School Board Remains at Odds

By Stephanie Warsmith, The Akron Beacon Journal, Ohio

Sep. 30–Legal opinions about whether there is a conflict of interest for Akron school board member Loretta Haugh to work for a local charter school company are, well, conflicting.

“The bottom line is that there is no conflict in this situation but, if there was one, you would rectify the situation by abstaining from any discussions, debate or vote involving your employer,” wrote Stephen DeVita, the Akron school district’s attorney, in an opinion he gave to Haugh on Aug. 31 and obtained by the Akron Beacon Journal this week.

However, an outside attorney’s second opinion, which DeVita himself requested nearly a month later, disagreed.

“The only way for a board member to avoid both an appearance of and an actual conflict of interest is to choose between accepting outside employment from a charter school which competes for that board’s students, or continuing to serve as a member of the board of education,” Cleveland attorney Lewis Adkins wrote in his Sept. 26 opinion. “Once the board member accepts employment and begins working for the charter schools while continuing to serve on the board, an impermissible conflict of interest arises.”

The question of whether Haugh’s board position conflicts with her charter school job is at the center of a fiery, two-week debate that has included calls for her to resign, a huge community outcry and the school board president tearing up during a public meeting.

In hopes of settling the issue, Tom McCarty, Haugh’s attorney, sent a letter Wednesday to the Ohio Ethics Commission, asking the agency to issue an advisory opinion. He requested that the commission expedite its response.

“Frankly, it seems to be a manufactured issue,” McCarty said. “There is no conflict. Mr. DeVita said there is no conflict.”

Haugh’s board colleagues unanimously adopted a resolution Monday asking her to step down. She refused, saying there is no conflict with her new job at Summit Academy Management, a nonprofit company that operates 27 charter schools across Ohio, including three in Akron with about 150 students.

Haugh, 59, a six-year board member and retired Akron teacher, is director of special projects for Summit Academy Management, based in Copley Township. She is working to improve the standardized test scores of the charter students.

As a board member, Haugh is paid $125 per meeting. She has been unwilling to disclose her salary with Summit Academy.

Haugh has pointed to the opinion issued by DeVita as one of her reasons for refusing to resign.

In his opinion, DeVita wrote that Summit Academy is a charter school that is not sponsored by the Akron school district and has “no contracts, regulatory relationship or other agreements” with the district.

“Your question raises several points for consideration — none of which would prohibit the proposed employment, in my opinion,” DeVita wrote.

He noted there are no restrictions under Ohio law that prohibit a school board member from working for a charter school.

If the district entered into a contract with Summit Academy in the future, Haugh could avoid any discussions or votes involving the contract, said DeVita, who could not be reached for comment Thursday.

After the Monday meeting, board President Paul Allison described what DeVita was asked to examine in his legal opinion as “narrowly defined.” He said DeVita decided to get a second opinion after the two of them talked about the issue. He declined to discuss either of the two legal opinions farther.

In Adkins’ written opinion, he said school board members have a “continuous financial interest” in charter schools. He said Summit Academy is now getting about $1.25 million in state funding that otherwise would have gone to the Akron school district. Plus, he said, the charter school company is attempting to enroll more students, who would bring with them more money.

“An Akron Public Schools Board of Education member has a fiduciary duty to the district to encourage the public schools to enroll and educate Akron students,” wrote Adkins, who is with Roetzel & Andress, a prominent law firm with offices in several cities, including Akron and Cleveland.

Adkins said Thursday that Summit Academy has a business relationship with the Akron school district that “creates the basis for the conflict.” Besides that, he said, the charter school and school board have different missions.

“Even if you assume no business relationship, the mission of one is incompatible with the other,” he said.

McCarty said the district got a second opinion because “they weren’t happy with the opinion of their own lawyer.” He said the situations Adkins cites in his opinion are not applicable to Haugh’s circumstances.

“Summit Academy is not regulated by the Akron Public Schools,” he said. “Summit Academy is not interested in any matters that come before the Akron Public Schools. There is no conflict that statutory provision would prevent.”

The ethics commission’s opinion is not expected for four to six weeks.

School leaders have said the commission’s opinion won’t change their resolve.

“Mrs. Haugh’s position with a charter school while continuing to refuse to resign is a clear conflict of interest,” Allison said Thursday. “We will continue to explore any and all avenues which may be available to a school board to cause the removal of Mrs. Haugh from the board.”

—–

To see more of the Akron Beacon Journal, or to subscribe to the newspaper, go to http://www.ohio.com.

Copyright (c) 2005, The Akron Beacon Journal, Ohio

Distributed by Knight Ridder/Tribune Business News.

For information on republishing this content, contact us at (800) 661-2511 (U.S.), (213) 237-4914 (worldwide), fax (213) 237-6515, or e-mail reprints@krtinfo.com.