[This transcript was generated automatically from audio using AI and hasn't been reviewed by a person -- it can contain mistakes, including plausible-sounding sentences that were never actually said. Treat it as a starting point, not a verbatim record.]

[0:01] Good evening.
[0:05] This meeting is now called to order at 5 o'clock.
[0:11] I would like to ask everyone to please silence
[0:14] all cell phones. A quorum of the board members is present in the auditorium. I am board member
[0:22] at your cologne and I will preside over tonight's meeting. I am joined by board members, Karen
[0:27] and Duffy, and Marty Gousen.
[0:32] Our first order of business is to hear from speakers
[0:34] to agenda items.
[0:37] Public comment during school board meetings
[0:38] will only be available
[0:40] to those persons who have signed up to speak prior
[0:43] to the meeting time for current protocol.
[0:46] Verbal and other disruptions by persons
[0:49] during the school board meetings are not acceptable
[0:52] as they inhibit the board's ability to conduct business
[0:56] and the public's ability to observe those processes.
[1:00] Person who participate in such behavior
[1:02] will be given one warning,
[1:04] and if the behavior is repeated,
[1:06] they will be asked to leave the meeting.
[1:09] We have four registered speakers
[1:11] who will be limited to two minutes each per board policy.
[1:15] We ask that you stay on topic and reframe
[1:18] from naming individuals, especially students.
[1:23] As their identity is protected on their law.
[1:25] But you may name your own child.
[1:29] I ask that you please respect our procedures,
[1:33] and the other speakers and your comments promptly
[1:35] when your time has expired and the timer rings.
[1:41] Speakers please come to the podium in your number order
[1:45] and stay your name and topic.
[1:52] Do we have any speakers?
[1:54] I don't believe any speakers have signed in.
[1:56] Are there any speakers who've signed up for public comment here?
[2:00] speakers going once speakers going twice which I'll proceed
[2:09] that concludes our public comment
[2:11] period we will now conduct the hearings schedule for this meeting
[2:25] the purpose of this meeting
[2:27] is to consider the recommendation of the independent hearing examiner in the matter of the
[2:32] Keisha Manifee teacher at Fondrand Middle School hearings involving complaints against district
[2:39] employees are to be held in closed session, only the employee who is the subject of the hearing
[2:45] requests and open hearing. A both parties request an open session during the hearing, the board
[2:51] may go into closed session to consult with its attorney under the terms of Texas Government code
[2:57] section 551.081. If any board member wishes to seek the advice of council, please let me know.
[3:06] For the record, James Fallon, of the law office, of James Fallon, is representing
[3:11] Laquiche of NFI, who is also present.
[3:16] Laquiche is also present.
[3:18] Ashley Yee, H.I.A. Z. Assistant General Counsel representing the administration, is present,
[3:24] and Katoshia Woods, H.I.A. Z. General Counsel, is also present.
[3:29] Ms. Manifid, do you wish to continue in open or close session?
[3:38] The
[3:46] issues before the school board are whether to accept reject or change the independent hearing
[3:52] examiners' findings of fact, conclusion of law, and proposal based on a review of the record.
[3:59] We may reject or change a finding of fact after a review on the record of the proceedings
[4:05] before the hearing examiner, we find it is not supported by substantial evidence. If we reject
[4:12] the independent hearing examiner's recommendation or make any changes, we must state the
[4:17] reason and legal basis in writing. Miss Yi, you will proceed first, you would be allowed to
[4:25] make 10 minutes presentation to the board, followed by a 10 minute presentation by Mr. Fallen.
[4:32] Ms. He, you may reserve part of your 10 minutes for rebuttal to matters presented by Mr.
[4:38] Fallen. Both sides shall be available for questions from the board after their respective presentations.
[4:45] Ms. He, how would you like to divide your time in making your presentation to the board?
[4:54] Eight minutes for the presentation to a minutes for rebuttal.
[4:57] Thank you so much.
[5:00] All right,
[5:07] good evening, board members. Joining me today, I have the key at Jackson and Ms. Jackson is the principal at fondron middle school.
[5:14] And we are here tonight asking the board to uphold the independent hearing examers recommendation to dismiss mismetives request for a chapter 21 appeal hearing for lack of jurisdiction.
[5:27] The facts here are straightforward, mismanipy had received a written notice by this board proposing the termination of her probationary contract and the letter dated January 16 of 2026.
[5:43] Now, under the Texas Education Code Section 21.2538, a teacher must file a written request for a hearing under Chapter 21, sub Chapter F,
[5:56] With the commissioner no later than the 15th day after the teacher receives written notice
[6:03] of the proposed action. Ms. Manipy claimed that she received her letter on February 12th
[6:10] of 2026 when she picked it up at the post office. So 15 days from this date would have given her
[6:17] a deadline of February 27th, 2026. But she did not request for a chapter 21 hearing by the deadline.
[6:26] It was not until April 17, 2026, approximately seven weeks after the statutory deadline has passed,
[6:35] that Ms. Menophee requested for Chapter 21 hearing.
[6:41] Now, Ms. Menophee attempts to avoid this deadline by pointing to a different filing that she had made earlier on February 19,
[6:50] which was a petition for review that she had directly filed with a commissioner
[6:54] under Texas Education Code Section 7.057, which concerned her grievance.
[7:02] But this filing did not preserve nor did it invoke her chapter 21 jurisdiction.
[7:08] It did not request the appointment of an independent hearing examiner,
[7:12] and it did not comply with the statutory procedures that govern a proposed termination under chapter 21.
[7:19] More importantly, Section 7.057, expressly, does not apply to cases governed by Chapter 21,
[7:28] Subjector G.
[7:29] And the commissioner has recognized the distinction in the filings in Hendrix E. Dallas, ISD,
[7:36] and also in Nazar B. First U.S. Bedford, ISD.
[7:40] Explained that the termination of an educator during the contract term must proceed
[7:46] through the procedures established under Chapter 21.
[7:52] Now following a telephone conference with the administrative law judge,
[7:56] concerning her section 7.057 petition,
[8:00] this meant that you had acknowledged that there is a distinction between these two
[8:04] by-lings.
[8:06] Judge butcher specifically stated that a sub-Chapter F, hearing,
[8:10] is not initiated through an amended,
[8:12] did, pleading in Section 7.057 appeal, but through a separate request for a hearing filed
[8:20] with a commissioner, and you can find the ALJ's order and exhibit G.
[8:25] Now this separate chapter 21 request, again, was not made until April 17, well after the
[8:33] February 27th, statutory deadline, and so mismancipated therefore to not use her timely
[8:40] section 7.0 by 7 filing to cure her timely, untimely, chapter 21, or plus, through an amendment.
[8:49] And even assuming that this amendment was otherwise permissible, the commissioner decisions have
[8:55] recognized that a party cannot use an amendment filed after the statutory deadline to circumvent
[9:02] the Legislature's mandatory procedural requirements.
[9:07] The Legislature has specifically created procedures and deadlines for chapter 21 hearings.
[9:15] So a timely filing under a different statutory procedure,
[9:19] then cannot substitute a timely chapter 21 hearing loss
[9:23] but the Legislature expressly requires allowing this amendment then
[9:28] would effectively erase that statutory deadline and create jurisdiction
[9:32] for none exists. For these reasons, the administration respectfully request that this board
[9:37] upholds it into penny hearing zamers recommendation and dismiss this amount of each chapter 21
[9:42] request for a hearing for lack of jurisdiction. Thank you and I'll reserve the rest of my time.
[9:50] Thank you. Mr. Fallon, you may thank your presentation to the board. Please remember that you have
[9:56] 10 minutes. Thank you so much.
