Would You Revoke Your Consent if Your School District Wanted To Hang Your Child Upside Down?

As a parent, would you revoke your consent to an independent evaluation if a district doctor wanted to hang your child upside down by their ankles for 3 weeks?

That's what a former Fox C-6 School District attorney stated during a Section 504 meeting in May 2009 as an example as to why you may wish to revoke your consent to an independent evaluation for Section 504 eligibility.

How would you react as a parent if you had been told that during a meeting?

As the district attorney also explained during the meeting, if you choose to revoke your consent the meeting's over!

Wow! That sounds like an ultimatum to me. But, that's just the way things have been handled in the Fox C-6 school district for years. It's been a very easy way to make parents choose as to whether or not they really want to pursue having a Section 504 plan written for their child.

Luckily the majority of parents never have to go through all of the nonsense that a school district will put you through to write up a Section 504 plan. But, it's one of those memories that will last a lifetime if you had to go through it.

In the end, we were forced to go to Due Process in May 2010 as I predicted at the May 2009 meeting. It was quite easy to see that coming after having nearly a year to learn about the law before the May 2009 meeting and after talking to the U.S. Department of Education's Office for Civil Rights (ED OCR) attorneys many times between July 2008 and May 2009.

I brought this to the attention of several of Fox C-6 school board members back in 2009 but none of them were interested in what was really going on in the district. Perhaps hearing what goes on in Section 504 meetings will be very educational for the board, the community as well as other parents across the country. That's also why it's very important that parents document everything including recording their Section 504 meetings because sometimes you just can't believe what will be said during those meetings to get around the law.

Fox's school board policies did not prevent the recording of Section 504 meetings. However, the district's policies stated that you could not record IDEA meetings without prior approval. I just wanted to make sure everyone knows what the policies state.

Filling out Section 504 paperwork is quite easy. However, many districts have been taught that having Section 504's in their district is a bad thing. School districts will go to great lengths to make sure that they don't have to do that "additional paperwork". Because, "It's a slippery slope. Once you give it to one child, you'll have to give it to all children." that are eligible. It's that sort of mentality that causes people to do and say really stupid things. It's also what makes administrators really upset when you persist in making sure that your school district properly follows the law.

So as a parent, would it concern you if a school district doctor wished to hang your child upside down by their ankles for 3 weeks as part of an independent evaluation by your school district?

Listen To Why You May Wish to Revoke Your Consent!

Would you consider that to be an inappropriate statement to make to a parent during a Section 504 meeting?

I was infuriated by the fact that the district attorney made that remark during our meeting. When I asked former Fox C-6 Section 504 Coordinator Dan Baker about the attorney's statement while I questioned him under oath during our 2010 Due Process Hearing, Mr. Baker stated that the attorney "did not mean those words to come across as intimidation".

It was good that Mr. Baker remembered the district attorney's remarks from our May 2009 meeting because the attorneys comment have bothered me for years. It bothered me even more to learn 5 years later that derogatory and libelous comments directed at me were posted from Dan Baker's home.

Mr. Baker has very little regard for parents concerns when he dismisses a comment such as that and then posted defamatory comments online directed at the parents who he directly worked with at school.

Would Mr. Baker be bothered at all if the school district his children attend wanted to hang his kids upside down to see if they qualified for a Section 504 plan?

Since Mr. Baker was the Section 504 Coordinator for the Fox C-6 School District at the time that defamatory posts were made from his home about me, our school board should be asking to have his teaching certificate revoked by the state of Missouri for conduct unbecoming of an educator. Most parents and taxpayers have been appalled by the fact that the Bakers are still working for the district. At least they removed him from his position as the Section 504 Coordinator for the district.

Why the Bakers weren't fired from the district was even discussed on Donnybrook on KETC Channel 9. I wrote an article about that on July 25, 2014. Here is a link to the article below:

The Bakers Should Have Been Fired

Additionally, everyone including our Fox C-6 school board members should read the article I wrote on March 9, 2013 about having teaching certificates revoked for conduct unbecoming of an educator for bullying and retaliation. Reading that article would be a good refresher on this topic as well. Below is a link to that article:

Teaching Certificates Should Be Revoked for Bullying

Back to the attorneys comments made during the May 2009 Section 504 meeting, the attorney emphasized over and over the fact that as parents, we could always revoke our consent if the district decided to perform a test that we didn't want them to do. He also wanted us to know that if we revoked our consent, the 504 meeting would be over and that the 504 process would end here and now. That was his way of threatening us into doing what the school wanted or you lost your rights to a Section 504 plan.

