Jefferson County Sheriff's Office Investigation Report Narratives of the Critchlow Case

At the bottom of this post is a link to a copy of the complete Jefferson County Sheriff's Office Investigation Report in PDF format for downloading and reviewing.

The Jefferson County Sheriff’s Office (JCSO) investigation was a result of the findings released in 2016 by the Missouri State Auditor from a state audit of the Fox C-6 School District which took roughly 18 months to complete.

The State Auditor’s findings raised a lot of questions but didn’t provide a lot of details. You can view the State Audit using the link below:

https://app.auditor.mo.gov/Repository/Press/2016031684913.pdf

The district informed the community in a June 2016 document that they were currently working on recovering funds from the Critchlow's and Mark McCutchen for excessive compensation as well as misuse of school district credit cards. As far as I know those funds still haven't been recovered.

The Jefferson County Sheriff's Office investigation's Incident Report provides a little more insight than the state audit report

The Incident Report from JCSO does not contain any interviews with former Fox C-6 superintendent Dianne Critchlow, her husband Jamie Critchlow or Mark McCutchen (Fox’s former CFO).

In fact, reading the Jefferson County Sheriff’s Office Incident Report raises even more questions.

As I reviewed the JCSO’s Incident Report several times over the past couple of days, I started highlighting portions of the report that stood out to me. I had been requesting for years in emails and at school board meetings that the district be more transparent.

Because of the lack of transparency, the community didn't really know that there were any issues or problems.

And, because of the toxic office environment, people were afraid to question things that didn't seem right.

Critchlow Had The Board Sign Off On Things

Dianne Critchlow had the board sign off on things. However, it appears that she didn’t always provide the information that they needed in order to perform proper oversight. Like, not providing the board with credit card statements each month in their board packets. Not even the accounts payable person was provided a copy according to the Incident Report.

There’s really so much that could be written about the report after reading it, but it would take hours and hours. I’ve already written numerous times about the issues dealing with the credit card misuse and the difficulties that I had in getting copies of the school district's credit card statements.

I went to board meeting after board meeting requesting that documents get posted to the district website so the public could review them like they do in other districts. That fell upon deaf ears until right before the “retirement” of former Fox C-6 superintendent Dianne Critchlow.

Check Out Page 32 of the Incident Report

Check out page 32 of the Incident Report because it documents how Dianne Critchlow reimbursed “numerous individuals” with “Holiday Days” as a reimbursement for them giving back their raises to the district. It was a good PR piece for the district, but it just doesn’t feel the same after reading the report.

Below are links to a copy of the Jefferson County Sheriff’s Office Incident Report related to the investigation of the Fox C-6 State Audit Findings and Dianne Critchlow. I removed 3 pages from the original Incident Report that I was provided from JCSO. The 3 pages removed were the Persons portion of the report. Those pages did not contain any narrative. The Persons pages only contained information such as name, address, SSN (redacted by JCSO), DOB (redacted by JCSO), age, gender, telephone # (redacted by JCSO), weight, height, hair color, eye color and drivers license number.

The Jefferson County Sheriff's Office Incident Report is part of what the prosecuting attorneys reviewed when deciding whether or not any criminal charges should be filed in the case.

Highlighted Version of 

Jefferson County Sheriff's Office Incident Report

The Jefferson County Sheriff's Office Law Enforcement Records - Tim Crutchley Interview

The Jefferson County Sheriff's Office Law Enforcement Records Management System software tracks individual Narratives for interviews or evidence gathering conducted by the Sheriff's Office for an Incident Report. The Incident Report is assigned a Case Number.

The Case Number for the Critchlow Case is: 201619044. There were 14 Narratives in the Incident Report provided to me.

The first Incident Narrative in the Incident Report was an interview with Tim Crutchley who took over as "Interim Superintendent" of Fox C-6 after the departure of former superintendent Dianne Critchlow.

In Tim Crutchley's interview he mentions Dianne Critchlow, Jamie Critchlow, Pete Nicholas, Deborah Davis and Mark McCutchen.

One of the most notable narratives documented in the report from Tim Crutchley was :

"Tim advised cash from entry fees at school football games was taken home by Dianne, which was never counted or logged in any way."

I also found it interesting that Mr. Crutchley mentioned the 2012 Bond Issue money during his interview and the difference between what was budgeted and what was requested. I wrote about this issue back in July 2012.

It's one of the reasons I was sent a Cease and Desist letter from Dianne Critchlow:

https://foxc6watchdogs.blogspot.com/2012/07/why-you-should-vote-no-on-fox-c-6s-185.html

Documents Redacted by the Sheriff's Office

The documents I received from the Jefferson County Sheriff's Office are public records and were redacted by the Sheriff's Office to obscure Social Security Numbers, Date of Birth and Phone Numbers. It's important for the Fox C-6 community to see what was reviewed by the various prosecuting attorneys since no charges were filed in this case. I believe that most people in the Fox C-6 community and even outside the community find it difficult to understand and digest just what was collected by the Sheriff's Office collected and recorded into the Incident Reports. I wasn't provided copies of additional documents that were collected by JCSO.

Examples of some of the documents collected:

• Closed Session school board meeting minutes
• emails
• copies of employment contracts
• tax records from Dianne Critchlow's personnel file
• hard drives from the school district.

I'm curious as to why interviews weren't conducted with Dianne Critchlow, Jamie Critchlow or Mark McCutchen. Their names were listed in the Persons segment of the Incident Report but there weren't any Narratives documented for them.

Need A Copy of the FBI Report

It's important that community obtains a copy of the FBI's Report which was reviewed by the prosecuting attorneys in order to get a more complete picture of what was uncovered.

Below is a link to a copy of the Jefferson County Sheriff's Incident Narrative Report of Tim Crutchley's interview in PDF format.

Tim Crutchley's Interview with Jefferson County Sheriff's Office

I used PDF-XChange Editor software by Tracker Software Products to perform Optical Character Recognition (OCR) on the scanned PDF document that was emailed to me from the Sheriff's Office. Performing an OCR scan of the document makes the document text searchable. Otherwise, the Incident Reports are as I received them from the Jefferson County Sheriff's Office.

Was Misinformation Intended to Fool the Community? Absolutely!

I never knew that speaking at the December 14, 2010 Fox C-6 school board meeting would lead to a complete turnover of Central Office administrators just a few years later. The article below was published in the Arnold-Imperial Leader the week after I spoke at the school board meeting.

Former Fox C-6 superintendent Dianne Brown (Critchlow), former assistant superintendent Todd Scott (now Seckman High School principal) and former Director of the Bridges program, Jamie Critchlow were interviewed for the article. The article covered the hiring of Jamie Critchlow as the new head football coach for Seckman High School. It also mentioned the hiring of Jamie Critchlow as a Behavior Intervention Support Team (BIST) Teacher in August 2009 and his subsequent promotion a few months later in November 2009 to the Director of the at-risk Bridges program.

The promotion from BIST teacher to Director increased Jamie Critchlow’s salary from $45,870 (per May 2009 board meeting packet Certified hires list) to $98,005 (as reported in the article). That salary increase was given without having a certificate in Administration. That’s why I went and spoke to the Fox C-6 school board.

The article stated that Jamie Critchlow could have been making $2,000 more than the $98,005 salary that he was earning as the At-Risk Director of the Bridges program because Fox C-6 administrators had given back their raises for the 2010-2011 school year.

