The long-awaited report on the investigation into CMS Superintendent Crystal Hill is not on the agenda for Tuesday night's school board meeting, despite an earlier move by the school board to release the document. Board member Charlitta Hatch says she plans to make a motion at the start of the meeting to add it to the agenda, pushing for the report's release.
The school board previously voted to have staff create a report on the two-month investigation by the end of September, after Hill was reinstated by the board with no explanation in August. She had been on paid leave for two months during the investigation by outside lawyers.
The board hasn't given any details about that investigation, which cost close to $380,000. The latest disagreement over how and when to disclose the report shows there are still deep divisions over how much the public might find out about the investigation's motivation and findings.
In emails obtained by WFAE, board members Hatch and Shamaiye Haynes expressed frustration. They told acting General Counsel Anna Hehenberger they expected the report would be made public at Tuesday's meeting, the board's last meeting before the end of the month.
Haynes writes that not doing so puts the board “in a very weird position” and makes it look “as if we are putting off being transparent or trying to cover up the details.”
“We voted to have the report made public and presumably at a board meeting,” Haynes writes. “It has been reasonable to assume that since this is the last public meeting of the month, that report would be available.”
However, Hehenberger responded by quoting the board’s motion, which specifically calls for the report to be completed by the end of September. The board did not specify the report be presented at any specific time.
Hehenberger said that she has prepared a written report but does not recommend that she present it herself, given her role as the board’s counsel. A board member, theoretically, could present it, she said. She recommends the full board review the report, offer feedback and then present or publish it at a later date.
She noted it’s an “unprecedented time,” marked by a potential state criminal investigation into the district's finances, a potential probe by the state auditor and an employee grievance against the board.
“I completely understand and support the need for transparency but appreciate how that has to be balanced with these outside factors and risks, and that is what I base the recommendation contained herein on,” Hehenberger wrote.
In one of the emails, Hatch expressed frustration with that approach. She says she understood concerns that the board having its own counsel present a report that appears to “clear” Hill could be problematic given attorney-client privilege, but “that is not what I understood our attorneys to advise.”
“My understanding was that, based on the specific terms of Dr. Hill’s contract, the findings may not support termination for cause, and not that there were no concerns or actions for the Board to address,” Hatch wrote.
She wrote that she planned to make a motion to add the report to Tuesday's agenda, noting she’s willing to respect the board’s decision, “but after approximately seven months of closed-session discussions, if we are still not prepared to address the public, then I believe we need to explain why.”
“I continue to struggle with our hesitation to communicate our own account of what has occurred,” Hatch wrote. “Dr. Hill has exercised her ability to publicly share her perspective, and I respect that. As elected officials and members of the body that serves as her employer, we should also be willing to communicate the facts we can legally share, the actions we have taken, and the reasoning behind them.”
When reached for comment Tuesday, Hatch confirmed to WFAE that she still intends to make the motion, saying, "After months of asking the public to trust the process, I believe we owe them the transparency to bring it to a close." She said she accepted a proposed modification to her original motion to release the report earlier to give staff more time, but believes her “original intent was clear.”
“I should have ensured the final language protected that intent,” she said.
Haynes told WFAE she was “disappointed” the report wouldn’t be presented.
The spat comes as the board is prepared to weigh vacating board member Stephanie Sneed as chair at Tuesday’s meeting, following Hill’s allegations that Sneed was secretly routing money to a controversial consultant without district or board knowledge. The Mecklenburg County District Attorney has said it’s requested a criminal investigation of “financial irregularities” at CMS and the state auditor has said it’s looking into the district.
The board placed Hill on leave for two months amid an investigation, the cause of which remains a mystery. In her own public statements, Hill has said it focused on a misuse of federal funds, a hostile work environment and conflicts of interest regarding contracts. She said the investigation turned up no findings of wrongdoing, but has said that even she has not seen the underlying allegations. The board has said it identified “issues’ it would discuss with Hill directly, but has not specified those issues.
