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.

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

Wow! Dan Baker Chosen as Seckman Elementary Principal Over 58 Other Applicants

I do believe that Fox made some good decisions in the hiring of the new Fox Senor High School Principal, our new assistant superintendent in charge of Human Resources as well as Fox's new Food Nutrition Director.

However, it's quite obvious that Dr. Wipke, Fox's BOE and the selection committees never read the May 2009 Resolution Agreement with the U.S. Department of Education's Office for Civil Rights (ED OCR) that Dan Baker signed on May 1, 2009.

Dan Baker was Fox's Section 504 Coordinator when he agreed to make corrections to bring Fox into compliance with federal law. It's now been nearly 6 years since Dan Baker signed the Resolution Agreement and it's still open.

It also appears that Dr. Wipke, Fox's BOE and the selection committee never read the USDA OCR's August 2011 Final Agency Decision that found Fox C-6 Non-Compliant with Section 504 and the ADA AA. That agreement told the district to immediately reinstate a Section 504 that was removed in September 2008. It took until August 2014 and the removal of Dan Baker as the Section 504 coordinator before the district complied with that decision.

Did Fox's board of education not take the district's Non-Compliance issues into consideration when the they voted 6-0 to hire Dan Baker as the next principal of Seckman Elementary School?

As Dan Baker and Dianne Brown-Critchlow told me many times at board meetings, they kept the BOE informed about what was going on with the Resolution Agreement, the District Wide Compliance Review and the USDA's Final Agency Decision. However, the district never publicly acknowledged the problems. David Palmer is the only person that is still serving on the board when the Resolution Agreement and District Wide Compliance Review was initiated and he is running for school board again.

Did David Palmer ever ask why the district still hasn't complied with the May 2009 Resolution Agreement?

David Palmer's wife Gee Palmer also played a huge part in the Non-Compliance issues as the Director of Nursing. She participated in 504 Team meetings and was deposed during the Due Process Hearing.

Dianne Brown-Critchlow and Dan Baker have made comments about the Resolution Agreement and the District Wide Compliance Review during Public Sessions at board meetings but I don't believe any of their comments were documented in board meeting minutes. This all occurred before the district began audio recording school board meetings. Luckily, I've been recording meetings ever since I began attending them.

It would certainly be interesting to see if any of the other 58 applicants denied Section 504 protections to students for 6 years like Dan Baker did while he was the Section 504 Coordinator for the district.

It's interesting to note that after Dan Baker was removed as the district's Section 504 Coordinator in June 2014, students that had been previously denied Section 504 plans under his watch are now being found eligible for Section 504 and are being provided 504 plans in the district.

That fact alone should certainly be cause concern for the Fox C-6 community when being told that Dan Baker was the best candidate for the job.

Yes, Dan Bakers home was linked to derogatory comments that were posted online. But Dan has never admitted to actually making any comments online. However, he did apologize that his home was linked to those comments.

Fox's CFO John Brazeal told me that he asked Dan Baker directly if he had posted comments online and he said that Dan Baker did not answer.

So if Dr. Wipke did not read the USDA OCR's August 2011 Final Agency Decision that found Fox Non-Compliant with federal law, it would appear that he didn't have all of the facts that he should have taken into consideration when he made his decision to recommend Dan Baker to the Fox C-6 Board of Education as the best candidate for the job.

Reading the article in this week's Arnold-Imperial Leader about the hiring of Dan Baker and Todd Scott demonstrates that the "rigorous process" wasn't rigorous enough in it's screening of candidates.

Was Todd Scott still the assistant superintendent of Human Resources while he was going through the "rigorous process" when he applied for the principal position at Seckman Senior High School?

Fox C-6 board member Dan Kroupa told the Arnold-Imperial Leader that Todd Scott was selected after a "thorough and unbiased screening process." You can take that comment for what it's worth!

Acting superintendent Tim Crutchley, incoming superintendent Dr. Jim Wipke and the Fox C-6 Board of Education must be hoping that the community won't be able to see through all of the "smoke and mirrors" that they are feeding the public in the media.

Perhaps they're hoping that the community will eventually forget about all of the wrong doings and that everyone will just give up on trying to making changes in our district so they can get back to doing what they've been doing for years.

Should Fox's BOE publicly acknowledge the May 2009 Resolution Agreement with ED OCR that Mr. Baker agreed to uphold. It's very entertaining to read the years of "monitoring letters" that were sent to the district informing them that they still hadn't complied with the Resolution Agreement. ED OCR just kept giving the district new deadlines to meet which they never did.

