Austintown board denies grievance, affirms discipline appeal and ratifies termination of Daniel Moore

The Austintown Local School District Board of Education on Oct. 23 denied a grievance challenging Daniel Moore’s termination, affirmed a separate student-discipline appeal decided in executive session and approved a resolution formalizing the superintendent’s exercise of discretion to terminate Moore’s employment effective Sept. 23, 2025.

Board members voted on three personnel items in sequence. The board voted to deny a grievance filed Oct. 7, 2025, that challenged Moore’s termination under Article 7 of the district’s negotiated agreement; it directed the board president to issue a written answer to the grievance with reasons for the denial within 10 workdays of the close of the hearing. The board then affirmed the superintendent’s decision on a student-discipline appeal heard in executive session and directed the treasurer to provide the student and the student’s parents with written notice of the board’s action, including findings of fact. Later in the meeting, the board approved a resolution approving the superintendent’s exercise of discretion to terminate the employment contracts of Daniel Moore effective Sept. 23, 2025.

The motions were presented during the regular session and carried on roll-call votes. For the grievance denial, the board’s roll call recorded the following affirmative votes: Missus Smrek; Mister Sherwood; Mister Markham; Missus Mok; and Mister Porter. The affirmation of the superintendent’s discipline decision and the resolution ratifying Moore’s termination carried by the same recorded affirmative votes.

The grievance item references Article 7 of the district’s negotiated agreement; the board’s action directed the board president to respond in writing. The discipline-appeal item was described by the board as having been heard in executive session; the board’s public motion affirming the superintendent asked that written findings of fact be issued consistent with the board’s opinion and that the treasurer provide notice to the student and the student’s parents.

No further public discussion of the substance of Moore’s termination or the student-discipline case occurred during the open meeting; board members made their votes on the motions as presented.

The board did not provide additional detail in public session about the factual basis for the termination beyond the motions recorded in the minutes nor did the district supply additional documentation during the meeting. The board’s directive that the board president issue a written denial of the grievance within 10 workdays creates a public record that the grievant can rely on for any further steps allowed under the negotiated agreement or applicable law.