So, if you had to choose between hanging your child upside down by their ankles for 3 weeks or getting a 504 plan, what would you choose?

Yes, it's one of those decisions that you as a parent have to decide when dealing with the Fox C-6 School District as to whether or not you really want to pursue getting that Section 504 plan filled out for your child in the district.

Just in case you ever wish to request a Section 504 plan for your child, you can listen to how it was put to us at the May 2009 Section 504 meeting so you can be better prepared. There's also a little learning about the ADA Amendment Act and Section 504 law at the beginning of this audio clip that's important to hear. I contacted the ED OCR attorney in Kansas City after the meeting about the comments the district attorney made in the meeting that day because his comments about the law were incorrect. When the ED OCR attorney contacted the attorney about his comments, he told the ED OCR attorney that he didn't make those comments during the meeting. That's why you should always record your meetings. I emailed the OCR attorney my audio recording of the district attorney's comments.

Listen To The Attorney Say If You Revoke Your Consent the Meeting is Over!

Something else that you may take away from the audio above is the attorney's comment about "that's not the way Fox works" in reference to my comments about how other school districts in the area handle things differently than Fox. As the community has now learned, Fox definitely does things differently as we continue to uncover numerous misdeeds in the district.

Fox probably hasn't hung any kids upside down by their ankles for 3 weeks in order to perform independent evaluations to see if children are eligible for Section 504. But, it might be a good idea to go ahead and ask the state auditors to look into that just to be sure.

Apparently, attorneys will sometimes use some bullying tactics to deter parents from signing consent forms for an independent evaluation. It's just a game that they play to intimidate and/or drag things out in hopes that you will give up and go away.

Hanging kids upside down by their ankles for 3 weeks for independent evaluations would be quite a sight to see at your school. It would be something that you will always remember.

What would it be like to show up to school one day to see students hanging upside down by their ankles with a sign that read, "Fox C-6 Independent Evaluations in progress for the next 3 weeks!"?

For me, the former Fox C-6 School District attorney's comments at our August 2008 meeting were the catalyst that got me looking into the things going on in our district and making sure that what was going on got straightened out. Most parents probably don't want to have their children hung upside down by their ankles for 3 weeks for an independent evaluation. The thought of doing so can get your adrenaline flowing.

Comments made by the district attorney and Fox administrators were also enough motivation for me to run 90 miles on the Katy Trail to the state capitol in Jefferson City, MO in May 2009. I ran there to meet with state legislators and to raise awareness and ensure that the Allergy Prevention and Response Bill HB 922 would pass and get signed into law. Plus I needed to burn off a little energy because of the comments being made in our meetings, which I believe would make any parent mad.

It's ironic that "acting" superintendent Tim Crutchley announced at the October 21, 2014 Fox C-6 school board meeting that Fox had just hosted a Cyber Bullying summit for area schools the day before the board meeting. It's even more ironic when you've been one of the people cyber bullied by district personnel. I've been getting attacked for the last 4+ years because we asked for a Section 504 plan from our school district.

I can certainly tell you that comments like some of those made during Section 504 meetings by attorneys, administrators, nurses and staff will stick with you for a lifetime! That's why it's so important to audio record your meetings so you can preserve the nonsense that occurs in those meetings. Without documenting what really goes on in those meetings, it's just your word against theirs especially when Fox C-6 school board members don't want to believe that type of behavior is happening in their district.

It only took 6 years for the Fox C-6 district to fire the former law firm and properly provide Section 504 plans for students in the district with medical disabilities.

You have to wonder how many parents were put through this type of behavior over the years from a "National District of Character".

There's plenty of proof that it was happening and hearing is believing!

StopBullying.gov Website Needs to Include School Administrators!

Last night I found the following website called StopBullying.gov. It's a website created by the federal government to help parents and schools deal with bullying of students and young adults. Checking out the website reminded me of the first Public Comment made the other night at the Fox C-6 School Board meeting by Jim Osia. Jim made an excellent point when he asked the Fox C-6 School Board when they planned to put a Zero Tolerance clause for bullying into school employee contracts.

