Did she resign or was she terminated? It seems from the article that if she was terminated, she was due the $299K as severance. But if she resigned, why does she get the severance?

The school board absolutely needs to be more transparent to the community. And they have only made it more difficult to find another superintendent willing to work under these conditions.

From the article: "Many questioned the board’s assertion that the decision was a “mutual agreement,” alleging that the trustees had forced out the district’s first Black female superintendent. "

And according the contract the superintendent signed, with a clear mind and under no duress:

"and states explicitly that the resignation is “a voluntary act, and that there was no coercion by the district.”

Therefore and in summary, because the superintendent signed the contract, her resignation is a "voluntary act" per the contractual agreement she signed with her own hand. Can this be any clearer?

Nothing beats a contract where the truth gets buried. So much for accountability. Makes one wonder what else goes on outside of the public eye. Trustees? Really? Taxpayers beware.