Paradise Valley Unified board adopts hearing officer's findings, terminates superintendent Todd Cummings
Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts
Subscribe
Summary
The Paradise Valley Unified District governing board voted unanimously to deny a continuance request and to adopt a hearing officer's recommended decision, terminating Superintendent Todd Cummings effective immediately. District counsel told the board the record shows misstatements about a prior buyout and investigator findings of misconduct.
The Paradise Valley Unified District (4241) governing board voted unanimously on an emergency personnel motion to adopt a hearing officer's findings and terminate Superintendent Todd Cummings effective immediately.
Susan Siegel, district counsel for the Paradise Valley Unified District, told the board the district supports the hearing officer's findings of fact, conclusions of law and recommended decision after a two-day evidentiary hearing. "This was a complete untruth," Siegel said, arguing that Cummings' statements about a prior contract buyout were misleading and that documentary evidence in the record contradicted his account.
Siegel summarized the record and the investigative report she described as conducted by Lisa Ann Smith, saying the investigator found "good and just cause" to terminate Cummings for what she listed as incompetence, unprofessional conduct, inefficiency and violations of district policy. Siegel also told the board that the hearing process met constitutional and state law due-process standards, citing the Loudermill standard and Pavlik v. Chinle School District as satisfied by the procedures the board followed.
Earlier in the meeting the board denied a continuance request from Cummings to delay the matter until the week of Feb. 16, 2026. A board member moved to deny the continuance, a second was recorded, and the board voted 5 ayes, 0 nays, 0 abstentions.
Board members thanked legal counsel and district employees who testified or cooperated in the investigation. During the discussion, a board member asked whether adopting the findings and terminating today would "sever all ties and stop you paying any money"; Siegel replied that adoption would end district payments but acknowledged the possibility of future litigation and said statutes exist that can allow a prevailing party in employment litigation to recover attorney's fees.
The motion to adopt the hearing officer's recommended decision and terminate Cummings was moved by a board member and passed unanimously; legal counsel was directed to transmit any required statutory notice regarding the termination to Cummings and his counsel.
The board adjourned following the vote. The district did not record a public statement from Cummings at the meeting; his request to continue the matter and a written pleading from him were part of the record but he was not present to speak.