Last year, I made a similar comment when the district adopted their new Anti-Bullying policy. I said that the new Anti-Bullying policy needs to apply to school district administrators and board members as well. I consider it bullying when your school board members ignore your concerns regarding bullying that's being made by school administrators.

When I stated that the Anti-Bullying policy needed to apply to school administrators or leaders, I knew that some of the online harassment and bullying that's been made against me dating back to 2010 could only have been made by school district administrators due to the information contained in their remarks.  It took filing a lawsuit to confirm that the IP addresses from those comments were indeed linked to district administrators.

How did I know? Well, very few individuals had any knowledge of what was stated in some of the online comments. When one of the comments made by "Troop" referenced sparks would be flying soon for some which was in reference to the sending out of Cease and Desist Letters in early 2013, even the school board wasn't aware that those letters had been sent. Since they were sent by Superintendent Critchlow, that information could only have been given to "Troop" by her or possibly another administrator who Dianne confided with.

Former Fox C-6 school board member Ruth Ann Newman and former Fox C-6 school district superintendent Jim Chellew knew about the Cease and Desist letter that Dianne Critchlow sent to me in August 2012 because she copied both of them on my letter. So they were aware of what was going on.

Dan Baker "Apologizes" at School Board Meeting
At the August 4, 2014 school board meeting, Mr. Dan Baker was asked to make a statement at the start of the school board meeting by Fox C-6 School Board President John Laughlin. Mr. Baker read a prepared statement regarding his household being associated with posts linked to the recent internet scandal. I have to say that I was not impressed by his apology. But I admit I'm biased since I am the target of that post.

Dan Baker was mostly likely the person posting the comments. I don't know his wife at all and have never met her. But, Mr. Baker has been "working" with me and my wife on Section 504 issues in the district for more than 6 years now. So, he had a lot of knowledge of the issues and a lot of reasons to want to make the posts.

Mr. Baker is the reason that the National Director of the USDA's Office for Civil Rights began working on removing federal funding from the Fox C-6 School District last year for the National School Lunch Program.

Mr. Baker tried to pull a fast one on the USDA OCR National Director by changing documentation after it had been submitted it to USDA OCR to close a complaint. Of course Mr. Baker denied any wrongdoing. In an email, Mr. Baker clarified that he "accidentally" sent the wrong version of the document.

Luckily the National Director of USDA OCR FNS didn't believe Mr. Baker's story. But, it was a good try!

(Don't worry too much about Fox C-6 losing its federal funding for the National School Lunch Program. Removing federal funding is a very long and drawn out process. It takes an act of Congress for it to happen. Plus, it has never happened in the past since school districts typically comply with federal law when asked to do so. But that's not how Fox operates. They've been fighting USDA OCR for years.)

But back to Baker's online comment.  Dan may believe that his comments weren't that bad compared to those made by "Troop" and many others posted on the Topix website over the past 4 years. But, posting the comments that were made from the Baker's household while holding the position of Section 504 Coordinator for the Fox C-6 School District is extremely problematic for both Mr. Baker and the school district. Let me be clear on one very important point: Even if the comment traced to the Baker household were the ONLY comment made by a Fox school district administrator, it would be scandalous.

If our school board members were more knowledgeable about Section 504 Law, perhaps they would have terminated Mr. Baker and/or Angela Burns Baker for cause immediately after an admission was made to posting the comments that were made. But, that didn't happen. As I stated the other night at the school board meeting during my Public Comments, allowing the Bakers to keep their jobs, definitely sent the wrong message to our community. As I stated to the Board at Monday night's meeting, "Being the person who was attacked, definitely doesn't sit too well with me." since I was the person being called out in one of the comments made from the Baker's household.

Not only was I the one being targeted, but the comments were posted within hours of the January 2013 Fox C-6 school board meeting. I had just mentioned during Public Comment at the 2013 board meeting that I hoped that speaking that night would not lead to more online defamatory comments being made about myself and others for speaking that night by anonymous posters. But, someone in the Baker household took it upon themselves right after that meeting to post a comment that contained lies as well as libelous comments about me. Yes, that should be outside of Mr. Baker's "personal and professional standards" as he stated in his apology the other night. However, someone in their household did make the comments and should be held accountable and I don't mean just a "slap on the wrist".

Does posting comments such as those linked to the Baker's household violate Fox C-6's Policies and Regulations and Professional Code of Conduct?

