. BEFORE THE TEACHER STANDARDS AND PRACTICES COMMISSION
OF THE STATE OF OREGON
In the Matter of the Teaching License of: ) FINAL ORDER
)
GLENNA MARIE ZARNEKEE ) Ofﬁce of Administrative
) Hearings Case No. 119059

On March 30, 2005, Administrative Law Judge Peter A. Rader issued a Proposed
Order in this case.

On April 15, 2005, the Commission received from Ms. Zamekee her wn'tten
exceptions to the proposed order. The Commission has fully considered the written
exceptions and is now fully advised.

Now, therefore, the Teacher Standards and Practices Commission adopts the
Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and sanction contained in the attached Proposed
Order.

ORDER

The Commission adopts the Proposed Order and denies Glenna Marie Zamekee’s
application for reinstatement of her Oregon teaching license.

Dated this QA mday of April 2005.

TEACHER STANDARDS AND PRACTICES COMMISSION
, I’
Byr. W
Victoria Chamber ' ecutive Director

NOTICE: If you are dissatisﬁed with this Order you may not appeal it until you
have asked the agency to rehear the case or to reconsider the Order. To obtain agency
rehearing or reconsideration you must ﬁle a petition for rehearing or reconsideration
pursuant to OAR 584-019-0045 within 60 days from the day this Order was served on

' you. If this Order was personally delivered t0 you, the date of service is the day you
Page 1 — FINAL ORDER-Glenna Marie Zamekee

received the Order, If this Order was mailed to you, the date of service was the day it

' was mailed, not the day you received it. If you do not ﬁle a petition for rehearing or
reconsideration within the time limits provided, you will lose your opportunity for
rehearing or reconsideration and you will lose your right to appeal to the Oregon Court of
Appeals.

If, aﬁer you have ﬁled a petition for rehearing or reconsideration, the agency
issues an Order that you are dissatisﬁed with, you have a right t0 appeal that Order to the
Oregon Court of Appeals pursuant to ORS 183.482.

If, 60 days aﬂer you have ﬁled a petition for rehearing or reconsideration, the
agency has not issued an Order, your petition will be considered denied and at that time
you will have the right to appeal the original Order to the Oregon Court of Appeals
pursuant to ORS 183.480 and ORS 183.482. To appeal you must ﬁle a petition for
judicial review with the Court of Appeals within 60 days from the day that your petition
for rehearing or reconsideration is deemed denied. If you do not ﬁle a petition for
judicial review within the 60-day time period, you will lose your right to appeal.

Page 2 — FINAL ORDER—Glenna Marie Zamekee

BEFORE THE OFFICE 0F ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS
. STATE OF OREGON
for the
TEACHER STANDARDS AND PRACTICES COMMISSION .1
IN THE MATTER OF THE TEACHING ) PROPOSED ORDER E
LICENSE or ) i
)OAH No. 119059
GLENNA MARIE ZARNEKEE )
HISTORY OF THE CASE
On October 12, 2004, the Teacher Standards and Practices Commission (TSPC) served
Glenna Marie Zamekee (Ms. Zarnekee), with a Notice of Denial of Reinstatement of Revoked g
License and Opportunity for Hearing and Notice of Contested Case Rights and Procedures. §
TSPC alleges that Ms. Zarnekee failed to respond appropriately to character questions and to §
furnish documents regarding the reinstatement of her Oregon teaching license. Ms. Zamekee i
timely requested a hearing on October 27, 2004.
On December 7, 2004, TSPC referred the matter to the Otﬁce of Administrative Hearings
’ (OAH), for a contested case hearing. 0n January 14, 2005, the OAH served a Notice of Hearing I
and assigned the case to Administrative Law Judge (ALI) Peter A. Rader. ~
The hearing was held in Salem, Oregon on March 7, 2005. Ms. Zamekee appeared .
without counsel and testiﬁed on her own behalf. She waived her right to a private hearing ;
pursuant to Oregon Revised Statutes (ORS) 342.1770). TSPC was represented by Assistant
Attorney General Joe Gordon McKeever, who called TSPC Investigator Susan Nisbet as a
Witness.
ISSUES ' ‘
l. Whether Ms. Zamekee violated OAR 584-020-0040(4)(c) by allegedly failing to p
respond appropriately to character questions on her application for reinstatement of her Oregon Q
teaching license. i
2. Whether Ms. Zarnekee violated OAR 584-020-0040(4)(p) by allegedly failing to
respond to the TSPC’s requests for information and records regarding her application for l
reinstatement of her Oregon teaching license. '
EVIDENTIARY RULING
Exhibits A-I through A-25 were offered by the TSPC at hearing and admitted into the
record without objection. Exhibits R-l through R-4 were offered by Ms. Zamekee at hearing
In the Matter of Glenna M Zarnekee, OAH Case No. 119059 '
Page l of 10 ;

