21-002124TTS Lake County School Board vs. Martez Edwards Status: Closed Recommended Order on Wednesday, November 10, 2021.

Summary: School Board proved that Respondent's failure to disclose prior disciplinary action in another state was grounds for dismissal.

S TATE OF F LORIDA

D IVISION OF A DMINISTRATIVE H EARINGS

L AKE C OUNTY S CHOOL B OARD ,

Petitioner ,

vs. Case No. 21 - 2124TTS

M ARTEZ E DWARDS ,

Respondent .

/

R ECOMMENDED O RDER

Pur suant to notice, a final hearing was conducted in this case on

September 8, 2021, via Zoom teleconference, before Lawrence P. Stevenson, a

duly - designated Administrative Law Judge (ÑALJÒ) of the Division of

Administrative Hearings (ÑDOAHÒ).

A PPEARANCES

Fo r Petitioner: Steven W. Johnson, Esquire

Elizabeth Turner, Esquire

Johnson Turner

215 North 2 nd Street

Leesburg, Florida 34748

For Respondent : Branden M. Vicari, Esquire

Herdman & Sakellarides, P.A.

29605 U.S. Highway 19 North, Suite 110

Clearwater, Flo rida 33761

S TATEMENT OF T HE I SSUE

The issue is whether RespondentÔs employment with the Lake County

School Board (ÑSchool BoardÒ) should be terminated for the reasons stated in

the School Board SuperintendentÔs letter dated June 16, 2021.

P RELIMINARY S TATEMENT

By letter dated June 16, 2021, the School BoardÔs Superintendent,

Diane S. Kornegay, informed Respondent , Martez Edwards (ÑRespondentÒ or

Mr. EdwardsÒ) , that she intended to recommend his termination from

employment at the School Board meeting on June 28, 2021. Ms. KornegayÔs

letter stated the ground for her recommendation as follows, in relevant part:

It has come to the attention of the school board that

you entered into a settlement agreement with the

State of Alabama Board of Education. That

set tlement was signed by you on January 6, 2020

and by Eric Mackey, State Superintendent of

Education on February 7, 2020. As a result of that

settlement you received a letter of reprimand from

the State of Alabama Department of Education and

a directive to c omplete an anger management

course and a NASDTEC [ 1 ] course (Prevention and

Correction). The State of Alabama Department of

Education could not produce any records which

verify completion of the assigned coursework.

However, they were able to provide Lake C ounty

Schools with your letter of reprimand.

One question on the Lake County Schools

employment application is ÑHave you ever been

disciplined by any public agency responsible for

licensure of any kind, including but not limited to

education?Ò Another que stion from the certification

application was ÑHave you ever had a processional

[sic] license or certificate sanctioned or discipline in

this state or any other state?Ò Finally a third

question asked ÑHave you ever had a professional

license or professional certificate disciplined in this

state or any other state by receiving a letter of

reprimand, fine, probation or any other restriction

or special condition?Ò You answer [sic] ÑNOÒ to all

of these questions.

1 NASDTEC is the acronym for the National Association of State Directors of Teacher

Education and Certification.

School Board Policy (ÑpoÒ) 3121, Conditions for

Employment and Re - employment of Instructional

Staff states the following:

False or misleading statements or

answers or omissions made by a

person in connection with seeking

employment may bar a person from

employment with the Board or, if

discovered after employment, may

result in disciplinary action, including

termination upon the recommendation

of the Superintendent and the

approval of the Board. Each case shall

be considered on its own merits.

You are found to have committed fraud under

po8700 which is defined as:

Ñthe intentional, false representation

or concealment of a material fact in

order to personally benefit or induce

another to act to his/her detriment.Ò

ÑFraud and fraudulent activity are

strictly prohibited.Ò

The information provided by the State of Alabama

Department of Education and omission of that

information on the Lake County School district

employment application and the Certification

application for the state of Florida, proves you

falsified information in order to gain employment

wit h the District. Your violation of po3121 and

po8700 also constitute a violation of po3210,

Standards of Ethical Conduct and subsequently a

violation of the following sections of Rule 6A -

10.081, F.A.C.

