It claims Schroer committed misconduct by behaving unprofessionally and inaccurately reporting "information required by the local board of education or governing board, state education agency, federal agency or state or federal law," according to the Licensure Code of Conduct Profession for Ohio Educators.
In addition, Schroer is accused under a third section of the administrative code, “Accepting Compensation for Self Promotion or Personal Gain.”
The misconduct form was submitted to the state on Aug. 30 and was released by the school district on Thursday.
The form was sent to the Dayton Daily News in response to a series of public records requests made to learn more about Schroer’s resignation, accepted on Aug. 30 as part of a separation agreement with the Springboro Board of Education in which he is to be paid up to $115,000.
RELATED: Superintendent resigns after financial allegations
On Aug. 30, the board voted to accept Schroer’s resignation and approve the agreement, while releasing a statement that said a special audit would be done into “allegations of a financial nature.”
The separation agreement calls for the district to hold back $22,000 until completion of the audit. That money would be used to reimburse the district for any findings for recovery of misspent funds, with the remainder then paid to Schroer.
On the misconduct filing, boxes were checked for “The employee has resigned under threat of termination or non-renewal,”and “The employee has engaged or may have engaged in conduct unbecoming to the teaching profession.”
In the comments section, the district added: “Earlier this calendar year, concerns were brought to the attention of the Board of Education regarding Mr. Schroer involving issues of financial concern. An investigation was conducted into financial concerns involving mileage reimbursements, sick days and use of work days.”
MORE: Tornado survivors tell us what you need on the path to recovery
According to the state code, educators behave unprofessionally by “failing to adhere” to the state conduct code or violating law - not including traffic violations - or rules, “although the conduct may not have resulted in a criminal charge, indictment, prosecution or conviction.”
Professional misconduct can also include failing to complete required criminal background checks, being disciplined for “unethical conduct” by a state or professional licensing board or entity or “using technology to intentionally host or post improper or inappropriate material.”
Punishment can range from state license suspension to revocation.
Schroer also could face license suspension under the accurate reporting section for reasons including “falsifying, intentionally misrepresenting, willfully omitting or being negligent in reporting information submitted to federal, state, and other governmental agencies” and “reasons for absences or leaves.”
According to the code, Schroer’s license could also be revoked if the state determines he accepted compensation for self promotion or personal gain.
MORE: Video quality key in ex-Springboro teacher’s child abuse case
RELATED: Accused ex-teacher’s references included principal, superintendent
Among examples under this section of the conduct code prohibiting educators from accepting compensation for self promotion or personal gain: “Submitting fraudulent requests for reimbursement of expenses.”
Schroer was reimbursed $4,1016.22 in 2017-2019 for mileage expenses, according to school records. It was unclear which, if any, were related to the claims against him.
Other school district records provided show that on July 25, Schroer put in for 10 extended days during the 2018-19 school year: July 18, July 19, July 22, July 23, July 24, July 25, July 26, July 29, July 30, July 31.
A notation on the pay request indicates he was paid $6,695.65 on Aug. 5 for this time, although on Schroer’s work schedule for the year, these days are indicated as part of his “physical work days.”
“Any days ‘worked’ above 222, he is paid out at his daily rate up to 10,” Treasurer Terrah Floyd said in an August email response to questions. “The 10 days that Mr. Schroer was paid were listed as additional days worked above 222.”
Floyd has never responded to a question about whether this was an appropriate expense.
District officials have continued to refuse to disclose details of the financial allegations, such as the costs of the special investigation, or respond to other information requests.
“We do not respond to requests for information, due to being a school district. School districts have limited resources and staff. Therefore, we adhere to the public records laws and provide the required responsive records to fulfill requests. You will find this in every school district,” Floyd responded to a Sept. 27 question about why the district was not responding to information requests.
The district has redacted Schroer’s contact information from records released and other efforts to reach him have so far failed.
RELATED: Springboro superintendent on paid leave, board refuses to comment
About the Author