According to the article, Todd Scott said that, “Critchlow’s salary is the same this year as last.” and that, “Critchlow’s salary is the same amount the previous at-risk director, Kolin Peterson, earned.”

I’m not quite sure how Jamie Critchlow’s salary of $98,005, “is the same amount the previous at-risk director, Kolin Peterson, earned”. After reviewing the following data from the Missouri Department of Elementary and Secondary Education (DESE), it appears that Mr. Critchlow’s salary was more than 2.5 times higher than the previous at-risk director’s salary.

Jamie Critchlow began working for the district in the 2009-2010 school year. Below are the salary amounts as reported to Missouri DESE by Fox for Mr. Critchlow:

2010 -   $98,589

2011 - $101,884

2012 - $107,813

2013 - $116,103

2014 - $124,079

Kolin Peterson began working for the district in the 2006-2007 school year. Below are the salary amounts as reported to Missouri DESE for Mr. Peterson:

2007 - $32,096

2008 - $36,567

2009 - $37,744

2010 - $38,552

2011 - $39,323

Dianne Brown (Critchlow) mentioned the district’s "stringent hiring practices" in the article.

In 2012, the district's "stringent hiring practices" made headlines while Dianne (Brown) Critchlow was still superintendent. That’s when Fox hired Kelly Nash as the district’s Nutrition Director even though she didn’t have a college degree or certification for the job. Kelly Nash is the daughter-in-law of former Fox C-6 school board president, Linda Nash. In January 2015, Kelly Nash’s employment was terminated by the district and she walked away with a $20,000 settlement.

Assistant superintendent Todd Scott talked about the credentials in the article that I had asked about at the December 14, 2010 board meeting. He said, "the district checks with DESE (Department of Elementary and Secondary Education) when hiring a certified employee, such as a teacher or administrator, to make sure the person has the proper credentials."

Missouri DESE requires the completion of a master's degree or higher in educational administration in order to obtain an Initial Administrator Certificate. Mr. Critchlow had a master's degree in Art which does not meet DESE's requirements for obtaining an Initial Administrator Certificate.

If the district had checked Mr. Critchlow's credentials with Missouri DESE like I had done back then, they would have known that Mr. Critchlow did not have a Principal/Administrator certificate when he was promoted to an "administrator" position in November 2009. Mr. Critchlow didn’t earn a Principal/Administrator certificate until May 27, 2014 but was paid a principal's salary for nearly 5 years without having the credentials required to justify the salary.

Mr. Critchlow was fired less than a month after obtaining his Principal/Administrator certificate.

In 2009, Fox’s school board policy “0340 - Code of Ethics” contained the following statement, “Employ only such qualified employees as are properly recommended by the Superintendent of schools.” That’s an important statement. Former superintendent Dianne Brown (Critchlow) was responsible for properly recommending only those employees who are qualified for the job.

It wasn’t until the release of the May 2016 Missouri State Auditor’s report that the public learned that Mr. Critchlow’s promotion was not approved by the school board. I recently obtained copies of the Contract Modifications requests that were presented to the Fox C-6 school board for the 2009-2010 school year by Dianne Brown (Critchlow) for approval. Mr. Critchlow’s name didn’t appear on any of those requests. His name only appeared on the May 2009 list of Certified Hires from the 2008-2009 school board meeting packets.

Dianne Critchlow improperly promoted and compensated her husband (before they were married) to a position/salary schedule that he was not qualified or certified for.

The difference between a teacher’s salary with a master’s degree and what Mr. Critchlow earned while working for the district was more than $300,000 and should be repaid to the district.

Arnold-Imperial Leader Article

Jag Coach had DWI in Texas (PDF)

December 23, 2010

Fox C-6 Auditee's Response Highlights from the May 2016 Missouri State Auditor's Report

It's been nearly a year since the scathing results of the Fox C-6 School District audit by Missouri State Auditor Nicole Galloway were released to the public.

So far, no criminal charges have been filed and it appears that no taxpayer dollars have been recovered since the audit was released on May 25, 2016.

The Fox C-6 School District website has a webpage dedicated to the 2016 Missouri State Audit. It contains a link to the 2016 Missouri State Audit and a short timeline of what's happened since a state audit was requested in August 2014.

The webpage includes a link to a letter from Jefferson County Prosecuting Attorney Forrest Wegge to the school board on June 2, 2016 informing the school board that he requested a "complete criminal investigation into the various allegations contained within said audit".

The webpage also includes a link to Forrest Wegge's July 14, 2016 press release stating that he was referring the investigation to the United States Attorney's Office for further investigation.

You can view the district's State Audit webpage here:
https://www.fox.k12.mo.us/about_us/state_audit


Auditee Responses
The State Audit Report includes Auditee's Responses from the Fox C-6 Board of Education and District Administration in response to the State Auditor's Recommendations.

Below are only a few highlights from the District's Auditee's Responses as found in the 2016 State Auditor's report:

"The Fox C-6 Board of Education and District Administration agree with this recommendation. Implementation of new procedures to accurately determine the rate of compensation for the Superintendent and properly adopt a Superintendent contract were in place by December 2014. These new procedures comply with the recommendation. 

The audit findings are critical of the $260,598 salary paid to Dianne Critchlow and other administrators during 2013-2014, including that Critchlow's salary was substantial when compared to Superintendents of other districts and was not properly documented. By comparison, the 2015-2016 salary for Dr. Jim Wipke of $175,000 is competitive for a district the size and complexity of Fox C-6 Schools and is properly documented.

The District believes that most of the irregularities regarding former Superintendent Dianne Critchlow's contracts identified by the audit findings resulted primarily from acts of Dianne Critchlow and acts or omissions of persons holding the post of Chief Financial Officer, namely James Berblinger, or his successor Mark McCutchen. Fox C-6 Board of Education expects staff to properly implement all Board decisions. The Board of Education disapproves both the acts or omissions that (1) increased Critchlow's compensation without Board action and (2) compensated Dianne Critchlow greater than provided within her approved contracts Critchlow, Berblinger and McCutchen are no longer employed by Fox C-6 Schools.

The Board of Education intends to consider the following actions:
(1) seek recovery of the unauthorized compensation paid to Dianne Critchlow, (2) notify the Public School Retirement System (PSRS) about the unauthorized compensation to determine whether correction or forfeiture of pension benefits being paid to Dianne Critchlow is warranted, and (3) submit the record of unauthorized compensation to the Jefferson County Prosecuting Attorney's Office to determine whether prosecution is warranted. 

The District is committed to maintaining full compliance with the recommendation."

...

"As teaching jobs continue to be scarce, and as Fox C-6 budgets continue to be strained, the school board has an even greater responsibility to make sure the most highly qualified people land the few jobs available. School board members and the Superintendent doing the hiring have a fiduciary responsibility to the community to hire the best talent for the money. Under these circumstances, it is completely justified for the District to maintain its new hiring practices and strong anti-nepotism policy, which exceeds the provisions of the Missouri Constitution.

The audit criticizes the District for failing to follow proper protocols in the hiring process and in sections 1.3 and 1.4 focuses on unauthorized and unwarranted job promotions by the former superintendent, Dianne Critchlow, of her husband Jamie Critchlow. These job promotions and rates of compensation were without Board approval according to the audit. The reported findings indicate $88,751 in excess compensation paid to Jamie Critchlow. After fringe costs are added, the cost to the District rises to approximately $102,900.

