspension and investigation. The school board announced her reinstatement Tuesday night after an eight-hour meeting, about half of which was in closed session.
While Hill returns to work less than two weeks before school starts, board members have declined to publicly answer questions about the concerns they raised when the investigation began. WFAE’s James Farrell is here to break it down.
Marshall Terry: James, first, what have board members said about why they investigated in the first place?
James Farrell: Very little. Back in June, the board said it was putting Hill on paid leave pending an investigation into “matters involving administrative and operational oversight,” which can really mean almost anything. Board members have cited “allegations,” plural, that they felt needed to be looked into. Beyond that, board members have not offered any more clarity, saying it’s a personnel matter, which is confidential. This came after tensions between the board and Hill back in April. Board members then voted down her budget and kicked off a series of special meetings that were quite contentious. Since that vote, the board has held at least seven specially scheduled personnel hearings and provided no public updates until last night.
Terry: OK, so tell us more about last night’s meeting and this announcement - what happened?
Farrell: Last night was the last regular school board meeting before the new school year. The board had promised an update and had a lengthy closed session that started nearly four hours before the meeting, so it seemed possible an announcement was coming. At the very end of the meeting, Board Chair Stephanie Sneed made the announcement.
“We believe that returning her provides the best pathway forward for CMS," Sneed said, "while maintaining continuity and stability for our students, employees and families.”
Farrell: Immediately after, Sneed, flanked by the rest of the board, took questions from reporters. Board members made the decision behind closed doors. Sneed would not disclose whether board members voted or whether any decision was unanimous.
Terry: So after all of that, Hill is back – what did the investigation find?
Farrell: Yes, Board Chair Stephanie Sneed said that Hill would be back at work today – and CMS did confirm that to me today. But I think it’s important to note that board members did not say explicitly that they had cleared Hill of malfeasance.
Sneed said the review “identified issues that will require ongoing attention as it relates to leadership and operational practices,” which again, can mean almost anything. The board says it will address these matters with Hill. But without knowing what this investigation was focused on, we really don’t know what this means. Sneed declined to provide details, again calling this a specific personnel matter.
Terry: OK, so given all this – the tension during the budget cycle, the public suspension, these open-ended findings – what kind of impact might this have on Hill’s relationship with the board?
Farrell: Sneed was asked that question last night, and she said that if the board felt it could not work with Hill, she would not have been able to return to work. But this will almost certainly increase scrutiny on their interactions, not ease it. I’ve heard from some parents who have questions the board has not answered.
I’m sure everyone will pay close attention to their conversations at the Aug. 25 board meeting, Hill’s first back at the dais. I also think this raises questions about relationships within the board, since we don’t know if all board members were on the same page with this decision. I specifically asked if Sneed could share if the decision was unanimous, and she declined.
“Whether the vote was unanimous or not," Sneed said, "we are together as a board, we’re going to operate as a board, all decisions that we have are not unanimous, and the decisions that we make as a board, we stand with each other as a board and we’re going to do the best thing for students.”
Farrell: While we don’t know how this decision played out, it certainly doesn’t sound like it was unanimous.
Terry: What do we know about how much this investigation cost taxpayers?
Farrell: That’s a tough question, because the contract with Brooks Pierce, the outside firm, outlined hourly rates, not a total. The attorneys billed at $275 per hour, but the contract also noted it works with a public relations firm that has two employees working at rates of $450 and $350 per hour – it’s unclear if the attorneys used the PR firm. Until we get a better accounting, we won’t have that total sum. We’ve filed a public records request for both the findings of the investigation and the total cost.
