Coach Rock has been the football coach at Nutmeg Memorial High School for seven years. Sadly, his tenure has been a disaster of Biblical proportions. A number of anonymous letters have accused the booster club of providing secret financial support to the team, but the lack of inventory controls made it impossible to investigate this allegation. Whatever extra support Coach Rock has obtained under the table, however, has not helped. The Nutmeg Knights are the laughingstock of the Generic Athletic Conference, with a won-lost record of 3 and 27 over the last three years.
As Mr. Principal was driving past the athletic fields last month, he was reminded of what a pain Coach Rock has been. It may have been his new medication, but finally Mr. Principal resolved to act. He called Coach Rock into his office and told him that the high school would be "moving in a different direction." Before Mr. Principal could explain further, Coach Rock stood up, told Mr. Principal that he would be hearing from his lawyer, and stormed out. Mr. Principal called Ms. Superintendent, who told him to quickly write a termination letter, which he did.
As Coach Rock had promised, his lawyer called that very afternoon, before the letter even went out. Bill Alot, local legal scourge, was all over Mr. Principal, yelling at him about how unfairly he had treated Coach Rock after years of dedicated service. Mr. Principal apologized for his abrupt action, and he conceded that he hadn't been fair. However, he told Bill that he would not reverse his decision because change in the football program was desperately needed. Bill responded by demanding to see the Board procedures concerning the employment and dismissal of coaches.
Mr. Principal couldn't answer Bill's question, and he responded that he would be back to him. He called Ms. Superintendent, and after checking, she called Bill to say that he was out of luck because the Board did not have any such procedures.
Bill Alot promptly requested a hearing before the Board of Education concerning the "outrageous treatment" suffered by Coach Rock. Ms. Chairperson conferred with Mr. Board Attorney, who told her that Coach Rock does in fact have a right to Board review. Reluctantly, she so advised Ms. Superintendent and the Board scheduled a hearing for Coach Rock.
At the hearing last evening, Bill was in high dudgeon. "This is the thanks Coach Rock gets after his long service to Nutmeg youth?" A large group from the booster club stood up and booed on cue, and Ms. Chairperson did her best to gavel them quiet. However, Bill was on a roll, and he told the Board to get comfortable, because he had fifty or so witnesses. Ms. Chairperson, however, pulled out A Practical Guide to Connecticut School Law and told Bill that the hearing would be conducted in "a manner prescribed by" the Board. She told Bill that she was limiting Coach Rock's appeal to oral argument by him or his advocate, but not both.
With that, the room erupted, with members of the Booster Club shouting in unison, "Witch Hunt!!" Ms. Chairperson cleared the room, and declared the hearing over. Is Coach Rock out in Nutmeg?
* * *
Both the Administration and the Board of Education have missed opportunities here, and Coach Rock may be back for another season.
School administrators and board members alike must be aware of Connecticut General Statutes Section 10-222e. This statute, passed in 2004, requires that athletic coaches who have served in the same position for at least three years be notified no more than ninety days after their season concludes if their employment in that position is being terminated or non-renewed. The statute does not say what happens if such notice is not given, and arguably the coach's employment is renewed by operation of law. To be sure, the statute also provides that boards of education may terminate the employment of an athletic coach at any time, but only "(1) for reasons of moral misconduct, insubordination or a violation of the rules of the board of education, or (2) because a sport has been cancelled by the board of education." Simple dissatisfaction is not cause for termination of such a coach. Given the lack of notice within ninety days after the football season ended, Coach Rock may get to keep his job unless his lack of inventory controls, inappropriate activities with the booster club, or other misconduct is either insubordinate or violates a Board rule.
If notice is given in a timely manner, the coach has a right to request review by the board of education, "in a manner prescribed by the local or regional board of education," as Ms. Chairperson noted at the hearing. The Nutmeg Board of Education, however, was put at a disadvantage by not adopting an appeal procedure sooner. Boards of education are well-advised to adopt procedures before such claims are made so that procedural decisions are not made based on the coach involved. A model procedure would include a deferential standard of review (e.g., the judgment will be affirmed unless it is arbitrary and capricious) so that the board need not substitute its judgment for the athletic director and/or the superintendent. Such a procedure should also limit the number of witnesses, because almost any coach in trouble can rally the troops. However, Ms. Chairperson's impromptu ruling that the review would be limited to oral argument may have been overly strict, and it was not approved by the full Board in any event.
Boards of education must also be vigilant about booster clubs. Such clubs can be important and their members can unselfishly provide support for athletic programs. However, boards of education have a responsibility under Title IX (the federal law that prohibits discrimination on the basis of gender in educational programs) to assure that students of both sexes have equal educational opportunities, including sports. The football booster club would understandably wish to support the football team. However, any funds (or other in-kind support) would be included in calculating "expenditures" and thereby assessing support for the team. Contributions from booster clubs, therefore, must be monitored to assure that their contributions do not result in an inequitable allocation of resources and a Title IX violation.
Finally, while school administrators must deal with lawyers, they must be careful. Under the rules of ethics, a lawyer cannot continue to speak to an adverse party once he or she knows that the party has legal representation. Here, Mr. Principal made some damaging concessions in his conversation with Bill Alot. Mr. Principal may have been better off by simply telling Bill to talk to the district's lawyer.
Thomas B. Mooney is a partner in the firm's Labor and Employment Law Practice and heads the firm's School Law Practice.