Nast Tries to Explain Investigation

Interim Superintendent Michael Nast  wrote a letter to BOE members to “clarify” comments reported by The Hour last week.

The Hour  had reported that Nast had ordered the district’s Human Relations officer, Bruce Morris, to halt his investigation into the steps administrators took when handling complaints about John Tate and Dina McNelis, two employees now accused of inappropriate contact with students.

According to the Hour:

Nast said he brought the investigation to a halt because the district's attorney said a review of policy and procedures could conflict with police investigations into the accused teacher and substitute teacher.

"There are other investigations going on, and the attorney said we should wait for those to be completed before we pursue anything else," Nast said. "We have time later to pursue (how Central Office responded)."

Nast obviously believed that more expansive explanation was necessary and sent a letter to the BOE dated May 27:

An internal investigation occurs whenever we have an allegation of misconduct by an employee. . .There is a difference between the internal investigation  which is still ongoing, and the request for a chronology of events which I stopped.

Mr. Morris was never asked to halt the internal investigation concerning the recent allegations of misconduct by Board of Education employees.  He is actively engaged in the district's internal investigation of those allegation.  Our attorney correctly advised that we halt the simultaneous submission of separate requests for factual findings related to the internal investigation such as the request for a timeline of events, while [Morris’] investigation is being conducted. Mr. Morris needs to be given adequate time to be thorough and independently conduct his investigation.  The request for a timeline of events is a request for a discreet findings of fact which Mr. Morris is the process of verifying. It is important that information not be released prior to the conclusion of the investigation.  Moreover, Mr. Morris may need to coordinate aspects of his investigation with the investigation being conducted by the Norwalk Police Department and/or the Department of Children and Families (DCF). A piecemeal and premature release of select factual findings has the potential to negatively impact those efforts as well.

The notion that providing a public timeline would endanger the criminal investigations of the teacher misses the mark of the explanation parents are seeking from NPS. Parents want to know whether the district has aequate policies to protect children from potentially harmful subs and teachers?  Are they being followed?  If not, why not?  Why was McNelis was shifted from one school to another when she apparently had documented problems? 

Nast says in his letter that there is an internal investigation going on.  If it doesn't involve putting together a timeline, what does it involve?  Will the findings of this investigation be shared with the public?

As chief executive of NPS the buck should stop at Nast’s desk,  but Nast is leaving here in less than a month and the mess will be inherited by Susan Marks.