NEW HANOVER COUNTY — During last week’s school board meeting, new Superintendent Dr. Charles Foust remarked he was enjoying the ‘southern hospitality’ that had greeted him after arriving from Kansas — but what followed was significantly less warm and fuzzy.
During the meeting’s second half, Lisa Estep stepped down as chair and Stefanie Adams was elected as her replacement. In the process, board member Judy Justice and Vice-Chair David Wortman aired concerns and grievances about the lack of transparency — in fact, alleged deliberate secrecy — of some board members.
Questions about the timing — just two months before an election when the board will, by statute, again reorganize — were also raised. After the meeting, some suggested that Estep was trying to avoid the imminent fallout from a number of pending lawsuits, federal investigations, and other issues.
Those charges were refuted, both during the meeting and in interviews afterward, but it will be harder to deny the deep schism in the board, one that cuts deeper than policy decisions or political affiliation.
You can find Part I and Part II of the meeting online.
A new chair
After Foust was sworn in by Chief District Court Judge J.H. Corpening, Estep asked to add an item to the meeting’s agenda, namely the election of a new chairperson — confirming earlier rumors that she would step down.
Board members Justice and Wortman — a Democrat and Republican, respectively, who have been repeatedly at odds in the past — both took issue with the move. This was the first hint of the confrontations that were to come later in the meeting; Justice asked why the item was being added and Wortman pointed out the board was actually already slated to approve a new policy for the election of chair and vice-chair positions.
Wortman pointed out that, per the language of the new policy, if Estep stepped down her replacement would be elected during the next meeting. The board agreed to tackle the new policy first and then the chair issue.
New election policy
Discussing the new election policy, Board Attorney Deborah Stagner noted it was very unusual to have a policy on the agenda that would impact another item on that agenda, saying there wasn’t another case she was familiar with to refer to for guidance.
That said, Stagner said she interpreted the language of the new policy to mean only that a chair or vice-chair should be replaced quickly, not that a delay was required.
Wortman disagreed.
“The new policy we’re approving is very clear, it’s not open to interpretation,” Wortman said. “It clearly states, ‘the position will be filled at the next regular board meeting.’ From a legal perspective, should clear words be open to interpretation?”
Wortman said he was “confused” as to how Stagner could find semantic wiggle room in a statement he felt had “no ambiguity.”
Without initially naming names, Wortman then appeared to call out Estep, Adams, and board member Nelson Beaulieu for pre-planning the transfer of power.
“I am sure that the three people who have been planning this for a month, going behind everyone’s backs and talking about this, took the five-minute break [in mid-meeting] to consult with you,” Wortman said to Stagner, who denied meeting with anyone during the break.
Beaulieu, who serves on the policy committee, then suggested pulling the policy for future consideration. Under the board’s old policy, Estep would more clearly be allowed to step down and be replaced in the same meeting.
When Estep called for discussion on the motion to pull the policy, Wortman and Justice lept at the chance.
‘Going behind the back of the public’
Wortman noted that it was ironic that Beaulieu was forced to pull a policy he had helped craft upon learning it could interfere with an allegedly pre-planned transfer of power.
“This is the problem with this board,” Wortman said. “You’re continuing to go behind the back of the public, you’re doing things in secret, which you just got called out on, and now you’re trying to figure out a way to cover yourself.”
Estep denied any ‘secret’ plan, saying “we didn’t plan this three weeks out,” and “I did not plan this at all.”
Estep later clarified that she “discussed it individually with each Board member at least a week before the meeting, and with [Interim Superintendent Dr. Del] Burns and with Dr. Foust. I let senior staff know the day of the meeting once I knew a majority of the Board and Dr. Foust were still comfortable moving forward.” Estep confirmed that she had asked Adams ahead of time if she would serve as chair.
Apparently knowing at least some of this, Wortman took issue with Estep’s claim that she had not planned a power transfer. Estep countered by saying that she had previously discussed with Wortman both of them stepping down “when the time came” and that she was honoring that idea.
As Wortman and Estep spoke over each other, Wortman stated that he had called for Estep’s resignation a year prior. At the time, the shocking depth and seriousness of the administrative, ethical, and criminal issues in the district were becoming public.
“I absolutely demanded your resignation,” Wortman said. “Because I didn’t think you were an effective leader.”
“Okay — great,” Estep said, firing back, “Right back at you.”