[10:02] I would like to introduce myself, my name is Dr. Location Minifee. Mr. Fallen will be representing me. I would also like to just say that I am a veteran educator. I've been an educator for 20 plus years. I've been a teacher. I've been a principal. I've worked alongside Mr. Colone as a Chief Academic Officer at the Hornet Public Schools. Prior to even working as a teacher at Fundra Middle School, I also had a grant from the Texas Education Act
[10:32] agency where I provided a after-school program at Fundrum Middle School and the students at
[10:39] Fundrum Middle School won a drawing competition, they won a second place in a drawing
[10:43] competition. I have a proven track record of success. I've also, I know that the board
[10:49] took over HISD because of certain successes at Wheatley High School and I was a dean of instruction
[10:56] in a weekly high school and we were able to achieve mathematics success at
[11:01] weekly high school. I want to say I was the first dean at
[11:04] weekly high school to allow them to win, I mean, earn, instead of money for
[11:10] their math scores. I've also served as a science coach and I've written
[11:15] curriculum for HISD, the schools that I've worked with in HISD, they've
[11:20] all received at least 20% science increase in their scores for their
[11:25] and schoolers over the time that I've worked with them.
[11:29] I have a proven shraker record of success.
[11:32] In addition to that, the rationale for the termination,
[11:39] I submitted documentation to say that those things needed
[11:43] to be evaluated.
[11:45] And in addition to the things that you have stated,
[11:50] there are certain things that were stated
[11:51] in terms of what the hearing officer stated.
[11:54] and the rationale for things that will be denied.
[11:58] I want to say that those things need to be reevaluated
[12:01] for the record.
[12:02] I want agree with everything that she stated
[12:06] that this is what the hearing officer stated.
[12:09] And I would challenge and encourage the board to go back
[12:13] and request that they examine the recordings of those meetings.
[12:20] because I cannot confirm everything that Ms. Yee just stood here and said, or the record.
[12:28] And with all of that being said, I will yield the rest of my time to Mr. Fallon.
[12:33] Thank you.
[12:35] Thank you, Dr. Manifee. Ms. Yee, Ms. Woods, members of the board.
[12:40] Thank you for your time.
[12:42] I'm James Fallon. It's good to see you this evening.
[12:45] This chapter 21 appeal is unlike other chapter 21 appeals that you will see.
[12:52] This is really an appeal based on a ruling made by the hearing examiner in the case.
[12:58] And so he issued a ruling in response to HSD's plea to the jurisdiction,
[13:03] otherwise known as a motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction.
[13:07] And so, you know, but before I begin that,
[13:11] you got a brief introduction to Dr. Manify based on the items in the record.
[13:16] I can tell you a couple things about her other than what you've heard.
[13:20] She's a 24-year educator.
[13:22] She's had 15 years of education in the life science classroom and she's spent nine years
[13:28] in administrative leadership.
[13:31] She's been an HSD prior to this most recent round.
[13:35] She was in from 2003 to 2012, but here recently she came back in the district under a probationary
[13:42] contract for the 2526 school year.
[13:44] So that's how we got here.
[13:45] And so she received a notice of nominal according to the record on February 12th.
[13:52] The normal procedure would be to file in a portal on the Texas Education Agency
[13:58] and make a request for a hearing examiner where the requirements are to make that request
[14:03] and to provide a copy of your notice letter.
[14:06] Dr. Manify, at the time, was not represented by a lawyer, so she filed her own appeal.
[14:10] And so, when she filed it, she filed using the portal, she attached to copy of her notice
[14:18] of nominal.
[14:19] By the way, she received on February 12th, her filing was on February 19th.
[14:26] So, filed within a time period that would have been within the 15 days.
[14:29] It was within the 15 days.
[14:31] And it was a document called an appeal for review.
[14:37] So, but Dr. Manify being a smart woman but not being a lawyer did not ask in a direct way for a chapter 21 hearing examiner.
[14:48] And so, and so our journey begins. Whenever she filed, she filed referencing 7.057 of the education code.
[14:56] And when it got to TA, it got diverted over instead of to a hearing exam.
[15:01] We call an administrative law judge, an ALJ. So even at the TAA level, you don't get away from a bunch of letters to describe everything you're doing. But we leave the IHE, they put her away from the IHE into the ALJ. And the administrative law judge had the case pending until April 17th, and they had a pretrial conference in the matter.
[15:22] And at the time that the pre-shaw accommodate occurred, it was brought to Dr.
[15:26] Menofee's attention that that that filing was not sufficient to get her a hearing
[15:33] examiner.
[15:34] So she turned around that day immediately and filed within the same portal, something
[15:40] that directly asked for an independent hearing examiner.
[15:44] So once that was filed, the T.A. granted the request for a hearing examiner and then we
[15:50] have the proceedings.
[15:51] And that's what we're here in review.
[15:53] So all that's just procedurally how we got here.
[15:55] So we've got a form in this left.
[15:56] Let me, let me, let me try to get through this quickly,
[15:58] but also efficiently.
[16:01] HST's lawyer's file, the plea to the jurisdiction,
[16:03] saying, hey, April 17th is an untimely filing.
[16:07] Our response in some is this.
[16:10] Dr. Manifu, he was pro-say.
[16:12] She didn't have the benefit of lawyer.
[16:13] She met with substantial compliance with the statute.
[16:16] She filed what she filed.
[16:20] her appeal for review within a 15 days, she attached to copy the notice letter, what should
[16:28] have happened is the T.E.A. should have sent it to a hearing examiner because it was from
[16:33] all those things together, the timing of it coupled with the attachment of the notice letter,
[16:39] should have been at least enough of an indication to them to provide it to refer to a hearing
[16:44] But they didn't do that, for whatever reason they chose to deal with it with the ALJ, and that decision delayed
[16:52] Dr. Manify from understanding that they wanted to file a different way.
[16:57] So there are, I'm here arguing that there are strong equity considerations in this case.
[17:04] That should be considered. The judge rejected those arguments.
[17:08] We wrote a brief, we had some argument, the judge rejected those arguments, and so that is what I would like for you to consider.
[17:16] Dr. Menofee just once her day in court, and she wants to have somebody look at the facts of the allegations in the case,
[17:23] and she was never able to get that because of a filing that was made by her before she was represented by an attorney.
[17:29] And so, there's many instances in the law where a pro-Said defendant is given the benefit
[17:35] of the doubt in cases.
[17:38] And so that is essentially our equity argument.
[17:42] We would like for you board members to consider those filings as my position that her original
[17:48] filing was sufficient under the law to be the kind of request that should have given her a chapter
[17:56] But that decision wasn't made until after she filed a second time in April and that's what I would like for you to consider.
[18:07] I appreciate your time.
[18:08] Thank you.
[18:11] Thank you.
[18:12] Missy, do you wish to make a rebuttal statement?
[18:17] You have to move.
[18:30] What to clarify just two points here?
[18:32] First, we are not here at this hearing to contest the material fact of her underlying reasons for termination that being in subordination and excessive absences.
[18:42] That is not why we are here today.
[18:44] That would have again gone through the chapter 21 hearing process.
[18:49] And in disagreement with Mr. Fallon, I don't believe this is a different chapter 21 request from any other request that any other teacher has filed with the TA.
[18:59] Every other teacher has filed and a request through the proper procedures within the statutory deadlines that are given to them through our notice hearings.
[19:10] And so just briefly, I like to just read the first part that we include in our board
[19:16] notices when it comes to terminations to all of our teachers.
[19:20] And at the very second page, where is this appeal procedure, we do state that in accordance
[19:25] with Section 21.251 at seek at the Texas Education Code in H.I.S.D. policies, D.F.C.A.
