Alone in his bunker- the C. J. Huff story

It is  not a problem most of us will ever have to face.

Alone in his bunker at 32nd and Duquesne, C. J. Huff had a serious decision to make- Should he put "hero of the Joplin Tornado" at the top of his resume or should he put it somewhere slightly lower on the first page and show that he has remained a modest man in spite of all of the acclaim that has come his way since May 22, 2011?

People had been telling him for the past two years that he needed to cash in while he was still a hot commodity and they were not just talking about the frequent speeches he has made all across the country.

Other jobs were out there, other school districts, business possibilities, maybe even becoming a full-time motivational speaker. He had enjoyed the interaction with those who attended his presentations and the news clippings, all of which mentioned either that he had been brought to tears or he was at the brink of tears as he related the events of May 22 and the days afterward.

But C. J. Huff stayed in Joplin where he was loved. He had to be loved; his Bright Futures partners told him so.

Little by little, the hero facade that was erected around C. J. Huff after the tornado began fading away as he said things that reminded people of the days before May 22 when he was a mortal just like the rest of us.

-When more than 200 teachers left the district in two years, he said it was because their spouses had found jobs in other communities. That made sense. When the husbands get jobs, the little women have to follow.

-When he spent thousands of dollars of taxpayer money on a thank you tour at a time when district funds were dwindling. The people who helped Joplin would have appreciated phone calls and sincere thank-you letters just as much.

-When he, with the unanimous stamp of approval of the R-8 Board of Education, submitted a five-year strategic plan that called for the district reserves to fall to as low as eight percent, but to miraculously climb back up to 25 percent, even though no efforts were being made to curb spending.

-When he made a call to an employer and suggested it would not be a good idea that if an employee decided to run for Board of Education.

-When he made references to being a conservative and about conservatives having pitchforks and torches.

It has been one thing after another and it has not helped that during the past few months, he has had federal and state officials on his back about nagging paltry little things like proper use of Title I funds and questionable practices that led to higher graduation rates.

How could anyone question the graduation rates? Would the Joplin R-8 School District have spent $3,000 for a party for local businessman to announce an 85 percent graduation rate if it were not so?

C. J. Huff may have missed the best time to leave, but signs that he should be looking have been all around him for the past few months.

Though he was never really that close with Angie Besendorfer, she had been able to take care of the day-to-day management of the school district while Huff busied himself with the herculean tasks of increasing the graduation rates and continuing to build a Bright Futures empire.

When she resigned, all of a sudden Huff found himself surrounded by people whose chief loyalty was to Besendorfer and not to him. Even worse, many of the people were not qualified for the positions they held. Some lacked the proper degrees; most had little, if any experience, and many of the people who were there had not been hired because of any management ability or any outstanding knowledge of education, but because they were willing to do, without question, anything Besendorfer asked them to do. Huff needed a bulldog to do the kinds of things that Besendorfer had done and fortunately, he had one in human resources director Tina Smith. She was not really qualified to be a chief operating officer, but that approach had worked for Besendorfer, and this would enable him to continue to concentrate on graduation rates, Bright Futures and spreading the gospel of the Joplin Tornado across the nation.

Still, despite having someone else to handle the day-to-day operation of the school district, C. J. Huff has been a worried man. There are people running for the board of education who want to change the way he does things, maybe even force him out.
\
How can you force out the hero of the Joplin Tornado?

The sunset of C. J. Huff's time with the Joplin R-8 School District seems to be at hand. He sits alone in his bunker, surrounded by people who have never been loyal to him, guiding hundreds of people who have been in fear of Angie Besendorfer, Mike Johnson, or Tina Smith.

The idea that he was a man of the people, who just happened to be surrounded by autocratic administrators who have ruled by keeping the district's employees in fear of losing their jobs, is no longer held. Even those who have been long-time supporters of Huff know that it is he, no one else, who is ultimately responsible for the waves of teachers and staff members who have left the district.

Huff can look out his door and see Bright Futures, but there are no bright futures on his horizon.

Court documents: R-8 official made gay slurs, said he wanted to bend principal over her desk

Joplin R-8 Superintendent C. J. Huff is nothing if not a man of action.

When his custodial supervisor told him that he was being sexually harassed by Building, Grounds, and Transportation Director Mike Johnson, Huff said he was deeply concerned.

"Has he said anything about the principals?" Huff asked.

George Morris was concerned. This meeting, which took place September 9, 2008, was not Morris' idea. He felt uncomfortable talking about his immediate supervisor.

After a pause, Morris said, "Yes. "I heard Mike Johnson say that he would like to bend Marilyn Alley (former Stapleton Elementary principal) over his desk" That was one of many times Johnson had talked about Mrs. Alley, he added.

Documents: Huff, Tina Smith bury allegations of lawbreaking, insurance fraud against Mike Johnson

Documents filed with the Missouri Division of Employment Security paint a portrait of an R-8 Administration that purposely chose to ignore allegations of lawbreaking, insurance fraud, verbal harassment, and disregard of federal, state, and local safety regulations against one of their own.

Not only did Superintendent C. J. Huff and R-8 Human Resources Director Tina Smith sweep the accusations against Buildings, Grounds, and Transportation Director Mike Johnson (now in charge of the building project) under the table, but after the whistleblower, environmental control worker Luther Hunt resigned because of the corrosive atmosphere, Ms. Smith took steps to deny Hunt unemployment benefits, according to the documents.