2(C)1. Obligation to the profession of

education requi res that the District

instructional staff member shallÈ

Maintain honesty in all professional

dealingsÈ

2(C)7. Shall not misrepresent oneÔs

own professional qualifications.

Your actions are in violation of po3121, po3210,

po8700 and Rule 6A - 10.081, F.A.C. , which

constitutes just cause for termination under Rule

[6A - 5.056], F.A.C., specifically Misconduct in Office

which is defined as:

(b) A violation of the Principles of

Professional Conduct for the

Education Profession in Florida as

adopted in Rule 6A - 10 .081, F.A.C.;

(c) A violation of adopted school board

rules.

Based on the above findings and in accordance with

Florida Statutes 1012.27(5) and po3140, your

actions constitute Just Cause for DismissalÈ.

On June 28, 2021, Mr. Edwards timely requested a formal administrative

hearing to contest the allegations of Ms. KornegayÔs letter. On July 2, 2021,

the School Board referred the case to DOAH for the assignment of an ALJ

and the conduct of a formal hearing. The final hearing was originally

scheduled for August 20, 2021. An unopposed motion to continue the hearing

was granted and the hearing was rescheduled for September 8, 2021, on

which date it was convened and completed.

At the hearing, the School Board presented the testimony of:

Mr. Edwards; Chad Far nsworth, Assistant Superintendent for Human

Resources for the School Board; Erin Marra, a Certification Specialist for the

School Board; and David Myers, Supervisor of Employee Relations and

Compensation for the School Board. The School BoardÔs Exhibits 1, 3 through

5, and 8 were admitted into evidence by stipulation. Mr. Edwards testified on

his own behalf and offered no exhibits into evidence.

The one - volume Transcript of the final hearing was filed with DOAH on

September 24, 2021. RespondentÔs unopposed motion for an extension of the

time for filing Proposed Recommended Orders was granted by Order dated

September 29, 2021. In accordance with the Order granting extension, the

parties timely filed their Proposed Recommended Orders on October 1 3 ,

2021.

F IND INGS OF F ACT

Based on the evidence adduced at hearing, and the record as a whole, the

following Findings of Fact are made:

1. During the 2020 - 2021 school year, Mr. Edwards was employed by the

School Board, working as a physical education teacher and head f ootball

coach at East Ridge High School.

2. Mr. Edwards submitted his employment application to the School

Board on or about March 13, 2020. The application required applicants to list

their professional certifications. Mr. Edwards listed certifications in

Mississippi and Georgia.

3. Mr. Edwards testified that he had also been certified in Alabama,

Michigan, and South Dakota , but that his certifications in those states had

expired. He testified that he did not include expired certifications on the

employme nt application. The application did not specify whether applicants

must list every certification they have ever held or only current certifications.

4. The employment application also asked several background questions,

three of which are relevant to this case. The first question asked if the

applicant has Ñ[b]een investigated for misconduct related to your

employment?Ò The second question asked if the applicant is Ñunder

investigation, or have you been charged with any violation of the Florida

Code of Eth ics for Education or any similar professional inquiry in any other

state?Ò The third question asked if the applicant has Ñever been disciplined by

any public agency responsible for licensure of any kind, including but not

limited to educational licensure?Ò Mr. Edwards answered ÑnoÒ to each of

these questions.

5. At some time in the spring of 2021, the School Board received

information that Mr. Edwards had been investigated for disciplinary

infractions by the Alabama Department of Education (ÑAlabama DOEÒ).