[19:33] legal, D.F.D. legal, and D.F.D. local, you are hereby advised that you have the right
[19:38] to protest the proposed termination by submitting a written request
[19:42] for a hearing to the commissioner of education.
[19:45] The notice is clear, the statute is clear.
[19:48] Ms. Manavita, did not file a timely chapter
[19:50] 2021 request.
[19:52] Thank you.
[19:55] Thank you, no, no, no, I'm sorry, EEE.
[20:00] Is your time? Sorry.
[20:05] The parties have completed their presentations, and it is now time for board members
[20:09] to make our decisions on the issues before us. Is there any discussion? Any questions?
[20:18] I have a quick question. What prompted the April 17th file?
[20:36] When we had the pre-here in conference with the ALJ, the question was brought up about the
[20:45] timely filing and in that conference attorney, he did make the statement, yes, Dr.
[20:53] Minifey did submit her information on time.
[20:57] Therefore, the A.L.J. gave me the opportunity to resubmit the documents.
[21:05] So attorney Yee admitted in that conference that I submitted it on time.
[21:12] So therefore, I was extremely confused how all of a sudden it wasn't submitted on time after the fact.
[21:19] That's why I initially when I stood up, I said, I encourage the board to go back and get the
[21:27] recording of that February meeting because attorney Yee did say that I submitted the information
[21:34] on time in February.
[21:37] So that's what prompted me to submit the April 17th finally.
[21:43] That's what prompted me to submit the April 5th because she did agree that I submitted it
[21:50] Thank you.
[21:52] Any other questions?
[21:54] Any other questions?
[21:55] Thank you.
[21:56] Well, the board will now resist to close session on the chapter 551 of the Texas Government
[22:02] Code, Open Meetings Act.
[22:04] Subsections 551.004 through 551.089.
[22:11] Should board final action vote or decision on any matter considered in the close?
[22:17] session be required such final action vote or decision shall be taken at the open meeting covered by this notice upon the reconvening of this public meeting or at a subsequent public meeting of the board upon notice thereof.
[22:32] The board has reset to close session at 5.22.
[22:38] PM on August 27, 2020.
[22:43] Thank you, the special meeting of the school board of the Houston Independent School District
[22:48] is now reconvened in open section. The time now is 534 p.m. Do I have a motion?
[22:59] Yes, I move that we adopt the decision and recommendation of the independent hearing examiner,
[23:04] adopt the findings of fact and conclusions of law recommended by the independent hearing
[23:08] phenomena and dismiss this matter for lack of jurisdiction.
[23:12] We will have a second.
[23:20] We have a motion by board member Duffy and a second by board member Gousen.
[23:25] Is there any further discussion?
[23:27] Hearing none.
[23:29] Please vote.
[23:44] Voting has closed.
[23:46] The motion passes.
[23:49] The board has voted.
[23:52] Two four.
[23:53] Seer against one abstention.
[23:58] A letter notifying both parties of the action of the board shall be prepared.
[24:01] and signed by the Executive Director of Board Relations as soon as possible.
[24:06] This hearing is concluded at 536 p.m.
[24:20] Thank you.
[24:45] We're moving now on to the next hearing.
[24:49] The purpose of this hearing meeting is to consider the recommendation of the independent hearing examiner
[24:54] in the matter of Maria del Rosario Rodriguez, teacher, gross elementary.
[25:00] Hearings involving complaints against district employees are to be held in closed session, unless the employee who is a subject of the hearing requests and open hearing.
[25:10] If both parties request an open session during the hearing, the board may go into closed session to consult with it. It's a turning on the deterrence of the Texas government co section 551.071.
[25:23] If any board member wishes to seek the advice of Council, please let me know.
[25:29] For the record, Maria de Rosario Rodriguez is present.
[25:34] Amir Roji, HIs the Assistant General Council representing the Administration is present
[25:40] and Catosia Woods, HIs the General Council is also present.
[25:46] Mr. Rodriguez, do you wish to continue in open or close session?
[25:50] Open session, thank you so much.
[25:52] The
[26:00] issues before the school board are whether to accept reject or change the independent
[26:05] hearing examiners findings of fact, conclusions of law and proposal based on a review of
[26:12] the record. We may reject or change a finding of fact, if, after review, the record of
[26:18] the proceedings before the hearing examiner, we find it is not supported by substantial evidence.
[26:24] If we reject the independent hearing examiner's recommendation or make any changes, we must
[26:30] state the reason and the legal basis in writing. Mr. Ruhi, you will proceed first.
[26:38] You will be allowed to make a 10-minute presentation to the board, followed by a 10-minute
[26:44] presentation by Mr. Ruhi. Mr. Ruhi, you may research part of your 10 minutes for
[26:51] we bottle to matters presented by Mr. Dregas.
[26:55] Both sides shall be available for questions from the board
[26:58] after the respective presentations.
[27:02] Mr. Ruhid, do you?
[27:03] How would you like to divide your time
[27:05] in making your presentation to the board, okay?
[27:10] Eight minutes for presentation to a minute for a free bottle.
[27:14] You may begin.
[27:20] Good afternoon.
[27:21] Today, I'm joined by Tracy Hart Jackson,
[27:24] who is currently the Executive Director
[27:26] of instruction, but who at the time of this occurrence was the principal at Goose Elementary School.
[27:34] The administration is here to ask you to uphold the T.A. Independent Hearing Officers'
[27:38] recommendation to run on-renew Mr. Rodriguez's 25-26 term contract.
[27:43] Mr. Rodriguez was non-renewed for good cause solely on the basis of her excessive absences
[27:48] and her failure to follow the district's attendance policies and procedures.
[27:52] This violates multiple HIsD attendance policy, I'm sorry, by this multiple including board policy DH local exhibit 18 in your packet.
[28:03] That states that you must follow HIsD attendance policies standard 1.7 exhibit 19 in your packet.
[28:10] That states an employ must comply with written local board policies and DEC8 regulation, which is exhibit 21 in your packet.
[28:18] for applying for, to qualify for a family medical leave,
[28:23] a sought leave, temporary disability leave,
[28:25] or the supplemental sick leave bank.
[28:28] As HISD's assault and analyst Kelsey Gage explains
[28:31] on page 20 of the transcript you have before you,
[28:34] starting on 916.
[28:36] Ms. Rodriguez's doctor stated that she was approved
[28:38] to go back to work on December 22nd of 2025.
[28:43] Ms. Rodriguez then provided another doctor's note
[28:46] that allowed her to return to work on January 8th, 2026.
[28:51] Mr. Rodriguez did not return to work after either date.
[28:55] She continued to accumulate unpaid days as you can see from her absence history report
[28:59] in your packet under exhibit three. She accumulated 34 days, 24 unpaid days after she was given
[29:08] the all-clear from her doctor. Mr. Rodriguez further claim that she was injured at work
[29:13] and that it was why she did not come back to work.
[29:16] As you can see on page 25 of your transcript,
[29:19] Mr. Riddier's was denied assault leave,
[29:21] because HRSD did not receive the proper documentation
[29:24] from Mr. Riddier's.
[29:25] As you can tell from the transcript,
[29:27] HRSD tried numerous times and numerous methods
[29:30] to obtain the necessary paperwork
[29:32] to try and see if she qualified for assault leave,
[29:37] all to no avail.
[29:39] Under board policy, the EEC local and the ECH
[29:42] Teachers are a lot at five state, personally days, and five local personal days at the beginning of every school year.
[29:49] Importantly, according to the ECA Regulation, regardless of the amount of leave in an employee's lead bank,
[29:55] no employee may be absent from more than 15 days.