and admitted into the record without objection. The hearing concluded and the record closed on g
March 7, 2005. ‘
FINDINGS OF FACT 1
l. The Teacher Standards and Practices Commission (TSPC) is a State agency with i
jurisdiction over licensing and discipline matters involving teachers and school administrators in f
Oregon. (ORS chapter 342.175 — 190, OAR chapter 584, division 20, test. of S. Nisbet).
2. Ms. Zamekee obtained her Oregon teaching license in 1979, but TSPC revoked it on
May 23, 1995, because she knowingly falsiﬁed documents and made misrepresentations relating f
to her professional competence, experience and qualiﬁcations. (Exs. A-2 and A-12, and test. of S.
Nisbet). At the time, Ms. Zamekee was battling cancer, and when she did not request a hearing,
TSPC entered a Final Order by Default revoking her teaching license, which was sent to her ‘
address of record in Portland. (Ex. A-2, test. of S. Nisbet and G. Zamekee).
i
3. On July ll, 1995, Ms. Zamekee wrote to David Myton, who was then TSPC’s i
Executive Director, inquiring about a summary of a December 31, 1994 meeting with him and j
asking for veriﬁcation that her license was revoked. (Ex. A-25, test. of G. Zamekee).
- 4. On July 26, 1995, Ms. Zamekee’s attorney wrote to TSPC stating that he would not be
representing her on a Petition for Judicial Review, but that he had prepared a form petition for her f
' should she decide to proceed on a pro per basis. (Ex. A-3).
5. Ms. Zamekee holds valid teaching licenses in Texas and Washington and has been
continuously employed as a substitute teacher in Vancouver, Washington’s Evergreen School
Disuict #114 since 1999. (Ex. R-4, test. of G. Zamekee). She also works part time as a property
manager. (Test. of G. Zarnekee).
6. On April 18, 2000, Ms. Zamekee contacted TSPC regarding reinstatement of her
Oregon teaching license. (Ex. A-4). On April 21, 2000, TSPC provided her with a checklist of
documents required for the application, which included taking nine (9) hours of required
coursework. (Ex. R-l at l — 4, test. of G. Zarnekee). On May 26, 2000, her application was
rejected as being incomplete because She had not provided proof of the completed coursework,
which Ms. Zamekee attributed to ﬁnancial hardship. (Exs. A- 10 at 9, R-l at 4, test. of G.
Zarnekee). i
7. On November 15, 2001, a complaint was ﬁled against Ms. Zamekee with Oregon’s >
Construction Contractors Board (CCB), arising out of work on a residential remodeling contract.
(Ex. A-5). CCB found other complaints related to her work as a property manager. (Exs. A- 7,
A-8). The latest CCB complaint resulted in an uncontested Final Order, dated December 14,
2001, imposing a $5,000 civil penalty against her for operating as an unlicensed contractor in
violation of ORS 701 055(1). (Ex. A-8).
In the Matter of Glenna M. Zarnekee, OAH Case No. 119059
Page 2 of 10 ‘

