14-004717TTS Escambia County School Board vs. Holly Bamonte Status: Closed Recommended Order on Monday, March 2, 2015.

Summary: Teacher permitted teens to consume alcohol at a party at her house. Termination is appropriate.

STATE OF FLORIDA

DIVISION OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

ESCAMBIA COUNTY SCHOOL BOARD,

Petitioner,

vs. Case No. 14 - 4717TTS

HOLLY BAMONTE,

Respondent.

_______________________________/

RECOMMENDED ORDER

Pursuant to notice, an administra tive hearing was held in

this case before Diane Cleavinger, Administrative Law Judge of

the Division of Administrative Hearings , on December 15, 2014, in

Pensacola, Florida.

APPEARANCES

For Petitioner: Joseph L. Hammons, Esquire

The Hammons Law Firm, P.A.

17 West Cervantes Street

Pensacola, Florida 32501 - 3125

For Respondent: Holly A. Bamonte, pro se

1248 Plata Canada Drive

Cantonment, Florida 32533

STATEMENT OF THE ISSUE

The issue in this proceeding is whether Respondent should be

terminated from employment with Petitioner.

PRELIMINARY STATEMENT

By letter dated September 12, 2014, the Superintendent of

the Esca m bia County School District notified R espondent Holly

Bamonte (Respondent) that he was recommending to Petitioner

Escambia County School Board (Petitioner or School Board)

termination of her employment as a teacher for violation of the

Escambia County School Board ' s Code of Ethics . Specifica lly,

Respondent was charged with violating the code of ethics by

contributing to the delinquency of several minors in that she

provided alcohol to them when she permitted them to drink alcohol

in her home. On September 16, 2014, at its regular meeting, th e

School Board approved the recommendation of the Superintendent

and terminated Respondent ' s employment effective September 17,

2014. Respondent was notified of her termination by letter dated

September 17, 2014. Thereafter, Respondent requested a hearin g

and the matter was forwarded to the Division of Administrative

Hearings.

At the hearing, the School Board offered the testimony of

five witnesses and introduced four exhibits into evidence.

Respondent testified on her own behalf and offered the testimon y

of one witness.

After the hearing, Petitioner filed a Proposed Recommended

Order on January 20, 20 15. Respondent did not file a proposed

recommended o rder.

FINDING S OF FACT

1. At all times relevant to this proceeding , Respondent

Holly Bamonte was empl oyed as a classroom teache r by the Escambia

County School District .

2. As such, Respondent was subject to the rules and

certification requirements of the Florida Department of

Education, including the Code of Ethics of the Education

Profession in Florida and the Principles of Professional Conduct

for the Education Profession in Florida , Florida Administrative

Code Rules 6A - 10.080 and 6A - 10.081 .

3. Additionally, Respondent was subject to the Escambia

County School District Employee Code of Ethics. The e mployee

code provided that all school district employees were expected to

acknowledge and accept responsibilities stated in the state code

of ethics and must conduct themselves in a manner that promotes

and supports ethical principles and values.

4. All of these rules and codes were included in

Petitioner ' s Federal/State Compliance Packet for school year

2013 - 2014 . The compliance packet was provided and accessible to

all certified instructional personnel of the Escambia County

School District , including Ms. Bamonte .

5 . During the holiday break in 2013, J.T. , C.G. , and about

10 to 15 other high school s tudents under the age of 21 attended

a p arty at the Respondent ' s home. The home is approximately

1,500 square feet with a small kitchen and living area .

6. During the party these students consumed alcohol . The

students who drove were asked to put their keys on the counter or

in a bucket , if they were going to drink. Respondent was present

during the party and was aware that the students were drinkin g

alcohol . C. G. and J.T. saw and spoke to Respondent in the area

where student drinking was openly occurring. She did not stop or

prohibit such alcohol consumption and was not concerned that such

overt alcohol consumption was taking place.

7. Ms. Ter esa Bowden was the mother of C.G., then a high

school student. C.G. also attended the party at the Respondent ' s

house where he consumed alcohol . Ms. Bowden went to Respondent ' s

house because her son , who had been drinking beer at the party ,

called her to be picked up. On arriving , she went i nto the

living room and saw five to ten students in a circle. She could

not determine if any had been drinking alcohol. Another pair of

parents was present who were angry b ecause of a concern that the

student s , and in particular their son, had been drinking alcohol.