[30:00] Perth fiscal year. Employees may not use unpaid, may not use unpaid days, and shall be subject to disciplinary action, up to an including termination, once they exhaust all paid, leave days.
[30:12] Ms. Rodriguez accumulated 46 total absences, 36.5 of which were unpaid, and, as I mentioned
[30:20] earlier, these unpaid days were not protected by a FMLA or any other kind of protected
[30:26] leaf.
[30:27] This is the direct violation of the ECE8 regulation.
[30:31] Ms. Rodriguez has given multiple opportunities to apply for the various leaves and protections
[30:35] that HIsD offers.
[30:36] When she didn't provide the correct paperwork,
[30:39] HRSD reached out to get the paperwork.
[30:42] HRSD didn't receive anything,
[30:43] no matter how many times we asked for it,
[30:45] in any way that we asked for it.
[30:48] It should be noted that the independent hearing officer
[30:50] found in her conclusions of law that HRSD correctly identified
[30:54] that Ms. Rodriguez was ineligible for FMLA,
[30:57] assault leave, or temporary disability.
[31:00] I should also point out that Ms. Rodriguez
[31:02] knows the process to apply for and get FMLA
[31:05] because she had been approved for said leave the previous year.
[31:10] The independent hearing officer found that the district
[31:12] men had spurned a non-renewed Mr. Rodriguez's contract
[31:14] and found that the district proved by the hundreds of the evidence
[31:18] that Mr. Rodriguez violated HIs' deep policies
[31:20] and had good cause to terminate.
[31:23] Mr. Rodriguez's term contract pursuant to section 13
[31:26] of a term contract in the Texas Education Code section 21.211.
[31:31] Therefore, the administration would ask this board to uphold the hearing examiner's findings of that
[31:37] conclusions of law. Thank you.
[31:43] Thank you. Mr. Rodriguez, you may make your presentation to the board.
[31:49] Please remember, you have 10 minutes.
[32:01] Good evening. More members of you doing well today, Mr. Ronny.
[32:06] Happy to see you again. And to tell you a little bit about myself,
[32:10] I've been with HIV for close to 25 years.
[32:16] I started when I was very as a teacher assistant,
[32:20] and became a special education teacher.
[32:25] Okay. Throughout my years in history with HIV,
[32:29] I have numerous accomplishments.
[32:31] at when I was at when I obtained my first teaching position was at Wayne Roy
[32:40] Nell Elementary as a special education teacher. At that time I had
[32:44] Grace of Sex with students and teachers and with parents. I then moved
[32:49] on to Native Middle School. With it, when I started a West
[32:54] experience at the University of Houston's special education, I
[32:57] So kids come in in lacking something, lacking the understanding
[33:01] of how to obtain the tools needed to be a fantastic citizen
[33:08] for this country.
[33:10] So I said, let me look.
[33:11] So I started looking, my first position was elementary.
[33:15] And I said, no, these teachers are very concerned with them.
[33:19] Let me move.
[33:20] I went to the middle school as a co-teacher and research teacher.
[33:24] Well, I was there, my students, not only pass the start test in math English, some of them even pass the start test on math English science and social studies.
[33:37] They did 100% 360 turnaround.
[33:41] Also, during attending, a couple of my students exit the special education program.
[33:47] Everyone wondered how this happened.
[33:50] It wasn't in the myself, of course, it was a whole team working together to get the students
[33:55] to go and do what they needed to do.
[34:01] COVID came, and guess what?
[34:04] We came back,
[34:07] tell me, wish to them pass the start test with flying colors.
[34:12] My students, master in math.
[34:19] Do you think that did you like me?
[34:21] Would do something like that?
[34:22] Not only that, fine, I went to, right now on just, I went to the other school after that.
[34:39] After DD, I went to Patrick Hendry.
[34:42] Patrick Hendry, I didn't stay the whole year because I was already retiring.
[34:49] So at that time, I did retire in January first.
[34:52] And during my return, during the factory Henry.
[35:03] This is the last stroke. We are going into attorneys. We need to see what we can do with this student. Two months, this case
[35:15] have been dragging for three years.
[35:23] A set of the table with Mr. Basel and her team and their attorneys.
[35:28] attorneys at the desk, guess what happened during that time?
[35:35] I say, HIV from having a lawsuit.
[35:40] I say them two months, and I proved that this shall
[35:45] could do what nobody thought that he could do.
[35:50] That's what I did.
[35:53] From there,
[35:57] that's when I retire.
[35:58] then the state of Texas says, we need teachers, they contact me. I can. And I thought by
[36:08] them back I started October 17 of 2021. And I thought, okay, I retired and state of Texas
[36:18] is coming back. I said yes. They weren't going to pay me both. My retirement and my salary.
[36:24] you quoted it wrong. I didn't get no money. I got my salary, but I didn't get my retirement,
[36:34] but did I say anything? No, I continue working because I knew the state needed it.
[36:42] Not only that,
[36:43] I went and got hired. I went right elementary. I say teacher of record.
[36:52] Start test.
[36:53] To point out with a written component first year after COVID, guess how my students did.
[37:03] And I got sick at the end.
[37:06] As a matter of fact, I had surgery in June of that year.
[37:14] District level 7.5.
[37:18] Do you think I wanted to be absent?
[37:24] I just wanted the time to be able to recoup.
[37:28] and be able to do what I've done every single year for H.I.s.ing.
[37:35] It was in a game from you guys. Nothing, nothing for that was
[37:47] across.
[37:49] I was tired, I say, life skills teacher.
[37:53] You would think that the classroom will have computers, will have laptops, will have the tools that are needed.
[38:03] It was, no, nothing for we to teach the students' skills.
[38:08] There was no blender, no microwave, no dishes, no manipulative.
[38:15] Nothing.
[38:17] And then you have a classroom of those three buildings, one window, two bathrooms,
[38:23] no exhaust system.
[38:25] The conditions were improbable for Alaska's classroom.
[38:33] I have no equipment
[38:37] to take home and work because the only computer that was there was
[38:43] for me for the system that was on count right there.
[38:49] I had non-verbal students, kindergarten, I did not have a curriculum given to me in order
[38:58] to do my work,
[39:02] I had nothing, but what do you guys want to do, non-verbal students,
[39:09] when I were because of my disability unfortunately,
[39:14] what happened, they were able to write
[39:18] their names, they were able to act, one digit,
[39:24] they were able to advocate, even if they
[39:26] were not able to talk,
[39:29] they wanted to learn. And when I was saying, well, I was
[39:36] sending information in. And here I am, I have no curriculum, one more later, a month
[39:43] later, I got unique.
[39:47] Take it, I have not done unique since, what, 28, 28. So I have no idea
[39:55] I had my new field in it, my work with the system.
[40:00] Not only is it a game, it's a wrong system, because it was supposed to be initial and not intermediate.
[40:10] You have to be in a slot.
[40:13] That's what happened.
[40:16] I got injured. I had no assistant in the classroom.
[40:23] The only one that was so what happened was kids.
[40:26] I think my best, and unfortunately, when I was a Tanglewood, what happened? I got injured.
[40:35] I was attacked from behind.
[40:39] In the doctor's data, I needed to be out of the system, or I needed to be someone there at all times.
[40:44] What do I have? Nothing.
[40:47] Did I want it to be out? No, I did.
[40:51] I was diagnosed unfortunately with PTSD.
[40:55] It's an injury that is not under the work of Stanford,
[40:58] especially for HSV, which I understand.
[41:03] But even today, because of the injury that I suffered,
[41:07] I'm HSV, three-meter mirror.
[41:10] I was the pack once.
[41:13] I was hurt again, and then I was attacked again.
[41:17] I only needed time to group.
[41:19] And do what I do best.
[41:21] My job.
