The Hartford School Board owes the public a much fuller explanation of the circumstances surrounding the recent departure of long-time school Superintendent Tom DeBalsi than the highly implausible version it has provided so far.

Thanks to the reporting of our enterprising colleague Christina Dolan, it is possible to piece together a timeline of the events that led to DeBalsi’s retirement/resignation/separation from the school district (which seems to use those terms interchangeably.)

The board met in closed session on June 12 for the annual evaluation of the superintendent. School Board Chairman Kevin Christie told Dolan on June 19 that no decisions were made or actions taken at that meeting, and indeed DeBalsi replied to the reporter’s inquiry a day later that he planned to remain as superintendent in Hartford until his contract expired at the end of June, 2025.

However, on July 3 the district announced DeBalsi’s departure in a news release saying that the move would allow him to “complete his career as an educator, by returning to his roots as a teacher, which has always been his first love.” For his part, DeBalsi wrote in an email that, “I felt this was a good time to make a change and am looking forward to finding a position that will leave me with more time for family pursuits.”

According to Christie, this resignation came orally just before the end of the fiscal year on June 30, although he declined to specify the date.

No letter of resignation was submitted, however, and the School Board did not hold a special meeting at that time to accept the resignation or to name an interim superintendent.

Instead, Christie said, he was authorized on behalf of the board “to do this work,” which included negotiating a contract with Caty Sutton to become interim superintendent. She has been the district’s director of secondary curriculum, instruction and assessment.

As the result of a public records request, Dolan on July 12 was able to shake loose a copy of the district’s “separation agreement” with DeBalsi, dated June 30 and signed on July 2, under which he will receive the full salary and benefits due him under his original contract through June 2025, including $210,214.65 in salary and health benefits, as well as $2,214.96 for cell phone and internet expenses. This largess was characterized by the board as “an appropriate recognition of his service to the district.”

The agreement also includes provisions that prohibit either party from disclosing the terms of the agreement, with some narrow exceptions. It also provides that DeBalsi “will not do or say, whether orally, in writing or in any other medium, anything maliciously false about the School District, its employees, services, or agents” and that he will forgo any other claims against the district.

Questions abound. First, what occurred between June 20, when DeBalsi confirmed his intention to soldier on as superintendent through the end of his contract next year, and July 3, when his departure was announced? Second, who authorized Christie to “do this work on behalf of the board,” and when was he so authorized? Third, why was no formal letter of resignation sought and obtained at that time and why did the School Board not vote in public session then on accepting that resignation? Fourth, who decided, and when, that Sutton would become the interim superintendent? Fifth, why was a separation agreement necessary if DeBalsi was simply retiring early and the board was merely releasing him from the final year of his contract; and why is he being paid full salary for not working for the district for the next 12 months? (The taxpayers may well wonder why the customary retirement gold watch did not suffice.) Sixth, why were strict nondisclosure provisions included in the separation agreement when the public has an obvious right to know how taxpayers’ money is being spent? Seventh, if DeBalsi was leaving on good terms, what was the need to prohibit him from bad-mouthing the district?

The board provided no good answers at a special meeting Thursday night, although it did finally get around to accepting DeBalsi’s resignation and welcoming the interim superintendent. Instead, members took refuge behind the evergreen “we can’t discuss personnel issues” shield.

That’s a shame. By most accounts, DeBalsi compiled a record of solid accomplishment during his 13 years as superintendent, and he leaves the district, despite its remaining problems, in a much stronger position than when he arrived. Gilded as his parachute may be, the circumstances of his abrupt departure do not seem to do full justice to his tenure. To the contrary, they may leave the impression that he was unceremoniously ushered out the door.