I certainly think so. Of course I am biased. But, based on comments from others, I don't think I am alone in my opinion. Even the panelists on Donnybrook thought the Bakers should have been fired. 

The actions of Dan and/or Angela Burns Baker easily violate any employment contract that they may have had with the Fox C-6 School District. But, for those comments to come from the Fox C-6 School District's Section 504 Coordinator's home violates federal Section 504 Law. I believe that they may have also violated Missouri DESE's code of conduct for educators holding a teaching certificate in the state of Missouri.

The StopBullying.gov website has a page covering Federal Laws that apply to Bullying. The Federal Laws page instructs you to contact your school district's Section 504 Coordinator to file a complaint when bullying occurs.

So, what are you supposed to do when your school district's Section 504 Coordinator is the one doing the bullying?

Should your school board give them a slap on the wrist by docking them 2 weeks of pay and spreading the amount being docked over the next 24 pay periods?

I recommend reading about the Federal Laws that apply to Bullying at the StopBullying.gov website using the link below.

StopBullying.gov - Federal Laws that apply to Bullying

Certainly I'm biased in my opinions that Dan Baker should have been terminated for cause because I was the one that he was personally attacking online. But, I also know a lot about Section 504 Law. I have been dealing with it on a regular basis with Mr. Baker for the past 6 years. I also know that what he did by posting online comments directed at me violates Section 504 Law. It is considered retaliation due to the fact that we filed complaints with ED OCR and USDA OCR and those complaints were open at the time that his comments were made.

Dan Baker's newest contract states that, "Administrator agrees to comply with all federal, state and local laws." So, if he violated Section 504 Law, would that not be cause for termination? 

Previous contracts may not have stated this directly, but they were supposed to according to district policies and since district policies also states this, it should have been covered anyway.

Fox is Looking to Reduce the Budget

Fox's 2014-2015 budget was discussed again at the August 4, 2014 Fox C-6 School Board meeting. Leah Thorsen of the Post Dispatch wrote an article about what was discussed at the August 4th board meeting and even quoted me in the article. The article said that Fox is still looking to cut another $1.1 Million dollars from the 2014-2015 budget. Terminating the Bakers would save the district more than $300,000 in salary and benefits. The district contributes an amount equal to 14.5% of their salary to the Public School Retirement System which is roughly $38,000 per year on top of their combined salary of roughly $260,000. So cutting $300,000 from the budget by terminating the Bakers would be nearly one third of what the district still needs to cut.

I've had several people ask me what the Assistant Superintendent of Instruction does for the district. I don't know the answer to that. But, perhaps our school board knows. They recently moved Mr. Baker from the position of Assistant Superintendent of Elementary Education over to the Assistant Superintendent of Instruction. 

Since very few people seem to know what the position entails, it might be a position that can easily be eliminated!

The Bakers NOT Losing Their Jobs at Fox C-6 Was Discussed on Donnybrook Last Night!

What is Donnybrook?

Donnybrook is a weekly discussion / debate program that airs on Thursday night on KETC Channel 9 in St. Louis, MO. It's hosted by 5 journalists that discuss topics of local interest. Past episodes can be viewed online or seen on TV on Sunday evening if you missed Thursday's airing.

This week's discussion on Donnybrook started with the recent announcement of Dan and Angela Baker being allowed to keep their jobs at Fox C-6 after they had been placed on paid administrative leave June 4, 2014.

If you recall, online defamatory comments were traced to the Baker's residence as well as the residence of Superintendent Dianne Critchlow and her husband Jamie Critchlow the former Director of the At Risk program.

It needs to be noted that many comments were linked to the Baker's residence. There may have only been one comment documented in the original lawsuit petition but many more were posted in defense of the school district and our school board that were linked to the Baker's residence.

This is the second time that Fox C-6 has been a topic of discussion on the Donnybrook program. Superintendent Critchlow and the Internet scandal was first discussed on the June 5, 2014 Donnybrook program starting 19:15 in that episode. The prior episode of Donnybrook can be viewed online using the link found at the end of this article.

If you missed last night's episode you can view it online using the link below. It was a great discussion by the Donnybrook panelists regarding Dan and Angela Baker getting to keep their jobs as administrators at Fox C-6.

I believe the Donnybrook panelist's unbiased views believing that the Bakers should have been fired speaks loud and clear to our school board and the community.

Of course, I'm biased because Dan Baker's defamatory comments were directed at me. I pointed that out during my Public Comments at this weeks Fox C-6 school board workshop.