[41:22] I hope you take that into consideration and let me know, because to be honest with you, I
[41:31] do not know.
[41:32] I'm humble.
[41:33] Thank you for listening to me, thank you for giving me the opportunity to be here with
[41:39] HIV.
[41:41] And I hope you are not, but I've done for this school and not kids.
[41:48] Thank you.
[41:49] Thank you.
[41:51] Mr. Rui, do you wish to be in a brutal statement?
[41:54] You have to move it.
[41:59] Thank you.
[42:00] So we're not here because of the various things that Mr. Rui has talked about, we're
[42:04] here because of absences and at the end of the day, HRSD gave her ample opportunities
[42:09] to apply for the various leaves and protections that HRSD provides all of our employees.
[42:14] She did not take advantage of those opportunities.
[42:17] I should also point out the reason she didn't, she didn't, she didn't get FML this year was
[42:27] because she had gotten FML last year because we do give it when it is actually appropriate.
[42:32] And again, and I want to make it clear that Ms. Hart Jackson made the termination recommendation
[42:36] because of attendance because of her performance but because of attendance which we made clear already
[42:43] We obviously gave our numerous opportunities to take advantage of the various leaves and protections
[42:49] that HRST has at their disposal of the employees.
[42:54] I should also point out just really quickly in terms of if we're not having an assistant,
[42:57] she did have an assistant, they have a 30 minute lunch, which is the only time that she wouldn't be without an assistant,
[43:02] and even then our principal sent in someone there about 10 minutes into the assistant's lunch.
[43:08] If you have any questions, I'm more than happy to answer them.
[43:11] But at the end of the day, Mr. Theta has just terminated because of her absences, no matter how much we try to give her the opportunity to take advantage of the protections that HISD provides.
[43:23] Thank you.
[43:24] Thank you.
[43:26] No, you used all of your 10 minutes.
[43:30] No, you used all of your time.
[43:32] You used all of your time of life.
[43:36] Sorry, thank you.
[43:37] The parties have completed their presentations, and it is now time for board members to make our decision on the issues before us.
[43:44] Is there any discussion, any further questions?
[43:49] No?
[43:49] Okay.
[43:51] There is no need to go into closed session.
[43:54] So do I have a motion?
[44:00] I have a motion.
[44:02] I move that we adopt the decision of recommendation of the independent hearing examiner.
[44:06] adopt the findings of the fact and conclusions of law by the independent hearing examiner
[44:10] and improve the administration's proposal to terminate Maria Del Rosario by the Registres
[44:15] determined appointment.
[44:18] Thank you.
[44:18] Is there a second?
[44:22] Thank you.
[44:26] We have a motion by Board Member Gousin and a second by Board Member Duffy.
[44:33] Is there any further discussion?
[44:36] Hearing none, please vote.
[44:47] Boding has now closed the motion passes.
[44:51] The board has voted three, four, and zero against the motion.
[45:00] We find both parties of the action of the board shall be prepared and signed by the executive director of board relations as soon as possible.
[45:09] This hearing has concluded at 5.57 p.m.
[45:29] Thank you.
[45:43] We will now proceed with our next hearing.
[46:07] The purpose of this meeting is to consider the dispute filed by Karaya, Washington, former curriculum designer, office of academics.
[46:16] Hereings involving complaints against district employees are to be held in closed session
[46:21] on the employee who is a subject of the hearing, requests and open hearing.
[46:27] If both parties request an open session during the course of the hearing, the board may go
[46:32] into closed session to consult with its attorney on the terms of the Texas Government Code
[46:37] section 551.071. If any board member wishes to seek the advice of council, please let me know.
[46:47] For the record, Kimbal or Rutia, Houston Federation of Features, is representing
[46:53] Cairo Washington. That correct? Thank you.
[46:58] And, May is Washington is also present. Thank you.
[47:02] Daniel Ramirez with Monty and Ramirez L.P. representing the administration is present and so is
[47:09] Katasha Woods, H.I.A. Z. General Counsel.
[47:15] Mr. Urrudya, do you wish to continue in open or close
[47:18] session?
[47:21] Close session.
[47:26] As you may remember at the beginning of the meeting, I call for public speakers.
[47:31] It is my understanding that those speakers are here now, so we are going to allow them to speak.
[47:40] Public comment during school board meetings, we only be available to those persons who have signed up to speak prior to the meeting time for current puricle.
[47:51] Verbal and other disruptions by persons during the school board meetings are not acceptable,
[47:56] as they inhibit the board's ability to conduct business and the public's ability to observe those processes.
[48:03] The person who participate in such behavior will be given one warning and if the behavior is repeated, they will be asked to leave the meeting.
[48:12] My understanding is that we have two registered speakers who will be limited to two minutes each per board policy.
[48:19] We ask that you stay on topic and refrain from naming individuals, especially students, as their identity is protected on the law, where you may name your own child.
[48:31] I ask that you please respect our procedures,
[48:35] and the other speakers, and end your comments promptly when your time has expired and the time remains.
[48:42] speaker's please come to the podium in the number order and say your name and topic.
[48:48] Please, may I say if you can call our first speaker?
[48:52] Cassidy, OCOB, followed by Alan Tizer, and
[49:07] afternoon.
[49:08] So I'm here to discuss the case for Mr. Donald Taylor.
[49:12] I want it to start off to say that HSD has now cleared.
[49:17] Mr. Taylor has now made clear that Mr. Taylor's termination is not based on any wrong
[49:21] doing the following student incident that originally caused him to be removed from duty.
[49:27] The district investigated that incident, and at the last hearing HIZ stated that the basis
[49:31] for termination was solely, Mr. Taylor's alleged failure to participate in an investigation.
[49:37] Think about what that means. HIZ essentially saying that Mr. Taylor did nothing wrong in
[49:42] the underlining incident, yet he should still lose his job because of what was and most
[49:47] breakdown and communication. That raises a very important question. Why would an employee who knew he had done nothing wrong intentionally refused to participate in an investigation that could clear his name?
[50:00] Mr. Taylor did attempt to participate. He attempted to contact Mr. Bonda, his supervisor, and that there is a significant difference between refusing to cooperate in failure and communication.
[50:12] Mr. Taylor should not lose his livelihood over miscommunication, especially when HIV is no longer alleging that he committed any wrongdoing in the very incident that triggered the investigation.
[50:25] Thank you.
[50:27] Thank you.
[50:43] Good evening members of the HISD School Board. My name is Alan Tizer and I'm here this evening representing transportation employees of HISD.
[50:53] I've been driving a school bus from HISD out of the Butler terminal for the past 24 years.
[50:59] Previously we chose our bus route each year from a seniority list based on our years of service.
[51:07] This year, however, the district has gone to what they call a metric system, which puts
[51:12] the majority as the last consideration.
[51:16] We are given 30 hours of school year paid time off.
[51:19] This is primarily time to use for illness or personal business during school time.
[51:24] The current metric system counts 40% for attendance, 30% for preventable accidents or disciplinary
[51:31] actions 10% for mid-year evaluation and 10% education and lastly 10% based on seniority.
[51:41] The metric system penalizes an employee who uses their pay-time off, which is provided,
[51:47] to compensate them when ill or when they need to be off for personal reasons.
[51:51] Because the district counts 40% for attendance, they are indirectly encouraging their drivers
[51:58] and attendance to come to work when ill.
[52:01] If safety is the district's primary concern,
[52:05] then in my opinion, attendance should not represent 40%.
[52:09] This leaves employees with the unfavorable option
[52:11] to come to work ill, which is contradictory to that concern.
[52:16] As a devoted 24-year HISD employee,
[52:19] I'm asking the school board to give my devoted coworkers in B.