8. When Ms. Zarnekee did not pay the civil penalty, CCB’s Final Order was recorded as
a judgment with Multnomah County Clerk’s Ofﬁee on March 22, 2002. The judgment was
released by CCB on July 15, 2002, due to defective service. (Exs. A-S, A-9).
9. On September 9, 2002, Ms. Zarnekee met with TSPC Investigator Susan Nisbet at
TSPC’s ofﬁces in Salem. She claimed to be unaware of her 1995 license revocation, but was
advised of the preliminary requirements for reinstatement. (Ex. 10 at l8, test. of G. Zarnekee and t
S. Nisbet). ' ;
10. On February 19, 2003, TSPC’s Executive Director advised Ms. Zarnekee in writing E
that her application was to be supported by a personal affidavit and additional documentation i
sufﬁcient to establish that she possessed all of the qualiﬁcations required for licensure. (Ex. A-
1 1). l
11. Ms. Zarnekee ﬁled an Application for Educator License Form C-l with TSPC on I;
March 26, 2003. (Ex. A-12). Question no. 8 on the application asks whether an applicant has
ever been convicted or granted conditional discharge by any court for a misdemeanor, to which
Ms. Zarnekee answered in the negative. (Ex. A—12 at 4). Question no. 9 on the application asks i
whether an applicant has ever been arrested or cited for any offense listed in question 8, to which
Ms. Zarnekee answered in the negative. (Ex. A-12 at 4).
12. On May 9, 2003, as part of its routine background check, TSPC accessed the
‘ National Judicial Information Network (NJIN), a database that revealed an arrest warrant ma i
been issued for Ms. Zarnekee on August 1, 2002, for the Class C misdemeanor charge of l
operating as an unlicensed contractor. (Ex. A-23 and A-24, and test. of S. Nisbet).
l3. On May 12, 2003, Ms. Nisbet wrote to Ms. Zarnekee requesting information 1
concerning the charge and that she arrange to have Evergreen School District send a copy of her .
personnel ﬁle directly to TSPC. (Ex. A—14, test. of S. Nisbet). The purpose in requesting a
personnel ﬁle is to verify whether there have been breaks in a teacher’s work history, the rate of ,
pay, the number of days worked and whether a teacher is ineligible to teach at certain schools. 5
(Test. of S. Nisbet). . j
14. Ms. Zarnekee leﬂ recorded telephone messages for Ms. Nisbet on May l9 and 20, j
2003, stating that she knew nothing about an arrest warrant. (Exs. A-l 5, A-16 and A-l7). She '
did not arrange for Evergreen School District to send her personnel ﬁle directly to TSPC. (Test.
of S. Nisbet and G. Zarnekee). .
15. Ms. Zamekee was found not guilty of the misdemeanor charge on November 12, ‘
2003, following a hearing. (Exs. A-23 at 3, test. of G. Zarnekee).
16. On May 25, 2004, Ms. Zarnekee’s attorney wrote to her stating that he was providing
a copy of an Order Setting Aside Arrest Record and advising her that the records in that case were
sealed and that she had the legal right to deny ever being arrested in that case; however, that
Order is not part of this record. (Exs. A-20, A-2l at 3, test. of G. Zarnekee).
In the Matter of Glenna M. Zarnekee, OAH Case No. H9059 i
Page 3 of 10

l7. On February 12 and July 19, 2004, Ms. Nisbet wrote to Ms. Zarnekee requesting
additional information about the misdemeanor charge and requesting that she arrange to have
Evergreen School District send a copy of her personnel ﬁle directly to TSPC. (Exs. A-l9, A- 22, 1
test. of Si Nisbet)_
18. Ms. Zarnekee submitted an unsworn affidavit to TSPC, dated June 21, 2004, along
with ﬁngerprints, various letters of recommendation dating back to 1977, employment -
veriﬁcation forms from Evergreen School District, course completion records, and letters from ;
students and colleagues reﬂecting favorably on her teachings abilities and activities. (Exs. A-13,
A-21, R-2, R-3 and R-4, test. of G. Zarnekee). 5
l9. Ms. Zarnekee declined to sign a release allowing Evergreen School District to send
her personnel ﬁle directly to TSPC. (Test. of G. Zarnekee). g
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
1. Ms. Zarnekee did not violate OAR 584-0200040(4)(c) by failing to respond Q
appropriately to character questions on her application for reinstatement of her Oregon teaching
license. j
2. Ms. Zarnekee violated OAR S84-020-0040(4)(p) by failing to provide information and l
records requested by TSPC regarding her application for reinstatement of her Oregon teaching
. license. 3
OPINION ‘
The issues in this case are whether Ms. Zarnekee knowingly falsiﬁed her application, in
violation of OAR S84-020-0040(4)(c), by failing to disclose information relating to the 1
misdemeanor charge of operating as an unlicensed contractor, and whether she violated OAR q
584-020-0040(4)(p) by failing to provide personnel records requested by TSPC as part of its I
investigation into her ﬁtness for licensure. ' v
The burden of presenting evidence to support a fact or position in a contested case rests
on the proponent of the fact or position. ORS 183.450(2). Ms‘ Zarnekee has the burden of z
proving her ﬁtness to hold an Oregon teaching license, but once her application is denied, the ‘
TSPC has the burden of proving by a preponderance of evidence that its denial was justiﬁed. \
t wguero v. Teacher Standards and Practices Commission, 312 Or 418 (1991). The standard in =
minisnative hearings is preponderance of the evidence. Cook v. Employment Division, 47 Or
App 437 (1980). Proof by a preponderance of the evidence means that the fact ﬁnder is ,
convinced that the facts asserted are more likely true than false. Riley Hill General Contractor
v. Tandy Corp, 303 Or 390 (1987).
TSPC’s authority to require an applicant for a teaching license to furnish satisfactory v
evidence of good moral character and physical and mental health is found in ORS 342.143,
which states in relevant part:
In the Matter of Glenna M. Zarnekee, OAH Case No. 119059
Page 4 of 10