The Board of Education disapproves of both (1) Dianne Critchlow's apparent disregard of Board procedures and authority; and (2) enrichment of Dianne Critchlow's husband with District financial resources. Jamie Critchlow and Dianne Critchlow are no longer employed by Fox C-6 Schools.

The Board of Education intends to consider the following actions:

(1) seek recovery of the unauthorized compensation paid to Jamie Critchlow, (2) notify the PSRS about the unauthorized compensation to determine whether correction of pension benefits relating to Jamie Critchlow is warranted, and (3) submit the record of unauthorized compensation to the Jefferson County Prosecuting Attorney's Office to determine whether prosecution is warranted."

...

"The audit criticizes the District for failing to follow proper procedures and focuses on unwarranted job promotions for Mark McCutchen, Jamie Critchlow, and others. These job promotions were not approved by the Board and were often accompanied by unauthorized increased rates of compensation. The reported findings indicate $49,162 in excess compensation paid to Mark McCutchen. After fringe costs are added, the cost to the District rises to approximately $57,000. The Board of Education disapproves of: (1) Dianne Critchlow's apparent disregard for Board authority and (2) acts that compensated Mark McCutchen greater than provided within his contracts. Critchlow and McCutchen are no longer employed by Fox C-6 Schools.

The Board of Education intends to consider the following actions:(1) seek recovery of the unauthorized compensation paid to Mark McCutchen, (2) notify the PSRS about the unauthorized compensation to determine whether correction or forfeiture of pension benefits relating to Mark McCutchen is warranted, and (3) submit the record of unauthorized compensation to the Jefferson County Prosecuting Attorney's Office to determine whether prosecution is warranted.

Subject to the clarifications presented, the District is committed to full compliance with the recommendation."

...

"The audit findings indicate charges made to credit cards held by former Superintendent Dianne Critchlow and her administrative assistant appear to be questionable or improper use of District financial. The Board of Education disapproves of these questionable and improper purchases totaling $96,743 as a misuse of taxpayer funds. This constitutes a violation of the public trust. The District has previously demanded repayment from Dianne Critchlow for many questionable and improper credit card charge that constitute personal purposes, excessive expenditures, gifts of public property, and payments in violation of Missouri laws relating to conflicts of interest. Dianne Critchlow has failed to respond to District demands for repayment.

The Board of Education intends to consider the following actions:(1) seek recovery of the unauthorized improper and/or questionable charges made to credit cards assigned to Dianne Critchlow and her administrative assistant, (2) submit the record of improper and/or questionable credit card charges to the Jefferson County Prosecuting Attorney's Office to determine whether prosecution is warranted, and (3) in the event of a prosecution, notify the Public School Retirement System (PSRS), and/or the Public Educational Employees Retirement System (PEERS) about the potential need for correction or forfeiture of pension benefits."

...

"Dianne Critchlow and Jamie Critchlow appeared to have used taxpayer money for purposes that did not benefit the school district; made expenditures that were not properly documented, or constituted excessive expenditures, or gifts of public property; or in violation of Missouri laws relating to conflicts of interest. The Board of Education disapproves of any and all misuse of taxpayer funds.

The District is committed to full compliance with the recommendation."

Breaking News! Fox C-6 State Audit to be Reviewed at June 14, 2016 School Board Meeting

Breaking News!

Tuesday June 14, 2016 Fox C-6 School Board Meeting will include a Review of the

May 2016 State Audit Report

The Fox C-6 School Board Meeting agenda for Tuesday June 14, 2016 was updated today to include a review of the May 2016 State Audit Report. The links below go to the Fox C-6 School District BoardDocs pages for the agenda items.

Fox C-6 received a rating of "POOR" on the May 2016 State Audit Report which is the lowest rating given by the state auditor's office.

Fox C-6 State Audit Report Review Agenda Item

A draft budget for the 2016-2017 school year is also included on the agenda.

Public Comments

Anyone wishing to make a Public Comment at the June 14, 2016 meeting must submit an outline of your remarks on the Public Comments Information form by 6:45PM.

A link to the policy for making Public Comments can be found on the Patrons Comments Agenda Item below or download the Public Comments Information form directly using the second link:

Patrons Comments Agenda Item and Form

Download Public Comments Information Form

Former Superintendent Critchlow Asked Her Cabinet To Post Positive Comments About the District on TOPIX

Recently, I posted the handwritten notes former Fox C-6 assistant superintendents Tim Crutchley and Todd Scott wrote after their conversation with former Fox C-6 superintendent Dianne Critchlow in which she told them that her husband Jamie Critchlow had been posting comments on the TOPIX.COM website. As I mentioned in that post, getting the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth from some of Fox's former school district administrators had been a huge problem for years.

According to Tim Crutchley's deposition, former superintendent Dianne Critchlow had been concerned with comments that were being posted on TOPIX.COM for quite some time. Mr. Crutchley stated that comments on TOPIX were discussed quite often in their "cabinet" (assistant superintendent) meetings. In fact, she asked her "cabinet" (the assistant superintendents) to post positive comments on TOPIX about the school district in response to the comments that were critical of the district.

Former superintendent Dianne Critchlow's directive lead to some administrators posting comments on TOPIX.COM during the school day as well as at home. Not all of the comments posted were positive as you can see by reading the ones listed in the exhibits in the lawsuit that was filed with Jefferson County courts in November 2014.

Comments Posted On TOPIX from Fox's IP Address Date Back to 2010

Some of the earliest posts made on TOPIX that came from the school district's IP address date back to October 2010. They were made by a user named "Bullwinkle" who responded to a post that I had made on Topix regarding my concerns about the school district's open District Wide Compliance Review.

Former superintendent Dianne Brown was not happy that we had filed an OCR complaint with the U.S. Department of Education's Office of Civil Rights in August 2008. And then in March 2010, Washington D.C. Office of Civil Rights informed superintendent Brown that her school district would be undergoing a District Wide Compliance Review adding insult to injury.

Making the public aware of the District Wide Compliance Review was something that former superintendent Dianne Brown didn't want. When I would ask the school board about it during public comments, Dianne would respond saying that it couldn't be discussed due to litigation. But, there was no litigation related to the Compliance Review. Stating that there was ongoing litigation was a simple way to make everyone believe that it couldn't be discussed. It was simply another tactic used to keep people from questioning things in the district. The District Wide Compliance Review was an investigation of the school district's Section 504 practices.

So, when a comment was posted on TOPIX by Bullwinkle referencing the recent Due Process decision for the OCR complaint, it was very obvious to me as to who would have posted that online comment. I just couldn't prove at the time that the comment came from a school district computer.

Dianne Brown and former assistant superintendent and Section 504 Coordinator, Dan Baker, had both been involved with the OCR complaint and Due Process Hearing as well as the District Wide Compliance Review in 2010 and were aware of the recent ruling.

So, when it was confirmed that Bullwinkle's comment that was posted on TOPIX.COM on November 16, 2010 came from a the school district's IP address, it helped validate my suspicions.

Below is part of Bullwinkle's comment that was posted on TOPIX. The comment seems to have a bit of an attitude resonating from it: 

"Channel person. You must be the disgruntled parents over the OCR case. get over it! you lost."

The Due Process Hearing ruling had made by an attorney who was hired by the school district and who just happened to be a former law associate in two different law firms of the attorney who represented the school district during the Due Process Hearing. The attorney hired by the district to hear the Due Process Hearing was supposed to be "Fair and Impartial" but that was not the case. That's just how the game has been played in our state for a very long time.