David Myers, S upervisor of E mployee R elations for the School Board,

testified that the matter came to his attention when he received a

memorandum, dated April 29, 2020, from the Alabama Superintendent of

Education to all city and county superintendents in that state. The

memorandum contained a list of persons whose certificates had been

disciplined. Mr. EdwardsÔ s name was listed with the notations that he had

received a letter of reprimand and was required to complete a NASDTEC

Ñprevention and correctionÒ course and an anger management course.

6. The School Board investigated the situation and obtained more details

from the Alabama DOE. By certified letter dated January 15, 2020,

Mr. Edwards had officially been notified that the Alabama DOE intended to

take action against his Alabama Professional Educator Certificate pursuant

to a provision of state law allowing the Superintendent of Education to act

against a certificate holder who Ñhas been guilty of immoral conduct or

unbecoming or indecent behavior.Ò See Ala. Code § 16 - 23 - 5(a)(1975). While

employed at Bessemer City High School in 2016, Mr. Edwards had been

accused in two instances of crudely insinuating to students that he had a

sexual relationship with their mothers and in a third instance of declining t o

follow instructions from his female athletic director in crude sexual terms.

7. Mr. Edwards was apparently aware of the allegations prior to the date

of the certified letter because on January 6, 2020, he signed a Settlement

Agreement with the Superinten dent of Education in which he agreed to

accept a letter of reprimand and agreed to complete at his own expense a

NASDTEC course in Ñprevention and correctionÒ and an anger management

course within 120 days of the date the agreement was signed by all partie s.

8. The settlement agreement included three signatories: Mr. Edwards;

James R. Ward III, attorney for the Alabama DOE; and Eric C. Mackey, the

Alabama Superintendent of Education. Mr. Edwards signed the agreement

on January 6, 2020. Mr. Ward and Mr. Mack ey did not sign the agreement

until February 6 and February 7, 2020, respectively.

9. The School Board obtained a copy of the letter of reprimand, signed by

Mr. Mackey. The letter was dated February 6, 2020. The copy obtained by the

School Board indicated that it was the ÑThird MailingÒ of the letter, which

was sent certified, return receipt requested, to 217 Hemlock Drive,

Stockbridge, Georgia 30281.

10. Mr. Edwards explained the situation in Alabama as follows. In

December 2019, while teaching at a high s chool in Tennessee, he was

recruited by a high school principal in Alabama for the position of head

football coach. After some negotiation, he accepted the job. Mr. Edwards

stated that he had not taught in Alabama since 2016 and that his Alabama

teaching l icense had expired in 2018.

11. In January 2020, Mr. Edwards applied to reactivate his Alabama

teaching license. During the application process, the Alabama DOE informed

Mr. Edwards of the allegations regarding his behavior at Bessemer City High

School in 2016. He was presented with the choice of contesting the

allegations through an administrative hearing or accepting the offered

settlement agreement.

12. Mr. Edwards denied the allegations. He testified that he chose the

settlement agreement without admi tting to the factual allegations against

him because it was the fastest way to put the charges behind him.

Mr. Edwards stated that Alabama is a Ñvery competitive stateÒ when it comes

to football and it was important that he begin work immediately with the

football team. He wanted to get his teaching license and begin coaching as

soon as possible.

13. Mr. Edwards stated that, about a week after he signed the settlement

agreement, he called the Alabama DOE to ask why his teaching license had

yet to be granted . He was told that licensing could not go forward until the

settlement agreement had been signed by all parties, including the attorney

for the Alabama DOE and Mr. Mackey, the Superintendent.

14. While Mr. Edwards was waiting to hear from the Alabama DOE o n his

teacherÔs license, his fiance was offered a job in Florida. They discussed the

offer and decided to move together to Florida. Mr. Edwards began applying

for jobs in Lake County.

15. Mr. Edwards testified that he never received confirmation of the

s ettlement agreement, the letter of reprimand, or anything at all from the

Alabama DOE. He testified that he had not lived at the Stockbridge, Georgia ,

address since 2019. His mailing address just before he moved to Florida was

in Olive Branch, Mississippi, near Memphis, Tennessee.