All of this was before the board actually got to the chair election agenda item.
Power transfer
Estep noted that she did not want to “spend much time” discussing the power transfer, but briefly explained her reasoning. Estep is not running for reelection and her term ends this year. Since the Superintendent and Chair often work closely, Estep argued, the disruption of having to pivot to a new chair in January could be at least potentially avoided by nominating someone else (in this case, Adams, whose term runs through 2022).
Estep conceded that Adams might not be re-elected chair following the election, but since she would still be on the board for a further two years she could provide more continuity. In an interview, Estep said she explained this logic to Foust and would not have moved forward with stepping down had he not agreed beforehand.
However well-intentioned and well-thought-out the plan, though, things did not go smoothly.
Like many legislative actions, the night’s proceedings appear to have been at least partially rehearsed. Estep acknowledged that she had previously asked Adams to take over and had gauged the support of other board members. Aside from the minor hitch with the election policy, the plan appears to have been to have Estep briskly step down, nominate Adams, and call for a vote.
Again, Wortman was not having it.
After a call for nominations, which saw Wortman nominate Justice and Estep nominate Adams, Estep called for a vote. Wortman interjected, challenging the move to vote without discussion, saying “the chair doesn’t usually try to get who she wants” appointed.
After some discussion, Wortman prevailed in getting the board to allow comments from the two nominees, although no board discussion followed.
Justice said she cared “first about our children, their education and their safety,” and noted she had the most experience in education. Justice then turned to the night’s leitmotif — the board’s lack of transparency. She expressed frustration that Estep, Adams, and Nelson had repeatedly “done things behind the curtain.”
As an example, Justice pointed to the board’s unhinged January 30 press conference, which was held on short notice to discuss the arrest of Peter Michael Frank on numerous felony charges of sexual misconduct involving students. During the meeting, the board failed to provide much new information and ultimately reneged on its promise to release some of Frank’s personnel records. Adams, who organized the meeting, also neglected to notify Justice, who only learned about the impromptu conference through a reporter and barely arrived in time.
Adams rebutted that “one thing I stand for is that I don’t bash,” and that she would focus on the work she had done over the last two years. Adams then turned to her strong record of committee work but, in doing so, took a swipe at Wortman, saying she had taken a stronger role on the SEA-TECH committee because he “didn’t participate.”
Adams acknowledged that the January press conference “was a disaster,” but said she had owned that mistake and would “always be positive.”
Adams then turned to those who she said wanted to “run a false narrative,” including “unfair and sideways commentary” from Justice. Adams said she wished “everyone would stop saying something nefarious is going on,” and vigorously defended Estep’s leadership, touting their cooperation despite their different partisan affiliation.
The ensuing vote left Justice with just two votes, her own and Wortman’s, and Foust prematurely declared Adams the chair. Sanger then reminded him that, technically, votes for Adams would also have to be taken.
Adams was approved 5-2 and was named chair.
As the board was moving on, Nelson interjected, adding that after serving in Afghanistan he would have taken Estep “over any leader I had over there” and thanked her for her service.
Now?
After the meeting, Estep rejected the suggestion that she had stepped down to avoid the fallout for pending litigation and on-going investigations, noting that would still be on the board for the same amount of time whether she was chair or not.
Asked if the difficult year behind her factored into Estep’s decision to step down, she said, “Over the next few months Board will continue to have to make challenging decisions, and me stepping aside as Chair will not change that. I don’t feel tired, instead I am excited to be working with Dr. Foust as a Board member and look forward to seeing where his leadership can take this district. ”
One way or another, the New Hanover County Board of Education will look very different in three months, as Wortman, Estep, and veteran member Jeannette Nichols will all be leaving. Board member Bill Rivenbark, who stayed out of the fray during last week’s meeting, could also be leaving if he wins a seat on the New Hanover County Board of Commissioners (the fact that he’s running for a seat on a different board, in the middle of his first school board term, is not an overwhelming vote of confidence for the board’s atmosphere).
With an administration decimated by resignations and retirements and battered by scandal, arrests, lawsuits, and investigations, the need for stability is hard to overstate. Whether a new chair and a new superintendent, who have inherited serious and ongoing problems, can bring that stability remains to be seen.
Send comments and tips to Benjamin Schachtman at ben@localvoicemedia.com, @pcdben on Twitter, and (910) 538-2001