Bullwinkle also responded to another comment in which I had talked about speaking to Fox's school board president in 2008 about speaking to the school board and superintendent Brown blocked the school board from speaking to me. When superintendent Brown arrived at the meeting, she told me that the school board had already decided not to speak with me.

However, the board president at the time wasn't aware of this decision as we were already speaking about getting on next months agenda since he had forgotten to put me on the agenda for that evening. Apparently, superintendent Brown forgot to tell him that "he" had already decided not to speak with me. Superintendent Brown seemed to be the only person who knew that the school board had decided not to speak with me.

Bullwinkle didn't catch that my comment was about speaking with the board president in the fall of 2008. I guess being angered by information being posted in a public forum that had been kept quiet for so long was causing unrest in the upper ranks. My comment related to this incident caused Bullwinkle to post the following comment on TOPIX.COM:

11/16/2010 - 08:10AM

"The school board president is a female and has been president since early last spring you dip stick. 

Mr Critchlow, I will call you and we can start our own campaign against these crazy parents.. LOL Perhaps we can find them something to do at your school... hahahaaa"

Bullwinkle posted 5 comments on TOPIX.COM during October and November 2010. Several of Bullwinkle's online posts made "positive" comments about superintendent Brown and the school district. Bullwinkle certainly wanted to make sure that the community was aware of the great job that superintendent Brown was doing for our school district.

What helped confirm my suspicions that Bullwinkle was most likely superintendent Brown, was that the language and writing style used by Bullwinkle was strikingly similar to that found in the Superintendent Messages written by Superintendent Dianne Brown that she posted on the district website and also published in The Rock newspaper.

There was no doubt in my mind as to who Bullwinkle was who was posting on TOPIX defending superintendent Brown and responding to criticisms that were made on the Fox High School Superintendent thread.

Even though Bullwinkle didn't post that many messages, the phrases and keywords used by Bullwinkle gave you the impression that you were reading comments written by superintendent Dianne Brown herself.

Here are some of the phrases and keywords that stood out in Bullwinkle's comments. Compare the phrases to those used in Dianne Brown-Critchlow's Superintendent Messages from 2010 to 2013:

• Kudos to you
• second to none
• I applaud
• I'm proud of
• positive attitude

Below are the comments posted on TOPIX by Bullwinkle in 2010 from the school district's IP address with the dates and local time that they were posted:

10/19/2010 - 9:51AM

This is obsurd. Those of you who are relishing in these rumors are worse than the rumors theirselves. Complete rubbish. I have two kids that graduated from the district. Couldnt be more impressed with their experience and education. I applaud the superintendent and all her efforts. Her personal life is exactly what it is. Hers...not yours! Get a life people!

In 2010 when the message above was posted, Dianne Brown did have two kids that had already graduated from the district.

11/05/2010 - 11:19AM

Who here has been divorced or has had a close friend or relative get divorced? Because your not a public figure does that give all of us the right to judge you/her? Nope dont think so. One thing thats a common factor here is about the kids. Do you think your children would be proud of you guys posting negative remarks about their teachers and administration? Think about that... 

I love humans nowadays. Collectively forming a cyber‐subpar lynch mob with nothing to do other than try to tear people down. 

As you judge others always keep in mind you too will be judged when your time comes. 

Im proud of the school district. Its teachers, faculty, administration and staff are second to none. Kudos to you guys!!! I know your doing everything you can to help our children succeed.

The next comment posted by Bullwinkle was quite intent on defending superintendent Brown who had been getting criticized online about her close relationship with Jamie Critchlow.

11/08/2010 - 10:33AM

"Dear unknowing fellow constituents,... 

I am amazed that any of you morality, podium pounding blabber‐mouths feel you have any right to judge. Do you know the superintendant or any of the people being accused on here? What are your facts? I'm sure you caught wind of a rumor and you took it to the highest level without knowing a damn bit of whats going on. Have you lived in her house? Have you been in her former marriage? Have you had her confide in you why she got a divorce? NO... you have not and don't kid yourself if you think you have a clue. This is where the term "hypocrite" applies. 

I know the parents and board hold her in high regard and have nothing but the utmost respect for her. And my opinion still remains the same. Get a life and find a positive place in your head to venture to. The world is crappy enough without this rubbish and your nonsense. Be a parent with a positive attitude...not a bad one."

11/16/2010 - 8:10AM

The school board president is a female and has been president since early last spring you dip stick. Again...more lies to harm others. 

Mr Critchlow, I will call you and we can start our own campaign against these crazy parents..LOL Perhaps we can find them something to do at your school...hahahaaa

Below is the complete post that was made by Bullwinkle in response to my comment about the District Wide Compliance Review being conducted by OCR. In that same post, Bullwinkle also responded to another person who used the screen name "Please" which was not me:

11/16/2010 - 10:03AM

Channel person. You must be the disgruntled parents over the OCR case. get over it! you lost. 

"Please" You are correct in that affairs in the work place are frowned upon and Im sure Paul would agree with you. However, making accusations without proof is slander and you, my friend, are crossing the line repetitely. You lose. get over it! 

Put your name out there like Mr Critchlow did. Hes being ripped on here too and I applaud him for his righteousness.

Bullwinkle certainly thought highly of former Fox C-6 superintendent Dianne Brown back then and also thought that the school board held "her in high regard". Bullwinkle's comments certainly had a familiar ring to them.

I wrote an article about this in July 2014 titled:

What Got Our Educators Riled Enough To Write Defamatory Comments?

Comments Posted From District and Home Computers and Cell Phones
If you read through the exhibits in the publicly available lawsuit, you will see date / time stamps and an IP address recorded for each post. The school districts IP address was documented by MOREnet. Other IP addresses that were traced back to individual homes and cell phones were verified by the respective Internet Service Providers.

You'll probably notice that not all of the posts made on TOPIX that were traced back to the school district or to the homes or phones of school district administrators were "positive" posts.

The dates and times in the exhibits from TOPIX.COM are in Pacific Standard Time. So, you must to add 2 hours to the times that are documented in military time in the exhibits. The text of the lawsuit didn't properly document the times when they were converted from the exhibits into the lawsuit text.

Did Jamie Critchlow Use a School District Computer to post comments?

In Tim Crutchley's notes of his conversation with Jamie Critchlow, Mr. Crutchley documented that Mr. Critchlow didn't use any district computers when he posted comments on TOPIX.COM, "We asked if he used personal or district computers and he said he used personal computer."

Did Mr. Critchlow tell the truth when he told Mr. Crutchley that he didn't use a district computer?

On November 16, 2010 at 7:49AM, there was a comment posted on TOPIX by someone using the screen name, "Jamie Matthew Critchlow". The online post was removed from TOPIX long ago but was provided by TOPIX when subpoenaed since it originated from the school district's IP address.

The original comment posted by the screen name, Jamie Matthew Critchlow was as follows except that I redacted part of the phone number that was made in the original online post and in the lawsuit exhibits:

Public...let me introduce myself. I am Jamie Critchlow. Principal of the Bridges program at Fox C‐6. I have been made aware of this website and rumors as of late. I am on here to speak to you as a concerned parent. I am truly apathetic for anyone who finds comfort in these negative words. Dr Brown and I are great friends who have found solitude in each others friendship through difficult times. The light in which both she and i have been shed on this website is at best ridiculous. If you have any questions you would like to ask please call my personal cell at 314‐775‐XXXX.