How many years does it take a school district to comply with federal law?

Should the district publicly acknowledge the District Wide Compliance Review investigation that was initiated by ED OCR in March 2010 that is still an open investigation?

Since Dan Baker was responsible for all of the OCR Non-Compliance issues along with Dianne Brown-Critchlow that are still hanging over the district after more than 5 years, one would think that Fox's Board of Education would have taken that into consideration before they voted 6-0 to hire Dan Baker as Seckman Elementary School principal.

Did Dan Baker not know or understand Section 504 law when he was the district's Section 504 coordinator from 2008 to 2014?

Is that why the district spent hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal fees between 2008 and 2014?

Did Fox's Board of Education ever review any of the invoices for legal services between 2008 and 2014 while Dan Baker was the district's Section 504 Coordinator to see why the district was spending so much money in legal fees?

It's certainly hard to believe that the other 58 candidates that applied for the principal position at Seckman Elementary School were given a fair chance considering who was on the screening committees and final interviews. It was stated that the Seckman Elementary School teachers heavily influenced the decision to hire Dan Baker as the new principal at Seckman Elementary. Are the teachers responsible for hiring their own boss?

You can read Tim Crutchley's response as to who participated in the hiring process in my previous article:

Fox's Rigorous Process that You Should Trust for the Latest New Hires!

Is moving an educator who denied services and protection to students for 6 years what's really best for our students and parents at Seckman Elementary School?

Read the Arnold-Imperial Leader article to learn more about what some of our school board members had to say about the recent hiring of Dan Baker and Todd Scott by using the link below.

March 26, 2015 Arnold Imperial Leader Article on Hiring Dan Baker and Todd Scott

Fox's Rigorous Process That You Should Trust for the Latest New Hires!

Nikki McClain, a parent in the Fox C-6 School District and the administrator of the Facebook page NO MORE MONEY OR RESOURCES For the Fox C-6 Superintendent recently received a Sunshine Request response from acting superintendent Tim Crutchley regarding the hiring of administrators that were recently announced at the March 17, 2015 Fox C-6 Board of Education meeting.

Thank you to Nikki McClain for sharing with me the response she received from the district.

I had emailed all of the current Fox C-6 school board members early Tuesday morning March 17, 2015 asking for the same information but never received a response from a single board member.

I had also emailed incoming superintendent Dr. Jim Wipke and Fox C-6 board president John Laughlin on Monday March 16, 2015 asking how Dan Baker was even considered as a candidate for the Seckman Elementary School principal position.

I did not receive an email response from Dr. Wipke or Mr. Laughlin. I did receive a Read Receipt message from Mr. Laughlin's email software at 12:18AM on Monday March 16, 2015. I did not receive a Read Receipt message from Dr. Wipke. However, Dr. Wipke told me he received my email when I spoke to him immediately following the March 17 BOE meeting.

Mrs. McClain submitted a Sunshine Request for the list of candidates for the recent new hires for the Seckman Elementary School, Fox Senior High School and Seckman Senior High School principal positions as well as the new Food Nutrition Director. I believe the district did an excellent job in choosing the new Fox Senior High School principal and the new Food Nutrition Director. I haven't dealt with Todd Scott on any school matters other than the time he stood up for Dan Baker and Dianne Critchlow when I asked Dan Baker about the USDA's August 2011 Final Agency Decision that found the Fox C-6 School District Non-Compliant with Section 504 law and the ADA AA. That conversation occurred after the December 2011 Fox C-6 BOE meeting.

I would think that a rigorous hiring process would do a much better job at filtering out potential candidates who have been linked to online bullying of parents in our district as well as not being able to bring our district into compliance with federal law after more than 5 years. Dan Baker signed a Resolution Agreement to do so with ED OCR on May 1, 2009.

After you read Tim Crutchley's response as to who screened the applications and who served on the committees, you may understand why those concerns were overlooked.

Is the Ms. Kriese that is listed on the Seckman Elementary School principal selection committee related to 2015 board candidate Drew Kriese?

A friend of mine told me that the Kriese's attend Oak Bridge Community Church with Tim Crutchley and Kristen Pelster. This person told me that Drew Kriese was speaking with Tim Crutchley at church the Sunday before the announcement of the new hires. Did that perhaps have any influence on the candidate screening as well? I was told that they are also all friends on Facebook as well. Interesting!

