Patrons press Conway board over maintenance investigation and timeline for reporting to legislative auditors

Speakers during the public-comment period accused district officials of failing to report misappropriation allegations promptly and of misleading the board and public about notifications to the Legislative Joint Auditing Committee.

Patron Jimmy Kevin said the board improperly went into executive session at a prior meeting and then was told by the district's chief legal officer that the district had notified legislative audit. "She stated, 'I have notified legislative audit as we're required to do if there is any allegations and misappropriations of funds.' ... That was a lie," Kevin said, adding that emails he obtained show the initial legislative-audit responses indicated the district's private auditor, not the legislative auditors, needed to make a report that could trigger a legislative audit.

Tammy Marsh, a second patron and former educator, said she had hoped the truth would emerge and urged the board to prioritize teachers and students and to post the superintendent opening. "We are the role models for 10,000 children," Marsh said, asking the board to consider what its decisions teach students about ethics and stewardship of taxpayer dollars.

Interim Superintendent Black and General Counsel Shasta Wagner responded during the meeting with a summary of the timeline and the district's actions. Wagner said allegations were first brought forward in late January and a third-party investigator was retained. Wagner said the final investigative report was submitted to the superintendent on May 9, 2025, and the district approved resignations and retirements on June 10. Wagner said she first saw the investigative report on July 23. She said she and a colleague contacted the legislative auditors on August 12 and that she submitted an initial notification to legislative audit on that day after learning of Arkansas Code Annotated 25-11-124which she described as requiring reporting of apparent misuse of district funds over $1,000 within five business days of learning about it.

Wagner said she later provided the district's private auditor with materials on Aug. 18 and then conveyed additional documentation and the auditor's responses to legislative audit on Aug. 19. She told the board she did not realize legislative audit would not initiate an audit until the private auditor filed an audit finding; legislative audit replied Aug. 14 with process guidance that clarified how the agency becomes involved.

Board members asked procedural questions about what can and cannot be decided in executive session, with Wagner clarifying that binding votes must be taken in open session and that personnel termination is a process requiring notice and a public hearing if the board pursues termination. Several board members said they did not participate in the prior administration's discussions and wanted to move forward. No formal vote on the allegations or a referral to local prosecutors occurred during the meeting; board members discussed that referring the matter to local law enforcement would be a public-board decision.