In light of the recent revelations surrounding the Monroe City School Board, it’s become increasingly clear that a change in leadership is not just warranted but necessary, especially while the board searches for a new superintendent.
A central figure in this unfolding drama is Bill Willson, the board’s current president, whose actions and decisions have cast a long and dubious shadow over the board’s operations, particularly concerning handling the contract with former Superintendent Brent Vidrine.
Last week’s report from the board’s workplace investigator unearthed unsettling details about a 2018 contract with Vidrine, which included provisions for buying several years of retirement in the state retirement system, a decision not approved by the board. This clandestine arrangement led to over $325,000 in unauthorized payments to Vidrine, a startling misuse of public funds.
What exacerbates this situation is Willson’s role in both the signing of this contract and not getting board approval first.
Willson’s subsequent actions as chairman of the finance committee failed to adequately respond to questions about the retirement payments. His influence seemed to have been further misused to prevent a board vote on suspending Vidrine during an investigation into these misconduct claims in which he himself was a party to as a contract signer.
Moreover, as president, Willson presided over a secretive deal allowing Vidrine to retire with full benefits, even as the legislative auditor continues investigating the matter. The lack of transparency and the refusal to disclose whether Vidrine is required to repay the unauthorized funds only deepen the mistrust.
There is too much secrecy and behind-the-scenes maneuvering involving the superintendent. It even puts a shadow over one of the present interim superintendents, Dr. Serena White, who signed the infamous 2018 contract as a witness.
We don’t expect the board to ask District Attorney Steve Tew to look into the matter because the DA, listed in state filings as one of Willson’s campaign donors, is unlikely to intervene. When asked to look into Vidrine’s misconduct, the DA punted the matter to the legislative auditor.
It all paints a concerning picture of potential conflicts of interest and a lack of accountability at the highest levels.
Now, as the board embarks on the crucial task of selecting a new superintendent, Willson’s continued presence as president raises serious questions about the integrity of this process.
The shadow of the Vidrine scandal, coupled with Willson’s questionable role in it, suggests, in our opinion, a compromised selection process if he remains in charge.
To restore public trust and ensure a fair, transparent, and unbiased selection for the next superintendent, it is imperative that the board acts decisively. Willson should voluntarily step aside as president during this critical juncture.
The district and its stakeholders deserve a selection process for their next superintendent that is untainted by secrets and undue influence.
The future of the district depends on it.
