IBJNews

  • Home

Area school district claims fraud by ex-superintendent

Associated Press
November 16, 2011
Keywords
Education & Workforce Development, K-12, Law, Lawsuits, Legal Issues, Public schools
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrint

A suburban Indianapolis school district is suing its former superintendent, claiming that he schemed to defraud it of millions of dollars for himself.

The lawsuit filed in Marion County court by the Wayne Township school district says Terry Thompson deceived school board members into approving more salary and compensation than he knew they would approve in contract negotiations.

In its complaint filed Tuesday in Marion Superior Court Civil Division, the district said Terry Thompson used complex contractual changes to increase his annual income from $218,000 in 2003 to $2.2 million in 2010, WIBC-FM 93.1 reported.

School district attorney Linda Pence told WTHR-TV that the board trusted the recommendations Thompson made.

A law firm representing Thompson called the lawsuit inappropriate and said it was the school board's duty to review contracts for all employees.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

  • WAYNE TWP. SUPT. SLICK; BOARD; NO OVERSIGHT
    OCEANINMOTIONNovember 17, 2011 3:17 PM
    I agree with the comments about the school board. Good old boy-ism with women included. Board was challenged (by some) back when bond issue was passed to build the elite sports campus WT now has and when hundreds of thousands of dollars were spent on vainglorious (to the school system) unnecessary electronic signs at all 10 schools (one got TWO of them); all to no avail. Time to vote them out, but gotta wait for election time when less than 30% of REGISTERED (don't even mention NOT-registered) voters come out and most of them have no clue about who's running in any office. You get the government you deserve.
    Reply to CommentFlag Comment
  • Board at Fault
    ObserverNovember 16, 2011 1:54 PM
    By law, the school board has the direct authority to hire/fire 1 person -- the superintendent. The Wayne Twp. School Board failed completely in its responsibility to their school community.

    This is NOT a good school board and many, many other Boards - faced with the same situation - would have handled it much differently.

    Looking at their Board, one of their members has served for some 40 years - WAY TOO LONG.

    Thompson is not blameless; he and his attorney knew what they were doing.

    BUT, at the end of the day, it is the Board that is legally responsible for accepting/signing the contracts and approving them.

    If I were in their district, I'd go find some new people to serve on that board.

    The hundreds of thousands of dollars WASTED in all of this could have been used in the classroom to help students. No excuse.
    Reply to CommentFlag Comment
  • Unbelievable
    DisbelieverNovember 16, 2011 1:30 PM
    So the school board charged with oversight, admits they were to lazy, stupdid or ignorant to do any oversight and now wants to sue? The school board should be sued for negligence by taxpayers. Seems to me like fresh fuel for the drive to change school governance. Also, go ahead and take away the license of the school board's "smart" attorney for filing this piece of garbage.
    Reply to CommentFlag Comment

    Post a comment to this story

    COMMENTS POLICY
    We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
     
    You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
     
    Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
     
    No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
     
    We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
     

    Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

    ADVANCED SEARCH
    Sponsored by
    ADVERTISEMENT

    facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

    Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
    Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
     
    Subscribe to IBJ

    1. So the Mayor adds another non value added layer to having a vehicle towed? Whereby the City Government RECIEVES AN ILLEGAL KICKBACK FROM A LGOISTICS COMPANY THAT SUBS THE WORK TO LOCAL TOW COMPANIES? What is the service the City performs for receiving the "tribute"? This is RICO!!!!! What a corrupt and unnecessary layer. What a dirtbag Mayor and his cronies.

    2. Owner occupied housing. Clear enough?

    3. So people think I am paranoid. It's from experience in dealing with puds requested by developers who make major donations themselves to representatives, have nice fund raisers for those running for office and hide through pac's. then there are the public relation firms. You will note some pr comments below. You there Clyde Lee? My opinion. Commercial along 421, great. Multifamily housing, terrible idea that will change the town. Senior condos or zero lot line homes west, great. I suggest keeping all entries to commercial areas at 421. All entries to owner occupied on sycamore. Will keep the traffic on sycamore down some. Two other things. You can't trust what will be there in 10 years. Steve builds quality stuff, but areas change over time. Look at the changes at the wall mart center at 86th and 421 over the last 10 years. Look at the apartments and neighborhoods behind St Vincent's. Raintree properties WILL decrease in value if commercial and multifamily goes in near. It has already been happening around the bridges area. The houses that have been sold recently are way below market. Several deals not closed due to the Illinois construction and the whole unsurety of the bridges. It's pretty simple, Zionsville will approve the whole thing because the city council has been groomed over a LONG period of time for this. I might even suggest some are in their position as a result of this.

    4. Esta, do you have a dog in this fight? You seem to really want to knock anyone against this project. No, I didn't move to Indiana for the architecture. I moved here for that red barn in the field. The horses and fields of corn. A place that is NOT overdeveloped. There are plenty of nearby places in Indianapolis that could be REDEVELOPED instead.

    5. RKW - OK, we get it, you're paranoid. The question is, are you paranoid enough? Greg - Yes, Pittman(s) is (are) at it again. They are developers, they build things. It's what they do. So when you go to work tomorrow, Greg, you're at it again too. Cliff - Really? You moved to Indiana for its progressive architecture? That's like moving to England for the cuisine. Zionsvillain - The house you moved to was once a field or woods. I'm willing to bet folks were upset when that ground was plowed under and a house was built. But I guess now that you are in, everything should stop? "My house was OK, but the next one is sprawl." SE Guy - Please don't paint us with such a wide brush. Most reasonable Zionsville residents welcome planned, measured development.

    ADVERTISEMENT