As a Fox C-6 administrator and school district Section 504 Coordinator, Mr. Baker should have been fired immediately once our school board knew that he did in fact post online comments even if they weren't as vile as Troop's comments.

Mr. Baker spent July 2013 through October 2013 in discussions with Missouri DESE and the USDA's Office for Civil Rights attempting to correct issues in our school district and bring the district into compliance with federal law. Fox's school board members were copied on many of the correspondences with the USDA during that time period.

Fox C-6 had been found Non-Compliant by USDA OCR in August 2011. Superintendent Critchlow forwarded that letter of Non-Compliance to the Fox C-6 School Board back then informing the board that she had "received a really long letter from the USDA" but the district attorney found some mistakes in the letter. Dan Baker told me at the December 2011 school board meeting that the district filed an appeal. Mr. Baker said it wasn't fair that the district wasn't offered a chance to file an appeal. That's because it was a Final Agency Decision. In August 2013, the USDA OCR finally took action to enforce the August 2011 non-compliance notification and bring the district into compliance.

It's Not Just Bullying! It's Retaliation!
As an administrator you can't post defamatory comments abut parents that you've been dealing with while being under investigation by federal agencies. It's not just BULLYING! IT IS RETALIATION!

Mr. Baker may not have enjoyed dealing with federal investigations and Section 504 complaints, but that was his job. Mr. Baker was being paid more than $150,000 to ensure that our district followed Civil Rights laws and he failed to do so. That's why Fox C-6 was found Non-Compliant in August 2011. Not only did Dan Baker violate federal law, he violated our district's anti-bullying policy.

The comment from the Bakers house directed towards me were libelous and were meant to discredit me and my efforts towards getting our district to comply with federal law and and for my advocacy efforts on Section 504 issues at Fox C-6.

Since Dan Baker has been handling Section 504 issues for the district for the last 6+ years and working with us directly makes the comments from his residence even more damaging for him because of his position. The board needs to read the 2013 Dear Colleague Letter from ED OCR to understand why Dan Baker's comments were retaliatory.

Even worse was the fact that he was in charge of ensuring that the district properly followed the ADA and Section 504 law. In his anonymous online comment posted under the pseudonym of "Seriously", he called out my "weird eye" which is due to paralysis from a 1978 car accident. I don't think a disability coordinator for a school district should be publicly be making fun of a parent's disability. I doubt Mr. Baker would have posted the comment using his own name. So, I'm betting he never thought that someone could find out that he posted comments online. His comments should have been cause for immediate dismissal once our school board reviewed the current lawsuit petition and knew which post he made.

Retaliation Violates Federal Law

Retaliation in Section 504 Law is a very serious offense as outlined in this 2013 Dear Colleague Letter from ED OCR.  Mr. Baker violated Section 504 Law and should be dismissed. The board cannot be allowed to be "satisfied with the discipline" that the Bakers received knowing that his comments violated Section 504 Law and school board policy. He should have been fired!

KETC's July 24, 2014 Donnybrook Episode 
Below is the link to the July 24, 2014 episode of Donnybrook that aired on KETC Channel 9. The discussion by the Donnybrook panelists about Fox is the very first topic of discussion. Guest host Eric Reid starts off the conversation by saying he asked a Fox High School student purchasing books at a bookstore what she thought about what had been happening lately in the Fox C-6 school district.

Watch the Donnybrook discussion about

the Bakers getting to keep their jobs!

Host Eric Reid started the discussion asking, "Bill, do you think that these two who weren't necessarily vindicated but didn't do as much emailing as the others, do you think they should get to keep their jobs?"

Panelist Bill McClellen of the St. Louis Post Dispatch said, "No I don't. I thought they should be fired. Matter of fact I thought the board members should resign as well. And the other thing that bugged me about this is the discipline they got was being disciplined with pay. I mean, I'd like to be suspended with pay. You know if my boss were to say to me that's enough McClellan we're going to suspend you from pay for a week, I'd say, teach me a real lesson. You know, the idea that somebody does something wrong and you suspend them with pay, is crazy. I don't know what the board is thinking."

Host Eric Reid said, "Well, obviously this has festered for a while. But I guess they figured they came back and said like these two basically weren't as bad as the other players in all this. Now I don't know if that's not enough reason but and as I said, I guess I could see them keeping their job."

