LITTLE CHUTE, WI (WTAQ-WLUK) – The representative of a small group of parents made the case Monday night for the Little Chute School superintendent to be fired for his handling of a sexual assault allegation.
The alleged incident happened nearly 20 years ago to a student. It wasn’t reported until 9 years ago.
While most people, at the Little Chute school board meeting, clapped in support of superintendent David Botz’s position, Tia Ramirez tells FOX 11 she wants him fired.
“He’s been the superintendent of my daughter; she’s been here for 2 years and I feel like he can’t protect her.”
Ramirez told FOX 11, she and a couple of other parents are circulating petitions supporting the termination of the superintendent for the way he handled a sexual assault allegation.
“I’m blown away that people think that because he was a good guy, that that’s a good enough excuse to sweep under the rug what he did. He should have reported and he didn’t.”
In 1999, a high school teacher, Jason LaVigne, allegedly sexually assaulted a girl in his class several times.
However, the girl didn’t report the incident to school officials until 2009, when she was 24 years old.
At Monday night’s meeting, Botz explained his reasoning.
“Regrettably, being that the individual was an adult, I did not view the individual as a minor, which would trigger the mandatory statue to alert authorities about the alleged situation, as the mandatory reporter statue is designed for reports to be made on behalf of children.”
Botz said he viewed the case as a personnel matter.
“The investigation did not result in any findings, supporting accusations. Once completed, I shared the results with legal counsel and placed the copy in the staff member’s personnel file.”
Board members agreed Botz did not violate district policy by not reporting allegations of an adult.
Dan Valentyn, was the high school principal during the investigation.
He reminded the public that the decision was not made by Botz alone.
“At that time, I was on board with the decision. A lot of new information has come to light regarding the 1999 incident and 2009 investigation, but at that time, with the amount of information we had, and advice from legal, we made the call and clearly documented everything related to the decision.”
“The decision process was not the intent to cover up and/or protect the staff member because of a personal relationship with any of us. We simply felt, based on the investigation, at the time, this was the best decision,” Valentyn added.
Ramirez says she’ll continue to circulate her petition.