16. Mr. Edwards testified that he only learned of the completed settlement

agreement and the letter of reprimand when the School Board accused him of

falsifying his application in 2021.

17. Mr. Edwards testified that he answered all questions on the School

BoardÔs employment application truthfully. Mr. Edwards stated that, at the

time he completed the application, he was unaware of any ÑinvestigationÒ

pertaining to misconduct related to his employment. He claimed to have been

unaw are that he had been charged with a violation of the Florida Code of

Ethics for Education or any similar set of professional standards. He stated

that he was unaware of having been disciplined by any public agency

responsible for licensure because he had n ever received the executed

settlement agreement or letter of reprimand from the Alabama DOE.

18. In attempting to explain his failure to include the Alabama DOE

information in his application, Mr. Edwards pointed out that he had no

motive to mislead the Sc hool Board and that he included information about

his Alabama work experience in the application. Under Ñ Contract Teaching

and/or Administrative Experience, Ò Mr. Edwards disclosed his employment in

Alabama. He listed his principal/supervisor at Bessemer Ci ty High School,

Ylonda Gray, and included her as a reference. The School Board contacted

Ms. Gray, who responded that Mr. Edwards was a more than satisfactory

employee and had no disciplinary or performance issues while at her school.

Ms. Gray told the Sch ool BoardÔs reference checker that she would hire

Mr. Edwards back Ñin a heartbeat.Ò 2 Mr. Edwards argued that opening his

Alabama teaching career up to scrutiny in this fashion was contrary to the

School BoardÔs allegation that he was attempting to conceal his disciplinary

history.

19. Mr. Edwards also pointed out that he freely disclosed other negative

employment information in his application to the School Board. He disclosed

that he had been terminated as a head football coach at a high school in

Mississ ippi and that he had been arrested for a crime for which the charges

were dropped. He answered ÑyesÒ to application questions asking whether he

had Ñfailed to complete a contract for educational services in an educational

or school - related positionÒ and wh ether he Ñhad a contract non - renewed, non -

extended or been dismissed from employment.Ò Mr. Edwards argues that

these open and voluntary disclosures on the School Board application

corroborate his testimony that he answered all questions on the application

truthfully, honestly, and without intention to deceive.

20. Based on all the evidence, it is found that, even if Mr. Edwards is

credited with no intention to defraud or actively deceive the School Board in

his application, he was at least attempting to fin esse the Alabama situation

in a way that was practically indistinguishable from deception. Mr. Edwards

truthfully testified that he was unaware the settlement agreement had been

executed and the letter of reprimand issued, apparently because the Alabama

2 Ms. GrayÔs response leads the undersigned to infer that the allegations about

Mr. EdwardsÔ s behavior in 2016 were made well after he left Bessemer City High School,

because Ms. Gray seemed unaware of them. An alternative explanation would be that

Ms. Gray was aware of the allegations but did not credit them.

DO E sent those documents to an old address. 3 However, at the time he

applied to the School Board, Mr. Edwards had signed the settlement

agreement and accepted that he would receive a letter of reprimand and be

required to complete two specified courses. Mr. Edwards knew that he was

merely waiting for the Alabama DOE to take the final step of completing the

execution of the settlement agreement and issuing the letter of reprimand.

21. Mr. Edwards testified that he had been told it was possible that the

Alabam a Superintendent of Education might reject the settlement agreement

and press for more severe discipline; therefore, he had no way of knowing at

the time of his School Board application whether he had been disciplined.

Even accepting his testimony on this point, Mr. Edwards nonetheless knew

that he had been investigated for misconduct and had been charged with a

violation of AlabamaÔs counterpart to the Florida Code of Ethics for

Education. 4 It was within Mr. EdwardsÔ s power to make full disclosure to the

S chool Board as to his pending Alabama discipline even if he was unaware of

its final outcome. His failure to make that disclosure amounts to misleading

the School Board.