Guest panelist Brenda Talent of the Show-Me-Institute said, "And maybe the contract didn't allow them to quite do that. But I would say this, what a statement, what role models are we setting up for our children when this is the kind of conflict resolution they engage in by posting comments, which are rather sophomoric on internet sites. I mean that's what really offends me. These are supposed to be administrators. They're supposed to be mentors to the teachers and they're role models for the entire district. Pretty sad comment on the district."

Host Alvin Reid said, "Well I agree and I would have, I'm one that I would have dismissed them just for being in this conversation with these people in the first place. Never mind that they said some really vile things about people. Just the fact that, you know I agree with you, in that, wait a minute, why are you even involved in this banter?"

Panelist Bill McClellan said, "And not using their names. I mean they had to be found out. It's one thing if a person that works for the district wants to stand up for the district and take on the critics. But to do all of this stuff anonymously, that, that's just wrong on many levels."

Guest panelist D.J. Wilson of KDHX was surprised that an assistant principal at a middle school would be paid over $100,000. (Everyone should now be aware that Fox's administrative salaries have been way out of line for some time.)

Brenda Talent said, "And you're not counting the benefits."

Host Alvin Reid stated that Fox wasn't one of the states lowest performing districts but that it also wasn't one of the highest. D.J. Wilson stated that Fox's Average Composite ACT Score was 23. (NOTE: DESE records for 2013 show Fox's ACT Composite at 22.3).

D.J. Wilson said, "I'd love to be a student in a classroom and someone corrects me about what I said on email. What will they say back to the teacher."

Brenda Talent then said, "Well their comments may not have risen to the level of being libelous, whereas the others might have. But again, it's just sort of, this is how you resolve conflict? We're supposed to be adults here."

Bill McClellan reminded everyone that, "This was the school board that, that one of the board member's daughters-in-law was it, who worked at McDonald's was made dietician over the schools." 

One of the guest hosts said,"I guess they thought she deserved a break today." They all had a pretty good laugh out of that comment and then another person said, "She had it her way!".

Thanks to our soon to be retired Superintendent and former school board members and some current long time board members, our district has made national news and not in a good way.

Watch the June 5, 2014 Episode of Donnybrook on KETC

Superintendent Critchlow has touted our National District of Character award as a way to garner big raises for herself while at the same time bullying parents and critics of the district. The public and the board have been fooled for quite some time and the employees and taxpayers of Fox C-6 are now paying the price.

Donnybrook June 5, 2014 Episode

Fox C-6 Discussion Starts at 19:15

Fox's New Anti-Bullying Policy Needs To Include Administrators, Staff and Board Members

It was reported in the March 7, 2013 Leader newspaper that Fox is developing a new Anti-Bullying Policy that will include Cyber Bullying. This policy needs to apply to school administrators, staff and board members as well.

Why should this policy apply to school administrators, staff and board members?

It takes very little effort to figure out that there are school administrators, board members or their family and friends posting comments in an online forum attacking individuals who have voiced their concerns at board meetings and who are trying to educate the public about what has been going on in our school district. However, there is one individual that has exhibited an uncontrolled rage towards the individuals standing up to the district and expressing their concerns. This individual is not debating the issues. This person is making personal attacks and using language that no educator should be posting on a public forum simply because they don't like the message. This type of behavior falls under the Missouri Code of State Regulations that will lead to the revoking of their teaching certificate if they are a director, administrator or teacher or should lead to their immediate dismissal if they are an employee of the district or a school board member.

The Missouri State Board of Education has very specific rules on educator conduct.

You can read about teacher and administrator certification in the following document on the Missouri Department of Elementary and Secondary Elementary (MO DESE) website. The document is the Missouri Professional Development Guidelines for Student Success. The document explains the Mission, Mandates and Regulations for Professional Development. The document has been moved on the DESE website. But the paragraph from the document is posted below.

You can also learn about revocation, suspension or refusal of certificate in the Missouri Revised Statutes, Chapter 168.071 - Personnel - Teachers and Others here:

Missouri Revised Statutes Chapter 168.071 

Specifically, here is the paragraph from the MO DESE Professional Development Guidelines for Student Success that lists the reasons that the Missouri State Board of Education may refuse to renew, may suspend or revoke a teaching certificate:

Revocation

The Missouri State Board of Education may refuse to issue or renew, or may suspend or revoke a certificate of license to teach upon satisfactory proof of incompetency, cruelty, immorality, drunkenness, neglect of duty, annulment of a written contract, or upon conviction of a felony or crime involving moral turpitude.

