8 weeks and nearly $25K later, Dayton school superintendent still on leave

Rhonda Corr, Dayton school superintendent who was placed on leave.
Rhonda Corr, Dayton school superintendent who was placed on leave.

Dayton Public Schools Superintendent Rhonda Corr has been on paid leave for eight weeks, but a pre-disciplinary hearing that was originally scheduled for Dec. 13 still has not taken place, according to attorneys for Corr and the district.

At $150,000 per year, the Dayton Daily News calculated Corr should receive $24,230 in base salary for the 42 weekdays she has been on paid leave so far. Her contract also calls for the district to pay her retirement contribution as well as $1,500 per month for expenses.

RELATED: No decision on ousted superintendent’s hearing

In some school disciplinary cases, the sides reach a buyout settlement not precisely tied to the number of days on leave or days remaining under contract.

Beverly Meyer, the attorney whose report largely led to Corr being placed on leave, met with school board members and DPS attorney Jyllian Bradshaw in a closed executive session Tuesday night. Bradshaw would not comment on whether Tuesday’s executive session was about Corr.

RELATED: Here’s why DPS put Superintendent Corr on leave

Asked about the district disciplinary process for the exiled superintendent, Bradshaw would only say that hearings “are in the process of being rescheduled,” the same answer she gave last month. David Duwel, one of the attorneys for Corr, said Tuesday night that there had been no change in Corr’s case.

According to a November pre-disciplinary hearing notice from the school district, Corr slept in front of the federal mediator during an Aug. 9 contract negotiating session, created a hostile work environment by berating high-level administrators and received death benefits for a domestic partner while legally married to another person, among other allegations.

RELATED: School board gave Corr glowing review in October

Corr’s attorneys have argued that the complaints don’t make sense in the wake of a glowing performance review issued by the board on Oct. 3. They argued that some of the allegations may not be fully accurate, or wouldn’t rise to the level of a contractual violation.