When federal Judge Dean Whipple read the same report, he ruled that it contained no clear evidence of wrongdoing by board members. Then he hid it from public view and put a gag order on everyone who had seen it.
It's unclear whether Warrick's concerns arose from allegations or accusations in the report, but the Pitch has learned that many of investigator Richard Marien's questions focused on Warrick:
· Did Warrick threaten to fire administrator Debbie Kelly when Kelly declined to accept the job of superintendent? Kelly tells the Pitch it didn't happen, but the allegation stems from mid-April 2001, when Warrick was part of a slim majority of board members conspiring to fire former Superintendent Benjamin Demps ["Taylor Made," October 4]. As an executive director, Kelly oversees more than two dozen schools.
· Did Warrick later pressure Superintendent Bernard Taylor to fire Kelly?
· Did Warrick pressure Taylor to hire a man with connections to the Urban League at a salary of $120,000 a year?
· What was the significance of Warrick's own connections to the Urban League when the board approved a $160,000 contract with the organization to complement the Entrepreneurial Model Schools reform initiative, which Warrick helped devise and enthusiastically favored ("Lessons in Finance," November 8, 2001)?
Other questions hint at the tension between Warrick and the Black United Front, which also came under scrutiny:
· Did Warrick warn Taylor last year that there "would be trouble" if he hired Linwood Tauheed of the BUF to oversee the Entrepreneurial Model Schools?
· What happened at a breakfast meeting held at Tauheed's house just before his hiring? Present were Taylor, another district administrator, BUF President Ajamu Webster and board member Lee Barnes Jr. The school board cut Tauheed's salary after questions arose about whether Barnes and board member Michael Byrd covertly influenced Taylor to hire Tauheed. Barnes, Byrd and Tauheed are all BUF members.
· Did the district unfairly award a computer-purchase contract to Newspaper Electronics -- a firm owned by Barnes' friend Kelvin Perry -- after a low bid by Worldwide Technology was rejected for procedural errors?
Whipple declared on April 11 that Marien's investigation revealed "no clear instances of micromanagement and patronage."
Although Barnes and Byrd argued in a closed-door board meeting in favor of allowing the public to read the report, the board voted to ask the judge to close it. Barnes says, "I have nothing to hide." Byrd declines comment.
Although board President Al Mauro recently appointed a task force to look at ways to reduce the district's astronomical legal fees ("Legal Tender," February 14, 2002), he and his colleagues authorized Warrick to spend as much as $20,000 for counsel, sources tell the Pitch. The bill has yet to arrive. "It'll probably be authorized for payment within an open meeting," says Maurice Watson, attorney for the district. It's not clear what the lawyer did for Warrick, though the legal work apparently coincided with the period when the board, and then Whipple, deliberated whether the report should be opened.
"The board did say [Warrick] would have the right to have [a lawyer] and it would be at the expense of the district," says Mauro, who agreed that district lawyers shouldn't represent her in the matter. "It's a matter of conflict of interest."
Reached by telephone, Warrick declined comment and hung up.
Comments (0)