March 2015 BOE Meeting Audio
Some of the Fox C-6 BOE members talked about the new rigorous process that was used to hire our new administrators at the March 2015 BOE meeting. Click on the names to listen to the comments from BOE members Dan Kroupa, Dawn Mullins and John Laughlin about the new process from Fox's YouTube recording of the 2015 BOE meeting.

It was stated during the BOE meeting that the Seckman Elementary School teachers heavily influenced the board's decision to hire Dan Baker as the principal at Seckman Elementary. Mr. Baker was surrounded by his cheering teachers at the March 2015 BOE meeting as you can hear in the audio of the meeting.

Yesterday, I posted some tweets linking to the comments from the March 2015 BOE meeting but they appear to have been deleted by Twitter at someone's request.

I also received another Copyright Infringement notice this morning for the same public records report of the 2004-2010 legal bills paid that was paid with taxpayer money to the district's former law firm.

It's difficult to understand how a printed report from your school district for legal fee payments is a violation of copyright infringement. It just gives the impression that someone doesn't want you to know what Fox has been paying in legal fees.

Mr. Baker may have skills and credentials to be a principal in our district. However, it doesn't negate the black cloud that has been hanging and will be hanging over our school district since his "home" (and cell phone) was linked to online posts.

According to the district's response, the district is also keeping the list of candidates for the positions from the public since Missouri Sunshine Law ALLOWS them to do so but does not require them to do so. You can read about Missouri Sunshine Law that is referenced in Tim Crutchley's email response by using the links below.

Top 10 Things You Should Know About Sunshine Law

Revised Missouri Statutes Section 610.021

The following email was sent to Nikki McClain by acting superintendent Tim Crutchley in response to her Sunshine Request regarding the recent administrative hires that were announced at the March 17, 2015 Fox C-6 BOE meeting:

From: Crutchley, Tim - CO Admin.
Date: March 24, 2015 at 2:44:13 PM CDT
To: Nikki McClain
Subject: response to request 

We are in receipt of your March 19, 2015 email request for records. 

Please be advised the identity of candidates considered for employment is a closed record pursuant to Section 610.021(13) R.S.Mo.  As a result, we are unable to provide names of job applicants. 

The District does not have a list of committee members used in the hiring process for the Assistant Superintendent HR, the SHS, FHS or SES principals or the Director of Nutrition Services to provide in response to your request. Although the District is not obligated to do so, it will provide the following narrative in response to your request. 

The screening of applications for the principals and human resources position were done by a committee of district administrators, specifically Dr. Wipke, Mr. Crutchley, Dr. Rizzi and Mr. Brazeal.  The same committee interviewed first round candidates.  Screening and the first round of interviews for the Dir of Nutrition Services was performed by Mr. Scott and Mr. Brazeal. 

Second round interviews  were conducted by the following committees: Fox High School: Ms. Wucher, Mr. Williams, Ms. Schwalbe, Ms. Seliga, Ms. Greene, Ms. Hoeltzer, Mr. Reese, Mr. Sansoucie, Mr. Meadows, Ms. Weisemann, Ms. Rissi plus two students; Seckman High School:  Ms. Adkins, Mr. Prezzavento, Ms. Scott, Ms. Montegomery, Ms. Hildebrand, Ms. Kraus, Ms. Fritz, Ms. Thompson, Ms. Labelle, Ms. Hill, Ms. Rissi plus two students; Seckman Elementary School consisted of Ms. Randolph, Mr. Werner, Ms. Fisher, Ms. Callahan, Ms. McFerran and Ms. Kriese. 

Second round interviews for the human resources position were conducted by Ms. Werkmeister, Ms. Ferranto, Ms. Bambini, Ms. Fritz, Ms. Waller, Ms. Missey, Mr. Wilken and Ms. Mijangos.

Second and final round interviews for the food service director were conducted by a committee that included Mr. Scott, Mr. Brazeal, Dr. Cardona, Dr. Reese, Dr. Schwalbe and Ms. West plus one student. 

Third and final round interviews of high school principal finalists were interviewed by the Assistant Superintendent for Secondary Education (Dr. Rizzi) and incoming Superintendent (Dr. Wipke). 

Third and final round interviews of elementary school principal finalists were interviewed by the Interim Superintendent (Mr. Crutchley) and incoming Superintendent (Dr. Wipke). 

Third and final round interviews of the human resources finalists were interviewed by Interim Superintendent (Mr. Crutchley), incoming Superintendent (Dr. Wipke), Assistant Superintendent for Secondary Education (Dr. Rizzi) and the Chief Financial Officer (Mr. Brazeal).

