Thursday, June 11,
2020
Torkelson’s
Contract -- Part 2
CONFUSING,
CONFLICTING AND CONTRADICTORY
“A
fifth grader could have done a better job,” was the way an experienced attorney
described the employment contract of deposed Mercer School District
Administrator Erik Torkelson.
“In a
legal writing class, the contract would get a D- at best,” he went on to
say. “For starters, the contract assigns supervisory responsibility
to the District Administrator who is, presumably, the subject of the
Administrator’s Contract. However, the contract says that Torkelson
“will assume the duties of District Superintendent”, although the only
reference to ”superintendent” in the state statutes on education is to the
state superintendent.
Another
glaring contradictory statement in the contract says: “Mr.
Torkelson shall perform such other duties, services or obligations
as from time to time may be assigned by the District Administrator.”
So,
what was Torkelson – the District Administrator, District Superintendent or
both? Does this mean that he is to assign duties to himself and the
school board has no supervisory role?
An
attempt was made to correct some of the faux pas contained in the July 2011
contract with a new contract in July 2017. However, the validity of
the 2017 contract is in question because it was never presented to or received
the required approval of the full board. (More on that in Part 3.)
Other
major parts of the contract strongly suggest that it had no legal input and was
an amateurish attempt to make it look like it had. For instance, the
contract also says the “the renewal or non-renewal of this agreement shall
follow the procedures set forth in Section 118.243, Wis. Stats.” But
there is no Wisconsin Statute 118.243.
If
Torkelson had meant it to read Section 118.24, which does exist, then the
procedures for renewal or non-renewal as stated in paragraph two of his
agreement directly contradicts what is in 118.24.
A
couple of other conditions of the contract required that Torkelson obtain a
Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction administrator’s license, which he
did, and expressed a desire that he move into the school district, which he
never did. The provision that he be required to live in the school
district was removed from the 2017 contract.
A
”Sweetheart” Deal. Part 3 coming up.
No comments:
Post a Comment