School Board’s Trevor Tucker Asks For Expedited Attorney General Opinion on Conklin’s Superintendent Application

Conklin, a school board member for the past 20 years currently finishing her fifth term, last week joined 34 other applicants for superintendent. Flagler Superintendent Jim Tager retires in June. The school board will decide on a replacement on March 10. Meanwhile, it is going through the application process and will be conducting interviews in early March. Conklin on Tuesday announced she would step away from the board entirely and will not attend any meetings or functions until March 17 to avoid any appearance of impropriety.

Tucker on Friday sent a set of five questions to the attorney general in a one-page letter on what he called “this unprecedented matter,” reflecting his concerns that absent further guidance, the school board could be opening itself up to litigation, if not to ethical charges levied at individual school board members.

“A lot of this is to cover me, I don’t want to get an ethics violation if this is wrong, or if something is wrong in the future,” Tucker said. “The AG opinion will really help. I want the process to be done correctly. That’s the most important thing, in my opinion.”

Conklin’s decision to step away answered the first and third questions in Tucker’s letter: she is no longer an “active” member of the school board, and she has recused herself from everything that has to do with the appointment. But other questions remain: “If the member has worked on salary and job description for the new superintendent, can they still apply?” Conklin did have a hand in that decision, though the job description is essentially identical to the description that led to the appointment of Tager.

School Board Attorney Kristy Gavin said on Tuesday that none of the decisions that were part of the superintendent search were 3-2 votes where Conklin’s could then have played a swing role.

Despite the recusal, however, Tucker is asking the attorney general whether there are “steps that need to be taken by the District to
be sure the process is not compromised.” The district has taken such steps, among them the removal of four people Conklin had named to the Citizens Advisory Committee, which met for the first time Tuesday evening to draw up a list of 10 to 12 names from the 35 applications. The committee is charged with filtering the applicants and recommending top choices.

Tucker’s final question is forward-looking: “If my fellow board member does not have to resign from the Board, is she only recused from the process while she continues to be a viable candidate?” Tucker asks. “In other words, if she does not make it past the first stage of the vetting process as a candidate presented to the Board for consideration is she able to return to the Board to select the Superintendent?”

Conklin appears to have largely answered that question by saying she would sit out the process through March 10, which means that even if she were to not make it past the committee’s selection process, she would not take part in the interview process.

Tucker said the letter he wrote the attorney general is not a reflection of his opinion about Conklin’s candidacy. “I don’t really have much opinion one way or the other,” he said. “I wish there was some case law or guidance before this, but there isn’t. No, I have no problem whether she applied or not.”

Tucker overnighted the letter to the attorney general’s office on Friday, and will be calling the office today or tomorrow in hopes of getting some clarity about whether an opinion can be forthcoming within the school board’s selection time frame.

“The worst thing that can happen here is we go through this process and then we get sued and we have to start all over,” Tucker said. “We may not get a GA opinion or it may take too long, or ‘hey I don’t want to address this issue, good luck,’ but at least I’m asking so maybe we can get some advice.”