Stonington — Three school board members are calling for an independent investigation into how Superintendent of Schools Van Riley and other school officials handled reports that former high school teacher and coach Timothy Chokas inappropriately touched numerous female students over at least a seven-year period.

Board of Education member Alisa Morrison called for an independent investigation in July but didn't receive support of other members. She now has been joined by Jack Morehouse, who submitted several questions about the handling of the complaints to board Chairwoman Alexa Garvey on Thursday, and newly elected school board member Heidi Simmons.

Simmons, a longtime teacher who also works with victims of domestic abuse, said that she was surprised Morrison’s fellow board members did not support her call for an independent investigation this summer.

Garvey has said board members were unaware of the allegations against Chokas and the school system settlement with him to resign in January until The Day published a series of stories about the allegations and how they were handled at the end of June.

“I would like a lot more information. We need to know what happened and who is responsible. That’s what we need to know,” Simmons said. “That will resolve a lot of the feelings that students who had a problem with this teacher had and help avoid future fears they may have.”

Morehouse, meanwhile, submitted three question to Riley, saying he believes "the answers to these questions will help shed light on the seriousness of this issue." He wants to know when Riley first received student complaints, how many he received and whom he notified.

Morehouse said he would appreciate a response to his questions by the school board's Dec. 12 meeting. 

At a meeting last month, Morehouse said as a board member, and more importantly as a father of three daughters who have attended the high school, he thinks students must be made to feel comfortable in their classes. He added the questions surrounding the handling of the Chokas matter are casting a negative light on the good work being done at the school.

Riley and High School Principal Mark Friese have refused to say whether he and other school officials, teachers or staff members reported the complaints against Chokas to the state Department of Children and Families or police, as they are required by state law to do if they reasonably believe that a child has been abused. Riley has only said the allegations were appropriately handled.

The state law that governs the duties of school boards requires the boards “to maintain records of allegations, investigations and reports that a child has been abused or neglected by a school employee.”

DCF says it has record of one report from school system

The Day recently asked DCF to release information about whether it received reports from the school system regarding complaints against Chokas and what action it took. While state law grants DCF wide discretion in protecting the confidentiality of children, The Day made the request under a provision in state law that gives the DCF commissioner the option to release such information in connection with incidents that have been made public. In this case, The Day has published 16 news articles or editorials about the Chokas case.

On Thursday, Ken Mysogland, DCF’s bureau chief of external affairs, confirmed that DCF received a report from the school system on Jan. 19, but decided not to investigate the allegations because they did not meet the statutory definition of sexual abuse or neglect.

In a document released by the school system this summer, school officials redacted the girl’s entire account of how she said Chokas inappropriately touched her in the classroom on many occasions and made comments that made her feel uncomfortable. All but one of the other students in the class corroborated her account. The girl’s name is not mentioned in the memo — her initials appear to be redacted — and the teacher is only identified by the initials TC. It was this incident that led to Chokas' resignation with his full salary of $81,396 and benefits through the end of the school year. The school system also agreed not to fire him or disclose any information concerning his employment to anyone, except as required by law.

The Day is seeking an unredacted version of the document and has appealed the school system’s redaction to the state Freedom of Information Commission. A hearing began last month and has been continued to Nov. 22.

Mysogland also said DCF has no other records of complaints involving Chokas. But he explained that state law requires DCF to expunge reports of neglect and abuse that were not accepted for investigation after 60 days. It also expunges reports of neglect and abuse that have been investigated and not substantiated five years after the completion of the investigation.

Reports of neglect and abuse that have been investigated and substantiated are kept indefinitely.

“There is a difference between conduct viewed as abusive and neglectful to children under state law and conduct that is inappropriate or violates school policies and procedures,” Mysogland said.

Thirty girls have told The Day they were repeatedly touched by Chokas and saw him touching others dating back to 2004. The complaints include that Chokas allegedly placed his legs on girls' laps, touched their backs, thighs and stomachs, patted their buttocks, massaged their shoulders, leaned up against them and tickled them.