[52:23] Our seniority back is it has been in the previous years.
[52:27] Thank you for taking time to hear our concerns.
[52:31] Thank you.
[52:37] We're now going to proceed with our next hearing.
[52:39] The purpose of this meeting is to consider the dispute file by Donald Taylor,
[52:44] both attend and transportation department.
[52:47] Hearings involving complaints against district employees are to be held in closed session
[52:52] on as the employee who is the subject of the hearing requests and open hearing.
[52:57] If both parties request an open session during the course of the hearing, the board may go into closed session to consult with its attorney on the terms of Texas Government Code Section 551.071.
[53:11] If any board member wishes to seek the advice of Council, please let me know.
[53:16] For the record, Cecilia Edwards with People's Choice Association Union representing Dollar Taylor, Donald Taylor is present.
[53:26] Donald Taylor is also present.
[53:29] Daniel Ramirez with Monti and Ramirez L.P. representing the administration is present.
[53:35] Katosia Woods, H.I.S. E. General Counsel is also present.
[53:39] Ms. Edwards, do you wish to continue in open or close session?
[53:45] Open, thank you.
[53:48] The issues before the school board are whether board policies and administrative procedures
[53:53] where correctly applied to the grievance and whether the administration has violated those policies and procedures.
[54:01] Mr. Taylor, you would proceed first. Your representative would be allowed to make a ten-minute presentation to the board,
[54:08] followed by a ten-minute presentation by Mr. Ramirez.
[54:12] Ms. Edwards, you may reserve part of your ten minutes for rebuttal to matters presented by Mr. Ramirez.
[54:19] Both sides shall be available for questions from the board after the respective presentations.
[54:25] Miss Edwards, how would you like to divide your time in making your presentation to the board?
[54:32] 10?
[54:34] Total of 10.
[54:45] 4 and 6.
[54:49] Miss Edwards, you may begin.
[54:53] You may begin.
[54:55] I'm sorry.
[54:58] Okay.
[55:09] Okay, thank you for allowing me the opportunity to provide this statement regarding the termination of Mr. Donald Taylor.
[55:16] After a previous decision and the evidence presented, we respectfully disagree with the conclusion that Mr. Taylor failed to cooperate with the investigation, and that his termination was justified.
[55:26] First and foremost, Mr. Taylor did not refuse to cooperate with HIC. He was willing to participate in the investigation.
[55:32] He requested union representation before participating in an investigative meeting because he
[55:38] believed he had the right to have a representative present, a representative present.
[55:43] Mr. Taylor also attempts to contact Mr. Rowle Bonda, the executive director of transportation
[55:48] who was handling the investigation, Mr. Taylor made a call, but Mr. Bonda did not return
[55:52] his call.
[55:53] Therefore, it is not accurate to characterize Mr. Taylor as simply refusing to cooperate
[55:58] with an investigation.
[56:00] The evidence show shows that Mr. Taylor tempted to communicate and was willing to address the matter or also requesting representation.
[56:08] Mr. Taylor did not receive a text. He did not receive a miss call and he tried continually to contact Mr. Bonda.
[56:14] It is also important to note that in the level two hearing, if stated that Mr. Bonda attempted two texts, Mr. Taylor,
[56:21] and in the level to hearing, we present a documentation showing that he never received any text message throughout the entire summer for Mr. Bondo.
[56:32] We also dispute the way the underlying incident involving the student has been characterized.
[56:36] Mr. Taylor's position is that the only thing he said to the child concerning the issue was, if you want to write the bus, you must keep your clothes on. Stop taking your clothes off or you will not be allowed to write this bus.
[56:50] That statement was made in the context of an inappropriate behavior on a school bus.
[56:55] Mr. Taylor was addressing the child's behavior and explained that the child needed to remain properly clothed in order to wrap the bus.
[57:01] Mr. Taylor did not make a sexual statement to the child, nor did he intend anything inappropriate.
[57:06] The fact that the child's parents became upset about the statement does not by itself establish that Mr. Taylor's, that Mr. Taylor engaged in any misconduct.
[57:16] The complete circumstances need to be considered.
[57:19] We have also submitted documentation that caused into question the factual basis of the
[57:23] allegation, including documentation concerning whether the student was actually on Mr. Taylor's
[57:27] bus, which was route 1628 during the relevant circumstances.
[57:32] That evidence cannot simply be disregarded.
[57:35] If evidence submitted by the employee contradicts the administration's characterization of the incident,
[57:39] the evidence must be carefully examined before a person's employment and reputation are taken away.
[57:44] There's also serious concern regarding some of the photographic evidence presented by administration.
[57:50] We dispute the authenticity, sorry, and an accuracy of the photograph that appeared to contain words, statements, or annotations that were added to the images.
[58:01] Those words, not necessarily what appears in the original surveillance reporting.
[58:06] A selected or altered photograph should not be used as a substitute for the original video.
[58:10] We therefore request the HIsD produce and review the complete original unedited surveillance video,
[58:16] including the portion before during and after the alleged incident.
[58:20] If the district maintains that its photographs accurately represent what occurred,
[58:25] then the district should be able to identify the original source of each photograph,
[58:29] explain who created or annotated it, and show where the corresponding statement or conduct appears in the original recording.
[58:35] The original video should speak for itself.
[58:37] Another important issue is the district's confusion that Mr. Taylor failed to cooperate.
[58:42] There is this significant difference between an employee refusing to cooperate and an employee who is willing to participate,
[58:48] but only request representation in attempts to communicate with the investigator.
[58:52] Mr. Taylor did not say that he would never participate. He wanted his representative person and he attempted to contact Mr. Bondo.
[58:59] The district also needs to distinguish between an allegation and investigation and actual proof of misconduct.
[59:08] Thank you.
[59:09] Thank you.
[59:14] Mr. Ramirez, do you make your presentation to the board?
[59:17] Please remember, you have ten minutes.
[59:19] Thank you.
[59:19] I have a presentation for the board.
[59:28] Good evening members of the board.
[59:30] I'm here on behalf of the HSD to demonstrate that there is evidence that Mr. Taylor was properly terminated.
[59:39] Based on an investigation that was attempted by the district,
[59:42] but Mr. Taylor simply did not cooperate or interact with the district.
[59:53] When the presentation goes up, I'm going to show you snapshots of the bus interaction.
[59:56] And they're telling us that it's not relevant for the purpose of the termination.
[1:00:00] But they talk about it and it is relevant to some extent. But here, the interaction between the student and Mr. Taylor was the triggering event. They are right. That's not the basis for the underlying termination. But when HSD attempted to investigate that complaint and that student interaction, Mr. Taylor simply just did not respond and cooperate, just like any other employees should have in that situation. So that is the crux and basis of the termination. Here's a photo and that's Mr. Taylor in the back.
[1:00:29] There's some discussion with some kids. He's leaning over, talking to some kids. He
[1:00:35] lets some kids pass and you'll notice if you look at this, there's three boys in
[1:00:41] the back. He lets two boys pass. Then he's hovering over one kid over a sea.
[1:00:49] And
[1:00:49] he's hovering over the kid where the kid is leaning back. And eventually he lets
[1:00:54] the kid go. This is what triggered the situation. We know that they disagree
[1:00:59] allegedly that there's another video or this is not the kid, it's somewhat of a red
[1:01:03] hearing. This triggered the investigation that led to his termination. There's
[1:01:08] also allegations that we might hear in response that Mr. Taylor was unaware of
[1:01:13] this investigation and that's simply inaccurate. The record shows that the day
[1:01:18] after the incident, Mr. Taylor's supervisor spoke with him. The day after
[1:01:24] the incident, he was put on clear notice about this incident and he submitted
[1:01:28] the statement to it.