Hunt had documented his allegations in a 10-page letter to Huff, dated August 23, 2011, and sent to the superintendent by certified mail.

Huff ignored whistleblower's 10-page letter about Mike Johnson

No matter how serious the problem has been at the Joplin R-8 School District, those who have had the courage to bring the information forward have been punished through transfers, increasingly uncomfortable working conditions, and many times, loss of employment.

Through all of those times, whether it be through actions taken by Assistant Superintendent Angie Besendorfer, Building, Grounds, and Transportation Director Mike Johnson (now in charge of the district's building projects), or other top-layer officials, C. J. Huff has come down hard on those who dare question his top aides.

Such was the case in 2011, when Luther Hunt, one of the district's two environmental control/utility workers at the time, wrote a 10-page letter to C. J. Huff detailing problems with Johnson, including explosive temperamental outbursts, purposeful ignoring of safety laws and regulations, telling a story about the death of a child that had never happened, and making references to "morons, idiots, retards, and savages."

According to Hunt, Johnson also routinely punished principals he did not like by delaying work orders.

After the letter, despite assurances from Huff and Human Resources Director Tina Smith nothing was done about Hunt's complaints, he began having problems at work, and he eventually quit.

Lawsuits: Huff, Johnson bullied Joplin Schools support staff, targeted union leaders

Lawsuits filed by former Joplin R-8 support staff members provide a picture of Superintendent. C. J. Huff that is totally at odds with the touchy-feely, water fountain tears image he presents to the public. The lawsuits also depict Mike Johnson, director of buildings, grounds, and transportation as creating the same type of atmosphere of fear among the employees as Assistant Superintendent Angie Besendorfer created with teachers and lower level administrators.

One such lawsuit, filed by former custodial supervisor George Morris in 2010, was scheduled to finally come to trial next month in Jasper County Circuit Court, and lists the Joplin R-8 School District and Johnson as defendants and claims Morris was fired an an act of "retaliation" in violation of the Missouri Human Rights Act.

The district has already settled a lawsuit filed by James Tucker, a 26-year veteran, who was fired after bringing complaints about Huff, though court records do not indicate how much money changed hands.

Tucker was president of the Joplin Education Support Personnel, the chapter of Missouri NEA for support staff and as part of his responsibility in that position, according to the lawsuit, he sent letters to "Defendant Huff registering complaints brought to him by members of the union that Defendant Johnson had threatened them and otherwise acted inappropriately towards them in the course of his role as their supervisor."

Those letters were the beginning of the end of Tucker's employment with the R-8 School District, according to the lawsuit.

These letters played a direct role in Defendants’ decision to terminate Plaintiff  from employment and his termination constituted retaliation for raising the issue of Defendant Johnson’s inappropriate behavior in addition to his other advocacy on behalf of the Union.

    

Plaintiff attended a meeting with another Union member and Defendant Johnson in which the Union member registered complaints with Defendant Johnson about another employee. 

At the meeting, Defendant Johnson told Plaintiff and the other Union member that he could fabricate facts about them and have them terminated from employment if they did not cease their advocacy.  The other Union member was in fact terminated from employment shortly thereafter.   

 On May 3, 2010, Tucker received a letter from the district telling him he was being laid off due to "significant financial restraints."

Since according to the district's agreement with the union, Tucker should have been eligible for any job that came up because of his considerable seniority, he continued to serve as union president, until C. J. Huff put an end to that, according to the lawsuit.

After Plaintiff was terminated from employment on June 3, 2010, he still served as Union President until August 5, 2010, and it was expected by Union members that Plaintiff would still perform his duties as Union President and negotiate on the Union members’ behalf. 

  

When Plaintiff attempted to attend a meet and confer session on behalf of the Union with representatives of the Defendant School District at which the Administrative Guidelines were to be renegotiated, he was told by Defendant Huff to leave the meeting because he was no longer an employee and could no longer serve as a representative on the Union’s behalf.  

 

 Defendant Huff terminated Plaintiff’s employment and asked Plaintiff to leave the meeting because he knew that he would not be able to force his agenda upon the Union if  Plaintiff was present. 

  

Plaintiff’s termination from employment constituted retaliation for Union advocacy and other activities which he had a right to engage in under the 1st Amendment of the United States Constitution.

   

The individual Defendants engaged in a concerted pattern of intimidation as part of a School District policy and custom designed to intimidate Union leaders and other Union members so that they would cease advocating for their interests and to destroy the efficacy of the Union itself.  This policy culminated in the termination from employment of Union leaders who refused to bend to the will of the School District.   

Tucker sued the school district because of its denial of due process. After he was laid off, Tucker filed grievances, but was never allowed to have a hearing.

The Administrative Guidelines defined the procedures by which employees could file grievances and appeal decisions made by their supervisors concerning their grievances. 

   

After learning that he would be laid off from employment and after he learned that he would not be allowed to replace employees with less seniority than him as is required by the Administrative Guidelines, Plaintiff filed multiple grievances against the School District pursuant to the Administrative Guidelines in May and June of 2010.

   

On June 25, 2010, Plaintiff received a letter from Defendant Huff stating that because Plaintiff was no longer an employee of the School District, he had no recourse to file grievances under the Administrative Guidelines and therefore denied Plaintiff the opportunity to defend his rights using the process described in and required by the Administrative Guidelines.