Tim Crutchley 

Acting Superintendent 

745 Jeffco Blvd 

Arnold, Mo 63010 

636-296-8000 

636-282-5170 fax

Achievement - Character - Excellence
National District of Character

Another Cash Give Away of Fox C-6 Taxpayer Dollars!

On Friday February 27, 2015, it was reported in the Post Dispatch that the Fox C-6 school board voted 6-0 at this week's board meeting to approve the termination agreement with former Fox C-6 School Food Nutrition Director Kelly Nash.

Kelly Nash was the daughter in law of former long time Fox C-6 school board member Linda Nash. Linda Nash was the board president when her daughter in law Kelly Nash was hired as the Food Nutrition Director.

According to the Post Dispatch article, Kelly Nash is leaving with a settlement that will pay her more than $20,000 after being employed by the district for just over two years. According to the article Kelly Nash's employment was "terminated" on January 31, 2015. She was placed on paid administrative leave on December 31, 2014. Kelly Nash's salary was $63,621.

Kelly Nash should not have been given any settlement money. However, since Kelly Nash's employment contract did not contain any language specifying that she had to obtain her certification within 2 years, the district and Fox C-6 taxpayers were on the hook. The public was told in December 2012 that she would have to obtain her certification with 2 years as Fox's Food Nutrition Director. Not stipulating that in her contract was a mistake that should not have happened.

I wrote about this problem in December 2014 in the following article:

Fox Board Meeting Minutes and ContractsNO Record of Removal of 10 Years of Service Requirements

It's very apparent that Kelly Nash did not obtain her certification as required even though Tim Crutchley says he can't comment on whether or not she obtained her certification due to "privacy rules". This has been another costly lesson for Fox C-6 taxpayers due to a lack of board oversight. It's just another example of how easy it has been to cover things up for years and keep handing out cash for those types of mistakes. Just think about how many books could have been purchased over the past year for all that money that's been handed out.

Kelly Nash's 2014-2015 Employment Contract

Transparency is key to rebuilding the trust of the community. This fiasco was a big step backwards in rebuilding trust in the community. The board needs to ensure that job candidates for administrator and director positions are listed in board meeting minutes in order to remove the secrecy of what goes in Closed Session.

Terms of Kelly Nash's Settlement Agreement

• Kelly Nash will be paid a $20,000 settlement.
• Kelly Nash will be paid $105 for two unused sick days.
• Kelly Nash will be paid $1,967 for eight vacation days.
• Kelly Nash will be paid $403 per month until her contract expiration date of June 30, 2015.
• Kelly Nash agrees not to sue the school district.
• Settlement prohibits school board members and acting superintendent Tim Crutchley and CFO John Brazeal from making derogatory comments about Kelly Nash.
• Kelly Nash is prohibited from making derogatory comments about the district.
• Agreement states that Kelly Nash was not terminated for misconduct allowing her to obtain unemployment benefits.
• Kelly Nash agrees to never apply for another job in the district.

Post Dispatch article:Fox Nutrition Director Leaves with $20,000 Settlement

FNS Non-Compliance with Section 504 and ADA AA
In August 2011, Fox C-6 was found non-complaint with Section 504 law and the ADA AA by the USDA Food Nutrition Services division. The district was told to immediately reinstate a Section 504 plan that had been removed in September 2008. The district with the help of the district's former law firm fought the August 2011 ruling for nearly 3 years.

August 2011 USDA OCR Final Agency Decision

After the December 2011 Fox C-6 school board meeting, former 504 Coordinator Dan Baker told me that the district had filed an appeal with the USDA to the August 2011 ruling. The district had discussions with the USDA regarding the ruling in July through September 2012. In August 2013, the district was informed that their appeal was denied.

It wasn't until after the internet scandal broke and Dan Baker was removed from his position as the Section 504 Coordinator and the district hired a new law firm that the district reinstated the Section 504 plan that was removed in September 2008.

Food Nutrition Directors and Section 504 Coordinators agree every year to follow the USDA's Guidelines and Regulations in exchange for receiving federal funding for the National School Lunch Program. One of those guidelines is the USDA's Accommodating Children with Special Dietary Needs - A Guide for Food Service Directors document.

It was the job of Fox's former Food Nutrition Directors Candy Sengheiser-Gruenewald and Kelly Nash as well as Fox's former Section 504 Coordinator Dan Baker to comply with Section 504 law and the ADA and ADA AA.

It took the district 3 years after being found non-compliant with federal law to issue Section 504 plans for students with special dietary needs. It took 6 years of effort to have the district reissue the Section 504 Plan that was originally taken away in September 2008.