They also allege he asked about their boyfriends, invited them to have breakfast in his classroom, struck one girl in the buttocks with a cane he was using and asked them to call him "Uncle Chokas." The alleged touching took place in his classroom and an adjacent photo darkroom and during golf and soccer practice.

Some students and parents say they complained to guidance director Margo Crowley, Friese, Riley, teachers and staff members. But when The Day requested the school system release all complaints filed against Chokas and disciplinary action taken against him, Riley said those records were "not available."

The school department subsequently released documents that showed Chokas was placed on administrative leave, issued a formal letter of concern about his behavior and ordered to develop a plan to ensure students would not feel uncomfortable in his class.

The Day has filed a complaint with the FOI Commission about the district's failure to release complaints and disciplinary actions.

DCF review vs. independent investigation

The independent investigation being pushed by Morrison, Simmons and Morehouse would differ in several crucial ways from the review that is being undertaken by the state Office of the Child Advocate. OCA launched its review after reading The Day’s coverage of the Chokas controversy.

An independent probe undertaken by an outside attorney or investigator would involve seeking out and interviewing students, teachers, coaches and administrators to determine if they filed complaints and how they were handled, which is something OCA is not doing. An independent probe also would review school system records, including personnel and other files, where complaints of misconduct and discipline are kept.

In contrast, OCA is reviewing the schools policies and procedures and talking to schools officials to see if those were followed, and developing a set of recommendations, if needed. OCA also has access to DCF records and will determine if reports were field with the agency.

Since the reviews would be different, Morrison asked, "What are we waiting for?”

Sarah Eagan, who heads OCA, said Thursday an independent investigation that included interviews with students, teachers, coaches and others is “worthy certainly, depending on what the concerns of the board are, and go beyond what we are able to do at this time given our dedicated resources.”

“We are focused on the catalyst for the investigation, and the infrastructure in place to support abuse prevention and best practice regarding mandated reporting within the district," she said. "We have been wrapping up discussions with stakeholders statewide regarding abuse prevention, best practices, and general recommendations, and will be meeting soon with various officials in Stonington to discuss next steps. I can say that Stonington has reached out regularly to this office and has been very cooperative with our review.”

Other school board members respond to call for investigation

Asked if they supported an independent investigation, board Chairwoman Garvey and board member Candace Anderson released the same statement. They said that at a special meeting on Aug. 21, the board “confirmed” that the Office of the Child Advocate meets the criteria of an independent investigation.

Garvey and Anderson did not respond to a question about what the criteria for an independent investigation is and who established that criteria.

“Under state statute the OCA has the jurisdiction to review policies, procedures and practices regarding mandatory reporting of suspected child abuse and neglect. One of the duties of the OCA is to investigate complaints. A written response and action plan are carried out after the investigation. If there are further questions once we receive the conclusions of the Office of Child Advocate’s report, we as a board will determine at that time the best course to obtain the answers to those questions,” Garvey and Anderson wrote.

Board member Farouk Rajab said the “Office of Child Advocate is an independent outside investigator. That said, I can understand everyone’s frustration with how long the process has been. I want to give OCA another month or so to give us their opinion. After we receive the results of their investigation and recommendation, we will be able to formulate next steps. I am not against a second independent organization if we continue to not get a response from OCA.”

Board member Craig Esposito said he “would prefer to have the state (OCA) report and a discussion with my fellow board members about the next step, before deciding anything. If the state report is not forthcoming in the next month or two, then the board, with advice from our attorney, will probably have to discuss next steps.”

Esposito said it is not clear to him at this point how the OCA report and an investigation would differ.

“I’m sure there is more than one path forward, each with differing costs, benefits and implications. There should be an informed board discussion before making a final decision," he said.

j.wojtas@theday.com