[1:01:31] Thereafter, the district appointed Mr. Bonda, who's sitting here today, to investigate
[1:01:35] the matter, and he did try to investigate, and let's look at what he did.
[1:01:42] He also looked at the video, he determined there could be some make-miss conduct, but that's
[1:01:47] why he wanted to give Mr. Taylor a chance to respond, he wanted to interview Mr. Taylor
[1:01:52] to identify what if any conduct occurred and give Mr. Taylor a chance.
[1:01:56] that was his opportunity that he felt to cooperate with.
[1:02:02] There's testimony or evidence in the record
[1:02:04] where Mr. Bonda at the level two stated he observed.
[1:02:08] The video prompted him to call Mr. Taylor
[1:02:11] and question him about the incident.
[1:02:16] Whether there's any allegation, whether the school
[1:02:18] contacted him or not, the evidence is just outright clear.
[1:02:21] Mr. Taylor provided his own cell records for call records
[1:02:25] and on July 16th is the day that Mr. Bonda called Mr. Taylor
[1:02:29] shown in a cell record, and he talked to him that day, and he had prized him about the
[1:02:34] investigation and the need to interview him. Mr. Taylor, Mr. Taylor himself in the level
[1:02:42] two hearing said, yes, Mr. Bond called me on July 16th. And when he called me, he said,
[1:02:49] I need you to come in to give a statement about what happened. Clear notice once again, not
[1:02:54] simply the day after, but during the investigation being told to come in. Mr. Bond has testimony
[1:03:01] corroborates that. He says I told him that for him to call me back and so we could set up an appointment
[1:03:08] for him to come in in person so we can go ahead and proceed with investigation. So I make these
[1:03:14] points because at the end of the day it's very clear that Mr. Taylor had noticed of some issue
[1:03:21] that occurred on the bus, the Triggered Investigation, where his supervisor talked to him the next day,
[1:03:26] and Mr. Bondo was assigned an investigator and spoke to him by phone, asked the Mr. Taylor to come in
[1:03:31] person to conduct an interview to find out what happened.
[1:03:36] After that call, Mr. Bonda did text them.
[1:03:40] They stated that there's no record or they submitted record to show no texting.
[1:03:43] We disagree.
[1:03:44] What they provided in the level two was a call log of calls.
[1:03:48] And I showed you a record when Mr. Bonda called him.
[1:03:51] What they didn't provide is a log showing texts which is different.
[1:03:56] Regardless, if they agree to disagree, that's a separate issue.
[1:04:00] but regardless after that college,
[1:04:02] July 16th, on July 18th, 2025,
[1:04:04] Mr. Bonda sent this letter to Certified Mail
[1:04:07] and by email to Mr. Taylor's address.
[1:04:10] What we've not heard yet what we're gonna hear in her
[1:04:12] buttle is that, oh, the district sent it to the wrong address.
[1:04:16] That's my old address, I had moved.
[1:04:18] That's what we're gonna hear in her buttle,
[1:04:20] but that's beside the point
[1:04:22] and that's Mr. Taylor's responsibility.
[1:04:24] Persuant to the district's policy,
[1:04:27] We know that we have over 20,000 employees.
[1:04:30] We can't chase every employee to ask them to update their addresses.
[1:04:33] This is the employees obligation pursuant to the policy is shown here.
[1:04:37] If an employee has a different address, it is their sole obligation to update the district.
[1:04:42] Not vice versa.
[1:04:43] So if you hear any argument that we sent it to the wrong address, it's simply because
[1:04:46] a Mr. Taylor's failure to update his records.
[1:04:50] So let's look at a snapshot in relation to the investigation.
[1:04:55] Mr. Taylor failed to reply to Mr. Bonda.
[1:04:58] And let me go back to the letter...
[1:05:00] One thing I did not focus on, if you look at the last sentence, it's a tie-light. It says, please contact my office at this number by a deadline, August 4th, 2025 to schedule a meeting so we can proceed to close the case.
[1:05:15] That day passed and he never contacted him. That was the deadline that was given to Mr. Taylor and he never responded.
[1:05:22] because of his failure, Mr. Bond had decided to issue a conference summary in relation to what
[1:05:27] transpired and notified him that you did not participate in investigation. You're going to hear
[1:05:33] test our argument that we never got the letter. We had a wrong address. We've already talked about that.
[1:05:38] But what I find very curious is Mr. Taylor received a letter on September 19th and the termination
[1:05:45] notice on September 20th, but for some reason he's saying he never received the prior letter
[1:05:50] asking him to show up in person.
[1:05:56] We heard some argument in relation to obligations that this
[1:05:59] was not intentional that he wanted to cooperate or whatever that argument is. The policy of the
[1:06:05] district doesn't require for Mr. Taylor to intentionally avoid investigation. If you read the
[1:06:10] policy, it says any employee who fails to cooperate with such an investigation or provide complete
[1:06:16] information may be subject to termination. That's what happened here. There was an investigation.
[1:06:21] He felt to cooperate and he did not provide the information that we're seeking. It's as simple
[1:06:27] as that. And there is an obligation when the district conducts an investigation for an employed
[1:06:31] to cooperate and order for the district to give Mr. Taylor a fair chance and find out what if
[1:06:37] anything happened and he did not cooperate. So he forced the district's hand to lead that to termination.
[1:06:44] And in relation to Mr. Taylor's knowledge of the policy, he testified that he knew about
[1:06:49] this policy, he signed the handbook, so there's clear knowledge that he had to comply with
[1:06:54] it.
[1:06:56] So in conclusion, 24 hours after this incident, Mr. Taylor knew about the bus incident with
[1:07:03] the student, and we could argue all day about what transpired or not, he submitted a statement
[1:07:10] the supervisor told him that triggered Mr. Bondek to conduct an investigation. He talked to him
[1:07:15] by a phone, he texted him, he sent him a certified letter asking him to show up for an interview
[1:07:20] and Mr. Taylor for whatever reason just didn't do it. But at the end of the day, the district
[1:07:24] has a responsibility to conduct investigations and require employees to cooperate and comply
[1:07:30] with that policy. And that didn't happen here and that led to the termination.
[1:07:36] I'll mention this briefly.
[1:07:38] I don't want to focus on it wholly,
[1:07:40] but the whole address situation
[1:07:42] was Mr. Taylor's responsibility to update his address.
[1:07:45] We complied with our requirements.
[1:07:47] At the end of the day,
[1:07:48] he did receive two out of the three letters,
[1:07:50] even if went to the wrong address.
[1:07:53] So HSD is requesting this board
[1:07:55] to deny all requests of relief of Mr. Taylor
[1:07:58] and uphold a level two decision.
[1:08:02] Thank you.
[1:08:03] It means, Edwards, the U.S. to make a rebuttal statement, you have, I believe, six minutes.
[1:08:14] In fact, that a complaint was made does not automatically establish the complaint was true.
[1:08:20] An investigation being opened does not establish misconduct, and an employee request for representation should not automatically be treated as refusal to cooperate.
[1:08:29] The evidence must establish what actually happened.
[1:08:33] We also asked that the district position concerning Mr. Taylor's unemployment claim be considered
[1:08:37] in a constant connection with the overall record.
[1:08:42] If the district representative that Mr. Taylor committed misconduct, that those representations
[1:08:47] should be consistent with the evidence presented in this grievance, we are not asking that
[1:08:53] Mr. Taylor be treated differently simply because he is a veteran or because he has good
[1:08:58] reputation and great reputation. We're asking that the district considered the whole person,
[1:09:03] misceersious, of the termination of his employment basis on upon dispute allegations.