22. The preponderance of the evidence establishes that Mr. Edwards made

misleading sta tements in connection with seeking employment with the

School Board, in violation of po 3121.

23. The preponderance of the evidence establishes that Mr. Edwards

failed to maintain honesty in all professional dealings, in violation of po 3210

and Florida Ad ministrative Code R ule 6A - 10.081(2)(c)1.

24. The preponderance of the evidence establishes that Mr. Edwards

committed fraud in violation of po 8700, in the sense that he concealed a

material fact from the School Board. As indicated above, Mr. Edwards shade d

3 On this point , it is reasonable to infer that it was Mr. EdwardsÔ s responsibility to ensure

that the Alabama DOE had his current address and therefore reasonable to disregard his

effort to use AlabamaÔs lack of current information on his whereabouts as a defense.

4 Mr. Edwar dsÔ s denial that he was aware of any investigation for misconduct or ethics

violations is not credible.

the truth and interpreted his situation in Alabama in the manner most

advantageous to himself. He did not actively misrepresent a material fact to

the School Board, but he did conceal a matter that the School Board was

entitled to know about before it hi red him. He was less than completely

forthcoming, and in a way that redounded to his personal benefit.

C ONCLUSIONS OF L AW

25. DOAH has jurisdiction over the parties to and subject matter of this

proceeding. §§ 120.569 and 120.57(1), Fla. Stat.

26. The Sch ool Board is a duly constituted school board charged with the

duty to operate, control, and supervise all free public schools within the

school district of Lake County, Florida, under section 1012.22, Florida

Statutes.

27. During the 2020 - 2021 school year, Mr. Edwards was employed by the

School Board as a football coach and teacher. The School Board seeks to

terminate Mr. EdwardsÔ s employment and has the burden of proving the

allegations set forth in its June 16, 2021, letter by a preponderance of the

evide nce, as opposed to the more stringent standard of clear and convincing

evidence applicable to the loss of a license or certification. Cropsey v. Sch. Bd.

of Manatee Cnty ., 19 So. 3d 351 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009), rev. denied , 29 So. 3d

1118 (Fla. 2010); Cisneros v. Sch. Bd. of Miami - Dade Cnty. , 990 So. 2d 1179

(Fla. 3d DCA 2008).

28. The preponderance of the evidence standard requires proof by

evidence that Ñmore likely than notÒ tends to prove a certain proposition. See

Gross v. Lyons , 763 So. 2d 276, 289 n.1 (Fl a. 2000).

29. Section 1012.33(1)(a) provides that a teacher Ô s contract must contain

provisions for dismissal during the term of the contract for Ñ just cause, Ò

which includes Ñ immorality, misconduct in office, incompetency, gross

insubordination, willful ne glect of duty, or conviction of a crime involving

moral turpitude, Ò as those terms are defined by rule of the State Board of

Education. The School Board in this case has argued that Respondent's

misconduct in office provides just cause for the termination of his

employment contract.

30. The SuperintendentÔs letter of June 16, 2021, finds that RespondentÔs

actions constitute violations of po 3121, po 8700, po 3210, and r ule 6A - 10.081.

The first cited School Board policy, po 3121, ÑConditions for Employment a nd

Re - employment of Instructional Staff,Ò includes the following relevant

language:

False or misleading statements or answers or

omissions made by a person in connection with

seeking employment may bar a person from

employment with the Board or, if discov ered after

employment, may result in disciplinary action,

including termination upon the recommendation of

the Superintendent and the approval of the Board.

Each case shall be considered on its own merits.

31. The second cited School Board policy, po 8700 , ÑAnti - Fraud,Ò states as

follows, in relevant part:

This policy is implemented to make employees

aware of activities that may be fraudulent, illegal,

or otherwise unethical. The District will not

tolerate such activities, and disciplinary measures

will be implemented as appropriate.