Training Does Not Follow Section 504 Law
It was September 2008 when I informed the USDA's Office for Civil Rights Regional Director about a video presentation and power point slides that I had found using Google on a Missouri law firm's website that appeared to be providing incorrect information about Section 504 law. The video was recorded at the 2005 Annual School Law Seminar. It was titled "Controlling the Explosion in Section 504 Lawsuits: Allergic Reaction to Peanut Product Suits".

The presentation stated that school districts should not provide Section 504 plans to students with food allergies even if they were qualified for one because,"It may lead to a slippery slope making it more difficult to deny protection to others". The reason listed in their presentation didn't seem like a very good reason for not writing a Section 504 plan. The Regional Director informed me that the statements in the presentation did not follow Section 504 law and she wanted to forward the presentation to the national office so they could deal with it on a national level.

Video and Presentation Leads to Statewide Training

A link to the video presentation and power point slides was forwarded to the regional director of the USDA's Office for Civil Rights who forwarded it to the Washington D.C. office in 2008. The video presentation and slides were the subject of a presentation by the regional director in Colorado in 2008. It also led to state wide training in 2009 for the state of Missouri's school nutrition directors in Jefferson City. No one from Fox attended that training according to the regional director.

It's difficult to imagine the amount of legal fees spent by the Fox C-6 school district between 2008 and 2014 in order to keep from writing Section 504 plans for students with special dietary needs.

In August 2013, the National Director of the USDA's Office for Civil Rights in Washington D.C. told me that it was unlikely that the law firm would change its stance on Section 504 and accommodating children with special dietary needs after billing the district for years defending their position. It wasn't until after Fox C-6 changed law firms in 2014 that Section 504 plans were written for children with special dietary needs.

Trying to get the district to do the right thing led to the uncovering of many more issues going on in our school district that would have never come to light if there hadn't been so much push back and retaliation by former superintendent Dianne Brown-Critchlow and assistant superintendent Dan Baker.

USDA's Accommodating Children with Special Dietary Needs in the School Nutrition Programs

Fox C-6 Administrators Dan Baker, Todd Scott and Andy Arbeitman have applied for Early Retirement!

According to the December 19, 2014 edition of The Countian - Jefferson County newspaper, Fox C-6 assistant superintendents Dan Baker, Todd Scott and Andy Arbeitman have all applied for Early Retirement.

Mr. Arbeitman had previously submitted his request to retire early to Fox's Board of Education (BOE).

You can expect to see Dan Baker, Todd Scott and Andy Arbeitman walk away from our district with 50% of their current salary due to the Voluntary Separation Incentive Program (VSIP).

Based upon their current contract amounts:

Dan Baker will walk away with: $74,167.50

Todd Scott will walk away with: $72,693.00

Andy Arbeitman will walk away with: $66,747,50 (despite only working for Fox for 2 years)

Both Dan Baker and Todd Scott had each completed 20 years of service with the Fox C-6 School District at the end of the 2013-2014 school year according to Missouri DESE records.

Dan Baker's Contracts
Dan Baker's current contract has his salary listed at $148,335.00 for the 2014-2015 school year which reflects the 5% Voluntary Pay Cut he agreed to take.

Dan Baker's February 2014 contract had his salary listed at $156,142.00 for the 2014-2015 school year.

On June 4, 2014 Dan Baker and his wife Angie Burns Baker were placed on paid administrative leave after derogatory comments directed at district critics were traced to the Bakers' home computer and cellular phone.

However, in July, acting superintendent Tim Crutchley told the media that only one comment was posted from the Bakers' home computer. Mr. Crutchley's statement was incorrect.

Mr. Crutchley's incorrect statement gave the public the impression that what the Bakers had done wasn't that bad and that's why the Bakers got to keep their job.

Below is Mr. Crutchley's statement that appeared in the July 24, 2014 Arnold-Imperial Leader:

"School officials investigated the claims made in the lawsuit and decided only one comment was posted from the Bakers' home computer and that the two could keep their job, following disciplinary measures, Crutchley said."

Not only was Mr. Crutchley's statement incorrect about the number of posts, but it didn't reflect the fact that multiple posts were traced not only to the Bakers' home computer but also to their cellular phone.

Mr. Crutchley should have also pointed out the fact that when the online comments were posted by the Bakers, Dan Baker was Fox C-6's Section 504 Coordinator. As the 504 Coordinator for the District, Mr. Baker was responsible for ensuring that the District properly followed Section 504 Law.