If you have specific questions, please feel free to contact the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education’s Educator Certification Section at 573-751-0051 or visit the web at http://dese.mo.gov.

You can also read more on this subject in the Rules of the Missouri Department of Elementary and Secondary Education on the Missouri Secretary of State website in the following guide:

Rules of Department of Elementary and Secondary Education

Missouri DESE's Teacher Certification Division has a Conduct and Investigation group specifically for handling misconduct of educators.

It is easy to understand that some of our administrators and board members are not happy with members in our community voicing their concerns and questioning how our school district is conducting business. They are not happy that misconduct and unethical practices have been uncovered and brought to the public's attention. In fact, our school district has been using taxpayer dollars to threaten individuals speaking out about the school district's conduct by sending out Cease and Desist letters. This type of threat is called a Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation (SLAPP). Missouri has an Anti-SLAPP statute. The Missouri Revised Statute can be found here:
http://www.moga.mo.gov/statutes/c500-599/5370000528.htm

There is an excellent article from the May-June 2005 Journal of the Missouri Bar that explains Missouri's Anti-SLAPP law. The article explains how government entities such as our school district bring about or threaten to bring about lawsuits against individuals based upon their speech or conduct who criticize or petition the governmental body. A SLAPP lawsuit is a threat to Free Speech and your First Amendment rights. In other words, since Dianne Critchlow does not like the fact that members of the community have spoken up at school board meetings asking questions about decisions being made by our administrators and school board members, she uses taxpayer dollars to pay the district attorneys to mail out Cease and Desist letters to those individuals speaking out in a hopes of stopping them from communicating their concerns with others in the community. Should our school board be allowing this to happen? Is our school board even aware that these Cease and Desist letters were sent out since they were not CC'd on the letters?

The article regarding Missouri's Anti-SLAPP law can be found here:
http://www.jenkinskling.com/jenkinskling/files/MissouriNewAntiSlappLaw2005.pdf

Our administrators and board members portray anyone questioning the district as being negative towards the district and will lash out at those individuals or have others do it for them. A prime example of this occurred at the February BOE meeting when a record number of individuals spoke at the meeting during Public Comments in support of the district. It was as if our superintendent had written or given them outlines on what to say. Another example appeared in this week's Leader newspaper. It was a letter to the editor that was written by a district employee who said she wasn't related to anyone in the district. She then proceeded to lash out at anyone voicing concerns or opinions about the district. She needs to become more educated as to how other districts operate and what the laws are.

Asking your school district and school board members to publish board meeting information packets or provide email addresses for school board members so the public can contact them IS NOT being negative. That type of request is simply asking the district and the board to do their job and keep the public informed about what is going on in the district. Missouri Sunshine Law applies to our school district. To respond to those types of requests in this manner truly says something about how our district is being mismanaged and how poorly our community is being represented by our school board members.

I am asking that our new Anti-Bullying school board policy include language that will ensure that the Cyber Bullying rules apply to administrators, staff and board members as well.

There is no excuse for any individual to personally attack parents and patrons for asking questions at school board meetings and voicing their concerns to others in our community. Individuals can discuss and debate the issues. However, making personal attacks instead of attacking the issues is not professional or even worthy of a response. It will eventually catch up to this person making these attacks.

The individual who has been posting under several different names in the online forums and specifically naming individuals and personally attacking them has posted enough information and attacked specific individuals that it is now very easy to figure out who the individual is that has been posting these messages. These personal attacks are not reflective of a person of character or integrity. In fact, the comments that have been posted would call for the immediate dismissal of the individual from a teaching or administrative position. More than 2 years ago, I asked board member Ruth Ann Newman to look at the defamatory and derogatory comments that had been posted against me and my family just one week after I spoke at the December 2010 BOE meeting and she refused. She told me that all anyone ever posts on these forums is negative comments and that she wasn't going to read them. For more than 2 years I have been the target of Cyber Bullying by the same individual. This person has really stepped up their efforts lately due to the fact that there is a ground swell of community dissatisfaction with our school district administration and school board.

The community is watching and will be making their voices heard in the next school board election. Our school district needs a new superintendent and a new school board in order to heal and start moving in a positive direction.