32. The policy goes on to define ÑfraudÒ generally as Ñthe intentional, false

representation or concealment of a material fact in order to personally benefit

or induce another to act to his/her detriment.Ò

33. The third cited School Board policy, po 3210, ÑStandards of Ethical

Conduct, Ò is adapted from rule 6A - 10.081, ÑPrinciples of Professional Conduct

for the Education Profession in Florida.Ò Both the policy and the rule include

the substance of the following language, quot ed from the rule and cited by the

SuperintendentÔs letter as a ground for dismissal:

(2) Florida educators shall comply with the

following disciplinary principles. Violation of any of

these principles shall subject the individual to

revocation or suspensio n of the individual

educatorÔs certificate, or the other penalties as

provided by law.

* * *

(c) Obligation to the profession of education

requires that the individual:

1. Shall maintain honesty in all professional

dealings.

* * *

7. Shall not misrepr esent oneÔs own professional

qualifications.

34. It is well established under Florida law that determining whether

alleged misconduct violates a statute or rule is a question of ultimate fact to

be decided by the trier - of - fact based on the weight of the e vidence. Holmes v.

Turlington, 480 So. 2d 150, 153 (Fla. 1985); McKinney v. Castor , 667 So. 2d

387, 389 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995); Langston v. Jamerson , 653 So. 2d 489, 491 (Fla.

1st DCA 1995). Thus, determining whether alleged misconduct violates the

law is a f actual, rather than a legal, inquiry.

35. The School Board proved, by a preponderance of the evidence, that

Mr. Edwards violated po 3121, po 8700, po 3210, and rule 6A - 10.081(2)(c)1.,

by establishing that he failed to disclose the disciplinary matter that he knew

to be pending before the Alabama DOE at the time he completed his

employment application to the School Board. Mr. Edwards offered only

unconvincing rationalizations for his failure to inform the School Board of the

Alabama disciplinary matter.

36. The School Board has demonstrated, by a preponderance of the

evidence, just cause in this matter to terminate Mr. EdwardsÔ s professional

services contract and dismiss him from employment for misconduct in office,

as that term is defined in rule 6A - 5.056(2) (b) and (c). 5

R ECOMMENDATION

Based upon the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, it is

R ECOMMENDED that the Lake County School Board issue a final order

terminating Mr. EdwardsÔ s professional services contract , and dismissing

him from employ ment.

D ONE A ND E NTERED this 1 0 th day of November , 2021 , in Tallahassee,

Leon County, Florida.

S

L AWRENCE P. S TEVENSON

Administrative Law Judge

1230 Apalachee Parkway

Tallahassee, Florida 32399 - 3060

(850) 488 - 9675

www.doah.state.fl.us

Filed with the Cl erk of the

Division of Administrative Hearings

this 1 0 th day of November , 2021 .

C OPIES F URNISHED :

Branden M. Vicari, Esquire Stephen W. Johnson, Esquire

Herdman & Sakellarides, P.A. Johnson Turner

Suite 110 215 N orth 2nd Street

29605 U.S. Highway 19 North Leesburg, Florida 34748

Clearwater, Florida 33761

Elizabeth Turner, Esquire

Diane Kornegay, Superintendent Johnson Turner

Lak e County School Board 215 N orth 2nd Street

201 West Burleigh Boulevard Leesburg, Florida 34748

Tavares, Florida 32778 - 2496

5 The relevant text of the rule is set forth in the SuperintendentÔs letter of June 16, 2021,

quoted in the Preliminary Statement above.

Anastasios Kamoutsas, General Counsel Richard Corcoran

Department of Education Commissioner of Education

Turlington Building, Suite 1244 Department of Education

325 West Gaines Street Turlington Building, Suite 1514

Tallahassee, Florida 32399 - 0400 325 We st Gaines Street

Tallahassee, Florida 32399 - 0400

N OTICE OF R IGHT T O S UBMIT E XCEPTIONS

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 file d with the agency that will issue the Final Order in this

case.