University of Tennessee, Knoxville Trace: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange Tennessee Department of State, Opinions from the Administrative Procedures Division Law 12-7-2011 BOARD OF EDUCATION vs. NATASHA KRUITHOF, Respondent. Follow this and additional works at: http://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_lawopinions Part of the Administrative Law Commons This Initial Order by the Administrative Judges of the Administrative Procedures Division, Tennessee Department of State, is a public document made available by the College of Law Library, and the Tennessee Department of State, Administrative Procedures Division. For more information about this public document, please contact administrative.procedures@tn.gov
BEFORE THE TENNESSEE STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION IN THE MATTER OF: ) ) NATASHA KRUITHOF, ) Docket No. 07.01-114342J ) Respondent. ) AMENDED INITIAL ORDER This contested case came on to be heard on December 7, 2011, in Nashville, Tennessee before Administrative Judge Joyce Grimes Safley, assigned by the Secretary of State, Administrative Procedures Division, and sitting for the Tennessee Board of Education. Ms. Dannelle Walker, Counsel for the Tennessee State Board of Education, represented the State. The Respondent, Ms. Natasha Kruithof, was present and represented herself after waiving the right to assistance of counsel. The issue presented by this hearing is whether or not Respondent Kruithof s teaching license should be revoked or suspended by the State of Tennessee due to Respondent s conduct which resulted in her pleading guilty to charges of (1) Unlawful Use of Drug Paraphenalia and (2) Possession of a Controlled Substance. After consideration of the testimony and evidence presented, the arguments of counsel, and the entire record in this matter, it is determined that Respondent s teaching license should not be revoked. It is determined that Respondent s teaching license shall be suspended for a period of six (6) months from the date of the plea agreement/agreed order was entered on
August 10, 2011. Accordingly, Respondent s teaching license shall be placed on SUSPENSION until February 10, 2012. This decision is based upon the following findings of fact and conclusions of law. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. At all relevant times, Respondent was duly licensed by the State Board of Education as a teacher in the State of Tennessee. 2. Respondent is twenty-seven years of age. She has been a teacher for four years. She has her Bachelor of Science Degree in Education. 3. Respondent has worked in a private school (charter school) system. 4. At all times relevant to the charges involved in this case, Respondent was living with her boyfriend, in the home he owned. 5. Respondent opened the door pursuant to a search warrant executed by Metro-Davidson County Police. Her boyfriend, Mr. Day, was discovered to be growing 11 marijuana plants in his workshop in the home. 6. On March 11, 2011 Respondent was arrested for violation of T.C.A. 39-17-417, felony possession of marijuana with intent to sell or deliver. 7. Respondent maintained that she was unaware that her boyfriend was growing marijuana in their home. Without commenting on the believability of Respondent s assertions of ignorance, it is noted that Respondent entered a plea of guilty to violations of T.C.A. 39-17-418 (Simple 2
possession of marijuana and possession of drug paraphernalia) on August 10, 2011 in the Circuit Court of Davidson County, Tennessee. 8. Petitioner presented a book of accolades and honors she has been awarded during her teaching career. The evidence preponderates that Petitioner was an excellent teacher who is devoted to her profession. 9. The State Board of Education initiated revocation proceedings against Respondent s teaching license pursuant to Rule 0520-2-4-.01 (9)(b)(6) of the Rules of the Tennessee State Board of Education. 10. At the hearing of this matter, Respondent expressed great remorse over her arrest. 11. Further, Respondent voiced her great love of teaching and the desire to be given an opportunity to continue her teaching vocation. Respondent s testimony is deemed credible. 12. No evidence was presented by the State that any act or conduct had endangered or threatened to endanger school children in the State of Tennessee. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. Rule 0520-2-4-.01(9) of the RULES OF THE TENNESSEE STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION (Revised, July, 2010) provides as follows: Denial, Suspension and Revocation of License. (a) Automatic Revocation of License. The State Board of Education shall automatically revoke the license of a licensed teacher or 3
