De Soto board member Scott Hancock faces harassment allegations, recall drive

Opponents of De Soto School Board member Scott Hancock have begun a recall petition drive against him, alleging harassment and bullying toward female administrators and other school board members.

Hancock has pushed back, saying he never did the things he is accused of and hiring a lawyer who sent a letter of warning to the three women who initiated the signature drive.

The petition claims Hancock violated federal laws against sexual harassment by making offensive comments about women and being dismissive and belittling toward female administrators and board members. The petition states Hancock addressed a female administrator as “missy,” and “little girl,” and that he makes excessive demands on school administrators’ time with phone calls.

It also alleges Hancock has been trying to get rid of school Superintendent Doug Sumner since Hancock joined the board in 2013. His term expires in 2017.

Hancock said the allegations are untrue and cannot be backed up with direct witnesses. “What this is is a smear campaign, is what this is,” he said.

The recall effort is the result of the simmering discontent of some De Soto school patrons over the unexpected resignation of two popular administrators, Sumner and Jessica Dain, director of teaching and learning. Both will take jobs in other area districts.

Many of those patrons blamed the resignations on what they considered a disrespectful attitude by Hancock toward administrators and staff during board meetings.

Kansas law allows recall elections, but the wording must be approved by the county counselor and the district attorney’s office. For the petition drive to be successful, Ahn-Nguyet Nguyen, Karen Wall of Olathe and Julianne Wright of Lenexa, members of the recall committee, and the petition circulators have 90 days from the April 7 approval date to collect 1,000 signatures. The signatures must then be verified before an election can be set.

Kansas law also requires recall petitions to cite some violation of law. In this case, the petition alleges Hancock violated federal laws against sexual harassment with his comments, which petitioners said created a hostile work environment. No proof of those claims is required for the petition to be approved.

The petitioners also say Hancock has made excessive demands on school officials’ time — up to 40 hours per week. This is an assertion he also denies.

Petitioners also said that 10 administrators have resigned since early March, a fact confirmed by the school district.

At a March school board meeting attended by more than 350 people demands were made for Hancock’s resignation.

Only one person at that meeting said she had seen uncivil behavior at a board meeting. Others said they didn’t regularly attend the board meetings and had only heard about Hancock second-hand. School board meetings at the De Soto district are not videotaped.

Nguyen of Shawnee had threatened Hancock with the recall drive if he didn’t resign from the board.

Hancock attributes the brouhaha to the fact that he has openly questioned the district’s stewardship of taxpayer money. He cited the purchase in 2013 of $900,000 in wireless technology that was not competitively bid. Sumner ended up apologizing for that.

Hancock said he also has questioned whether the district should object to tax increment financing of developments. The incentives are sometimes offered by cities to encourage growth, but result in a short-term loss of tax money that would have been collected for the school.

Hancock said his critics may be trying to protect the district’s reputation. Nevertheless, he said he has always been respectful in his inquiries. “I’m very polite with my questions,” Hancock said. “When they’re not being answered, I become more direct.”

Nguyen referred all comment to her lawyer, Joe Hatley. Hatley said he has been retained to defend against a possible lawsuit about the petition, but could not provide any further information about the allegations in it.

Hatley provided a copy of a letter from attorney Wilson Stafford that said Hancock “reserves the right to pursue any and all legal remedies,” if the petition is not withdrawn.

The letter called the petition’s allegations “irresponsible or actionable” as well as “baseless and unsubstantiated.”

“The very nature of your repeated publication of these false and defamatory statements about Mr. Hancock demonstrates your willful or conscious disregard for the truthfulness of the allegations made,” Stafford wrote.

Hatley interpreted that as a threat of a lawsuit, and responded that the patrons are within their First Amendment rights to criticize public officials, and that Kansas courts leave the determination of truth to the electorate in this case. Holding public office carries with it the potential for public scrutiny, he wrote, quoting President Harry Truman’s line: “If you can’t stand the heat, get out of the kitchen.”

The demand to withdraw the petition “represents nothing more than a continuation of the very bullying tactics that have led to Mr. Hancock’s imminent recall election,” his letter said.

Stafford said his letter did not necessarily announce a defamation suit. “It was intended to provide the committee members with a graceful exit from a wrongheaded recall petition with wholly unsubstantiated allegations Scott categorically denies,” he said.

This story was originally published April 28, 2015 at 3:22 PM with the headline "De Soto board member Scott Hancock faces harassment allegations, recall drive."