In fact, Mr. Baker was responsible for signing an Assurance Agreement each year stating that the district would comply with Federal law including Section 504 Law as documented in board meeting minutes.

Section 504 Law prohibits retaliating against anyone that files an OCR complaint or advocates for a right protected by Section 504 law. Since one of the derogatory comments traced to the Baker's was directed at me and I had filed complaints with OCR as well as advocated for a right protected by Section 504, the Bakers violated Section 504 Law.

According to the exhibits in the amended lawsuit petition filed on November 14, 2014, multiple posts were made on the Topix forum from the Bakers' home computer and cellular phone. I covered this issue in more detail in the following article which lists some of the comments posted by the Bakers:

Was the Fox C-6 School Board Misled by the Bakers?

Dan Baker had a Loss of Compensation and Rank?

Also, Mr. Crutchley stated in his December 19 response to Nikki McClain that Mr. Baker had "a loss of compensation and rank" when he responded to Ms. McClain's concerns about Dan Baker being appointed as the interim principal at Seckman Elementary School.

If Mr. Baker had a loss of rank why wasn't his salary reduced?

Was Mr. Baker's salary reduced at the December 16, 2014 Fox C-6 BOE meeting?

Mr. Baker's most recent contract was provided to me by the district on December 2, 2014 and it is only 5% less than his previous contract.

Mr. Baker is expected to start working as the interim principal at Seckman Elementary School on Monday January 5, 2015. This was a very bad decision by the District. Mr. Baker should not have even been considered for the position at Seckman Elementary School.

Dan and Angie Baker's 2014-2015 Employment Contracts Before and After Settlement Agreement and 5% Voluntary Pay Cut

Todd Scott's Contracts
Todd Scott's current contract has his salary listed at $145,386.00 for the 2014-2015 school year which reflects the 5% Voluntary Pay Cut he agreed to take.

Todd Scott's February 2014 contract had his salary listed at $153,038.00 for the 2014-2015 school year.

Todd Scott's 2014-2015 Employment Contracts Before and After 5% Voluntary Pay Cut

Was the Fox C-6 School Board Misled by the Bakers?

Everyone makes mistakes. What’s important is that we recognize when we make a mistake so we learn from it, thereby increasing the likelihood that we won’t repeat it. I'm not really sure that Fox C-6 Assistant Superintendent Dan Baker and his wife Fox C-6 Director of Federal Programs Angie Burns Baker learned much from their mistake.

I question whether or not the Bakers fully disclosed their online activities with the Fox C-6 Board of Education (BOE) in order to keep their jobs. It does not appear that they did.

Also, Mr. Baker didn't apologize for his transgressions as Mr. Crutchley would like you to believe. Mr. Baker didn't apologize to the people that he made derogatory comments about.

Mr. Baker read a very well crafted statement at the August 4, 2014 Fox C-6 school board meeting in which he admitted NO wrongdoing or culpability. He apologized for getting caught!

Mr. Baker was not remorseful to his victims. He was checking a box to save his job!

Without honestly taking responsibility for our mistakes, and learning from them, it’s very difficult to genuinely move forward.  I’d say that’s especially true for those who were injured by someone’s “mistake".

Dan and Angie Baker apparently made “a mistake” when they wrote derogatory posts about me and others on a public online forum. At the time the posts were made, Dan Baker was Fox C-6's Section 504 Coordinator. That's an important fact because my wife and I had been advocating for our daughter’s right to have a Section 504 plan in the district for over 4 years when online comments were being made by the Bakers.

Mr. Baker originally provided our daughter with a 504 plan in May 2008, but then revoked it a few months later. For the next 6 years, including the time period during which “the Baker household” made the derogatory posts, we continued to pursue with the District our daughter’s right to have a 504 plan.

We firmly believed the District (i.e. Mr. Baker) was not fulfilling their obligations to our daughter, and we repeatedly sought the help of our school board to rectify this mistake. When the school board refused to help us, we sought the assistance of federal agencies to investigate the District’s management or should I say mismanagement of Section 504. It was Missouri DESE's former Compliance Officer who suggested filing a complaint with the Office for Civil Rights because he believed what the district was doing was wrong.

Missouri DESE's former Compliance Officer was correct. Both the U.S. Department of Education's Office for Civil Rights (ED OCR) and the USDA's Office for Civil Rights (USDA OCR) have been investigating and monitoring Fox C-6 since 2008 and 2009 respectively to determine whether or not the District was fulfilling its legal obligations to our daughter and other students in the district properly.

