The Fresno Teachers Association on Thursday called on Fresno Unified to publicly address the $162,000 settlement with former communications chief Nikki Henry at the board’s Wednesday, Aug. 13 meeting.

In a letter to the district, the teachers’ union said the public has a right to know how taxpayer dollars are being spent. The letter cites irregularities, and it claims the district and the board violated California’s Brown Act — the law outlining public notification of government decisions.

The union also said the public has gotten conflicting information about what action the board previously took to authorize the six-figure settlement.

In addition, district bylaws allow members of the public to request that an item be added to the board agenda.

“This is about more than one payout. It’s about the public’s right to know how decisions are being made and how public dollars are being spent,” said FTA President Manuel Bonilla. “Every dollar that goes to questionable settlements is a dollar not going to classrooms. Our students and community deserve better.”

Trustees Shouldn’t Be Able to Hide Using Closed Session: Wittrup

A district spokesperson said she had not yet seen the union’s letter. The district said in a previous public statement that the board took official action at the June 18 meeting authorizing the payment.

Bullard area trustee Susan Wittrup, however, said the board only directed staff to begin negotiations. An official vote should have been reported out to the public in the same meeting, Wittrup said.

“They can’t take action behind closed session and not report it out,” Wittrup said. “You can’t have it both ways.”

A call to board president Valerie Davis was not returned, nor were calls to trustees Claudia Cazares, or Andy Levine. Trustees Veva Islas and Keshia Thomas declined to comment.

Wittrup said she asked Davis and Superintendent Misty Her to put the settlement on the agenda.

She also said that trustees should not be able to hide their votes in closed session.

“Maybe it’s true you can find the narrowest legal pathway to do something, but that is not the intent of the Brown Act,” Wittrup said. “The intent of the Brown Act is to keep the public informed.”

Public Getting Conflicting Information About Henry Settlement

The union raised three “irregularities” about the settlement between the district and Henry after she resigned.

They said the public is getting conflicting information about the June 18 meeting given that Wittrup said no official action was taken.

The union also objected to a clause that could draw the district into providing legal protection for Henry. A controversial anti-teachers union dossier created by Henry containing 39 fabricated quotes — most of them attributed to Bonilla — could be construed as libel, Bonilla previously told GV Wire.

The district previously told GV Wire that the Henry settlement does not guarantee protection and relates to actions she may have taken while an employee.

“This language is industry standard and simply acknowledges Ms. Henry’s statutory right as a former public employee to request a defense and indemnification for claims arising out of the course and scope of her duties as a public employee,” said Fresno Unified spokesperson Diana Diaz in an email to GV Wire.

The union, however, is asking what kind of legal protection would be needed if the settlement was about avoiding the cost of a due process hearing — as the district has previously said.

“If no wrongdoing occurred, why include language that allows the former employee to be legally protected at the district’s expense?” the union’s release states.

The union said the third irregularity was in the justification for the payment. They said Henry resigned and no formal written complaint was submitted by Henry.

In a response to a public records request from GV Wire, the district said it did not receive any formal claims from Henry against the district.

Almost 99% of Educators Believe There’s an Ulterior Motive Behind Settlement

The union recently held a poll of Fresno Unified educators.

Nearly 99% believe there are ulterior motives behind the agreement, according to the release. More than 97% say they would view any board member who refuses to put the item on the agenda  less favorably.

GV Wire Reporter Anya Ellis contributed to this story.