Judge Calls Principal’s Suspension Unfair in Whistle-Blower Case

In the first test of a case involving a new California regulation protecting whistle-blowing educators, a judge has recommended that state authorities rescind their 10-day suspension of a San Fernando Valley elementary school principal accused of harassing one of her teachers.

Administrative Law Judge David B. Rosenman, in a proposed action dated Oct. 27, recommended that the state Commission on Teacher Credentialing withdraw its suspension last year of Jacklyn Thompson. The opinion was not scheduled to become public until later this month.

“Good cause does not exist” to temporarily suspend Thompson’s teaching and administrative credentials, Rosenman wrote, “for engaging in unprofessional conduct” or “for retaliation for so-called whistle-blowing.”

The state commission had imposed the 10-day penalty after deciding that Thompson, as principal of Nestle Avenue Elementary School in Tarzana, unfairly suspended teacher Sheila Hopper two years ago after Hopper lodged complaints with federal and state agencies about the Los Angeles Unified School District’s handling of special-education students.

The commission cited a new state regulation outlawing retaliation by school officials against whistle-blowing employees. But during a nine-day hearing before Rosenman in July, attorney Howard Friedman argued that Thompson had no motive for retaliating because Hopper’s complaints were directed against the district and not Thompson herself.

“It’s really a complete vindication,” Friedman said Thursday of the judge’s recommendation, which is not binding. “There should be absolutely no action against her credential because she is innocent of any allegations of retaliation or unprofessional conduct.”

Commission officials will consider whether to reverse the suspension at their monthly meeting in early December. Deputy Atty. Gen. Jonathan R. Davis, who represented the commission, said it was difficult to predict the outcome because the case was the first legal action taken under the new no-retaliation law.

“This is the first time the commission has used this regulation,” Davis said. “There is no track record with this regulation. It would not be right for me to speculate at this time.”

However, Davis acknowledged that no new evidence is permitted and that the commission would weigh heavily the recommendation of an independent judge.

Hopper had alleged that Thompson punished her for a number of complaints she filed with the state and federal education departments between May, 1989, and January, 1990. Federal and state authorities later determined L.A. Unified had improperly cut corners in setting up and managing its special-education classes.

Soon after authorities found the district at fault, Thompson suspended Hopper for 15 days without pay, alleging that the 22-year veteran instructor had pushed a youngster in class and caused him to fall. Police dismissed the accusation for lack of evidence, and Hopper’s appeal of the suspension was upheld by an arbitrator.

Hopper on Thursday described the judge’s recommendation as a blow but expressed hope that the commission would stand by its decision to suspend Thompson’s credentials.

“The commission believed in this case . . . They believed in the case to the extent that they refused to plea bargain it,” she said.

“Of course I am disappointed in the decision. I’m hoping that when the state Commission on Teacher Credentialing convenes in Sacramento . . . they will have the courage to stick to their convictions. They have the final say.”