4‘ ll‘ * * >8
(2) The Teacher Standards and Practices Commission may also require an applicant for a
teaching, personnel service or administrative license to furnish evidence satisfactory ;
to the commission of good moral character, mental and physical health, and such f
other evidence as it may deem necessary to establish the applieant’s ﬁtness to serve as _
a teacher.
TSPC adopted Standards for Competent and Ethical Performance of Oregon Educators,
as codiﬁed in OAR chapter 584, division 20, to determine whether a teaching license shorﬂd be
denied, suspended or revoked. TSPC’s Executive Director may deny licensure to an applicant if
there is evidence that the applicant lacks ﬁtness to serve as an educator. OAR 584-020-0040(3)l.
Among the grounds for denying licensure is gross neglect of duty as deﬁned in OAR 584-020- .
0040(4): I
(4) Gross neglect of duty is any serious and material inattention to or breach of
professional responsibilities. The following may be admissible as evidence of gross .1’
neglect of duty, Consideration may include but is not limited to:
=l= * 1F * *
(c) Knowing falsiﬁcation of any document or knowing misrepresentation directly related
. to licensure, employment, or professional duties; i
It 4t >1‘ 4‘ Ill I
(p) Subject to the exercise of any legal right or privilege, failure or refusal by an educator
under investigation to respond to requests for information, to furnish documents or to j
participate in interviews with a Commission representative relating to a Commission
investigation. 1
Application for Reinstatement 1
Ms. Zarnekee was found not guilty of the misdemeanor charge of operating as an
unlicensed contractor following a hearing in November 2003. The issue here is whether she ‘
knowingly falsiﬁed or misrepresented information concerning the misdemeanor charge on her
reinstatement application of March 26, 2003. .
' OAR 58402000408) states in part: .
The Commission may initiate proceedings to suspend or revoke the license or registration of an
educator under ORS 342.175 or deny a license or registration an applicant under ORS 342.143
who: .
$ I‘ * * * .
(c) is charged with gross neglect of duty;
In the Matter of Glenna M. Zarnekee, OAH Case No. 119059
Page 5 0f10 1

There is circumstantial evidence to suggest that Ms. Zarnekee was aware of the charge 5
ﬁled against her when she applied for reinstatement but, inasmuch as the court records in that
case are sealed, there is no way to conclusively verify that information. The NJIN printout
indicates that an arrest warrant was issued on August l, 2002, and her attorney’s letter of May
24, 2004 refers to an Order Setting Aside Arrest Record, but TSPC did not meet its burden of i
proving that Ms. Zarnekee was aware of the misdemeanor charge on March 26, 2003; the date
she applied for reinstatement of her teaching license. Accordingly, there is insufficient evidence
to ﬁnd that she knowingly falsiﬁed or misrepresented information on her application in violation
of OAR 584-020-0040(4)(c).
Reguest for Information and Documents

On three occasions, TSPC requested in writing that Ms. Zarnekee arrange to have her
current employer, Evergreen School District, send her personnel ﬁle directly to its offices. The _l
issue here is whether Ms. Zarnekee violated OAR 584-020-0040(p) by failing to make those l
arrangements or otherwise allowing TSPC unﬁltered access to her personnel ﬁle.