These parents were told that Respondent was in the bathroom at

the back of the house. Ms. Bowden asked her son , C.G. , if he had

been drinking and he said that he had. Like the other parents,

Ms. Bowden was upset and concerned that her son was allowed to

drink at Respondent ' s home.

8. At some point during the evening, l aw enforcement

officers arrived at the house . As the officers arrived outside ,

J.T. was leaving and spoke with them. They asked if the re were

kids inside drinking and he stated there were. The police

entered the house, but did not find Respondent . Law enforcement

contacted the parents of the students who were present at the

party to come pick them up.

9 . At hearing, Respondent claimed that she and her husband

had a fight the night of the party and that she left the

residence earlier in the evening before the police arrived. She

claimed that she did not see any of the teens at her home

drinking. However, given the testimony of the tee nage party

attendees , Respondent ' s testimony is not credible.

10. On the other hand, the evidence clearly demonstrated

Respondent allowed underage high school students to gather in her

home , and consume alcohol with her knowledge and in her presence.

W hether she purchased the alcohol is not relevant. By permitting

underage drinking in an environment she controlled, Respondent

failed to protect students from harm and permitted them to engage

in conduct that was illegal. Clearly, Respondent ' s lack of

ju dgment regarding student alcohol consumption at her home was

significant and impaired her ability to function as a teacher

with responsibility for protecting and supervising students.

Such conduct was of sufficient severity as to justify termination

of he r instructional contract.

11 . Further, the party at Respondent ' s house , where

students were knowingly permitted by her to consume alcohol ,

became known in the school community and resulted in upset ting

parents in that community . Petitioner ' s lack of j udgment

dem onstrated that parents could not have faith in her ability to

protect their children. Such parental lack of confidence

impaired her ability to serve as a t eacher in the school system.

As such, termination of her instructional contract with the

School Board was warranted and should be upheld .

CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

12 . The Division of Administrative Hearings has

jurisdiction over the parties to and the subject matter of this

proceeding. See §§ 120. 569 and 120.57, Fla. Stat. (2014 ) .

13. In this p roceeding , the School Board seeks to terminate

the Respondent ' s employment. As such, t he School Board must

establish by a preponderance of the evidence that Respondent

violated the various codes of ethics described above . See Dileo

v. Sch. Bd. of Dade Cn ty. , 569 So. 2d 883 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990).

1 4 . The basis for dismissal of instructional personnel with

the public schools of the State of Florida is set forth in

section 1012.33(6), Florida Statutes, which provides that

instructional staff may be terminated for " just cause . "

15 . Section 1012.33(1)(a) defines just cause as including

immorality and misconduct in office as defined by rule of the

State Board of Education . The State Board has promulgated such

rules defining just cause in Flo rida Administrative Code

Rule 6 A - 5.056 .

16 . Florida Administrative Code Rule 6 A - 5.056 provides in

relevant part :

(1) " Immorality " means conduct that is

inconsistent with the standards of public

conscience and good morals. It is conduct

that brings the individual concerne d or the

education profession into public disgrace or

disrespect and impairs the individual ' s

service in the community.

(2) " Misconduct in Office " means one or more

of the following:

(a) A violation of the Code of Ethics of the

Education Profession in Florida as adopted in

Rule 6B - 1.001, F.A.C. [now 6A - 10.080] ;

(b) A violation of the Principles of

Professional Conduct for the Education

Profession in Florida as adopted in Rule 6B -

1.006, F.A.C. [ now 6A - 10.081 ] ;

(c) A violation of the adopted school bo ard

rules;

* * * *

(e) Behavior that reduces the teacher ' s

ability or his or her colleagues ' ability to

effectively perform duties.

17 . Generally, " in order to dismiss a teacher for immoral

conduct , the factfinder must conclude: a) that the teacher

e ngaged in conduct inconsistent with the standards of pu blic

conscience and good morals; and b) that the conduct was

sufficiently notorious so as to disgrace the teaching profession

and impair the teacher ' s service in the community . " McNeill v.

