Testimony on School Official Ends : Suspension: The hearing focused on administrative charges against Hawthorne High’s security chief.

An administrative hearing over the suspension of Hawthorne High School Security Chief Jerome Brown concluded this week with testimony from McKinley Nash, the fired superintendent of the Centinela Valley Union High School District.

Nash, who is involved in litigation with the district over his contract, said the trustees’ handling of the charges against Brown was “arbitrary and capricious” and that he did not believe the district could support any of the allegations against him.

Trustees placed Brown, 33, on administrative leave with pay in March after he was briefly jailed by Hawthorne police for failing to appear in court four times since 1984 on traffic citations.

Newspaper accounts also reported around that time that Brown had been arrested for possession of crack cocaine in May, 1988, and had entered a court-supervised drug counseling program rather than fight the charge. Torrance Superior Court dismissed the charge after Brown completed the program.

In support of the suspension, school officials later filed administrative charges accusing Brown of drug possession, bringing notoriety to the district, interfering with the arrest of a student and passing out protest flyers during student walkouts in early March. Six other allegations were dropped.

Brown, who denies all of the charges, insists he was simply a victim of harassment and racism. He is black.

In August, after the administrative hearing had begun, the district suspended Brown without pay, accusing him of disobeying his superiors and threatening Assistant Supt. Robert Church during a confrontation at district headquarters.

During the hearing, which took place on three days between August and last Tuesday, testimony was given by Brown, several security guards, administrators, two police officers and former Hawthorne High Principal Kenneth Crowe.

Although Nash limited his comments at the hearing, he said in an interview Wednesday that he believes the way the district dealt with Brown was consistent with what he called a pattern of unfounded accusations lodged against blacks and others who support change in the district. Nash is also black.

“Whether Jerome Brown should or should not have been an employee is a legitimate subject for board and superintendent review,” Nash said. “But the way in which it was done was as a public expose to say, ‘Hey, there’s another criminal black over there.’ ”

Brown is one of several black employees in the district who have filed complaints with the state Department of Fair Employment and Housing alleging that blacks are not treated fairly at Centinela Valley schools.

A state report issued in August recommended that the board of trustees, which is predominantly Latino, develop programs to reduce racial conflicts in the district and appoint an ombudsman to investigate complaints. Once predominantly white, the student population today is 53.4% Latino, 18.4% black, 14.8% Anglo and 8.5% Asian.

Brown was first employed in the district in 1984 as a teaching aide before he became a district security guard. In 1988, he was promoted to Hawthorne High security chief, a position in which he earned about $30,000 a year.

Community activist Lionel Broussard, who acted as Brown’s representative during the hearing, argued that labor codes prohibit the school board from taking action against Brown based on his arrest for drug possession, because he was never convicted of the charge. Broussard also argued that Brown was treated more harshly by the board than another security guard in similar circumstances because he is black.

Nash did not directly raise the issue of race during his testimony on Brown’s behalf, but he did say that he believed the board “has one standard for Brown and another standard for employees who had personalities different from that of Brown.”

Nash later clarified his remarks, saying, “Any individuals who were well-trained, assertive, and who threatened the jobs of existing people in the district (were) the subject of attack. That attack was easier to manipulate if the person was black.”

He also said he believed the attacks have been orchestrated by a small group of employees who felt threatened by his administration and “who wanted control of the district for themselves and to return back to the 1950s.”

But the district’s attorney, James Baca, insisted Brown’s race had nothing to do with the board’s action. He also said the testimony of one of the police officers provided ample evidence to support the accusation that Brown was in possession of cocaine.

“We have a guy here who has no remorse, who made no request for rehabilitation and who proves to be a terrible role model and is involved in other misconduct as well,” Baca said. “If the person had been white, Hispanic or green, I would have made the same recommendation to the board. These are very serious charges that certainly merit dismissal.”

Hearing officer Ronald Wenkart, an Orange County attorney appointed by the board to hear Brown’s appeal, gave Baca and Broussard until Nov. 16 to send in their closing arguments. He said he would present the board with his recommendation regarding Brown’s pending dismissal by the end of November. The district, however, is not bound to comply with his decision.