In August 2011 Fox C-6 and Missouri DESE were notified in a Final Agency Decision from USDA OCR that they were found non-compliant with Section 504 and the ADA AA. They were told to correct the problem immediately. It took 3 years after the notification to immediately reinstate the 504 Plan for the district to properly correct the problem. In the meantime, we continued to email the federal agencies to follow up on the progress of their investigations and the progress with enforcing compliance. We also contacted our U.S. Senators and Congressman in hopes of expediting a resolution. Fox's former legal counsel also emailed our U.S. Senators in an attempt to curtail the investigations.

Persistence Leads To Backlash
Apparently, persisting in one's efforts to get your school district to do the right thing can lead to backlash from administrators who aren't properly doing their job and are being questioned in front of the school board.

What truly stands out is the great amount of effort that Dan Baker and Dianne Brown-Critchlow spent in order to avoid writing a 504 plan for our daughter, not to mention all of the time they spent posting in online forums from their homes, cell phones and school district computers.

Now that Dan Baker is no longer the Section 504 Coordinator for Fox C-6, students who were previously denied 504 Plans are now being found eligible and obtaining them.

This fact seems to document that Dan Baker wasn't properly managing and implementing Section 504 in our district for the 6 years that he was the Section 504 Coordinator, yet he continued to receive very large raises just like Dianne Brown-Critchlow and her husband received.

Did our school board not review Mr. Baker's performance as the district's Section 504 Coordinator given all of the money spent in legal fees related to Section 504 issues in our district battling the federal agencies?

Problems at Seckman Elementary School

That leads us to the next problem which involves the appointing of Dan Baker as the interim principal at Seckman Elementary School despite being named in a lawsuit for posting derogatory comments in a public online forum about myself and others.

Perhaps they posted comments because I had been questioning Mr. Baker's gross mismanagement of Section 504 in the district and had to file complaints with the U.S. Department of Education's Office for Civil Rights (ED OCR) as well as the USDA's Office for Civil Rights (USDA OCR) as he tried to subvert Section 504 Law for the past 6+ years.

August 2011 USDA OCR Final Agency Decision
In August 2011, Fox C-6 was sent a Final Agency Decision from USDA OCR directing the District to immediately reinstate our daughter's Section 504 plan that Dan Baker removed in September 2008.

The following paragraph was included on the next to last page of the USDA's Final Agency Decision. The language in the paragraph quoted below clearly spells out in fine detail that Section 504 Law PROHIBITS any form of retaliation against any person who files a civil rights complaint.

This is an extremely important paragraph. Dan Baker and Dianne Brown-Critchlow were very familiar with the USDA's Final Agency Decision and had even forwarded it to our Fox C-6 school board members in 2011. Dianne Brown-Critchlow forwarded me the email that she sent the Fox C-6 school board in December 2011 after I questioned her and Dan Baker as to whether or not the school board was even aware of the Final Agency Decision since Dan Smith and Ruth Ann Newman knew nothing about it when they were asked about it.

Here is the paragraph from the USDA's Final Agency Decision regarding retaliation:

No person shall be subjected to reprisal or harassment because he or she filed a discrimination complaint, participated in or contributed to the identification, investigation, prosecution, or resolution of a civil rights violation in or by a recipient of Federal financial assistance from USDA; or otherwise aided or supported the enforcement of Federal or USDA civil rights laws, rules, regulations, or policies. Any individual alleging such harassment or intimidation may file a complaint with USDA.

The language in the paragraph above didn't deter some of our administrators from participating in the online harassment and posting of derogatory comments on Topix that were directed at me and others. We filed complaints regarding retaliation but without have names and proof, nothing could be done. Now we have names and well documented proof.

I wrote an article about the Dear Colleague Letter that was issued by ED OCR in April 2013 to all school districts in the country regarding Retaliation. Here is a link to that article as well:

Dear Colleague Letter On Retaliation Law from the U.S. Department of Education's Office for Civil Rights

My pursuit to get the Fox C-6 School District to properly comply with Section 504 Law and the ADA AA and simply do the right thing led to an onslaught of online defamatory and derogatory posts that were traced back to the Bakers and the Critchlows.


Misled By the Bakers?
On July 24, the Arnold-Imperial Leader published an article titled, Bakers will keep Fox jobs. The article explained why the Bakers were allowed to keep their jobs based on a press release sent out by the District. The information provided by the District lead everyone to believe that the Bakers only made one comment from their home computer.