[1:09:10] Mr. Taylor is a military veteran who retired with honors. He is a respected number of the
[1:09:15] his community and our stand-in gentleman who has spent his life serving others. His honorable
[1:09:20] service is not place him above the rules, but his record of character and history are relevant
[1:09:26] when considering whether the extreme PILITY of a termination is appropriate, especially when
[1:09:31] the factual evidence support and the termination remains distributed. It is deeply concerning
[1:09:37] that an aggregation of the nature could cause a result of destruction of a person employment
[1:09:42] reputation, livelihood, when there is questions concerning the underlying facts that completeness
[1:09:49] of the investigation, the photographic evidence, and the request for the union representation
[1:09:54] and the employees' attempts to communicate with the investigator.
[1:09:58] We respectfully ask the district...
[1:10:00] Not to allow an allegation to become a finding of simple because it was repeated during an investigation.
[1:10:07] We asked that the original evidence be reviewed, the complete video be examined, the distributed
[1:10:13] photographs are authenticated and documentation concerning the student presence on 1628.
[1:10:20] Be considerate and Mr. Taylor attempts to cooperate and obtain representation, be fully evaluated.
[1:10:26] Most importantly, we asked that the district look at the evidence fairly and objectively.
[1:10:31] Mr. Taylor deserves an opportunity to have the facts heard, not merely the allegation of against him.
[1:10:37] For those reasons, we respectfully ask that H.H. has a reverse determination.
[1:10:41] We invite Mr. Donald Taylor to his position as a bus attendant and equipment position.
[1:10:45] We store his back pay, benefits, and correct or remove this mayor's records that are based upon any accurate and unsupported funding, basically.
[1:10:53] We are further requests to complete review of all conduct investigation, including the
[1:10:58] Helen of Mr. Tate's request for you, your representation.
[1:11:02] His attempt to contact Mr. Band and concerns regarding authentic authenticity and
[1:11:07] completeness of the evidence relieved upon their administration.
[1:11:11] This is not simply about employee losing the job.
[1:11:14] It's about whether in person, career, reputation, and livelihoods should be taken away
[1:11:18] without reliable evidence and fair opportunity to defend himself.
[1:11:21] Mr. Taylor was served his country earnably, he has served his community, he has been
[1:11:26] outstanding gentlemen, and he deserves nothing less than a fair and complete review of the
[1:11:31] facts before such a serious decision is allowed to stay in.
[1:11:34] Well, he did try to contact Mr. Bounder. Mr. Bounder is not the fourth coming, he's not truthful.
[1:11:41] We gave him the phone record, to prove that he'd never called him back, he refused to return to
[1:11:45] call. He actually sent that document to the wrong dress on purpose, like he said. He had to
[1:11:50] If you go back and look in their evidence, they never submitted his statement because that's untrue.
[1:11:55] You know, they didn't do their job digitally to investigate.
[1:12:00] They solely said in the unaparmate hearing that he,
[1:12:03] Mollary, they determined him because he didn't participate in the hearing, which is untrue.
[1:12:07] The child, nothing happened to the child.
[1:12:09] The child was told to keep his clothes on.
[1:12:12] That's merely why we hear today.
[1:12:14] Even in the hearing, they said they didn't even know why he was sent home.
[1:12:17] But they said he refused investigation. Mr. Bander was, I don't know if you know that he was
[1:12:22] demoted and it was some, I'm sure some part of what's going on now. So he, so administration
[1:12:28] did take corrective action. We're asking you to reconsider Mr. Taylor's position and give him
[1:12:35] a opportunity and even if you say we're going to wait and we're going to look and listen,
[1:12:41] you could do that without even making a decision today until you really ask them for the
[1:12:46] to prove, because right now they wrote their own words on it.
[1:12:50] It's not even what was said in the surveillance cameras.
[1:12:53] They just wrote a statement on it.
[1:12:55] But they have actual video.
[1:12:57] You can go back and look at the view.
[1:12:59] Mr. Banda, if you ask him, he interviewed the driver.
[1:13:02] The driver said he saw nothing.
[1:13:04] Nothing that was inappropriate.
[1:13:06] That's why he didn't ask the driver to write a statement.
[1:13:08] Because he knew we asked that in that meeting with the driver.
[1:13:12] And so he didn't even use the driver statement.
[1:13:13] because he's on this return about recommending termination from Mr. Taylor is unlawful and wrongfully.
[1:13:20] Thank you for your consideration.
[1:13:23] Thank you.
[1:13:37] I believe your time is up.
[1:13:39] We have like 30 seconds.
[1:13:44] Okay,
[1:13:48] go ahead two minutes.
[1:13:50] Thank you.
[1:13:51] I just wanted to make a few points.
[1:13:54] I know the representative for the district.
[1:13:56] made a few arguments, one saying that he wasn't cooperative with investigation, but that he also showed a display or a slideshow of photos that don't really tell the story of what transpired that day.
[1:14:10] To show photos and just create a scenario with no evidence is improper and it's not just, it's not justified and it doesn't allow justice for Mr. Donald Taylor.
[1:14:20] Mr. Second of all, Mr. Taylor never stated he was not aware. That's completely false.
[1:14:26] He was aware of this investigation. He wasn't contact with Mr. Bonda. He never said that he wouldn't be a part of it, and that's just plain and simple.
[1:14:34] To argue miscommunication whether someone got a call, he's here today, months three, four, five, however many months has been later.
[1:14:41] Clearly, he wants his job and willing to participate.
[1:14:45] This person that you explained, that you describe who would not participate in investigation
[1:14:49] would not be seen before asking for his job back.
[1:14:54] That's two.
[1:14:56] My third point is that the Rebson of the District State is that we did not submit.
[1:15:00] A text message. Logs that show the text messages. In exhibit F of the exhibit F we submitted phone call records and we also submitted text message records. For the month of June July, almost, yeah, the month of June July and a little bit of May. But you can see that there was never an incoming text message for any number associated with Mr. Bondo or with HISD.
[1:15:25] There were many fabrications in this entire representation to
[1:15:34] state that he was not cooperative
[1:15:36] to also state that Mr. Bonda called him and texted him with no proof and we've given
[1:15:41] proof that he hasn't.
[1:15:42] It says a lot and he shouldn't have been terminated and thank you for listening to me.
[1:15:49] Thank you.
[1:15:50] Thank you.
[1:15:52] Are there any questions from my colleagues?
[1:15:59] The parties have completed their presentations and it is now time for board members to make our decisions on the issues before us.
[1:16:07] Is there any further discussion?
[1:16:10] Is there any development on?
[1:16:12] No.
[1:16:12] Can we proceed?
[1:16:14] Okay.
[1:16:17] Okay.
[1:16:18] So do I have a motion?
[1:16:26] I move that we tonight are requested relief not previously granted by the level two hearing officer and
[1:16:31] the discretion at the level two hearing officer.
[1:16:35] Thank you.
[1:16:35] We have a second.
[1:16:47] We have a motion by Board Member Duffy.
[1:16:50] And a second by Board Member Gusen.
[1:16:54] Is there any further discussion?
[1:16:56] Hearing none, please vote.
[1:17:11] Boating has now closed.
[1:17:12] Demotion passes.
[1:17:15] The board has voted three, four, and zero against
[1:17:18] Demotion.
[1:17:21] A letter notifying both parties of the action of the Board shall be prepared and signed by the
[1:17:28] Executive Director of Board Relations as soon as possible.
[1:17:32] This hearing is concluded at 7.9 p.m.
[1:17:43] We'd now further business to discuss this meeting of the Board is adjourned.
[1:17:47] The time is 7.20 p.m. on August 27, 2026.
[1:17:54] Thank you everybody for coming.