State Board amends staff recommendation, directs 1-year retroactive suspension and 1-month prospective discipline for teacher who brought firearm to campus

The Tennessee State Board of Education on Feb. 21 amended the department’s recommended sanction for a teacher, Brenda Smith, who left a loaded firearm in a school staff area and directed staff to negotiate a consent order imposing a one‑year retroactive suspension of her license plus one month of prospective suspension.

Board legal staff had recommended a six‑month retroactive suspension as a negotiated outcome. Ryan Shanahan, associate counsel for the State Board, briefed members that Smith had previously been before the board in November 2024, when the board tabled the matter and asked staff to seek an alternate sanction. Shanahan told the board Smith’s attorney had now consented to a six‑month retroactive suspension; the board voted instead to direct staff to seek a more severe sanction.

The board’s discussion focused on the seriousness of bringing a loaded firearm to a school, the staff recommendation, and precedent for discipline. Marsha Johnson, board member, said she was concerned that a six‑month retroactive sanction would not be sufficient given the potential risk to students and urged a longer penalty. "I just feel like maybe a year's discipline would be more appropriate," Johnson said during the discussion. Several other members, including Ryan Holt and Jordan Molineux, urged the board to consider precedent and the effect on public safety when setting discipline standards.

Deputy General Counsel Pete Daniel Nellis reminded the board that the educator in this case did not meet any statutory exceptions permitting a firearm on campus and that statutory exceptions and the board's rule set strict training and approval requirements for educators who are authorized to carry on campus. Nellis also told the board that the statute and board rule allow recommending a range of professional development and training but cautioned that recommending weapons‑safety training would be inappropriate in a case where the educator was not authorized to have a weapon on campus.

Board member Ryan Holt moved an amendment to the staff recommendation to require a one‑year retroactive suspension plus one month prospective; Marsha Johnson seconded the amendment. The amendment passed on roll call (9 ayes, 1 nay). The board then voted on the motion as amended; the motion to direct staff to negotiate a consent order providing a one‑year retroactive suspension with one month prospective passed on roll call (9 ayes, 1 nay). The board instructed legal staff to take that direction back to Smith’s counsel for negotiation.

Board counsel clarified other factual and timing points during the discussion: the underlying incident occurred on March 28, 2024; the educator had been nonrenewed by her district and had obtained subsequent employment at a public charter school in July 2024; the board’s discipline recommendation would be effective only if the educator consents to the negotiated order. Counsel explained that the board’s typical process waits for local investigations and other agencies where relevant, which can delay the timing of discipline recommendations.

The board’s action does not itself impose an immediate forward‑looking suspension unless and until the educator consents to the negotiated consent order. Members who supported the heavier sanction said they viewed the vote as setting an appropriate precedent for conduct involving firearms on campus; members who favored the staff recommendation warned about the importance of consistency with staff investigations and past board actions.

Action and outcome: the board approved, by roll call, directing staff to seek a negotiated consent order imposing a one‑year retroactive suspension and one month prospective suspension for Brenda Smith; legal staff will return to the board with any negotiated consent order or, if negotiation fails, with next procedural steps.

Context: the item drew sustained debate over public safety, precedent for discipline when a firearm is brought on campus, and how negotiated consent orders shape future enforcement. Counsel and several board members emphasized that the board must balance appropriate public safety consequences with consistent application of prior disciplinary practice and the limitations of staff ability to investigate while other agencies or local districts are conducting inquiries.

Provenance evidence (transcript excerpts): "Mister chairman, Ryan Shanahan, associate counsel, state board of education. Item j for miss Brenda Smith was before the board in November 2024, and the recommended action was a formal reprimand. At the board meeting in November, the board voted to table the matter until a later board meeting and instructed board staff to bring an alternate recommendation to the board. In order to comply with the board's instructions, board staff contacted miss Smith's attorney. Miss Smith has consented to a 6 month retroactive suspension of her license." (transcript)

"So the motion as amended passes... this then gives you the direction or the to go back to renegotiate with their attorney." (transcript)

Ending: The board’s direction requires legal staff to attempt a negotiated consent order reflecting the amended sanction. If a negotiated agreement is returned to the board, the board will vote on that order; if not, the board may set a contested proceeding or other next steps according to its usual disciplinary procedures.