Pinellas Cn ty. Sch. Bd. , 678 So. 2d 476, 477 (Fla. 2d DCA 1996).

18 . It is not necessary, however, that there be specific

testimony regarding impairment of t he teacher ' s effectiveness in

the school system , where impaired effectiveness in the school

system can be in ferred from the misconduct at issue. See Walker

v. Highlands Cnty. Sch. Bd. , 752 So. 2d 127 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000)

( " evidence of impaired effectiveness not necessary where

misconduct " spoke for itself " " ).

19 . Florida Administrative Code Rule 6A - 1.080(3) , fr om the

Code of Ethics of the Education Profession, provides that the

educator must strive to achieve and sustain the highest degree of

ethical conduct.

20 . The Prin ciples of Professional Conduct f or the

Education Profession in Florida , found at rule 6A - 1 .081(3) ,

recites the obligation of a teacher to protect the student from

conditions harmful to learning , or the student ' s mental or

physical health and safety, and provides that a teacher shall not

exploit a relationship with the student for personal gain or

advantage.

21 . Florida courts have recognized that a teacher ' s

effectiveness may be impaired by off - campus conduct, as well as

conduct at school. Purvis v. Marion Cnty . Sch. Bd. , 766 So. 2d

492 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000).

22 . In this case, there is no qu estion that Respondent ' s

misconduct was inconsistent with the standards of public

conscience and good morals, or that it was sufficiently notorious

to bring disgrace upon the teaching profession , and impaired

Respondent ' s effectiveness as a teacher in the school system .

Further, the manner in which Respondent ' s misconduct impaired her

effectiveness as a teacher " speaks for itself. "

2 3. T he evidence clearly demonstrated Respondent allowed

underage high school students to gather in her home and consume

alc oholic beverages with her knowledge and in her presence.

Whether she purchased the alcohol is not relevant . By p ermitting

underage drinking in an environment she controlled, Respondent

failed to protect students from harm and permitted them to engage

in conduct that was illegal. Further, Respondent ' s lack of

judgment towards these students demonstrated that parents could

not have faith in her ability to protect their children, thereby

impairing her ability to serve as a teacher in the school system.

Suc h conduct wa s of sufficient severity as to justify termination

of her instructional contract , and the action of the School Board

in that regard should be upheld .

RECOMMENDATION

Based on the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of

Law, it is RECOMME NDED that :

The Escambia County School Board enter a final order

terminating the Respondent ' s employment effective September 17,

2014, as originally noticed and approved by the Board.

DONE AND ENTERED this 2nd day of March , 2015 , in

Tallahassee, Leon County , Florida.

S

DIANE CLEAVINGER

Administrative Law Judge

Division of Administrative Hearings

The DeSoto Building

1230 Apalachee Parkway

Tallahassee, Florida 32399 - 3060

(850) 488 - 9675

Fax Filing (850) 921 - 6847

www.doah.stat e.fl.us

Filed with the Clerk of the

Division of Administrative Hearings

this 2nd day of March , 2015 .

COPIES FURNISHED:

Holly A. Bamonte

1248 Plata Canada Drive

Cantonment, Florida 32533

Joseph L. Hammons, Esquire

The Hammons Law Firm, P.A.

17 West Ce rvantes Street

Pensacola, Florida 32501 - 3125

(eServed)

Pam Stewart, Commissioner of Education

Department of Education

Turlington Building, Suite 1514

325 West Gaines Street

Tallahassee, Florida 32399 - 0400

(eServed)

Matthew Mears, General Counsel

Depa rtment of Education

Turlington Building, Suite 1244

325 West Gaines Street

Tallahassee, Florida 32399 - 0400

(eServed)

Mr. Malcolm Thomas , Superintendent

Escambia County School Board

75 N orth Pace B oulevard

Pensacola, F lorida 32505

(eServed)

NOTICE OF R IGHT TO SUBMIT EXCEPTIONS

All parties have the right to submit written exceptions within

15 days from the date of this Recommended Order. Any exceptions

to this Recommended Order should be filed with the agency that

will issue the Final Order in this cas e.