(UPDATED: 01/05/2015 - I've been informed that Fox's BOE was aware of the fact that more than one comment was posted and traced to the Bakers contrary to what was published in the Arnold-Imperial Leader. Then you have to question why the information wasn't properly documented by the Arnold-Imperial Leader. Supposedly, the District informed the paper that only one comment traced to the Bakers rose to a derogatory level. What was published in the Arnold-Imperial Leader with regards to the Bakers posting of comments mislead the public.)

The Arnold-Imperial Leader article stated that:

"School officials investigated the claims made in the lawsuit and decided only one comment was posted from the Bakers' home computer and that the two could keep their jobs, following disciplinary measures, Crutchley said."

The Bakers must not have fully informed school officials about all of their online activities related to Topix. Online posts were traced back to their cellular phone's browser as well. They didn't make just a single post from their home computer as stated in the Leader. They made many posts.

Bakers will keep Fox Jobs
Arnold-Imperial Leader

I've published some of the posts traced to the Bakers that are listed as exhibits in the lawsuit. It's interesting to note the language used by our dedicated educators. It's also interesting to note the statements that were made in respect to their children and grandchildren.

I know that Dan Baker's wife's daughter teaches at Seckman Elementary were Dan Baker was recently appointed to be the interim principal.

However, I did not realize that they had grandchildren that were old enough to attend school in our district as stated in one of their online comments.

It should also be noted that the online comments linked to the Bakers spanned nearly two months in time for those comments that were documented in the exhibits. So, the statement from the Leader that "only one comment was posted from the Baker's home computer" was misleading due to the misinformation provided in Fox's Press Release regarding the board's decision that allowed the Bakers to keep their jobs.

So, did the Bakers not tell the board members about all of the online posts that they made?

I documented the derogatory comment that the Bakers made about me in an article I wrote two weeks ago:

Another Extremely Bad Decision at Fox C-6!

Here are some of the online comments posted on Topix that were traced back to a Baker owned cell phone:

Seriously wrote on 01/24/2013 at 7:16AM
The thing is no one says anything about being dissatisfied with any particular situation concerning a student. Because our children are well taken care of! Here is a thought...the main goal of the school district isn't about who did or didn't get the job they wanted. It is are our children able to succeed in the real world upon graduation? I can only speak for mine and mine graduated at the top of their class. And my grandchildren love their school and because of that I am grateful to our district employees from the bottom up.

Seriously wrote on 02/09/2013 at 7:19PM
This is the most stupid thread I have ever read. Not one thing ever gets said about students. It is all about what adult didn't get the job they wanted or who wants to make a jab because they are jealous and bitter. I support our district leaders and teachers. They get a better job done than most districts on a fraction of the cost. If you care so much about kids, step away from the keyboard and go spend some quality time with a child. When's the last time you read to a child, played catch or prayed with one? You want to see a positive change in this world, start with YOURSELF!

Haha wrote on 02/09/2013 at 9:28PM
Imagine "pulling kids into this" you big idiot it should be all about the kids and not what adult was chosen for the job and is all jealous and ticked, or the Hoosier custodian that got fired or the hag ex wife. Imagine, actually thinking about kids in a forum about children's education.

Haha wrote on 03/12/2013 at 9:23PM
If you had something worth real value to say you wouldn't find it on a public, free, anonymous forum. Really, truth be told this is nothing more than thinking out loud. Sorry but even people with screwed up views think a lie is the truth if enough (even anonymous people) agree with them. And just a word of advice to the common posters on here...you could only be backed by 2 or 3 people who are signing on in different names. No offense intended to anyone but really this is like the "National Enquirer" of the Internet.

Haha wrote on 03/12/2013 at 9:54PM
Then send help because I just found out my cousin is an alien.

It appears from one of the post's above, that the Bakers weren't fond of the ex-wife or a custodian at Fox. People are certainly entitled to their opinions. Perhaps I just expect a lot more from individuals who are touted as dedicated professional educators.

Perhaps Fox's Board of Education should have questioned the Bakers and the Critchlows as to why there were making posts on a public internet forum in the first place about school district issues. They were high ranking officials in our school district and were expected to set good example for District employees, students and the community. I think they failed severely in that regard. Especially if you read the comments that were traced back to the Critchlows residence and to school district computers.

It's needless to say that their behavior was completely unacceptable but sometimes you have to state the obvious so people actually get it!

So, should Seckman Elementary School parents and teachers be concerned with the recent appointment of Dan Baker as the interim principal at SES?

Most people in the community I've spoken with want to know why the Bakers and the Critchlows weren't fired from the get go. I've been asked that question numerous times over the last 7 months.