Read through the TOPIX.COM posts that are documented in the lawsuit that was filed electronically in the Jefferson County courts in November 2014. You can see just how many comments were made on TOPIX from the school district's IP address. The district said they were unable to trace which specific computers the posts came from when asked to do so. However, there's a definite pattern in the content that goes along with certain screen names in many of the online comments.

Hopefully reading through the online comments will give everyone a little more perspective as to why I've put so much time and effort into documenting what was going on in our school district. It's important to get the facts and the truth to the public so this type of behavior never happens again in our school district.

Fox's former superintendent, Dianne Brown/Critchlow invested a lot of time and effort into hiding information from the public for years. That allowed her to get away with a lot of things that never should have happened. It's very well documented in my emails to board members and administrators as well as audio recordings that I made when I attended school board meetings as to what was going on.

It's extremely hard for anyone to even imagine that this sort of harassment could or would occur especially since it was being done by some of the top administrators in our school district.

It's even harder to imagine that our Fox C-6 school board members did nothing to stop it. I repeatedly spoke to them and emailed them about this harassment for years.

In 2014 after obtaining IP addresses, we provided the lawsuit information to the Office of Civil Rights since this sort of behavior would surely be considered retaliation under Section 504 Law. However, the Office for Civil Rights told us they couldn't do anything until there was a court ruling. We also spoke to the Department of Justice as well.

There's a huge problem with the system and the people involved when this type of harassment cannot be stopped. Perhaps this will be a lesson that everyone will learn from.

The following document contains all of the online posts that were submitted in the original lawsuit along with the locations that the online posts were made from. Reading through the online comments that were posted and from where shows is a very sad example of how desperate people were to keep their jobs as I brought my concerns to our school board that our superintendent did not appreciate.

Lawsuit With Exhibits Electronically Filed in Jefferson County Court in 2014 over TOPIX.COM Posts

May 27, 2014 - Critchlow Tells Crutchley and Scott That Her Husband Was Posting on TOPIX.COM

I'm glad to see that the Fox C-6 community is finally questioning all of those denials of wrong doing over the years by former Fox C-6 superintendent Dianne Brown-Critchlow.

Telling the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth was a huge problem for some of Fox's school district during the Dianne Brown / Dianne Critchlow Era of our school district.

Seeing some of the comments posted by parents, taxpayers and students on some of the news sites and Facebook helps validate years of work spent chasing down and documenting the corruption going on in our district as school board members turned a blind eye.

Below is a link to a few pages of notes written by former assistant superintendent Tim Crutchley and former assistant superintendent Todd Scott on May 25, 2014 soon after Dianne Critchlow informed them that she knew that her husband Jamie Critchlow had been making posts on TOPIX.COM. Dianne met with Tim Crutchley and Todd Scott shortly after the Post Dispatch newspaper published a story about the internet scandal lawsuit.

Their notes aren't very detailed. But, I thought it would be helpful for the community to get a glimpse at some of the things that were going on behind the scenes two years ago.

It's hard to believe that it's already been two years since the internet scandal broke things loose for the school district. It wasn't long after the internet scandal, that the credit card spending scandal hit the news. What a crazy time it was!

While Dianne Brown-Critchlow was touting Fox as being a National District of Character, she was busy padding her pockets and using district credit cards to pay for red light tickets and meals as well as purchase logging tongs, cameras and softball equipment on Amazon.com.

As documented in Tim Crutchley's hand written notes, Dianne Critchlow asked Tim Crutchley and Todd Scott to tell the board  "about her wanting to to retire right away and that she has gotten bad health news and was going on FMLA right away. She also wanted us to get board to move Jamie's retirement up right away because of her health concerns."

I'm betting that Dianne Critchlow didn't feel too well after being contacted by her Internet Service Provider and being told that their IP information was being requested for a lawsuit.

Crutchley and Scott's Hand Written Notes Document Critchlow's Knoweledge of Posting On TOPIX.COM

While You're Waiting for Fox's State Audit To Be Released!

While you're waiting for the Missouri State Auditor's office to release the results of the Fox C-6 audit, you may wish to read the state auditor's report of the Lee's Summit School District which was released in February 2014. The Lee's Summit state audit will give you an idea of what an audit report looks like. The last state audit of Fox C-6 was completed in 2002. I wrote about that audit back in 2013. The link to that audit on the Missouri State Auditor's website has been moved and is no longer valid.

Why check out the Lee's Summit school district audit?

Well, the Lee's Summit superintendent and school board president and several board members are currently under fire by the citizens of Lee's Summit. Citizens are upset after it was brought to their attention that the superintendent was dating one of the attorneys for the school district and the superintendent was given a new 3 year $400,000 a year contract.

2014 Lee's Summit School District Audit Report

Citizens Voice Their Concerns During Public Comments

The April 2016 Lee's Summit school board meeting was refreshing to watch as the community rallied and citizens came to the board meeting to voice their concerns. However, many of them were shutdown by a district attorney asked to attend the meeting by the school board president. You'll want to read about the attorney hired by the district in the online opinion article posted by a Lee's Summit school board member on the Lee's Summit Tribune website which I have linked to further down in this article about keeping the public informed.

The April 2016 Lee's Summit school board meeting was video recorded by a parent in the district and at least 3 news stations. The video recording of the board meeting is definitely worth watching. Members of the community were there to voice their concerns about what they believed to be a "conflict of interest" with the law firm since the principal attorney of the law firm and the superintendent were dating. The attorney had helped negotiate his contract for the 2015-2016 school year in which he received a significant salary increase.

Watch the community's reaction as a different Lee's Summit's attorney stopped the citizens from voicing their concerns about their superintendent's new 3 year $400,000 a year contract because, it wasn't on the agenda using the links below. The first video link was recorded by a Lee's Summit resident. The second video link was a news story posted by Kansas City KSHB 41 Action News.

Watch Citizens Voicing Concerns at Lee's Summit April 2016 School Board Meeting

Outrage at Lee's Summit School Board Meeting - 04/14/2016 (KHSB 41 News)

One of the interesting things about Dr. McGehee's salary was that he was receiving deferred payments which weren't openly reported in his salary disclosure to the community. He was being paid much more than the community thought he was being paid. Once the community found out about this and the relationship of the superintendent and the school district's attorney, they were very willing to voice their concerns to the Lee's Summit school board.

Read more about Dr. McGehee's contracts and deferred payments on the Lee's Summit Tribune website here:

Conflict Continues in Lee's Summit R-7 School Board and with Superintendent

Luckily, for the citizens of Lee's Summit, there has been a school board member who has been willing to stand up for the citizens who elected him rather than sit back and remaining silent. He was responsible for informing the citizens about concerns he had with what was going on in the Lee's Summit school district.

Lee's Summit Superintendent Placed on Paid Administrative Leave
According to an article in today's Kansas City Star newspaper, Dr. David McGehee has been place on "paid" administrative leave and Lee's Summit board president Terry Harmon has stepped down as the board president. Below are links to an article in the Kansas City Star and news reports from KHSB 41 Action News:

Lee's Summit school board puts superintendent on paid leave,

chooses new board president - (Kansas City Star) 

Angry Parents Rallying in Lee's Summit - 05/19/2016 (KHSB 41 News)

Lee's Summit Superintendent Put on Paid Leave - 05/19/2016 (KHSB 41 News) 

Remaining silent and allowing Fox's former superintendent to run the district is what led to the loss of respect of Fox's school board and administration under former superintendent Dianne Brown-Critchlow's reign. Concern after concern was brought to the attention Fox C-6 board members for years and nothing was done about them. Eventually, the community recognized that there was a problem and board members were voted out of office.