administrator without the right to a hearing upon receiving verification of the identity of the teacher or administrator together with a certified copy of a criminal record showing that the teacher or school administrator has been convicted of any felony or offense listed at T.C.A. 40-35-501(i)(2) or T.C.A. 39-17-417 (including conviction on a plea of guilty or nolo contendere). The Board will notify persons whose licenses are subject to automatic revocation at least 30 days prior to the Board meeting at which such revocation shall occur. (b) Denial, Suspension or Revocation of License. The State Board of Education may revoke, suspend or refuse to issue or renew a license for the following reasons: 1. Conviction of a felony, 2. Conviction of possession of narcotics, 3. Being on school premises or at a school-related activity involving students while documented as being under the influence of, possessing or consuming alcohol or illegal drugs, 4. Falsification or alteration of a license or documentation required for licensure, 5. Denial, suspension or revocation of a license or certificate in another jurisdiction for reasons which would justify denial, suspension or revocation under this rule, or 6. Other good cause. Other good cause shall be construed to include noncompliance with security guidelines for TCAP or successor tests pursuant to Tenn. Code Ann. 49-1-607, default on a student loan pursuant to Tenn. Code Ann. 49-5-108(d)(2) or failure to report under part (e). For purposes of this part (b), conviction includes entry of a plea of guilty or nolo contendere or entry of an order granting pre-trial or judicial diversion. A person whose license has been denied, suspended or revoked may not serve as a volunteer or be employed, directly or indirectly, as an educator, paraprofessional, 4
aide, substitute teacher or in any other position during the period of the denial, suspension or revocation. 2. The State asserts that revocation of Respondent s license would be appropriate. 3. A review of Tennessee statutes and case law reveals no statutes or cases which could provide guidance in this matter. This matter is governed solely by the above referenced RULES OF THE TENNESSEE STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION. 1 4. In this case, Respondent made a very bad mistake in judgment. The State presented no evidence that Respondent had been guilty of any misconduct before the incident forming the basis for this disciplinary matter. 5. The testimony and evidence supported that she has walked the straight and narrow path since her arrest. 6. There was no evidence presented that Respondent endangered any student or other person at her school. Nor was any evidence presented that Respondent s acts have impaired her ability to teach. 7. While it is true that Respondent violated certain State laws and entered a plea of guilty to lesser charges to her criminal prosecution, when this matter is considered under all the facts and circumstances of this case, it 1 The statutes and case law reviewed address teacher tenure proceedings and disciplinary actions of local school boards, rather than teacher licensure proceedings. This case is not a tenure proceeding nor does it involve a termination /suspension of employment by a local school board. 5
is not clear, by a preponderance of the evidence, that the proper action in this case would be to revoke Respondent s teaching certificate. 8. Respondent has shown genuine contrition and remorse. Based upon the evidence presented, Respondent has been punished for the above referenced incident. She has paid a large fine, and has not worked as a teacher since her arrest. 9. Generally, disciplinary proceedings against licenses in the state of Tennessee are conducted to protect the health, safety, and welfare of the citizens of Tennessee and the public. 10. No evidence was presented that, under the facts and circumstances, failure to revoke Respondent s teaching license or certificate would place the public s health, safety, and welfare at risk. 11. Notwithstanding the above conclusions, due to the seriousness of Respondent s conviction, it is determined that her license should be subject to discipline. 12. Considering all the facts and circumstances of this case, including Respondent s remorse, and the punishment she has already received, it is determined that the correct discipline to be imposed is a six (6) month suspension of Respondent s teaching license from the time of her guilty plea. 13. It is noted that the State did not proceed or charge Respondent with violations of RULE 0520-2-4-.01(9)(a) or RULE 0520-2-4-.01(9)(b)(2). Rather, the State proceeded strictly on the charge of other good cause as set 6
forth in RULE 0520-2-4-.01(9)(b)(6). It is also noted that the State did not present a certified copy of Respondent s criminal record and plea conviction. However, Respondent did not object to the introduction of the online copy of Respondent s plea conviction. Accordingly, any such objection on the basis of hearsay is deemed waived by Respondent. Accordingly, Respondent s teaching license shall be SUSPENDED until February 10, 2012. It is so ordered. This order entered and effective this 19th day of December, 2011. Thomas G. Stovall, Director Administrative Procedures Division 7