Why Should Delaware Care?
The Christina School District is Delaware’s third largest district, with more than 9,600 students. Long-running controversy between its school board and former superintendent has resulted in a lawsuit that could cost the district millions of dollars should it lose. The case heats up just a few months before Christina also needs to pass a referendum to stave off program and staff cuts.
Christina School District’s former Superintendent Dan Shelton filed a long-awaited federal lawsuit against the district and four of its board of education members, arguing that he was wrongfully terminated. He is seeking more than $2.7 million in compensation.
Aside from the district, Board President Donald Patton, Vice President Alethea Smith-Tucker, and board members Y.F. Lou and Naveed Baqir – who voted to terminate Shelton this past summer – were also named as defendants in the lawsuit.
Shelton claimed was terminated without notice, without being given a pre or post-termination hearing and without receiving a “written statement of the reasons for termination.”
The lawsuit, filed Monday in the U.S. District Court of Delaware, seeks compensatory damages including lost wages, back pay, pension and other benefits, for future or front pay and loss of earning capacity. The lawsuit also argues that defamation against Shelton’s character has made him “unemployable.”
In total, the embattled school administrator is seeking $2.7 million for lost wages over the next decade, but Shelton’s attorney Thomas S. Neuberger said the sum could rise if emotional distress is factored in by a jury.
The Christina School District has declined to comment, citing the litigation. It has retained Philadelphia-based law firm Marshall Dennehey to defend it in the case.
What led to this?
Shelton began his career as a teacher in the Christina School District before being hired as superintendent of Dover’s Capital School District in 2015. He later returned to Christina as its superintendent in 2020, and was named the state’s Superintendent of the Year in 2022.
For reasons that are still not entirely clear, however, Shelton held a tense relationship with several of the elected members of the school board for the past year, particularly Patton, who is singled out in the lawsuit.
“His professional history as an educator employed by the District was not distinguished and certain incidents which occurred provide various motives for him to dislike and retaliate against Plaintiff,” the lawsuit alleges about Patton.
In March, a majority bloc of the school board voted to suspend Shelton without pay for three days and rescind a one-year extension on his contract. According to the lawsuit, the board never discussed what precipitated that decision with Shelton, nor was a hearing held.
In response, a May board vote to vacate Patton’s board president role and censure him for “abusive behavior and retaliatory actions” failed, and afterward Patton said in an interview on DETV that he suspected Shelton had been involved, accusing him of being racist.
A litany of controversies ensued in June, when the Delaware Department of Justice found the board violated the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) by holding an unannounced executive session for an improper purpose. It found the board also failed to provide adequate notice in its March and May meeting agendas for votes regarding the contract rescission and vote of no-confidence in Shelton.
The board then held a nearly eight-hour-long meeting in July, where the majority voted to remove Shelton despite public backlash.
Its August meeting did little to relieve existing tensions.
The discussion information items in its Aug. 13 agenda included a “referral to the Public Integrity Commission for an opinion on whether targeting of the superintendent by the board violates public trust and reflects unfavorably on the district,” a second referral to the PIC for an opinion on whether engaged in self-dealing with the district “through alternative entities,” and a third referral on whether a board member’s prolonged absence from the district undermines the public’s trust.
Other points included reinstating Shelton as “the latest investigation uncovered no wrongdoing,” along with recommendations for an interim superintendent. But the board’s majority voted to strike discussion on all items except naming an interim superintendent.
Patton apologized to the public during the meeting for “a number of things,” admitting the board should be functioning differently. Some members of the public have still labeled the board as “an embarrassment.”
Lawyer warned board
Christina also strained its relationship with the district’s longtime lawyer after this summer’s actions.
James McMackin III — whose law firm, Morris James LLP, represented the district for 41 years — told the Christina board he was stepping down on July 12 but would continue representing the board until it finds new counsel. The board approved requesting quotes for a new firm at its August meeting.
McMackin chose to stop his relationship with the Christina school board due to the defendants’ “wholesale disregard of the law,” according to board emails leaked to the media.
“I am not sure what the Board’s goal is, but it is not adherence to the law,” he added in another exchange.
Those warnings from the school board’s own attorney make the case a “slam dunk,” according to Neuberger, who has represented clients in civil cases in Delaware for 50 years.
“I’ve never had evidence from the lawyer for the other side, where he’s saying, ‘You’re violating their rights,’” he told Spotlight Delaware.
Damages could grow
In September, Neuberger filed a cease-and-desist letter demanding that the Christina school board stop the actions he claimed were defaming Shelton and violating his rights. The letter also said the board owes Shelton for lost wages – he earned just under $220,000 annually in base salary as superintendent – harm to his reputation and emotional and physical distress.
He claims in the lawsuit that media coverage of the episodes have made him “unemployable.”
Neuberger said that Shelton has applied for jobs in other districts in Delaware, Pennsylvania and Maryland since being terminated, but has only once even made it to the initial interview stage despite significant credentials.
While still technically on payroll until the end of this school year, Shelton is effectively stuck in limbo and has not communicated with anyone from the Christina School District since being terminated, Neuberger said.
The Christina School District is currently paying the salaries of two superintendents, Shelton and interim Superintendent Robert Andrzejewski. Christina could pay more than $335,000 in total this school year for the salaries of both Shelton and Andrzejewski, despite only one actively serving.
“At this point, it’s just about the money,” Neuberger said, noting that while the lawsuit does seek a public apology from the district, Shelton is not seeking reinstatement to his job considering the hostile environment.
Neuberger also warned that, if taken to trial, the compensatory damages could be much greater than the $2.7 million initially sought, as a jury would be able to award damages for emotional distress too. He pointed to a similar 2005 case in which the jury awarded more than six times the lost salary to a Sussex Vo-Tech assistant principal for emotional distress.
“[Carol Schreffler] got just shy of $1 million of emotional distress, and she was not suffering as much as my client [Dan Shelton],” Neuberger said.
The Schreffler case could also serve as a warning to the four named school board defendants in Shelton’s case, as the jury found four Sussex Vo-Tech school board members personally liable in that case. The board vice president was hit with a personal judgment of $25,000, while other members saw smaller judgments at the discretion of the jury.
While Christina’s insurance policy could help insulate it from immediate financial harm, it would not cover the personal liability of the elected school board members, who could possibly turn to their homeowner’s insurance policies in some cases.
It’s unclear how much coverage Christina carries, however, and if its policy does not provide enough of a buffer, a ruling against the district could carry significant repercussions. The district held $13 million in a reserve fund as of June 30.
“Unfortunately, the citizens are really accountable for the recklessness of these board members,” Neuberger said.
Case could impact referendum
The looming lawsuit is also likely to complicate Christina’s pitch to district residents, as it pursues a referendum on March 12,
According to its preliminary budget report, Christina is planning for an operating referendum “in order to avoid program and staff cuts.” It is also likely to seek a capital referendum to make progress in funding school renovations, despite the state recently denying its request for funding support on those projects.
State leaders, including former state Rep. Paul Baumbach (D-Newark), have expressed opposition to the idea of holding a referendum because of the board’s decision to place Shelton on administrative leave this summer.
“You have an agenda item to hire an interim superintendent, when you have an award-winning superintendent on your payroll. And you plan to go to the voters asking for more money next year? Good luck with that,” Baumbach said during public comments for the August board meeting.
Get Involved
The Christina Board of Education’s next meeting is tonight at 7 p.m. at The Bayard School, located at 200 S. DuPont St. in Wilmington. The meeting will also be livestreamed for remote access.