It appears that the same thing has been occurring in the Lee's Summit School District for some time, just like what had happened at Fox C-6. The school board was being told about all of the awards and accolades that the district was receiving and the board kept increasing Dr. McGehee's salary without looking at the numbers. Lee's Summit citizens who have pointed out MAP and ACT score results which don't appear to rank the district where their superintendent deserves to be the highest paid superintendent in the state of Missouri.

Former Fox C-6 superintendent Dianne Brown-Critchlow continuously tossed out similar statements about awards and accolades which weren't necessarily academically related. Fox's ACT scores and the number of students taking the ACT had Fox ranked in the bottom half of the state. Voicing my concerns in this area were always met with snide remarks from our former superintendent. When the facts aren't as impressive as they want the public to believe, some superintendents will deflect the criticism and make it appear as if those voicing the concern aren't properly informed. Anyone, including our former school board members could have verified the data themselves on Missouri DESE's website.

Keeping the Public Informed

The Lee's Summit Tribune has an open online Opinion/Letter to the Editor section on their website. This is where Lee's Summit school board member Bill Baird has been able to expose some of the issues occurring in their district to the public. I commend the Lee's Summit Tribune for allowing citizens in their community to voice their concerns in an open and professional and manner in as many words as are needed. That is something that is severely lacking in our community.

Lee's Summit Board Member's Letter to the Community on Atrocities

at the School Board Level

It's good for the public to hear about some of the things that go on behind the scenes in school districts in our state. There are some very close relationships between some school superintendents and some of the attorneys representing school districts in our state. It reminded me of the documentation written up by former assistant superintendents Tim Crutchley and Todd Scott regarding their meetings with former Fox C-6 superintendent Dianne Brown-Critchlow and her husband Jamie Critchlow on May 27, 2014. Dianne Critchlow had called a meeting with Mr. Crutchley and Mr. Scott after an article was published in the St. Louis Post Dispatch on May 23, 2014. Their notes documented that Dianne Critchlow knew that her husband Jamie Critchlow was posting on Topix but that she didn't say exactly what he was posting.

I found it interesting that Mr. Crutchley also documented that Dianne Critchlow contacted Tom Mickes of Fox's former law firm, Mickes Goldman O'Toole shortly after informing Mr. Crutchley and Mr. Scott about her husband's postings on Topix. A portion of Mr. Crutchley's documentation was redacted where he mentioned her phone call with attorney Tom Mickes.

While searching for the date that Fox's CFO John Brazeal requested an audit of the district, I came across the following article on The Missouri Volunteer Movement website. This article referenced several of my articles on this blog.

Missouri Volunteer Movement article: "Liar Liar"

In August 2013, I had voiced my concern about the lack of details in our school board meeting packets and the payments to credit cards without providing any credit card statements. In that article I linked to the 2002 state audit of the Fox C-6 School District conducted by State Auditor Claire McCaskill. Below is a link to the August 2013 article where I had been voicing my concerns about the board packets and getting access to them. It had taken nearly 3 years of making requests to get the board meeting packets posted onto Fox's website.

More Memory Holes In August 2013 Board Meeting Packet

It was February 20, 2014, when I wrote an article titled, "Why Does Fox C-6 Have a School Board?" in which I wrote, "Perhaps the community needs to request a state audit of the school district."

I'm glad that Mr. Brazeal requested an audit of the district. However, when audits take nearly 2 years to complete, memories begin to fade and people lose faith in the system. It's similar to waiting for nearly 7 years for the district to update and adopt a new set of school board policies and regulations. It was May 2009, when the district agreed in a Resolution Agreement with the U.S Department of Education's Office for Civil Rights to update their school board Policies and Regulations to comply with federal law. There were several years spent rewriting the old policies which was never completed before having to switch over to the Missouri School Board Association's set of Policies and Regulations. This was done after the district fired the Mickes Goldman O'Toole law firm which was responsible for drafting and updating our school district's previous Policies and Regulations. 

School district administrators and school board members should be accountable for their actions. School board policies and regulations document their responsibilities and ethical standards they are expected to uphold. Any perception of impropriety or conflict of interest should be avoided.

Continue to check the Missouri State Auditor's website for the status of the audit using the link below:

Missouri State Auditor's

Audits In Progress List

You can review the 2002 Missouri State Auditor's report of the Fox C-6 School District using the link below. The link has changed since posted a I link to the report in 2013:

2002 Missouri State Auditor's Report of the Fox C-6 School District

Dan Baker Probably Doesn't Want the Fox C-6 Community to See the Invoices for Legal Fees!

It was announced that Dan Baker was selected as the new principal at Seckman Elementary at the March 17, 2015 Fox C-6 Board of Education (BOE) meeting.

I voiced my concerns about Dan Baker being selected as a finalist for the Seckman Elementary School principal position to Fox C-6 board president John Laughlin and Dr. Wipke in an email early Monday morning March 16, 2015. Then after not receiving a response I sent another email to all of the Fox C-6 board members at 6:30am Tuesday March 17, 2015.

I also voiced my concerns to the Fox C-6 BOE meeting during Public Comments. Click on the link below to listen to my Public Comments. There were a total of 7 Public Comments made at the BOE meeting. There were two public comments in support of hiring Dan Baker for the principal position at Seckman Elementary which was made by teachers from Seckman Elementary. I wonder if Mr. Baker will give them any special treatment now that he's been selected principal?

My Public Comments Made at the March 17, 2015

Fox C-6 BOE Meeting

Dan Baker's selection reminds me very much of when the community was told that Kelly Nash was the best candidate for Fox's Food Nutrition Director in December 2012 by Todd Scott even though she didn't possess the certification and schooling required for the job as required by board policy.

Dan Baker, possesses the proper certification for the principal job. He was a principal at Hodge Elementary School prior to being promoted to the position of Assistant Superintendent and Section 504 Coordinator for the Fox C-6 School District in the Central Office.

Unlike Kelly Nash, Dan Baker has to face scrutiny from the public for his involvement in the internet scandal that made national headlines at Fox C-6 in 2014 after it was discovered that derogatory posts were linked to the home and cell phone of Dan and Angie Baker as well as to the home of former superintendent Dianne Brown-Critchlow and her husband Jamie Critchlow who was fired by the district in June 2014.

Dan Baker was the Section 504 Coordinator for the district at the time the posts linked to his home were made in 2013. Mr. Baker was also involved in our Section 504 case and had been since May of 2008. Having derogatory comments linked to his home that were made against me could be considered retaliation by the Office for Civil Rights because we had filed complaints with the U.S. Department of Education's Office for Civil Rights (ED OCR) and the USDA's Office for Civil Rights (USDA OCR) back in 2008 and 2009 respectively.

Section 504 law prohibits retaliating against any individual who files a complaint with the Office for Civil Rights or advocates for someone's civil rights. Therefore, it's very important that everyone understands what the law says on Section 504. It's also very important to know that it was Mr. Baker's job as the district's 504 Coordinator to ensure that Fox C-6 complied with Section 504 law and the ADA AA.

Had the public been properly informed of the district's run in with ED OCR and USDA OCR six years ago, Dan Baker may not have been considered for the principal position at Seckman Elementary School.

