By Adam Pagnucco.
On May 24, I filed a Maryland Public Information Act request with MCPS seeking records of legal costs in the lawsuit by Jane Doe, a teacher who sued the school district and former Principal Joel Beidleman for sexual discrimination last October. MCPS settled with Doe on the same day I filed my request for $300,000.
MCPS’s response consists of five records which have been partially redacted under the “Trade Secrets: Confidential Business and Financial Information” exemption in state law. Below, I post the records and explain them.
First, there is a redacted copy of the $300,000 check written to Doe, whose name is redacted.
There is also an expense record of this payment. If this image is too small to read, right click on it to open a full-size version in a new tab.
Third, there is a record of court costs paid in the total amount of $1,188.80. Again, right click on it to open it in a new tab.
Fourth, there is a record of defense legal fees paid to Karpinski, Cornbrooks & Karp, PA in the total amount of $78,462.35.
According to Maryland’s online records for the Doe case (C-15-CV-23-003967), Karpinski was MCPS’s defense attorney as shown in the screenshot below.
Fifth, there is a record of defense legal fees paid to Miller, Miller & Canby in the total amount of $68,369.64.
According to the screenshot from the Doe case information below, two attorneys from Miller, Miller & Canby represented Beidleman. I am redacting Beidleman’s address from this post.
And so, according to this records release from MCPS, the direct cost to taxpayers from this suit alone was $448,020.79.
The big question here is why MCPS paid Beidleman’s defense attorneys. I can’t answer that. But I do wonder if part of the reason relates to a story I ran back in March. At that time, MCPS had released its separation agreement with former Superintendent Monifa McKnight. I filed a Maryland Public Information Act request seeking any similar agreement with Beidleman. MCPS could have replied that it had no records responsive to that request, but it did not. Instead, MCPS told me, “The requested documents have been withheld pursuant to MPIA GP § 4-311, the exemption for personnel records.”
Does MCPS have an agreement with Beidleman providing that it will pay his legal fees? And why did MCPS release its agreement with McKnight but then invoke the personnel exemption to avoid releasing any records of agreement with Beidleman? Shouldn’t the personnel exemption, in its invocation or absence, apply equally to both of them?
McKnight is long gone and in her place now sits the new superintendent, Dr. Thomas Taylor. Dr. Taylor, everyone knows that you had nothing to do with any of this. But you have the power to explain why MCPS families have paid for the defense attorneys of an accused sexual harasser.
Alternatively, if MCPS does not explain this, our elected officials must demand an explanation. They have appropriated taxpayer money which has now been allocated in the ways described above. Their constituents deserve to know why.