Dan Baker, Dianne Brown-Critchlow and Todd Scott have been working hard for years to keep the district's non-compliance issues out of the news and hidden from the public. Board meeting minutes didn't document my questions or letters about the OCR issues. In fact, the district's former law firm sent me letters telling me that the public had no need to know about the Resolution Agreement that Dan Baker signed on May 1, 2009 with ED OCR or the 2010 District Wide Compliance Review investigation until ED OCR released their findings.

The Resolution Agreement signed by Dan Baker has been open now for nearly 6 years and the District Wide Compliance Review has been open for 5 years. 

How long does it take ED OCR to complete an investigation and report their findings?

That means that for nearly 6 years, Dan Baker and the district were unable to meet the terms of the agreement that Dan Baker agreed to in order for the district to be compliant with Section 504 law and the ADA AA. It certainly doesn't seem that Dan Baker was doing his job as Section 504 Coordinator.

I would think that not being able to meet the terms of an agreement with a federal agency for nearly 6 years would weigh heavily on Mr. Baker's job performance reviews over the years. But, since Dianne Brown-Critchlow and the former law firm kept ED OCR at bay for years as well as the USDA OCR, no one knew that Fox was non-compliant with federal law. The Resolution Agreement and District Wide Compliance Review and Monitoring Letters were never documented in the board meeting minutes or board packets.

I don't believe that Dr. Jim Wipke has been fully informed of all of the non-compliance issues with ED OCR and USDA OCR. I spoke with Dr. Wipke this evening after the board meeting about my concerns of hiring Dan Baker as the principal at Seckman Elementary School and Todd Scott as the new principal at Seckman High School. Dr, Wipke offered to get together and discuss my concerns further regarding this issue and that he would like to work with me on this issue.

I think it's time for the public to get involved and make a Sunshine Law Request and demand that the invoices from the district's former law firm be released to the public. Your taxpayer dollars were used to pay legal fees to keep ED OCR and USDA OCR at bay for years. In fact, one of the training sessions by the district's former law firm was titled, "OCR Is Gaining On You! How to Run Faster!".

It's seems quite obvious that someone in the district doesn't want the legal fee invoices to be made public. I've asked for copies of them for years via Sunshine Law Requests and the district still hasn't provided me a single copy of an invoice. 

As a Fox C-6 taxpayer, wouldn't you want to know why the school board approved paying more than $103,000 in legal fees between the August 2012 and September 2012 board meetings?

By the way, the $103,000 in legal fees corresponds time wise with emails we received from USDA OCR informing us that they were in discussions with the district and their legal counsel regarding the USDA's August 2011 Final Agency Decision that found the district non-compliant with Section 504 law and the ADA AA. It also corresponds with the time I was sent a cease and desist letter by the district to keep me from speaking with the public and school employees and former employees about my concerns with the district.

If Dan Baker and Dianne Brown-Critchlow were responsible for being found non-compliant with Section 504 law and the ADA AA in the USDA's August 2011 Final Agency Decision, shouldn't the public have been told about that?

Spending $103,000 in legal fees in just two months in 2012 was two times more than what the district paid the same law firm for legal fees for the entire year in 2005 from information recently provided to me by Fox's CFO John Brazeal.

It seems to me that paying out that much in legal fees in just two months in 2012 would have raised red flags for our school board members. In fact, we sent a letter to Dave Palmer and other board members back then asking them about the amount of money that the district was spending in legal fees because it appeared that the district wasn't following board policy on legal fees. We never received a response from our letter. You may want to make note of that since Dave Palmer is running for school board again this year.

I've made numerous Sunshine Requests for actual copies of the invoices for legal fees but I've only been given the dollar amounts for the invoices. Why is that?

Transparency is what keeps your school district and school board accountable. If there's a lack of transparency then there will be a lack of trust and lack of accountability in both the district and and the people in charge of running and overseeing the district.

Back in August 2010, the Post Dispatch wrote an article in which Dan Baker was quoted as saying, "the district had spent a lot in legal fees during the dispute, but he did not know an exact amount." What Mr. Baker didn't tell the newspaper was that the district decided to bring their legal counsel to a 504 meeting in August 2008. We asked why an attorney was need for a 504 meeting. The explanation given by the attorney was to ensure that the district was doing things properly. Well, it took from September 2008 when Dan Baker removed a 504 plan until August 2014 to get the 504 plan properly restored by the district. Restoring the 504 would not have occurred if the the district hadn't changed law firms.

Between 2008 and 2014 my wife and I worked to get the district to properly follow Section 504 law and restore what was improperly removed in 2008. However, some of our administrators decided to resort to bullying tactics using the internet as well the media in an attempt to halt our efforts to expose what was going on in the district.

So now, nearly a year after it was discovered that derogatory comments were traced to the home and cell phone of Dan and Angie Baker, Mr. Baker was selected as the principal of Seckman Elementary School despite his being linked to the internet scandal and to large sums of money being spent defying ED OCR and USDA OCR.

What do you think motivated the Bakers to post derogatory comments online?

In order for the community to believe that Dan Baker was the right person for the job, the district needs to release the invoices from the former law firm dating back to 2008 since he worked closely with the former law firm to get around the law.

Who Were the Other Job Candidates?
The district also needs to provide the public with the list of other candidates that applied for the job as well as the members of the selection committee that narrowed down the field of candidates. Without full disclosure of that information, the public is never going to believe that Dan Baker was the best candidate for the job!

Please contact you school board members and request that they release the invoices for legal fees from the Mickes Goldman O'Toole law firm.

Also ask the school board to publish the list of candidates that applied for the Seckman Elementary School principal position and the names of the selection committee members for the job.

Perhaps a community of requests for how your taxpayer dollars were spent on legal fees will finally encourage the district to release the invoice information. Other school districts publish that information, why can't Fox?

KMOV News 4 Covers Fox C-6 Voluntary Separation Incentive Plan Payout

Robin Smith of KMOV News 4 covered the Fox school district Voluntary Separation Incentive Plan (VSIP) payout on Friday March 13, 2015 at 5PM.

I posted an article about the most recent VSIP payot totals to date on Wednesday March 11. That article has already had more than 1,000 page views.

News 4 reporter Robin Smith interviewed Fox's Chief Financial Officer John Brazeal. John Brazeal is a fellow Fox graduate. Mr. Brazeal's father taught in the district years ago when my father was principal at Fox High School.

Mr. Brazeal told News 4 that current projections are that between 140 and 150 people will be taking advantage of the incentive payout which will cost the district about $4 Million dollars.

The March 17, 2015 board meeting packet was posted Friday evening March 13, 2015 but did not contain an updated list of employees that are taking advantage of the VSIP payout. The most recent VSIP report listing found in the February 24, 2015 board packet had less than 100 people listed at a cost of $2.72 Million dollars.

The cutoff to apply for the VSIP program was January 16, 2015. Employees then had 45 days to decide whether or not they would be taking advantage of the VSIP after reviewing the documents and having the opportunity to consult with their tax advisors. So, the list of employees taking advantage of the VSIP should be known by now but that information was not included in the March 17, 2015 board packet.

Fox is losing some very good employees who are taking advantage of the VSIP because they are tired of all of the disgraceful things that have gone on in our district over the past decade.

Fewer Fox employees would have been eligible for the VSIP program prior to last year, Prior to February 2014, Fox C-6 employees were required to work in the district for a minimum of 10 years before being eligible for the Early Retirement Incentive Plan which was changed to the Voluntary Separation Incentive Plan in the summer of 2014.

In February 2014, changes were made to remove the cap on the maximum number of years of service that kept some people from qualifying for the VSIP. It was considered discriminatory by the district's former legal counsel. However, when the upper cap was removed from the Employment Retirement Incentive Plan, the 10 year minimum requirement was also removed and approved by the board.

Fox's school board planned to make the 2014-2015 school year, the last year that the Early Retirement Incentive Plan was offered to employees as it had been offered year after year for years and was no longer being used as intended.

The 10 year minimum requirement of working for the school district was replaced with the requirement of only having to be vested in Missouri's Public School Retirement System (PSRS) or Missouri's Public Education Employees Retirement System (PEERS). A minimum of 5 years of qualified service is all that is required to become vested in PSRS or PEERS. This means that anyone who has at least 5 years of qualified service under the PSRS or PEERS retirement system would be eligible to take advantage of Fox's incentive payout program.

So, thanks to the changes made to Fox's Early Retirement Incentive Plan in February 2014, Fox C-6 taxpayers will be footing the bill for incentive payments to employees who have worked for the Fox C-6 School District for as little as 1 or 2 years. Lack of thorough oversight and lack of transparency by our school board allowed for this blunder to occur when the changes were made to the Early Retirement Incentive Plan last year.

Changes to Fox's early retirement incentive plan were made prior to the public learning that derogatory comments had been posted about myself and others in online forums that were traced to the home of former disgraced superintendent Dianne Critchlow and her husband Jamie Critchlow the former Director of the Bridges program. Jamie Critchlow was fired in June 2014. Dianne Critchlow was allowed to walk away with an incentive payout of more than $130,000 in October 2014 even after the public learned about all of the things that had been going under her rule as superintendent.

Derogatory comments were also traced to the home of assistant superintendent Dan Baker and his wife Angie Burns Baker who is Fox's Director of Federal programs. Comments were also traced to the home of former Fox High Assistant Principal Bill Brengle.

Dan Baker was Fox's Section 504 Coordinator for the school district between June 2008 and June 2014. As Fox's 504 Coordinator, Dan Baker was responsible for Fox having to sign a Resolution Agreement with the U.S. Department of Educations Office for Civil Rights (ED OCR) on May 1, 2009 in which the district agreed to take corrective actions and update policies as well as conduct an evaluation in order to comply with Section 504 law and the ADA AA.

As of March 2015, the district still hasn't fully complied with the May 1, 2009 Resolution Agreement with ED OCR that Dan Baker signed and agreed to comply with despite OCR's "vigorous enforcement of Section 504" as they state they do in ED OCR's October 21, 2014 Dear Colleague Letter on Bullying that was sent to all school districts across the country reminding them about their responsibilities in following the law.

I'm being sarcastic when I say that ED OCR performed "vigorous enforcement of Section 504". It's been well documented by the Kansas City Office's "monitoring letters" starting in December 2009 to the Fox School District that ED OCR was anything but vigorous. In fact, ED OCR did nothing but extend deadline after deadline when the district failed to comply with the Resolution Agreement.


What's Happening With the Bakers?
Dan Baker and Angie Burns Baker are both still employed by the district at this time. In fact, Dan Baker has been the interim principal at Seckman Elementary School after the previous principal was moved to an assistant principal position earlier this school year.

Dan Baker was also recently selected as a finalist for the principal position at Seckman Elementary School despite having derogatory comments traced to his home that were made against me in 2013 while he was Fox's Section 504 Coordinator.

It was also discovered last year that Mr. Baker played golf instead of attending the Marzano Conference while in Florida on the first day of the conference. The golf game was paid for with taxpayer money using Todd Scott's school district credit card that was loaned to Jamie Critchlow for the trip. Dan Baker also used his school district credit card numerous times to pay for personal meals and other items which violated school district policy.

Dan Baker's ethical and moral decisions over the past 6+ years should have kept him from even being considered for the principal position at Seckman Elementary School. He was caught bullying parents anonymously in online forums. He cost the district easily close to $200,000 if not more in legal fees as he and Dianne Critchlow tried to get around Section 504 law and the ADA AA for 6 years while Dan Baker served as the district's 504 Coordinator.

There is plenty of documentation to back up Dan Baker's failure in ensuring that the Fox C-6 School District properly followed Section 504 law and the ADA AA.

Read the USDA's August 2011 Final Agency Decision when the district was found to be in violation of Section 504 and the ADA AA.

The Post Dispatch had been informed about the May 2009 Resolution Agreement and the March 2010 District Wide Compliance Review but did not mention either one of those facts in the August 2010 Post Dispatch article that asked us if we had considered moving out of the district. Intimidating parents seems to have been a pattern of practice in the district for the last decade. Comments were posted online about the article within minutes of it being published. Many of them were very derogatory in nature. I asked that some of them be removed but the Post Dispatch refused to remove them. The Post Dispatch eventually removed all of the comments when they switched over to their Facebook comment system. We did ask for the IP addresses of the comments but the paper did not retain those records.

The 2010 Post Dispatch article was very much like a "House of Cards" attempt at using the media to silence parents for attempting to get the school district to do the right thing and do what they were supposed to do as documented in the District Wide Compliance Review.

Read the documents from the ED OCR and USDA OCR to see if you think Dan Baker's comments from the 2010 Post Dispatch article hold true when he told the paper that he "strongly believes the district has handled the situation appropriately".

Baker said he could not discuss the Simpsons' case because of confidentiality rules but strongly believes the district has handled the situation appropriately. He said the district had spent a lot in legal fees during the dispute, but he did not know an exact amount.

Getting around Section 504 law was easy, all for Dan Baker had to do was say he felt the student didn't qualify for Section 504. Then he would inform the parent that they could file a complaint with OCR, file for a Due Process Hearing or sue the school district if they didn't believe his decision was correct.

As the District's 504 Coordinator, Dan Baker was the person who ultimately decided whether or not a student qualified for Section 504 as the district's attorney pointed out several times during 504 meetings over the years.

Since Mr. Baker publicly made the claim that the district spent a lot in legal fees, then the fees spent by the district should be made public. To date that has not happened despite numerous requests. The district was in dispute with USDA OCR and ED OCR between 2008 and 2014 because the district and their legal counsel weren't going to back down from their position after spending all that money.

Dan Baker also violated the public's trust and most likely school district policy in his use of his school district credit card.

The Fox C-6 school board's ethics should be called into question for even allowing Dan Baker to be interviewed for the principal's job at Seckman Elementary School in the first place. Dan and Angie Burns Baker should have been fired last summer after the internet scandal broke but fear of violating their contracts kept the board from doing so.

Dr. Wipke and the Fox C-6 School Board will have to answer to the public and the media if Dan Baker and Angie Baker are offered contracts for anything other than a teaching job in our district. They both are automatically eligible for a teaching job due to teacher tenure law. Administrators don't have tenure but have tenure as teachers if they taught for 5 or more years in the district.

Doug Flowers in the St. Joseph School District (SJSD) was recently offered only a teaching contract after the recent release of the SJSD's state audit. Doug Flowers was the assistant superintendent of Human Resources at SJSD prior to being reassigned to other administrative duties until his contract expires June 30.

Please contact Dr. Wipke and your Fox C-6 school board members before Dan Baker is offered a contract for another administrative position in the Fox C-6 School District. The morale in the district cannot be seriously improved until the Bakers are no longer employed by the district.

Click on the link below to watch KMOV News 4's coverage of Fox's Voluntary Separation Incentive Plan payout.

KMOV 4 News Covers Fox's $2.72+ Million Dollar Voluntary Separation Incentive Plan Payout