In the course of investigating applicants who seek reinstatement of their revoked teaching
license, TSPC is empowered to request supporting documents to fully evaluate an applicant’s ;
moral character and ﬁtness for teaching. ORS 342.1761. The purpose in requesting a teacher’s g
personnel ﬁle is to determine such things as whether there have been breaks in work history, the i
rate of pay, the number of days worked and whether a teacher has been removed from a district’s i

. eligibility list. This information is legitimately related to the determination of a teacher’s moral
character and ﬁtness to teach and is not unreasonably intrusive. §

Ms. Zarnekee argues that she provided a great many documents in support of her -
application, including favorable letters of reference and thanks from former colleagues and
students, veriﬁcation of her employment with the Evergreen School District and records of I;
completed courses. She claims that as a substitute teacher, the school district does not evaluate _
her performance and that her personnel ﬁle contains no additional information regarding her ‘
teaching ability. She also contends that if personnel records are supplied, she must copy and 1
provide them herself because the school district lacks the staff to do so. She denies being placed i

on any ineligibility lists in the Evergreen School District and argues that she has reasonably
complied with all records requests.

Ms. Zarnekee’s representation that she provided all records from her Evergreen School
District personnel ﬁle to TSPC is not supported by the evidence. At hearing, she produced for .
the ﬁrst time a district-generated computer printout of all hours worked there since 1999. Many -
of the letters she provided predate her current employment and are not reﬂective of her most I
2 ORS 342.176 (2) provides:

The Commission may appoint an investigator and shall furnish the investigator with appropriate
professional and other special assistance reasonably required to conduct the investigation, and the
investigator is empowered to subpoena witnesses over the signature of the executive director, swear
witnesses and compel obedience in the same manner as provided under ORS 183.4490).
In the Matter of Glenna M. anekee, OAH Case No. 119059 1
Page 6 of 10

recent assignments. Moreover, her refusal to sign a release allowing the school district to send
her ﬁle to TSPC makes it somewhat problematic to verify her representations that the district
does not evaluate substitute teachers, that it does not provide copies of personnel ﬁles and that
she has never been placed on any ineligibility list. ‘-
Ms. Zarnekee is obviously an intelligent person, but when she contacted TSPC about her
reinstatement she claimed ignorance of her 1995 license revocation for falsifying documents, 1}
even though she had consulted an attorney and TSPC’s Executive Director about the matter at 5
the time. She also denied knowledge of the charge of operating as an unlicensed contractor, even
though she had legal representation and was found not guilty following a hearing in November
2003. These additional factors, as well as the grounds for her 1995 license revocation, make
TSPC’s request to have the Evergreen School District send her personnel ﬁle directly to its ;_
ofﬁces reasonable and directly related to the issue of competency and her qualiﬁcations to teach. t
Based on the foregoing, there is sufﬁcient evidence to conclude that Ms. Zarnekee
engaged in gross neglect of duty, as that term is deﬁned in OAR 584-020-0040, by failing to
furnish requested documents to TSPC in violation of OAR 584-020-0040(4)(p). i
ORDER L
I propose that the Teacher Standards and Practices Commission issue the following order:
. The application of Glenna Marie Zarnekee for an Oregon teaching license is denied.
t (.5! P215‘ 14 . g E éﬂ t
Peter A. Rader, Administrative Law Judge t
Office of Administrative Hearings i
MAILING AND ISSUE DATE: 2? M 30 1 Q a ,5 ‘
nxcrmons
The proposed order is the Administrative Law Judge’s recommendation to the Teacher
Standards and Practices Commission. If you disagree with any part of this proposed order, you _
may ﬁle written objections, called “exceptions,” to the proposed order and present written ‘
argument in support of your exceptions. Written argument and exceptions must be filed
within the fourteen (14) days after mailing of the proposed order with the: .
Teacher Standards and Practices Commission .
465 Commercial Street, NE
Salem, Oregon 97301
The Commission need not allow oral argument. The Executive Director may permit oral
argument in those cases in which the Director believes oral argument may be appropriate or
helpful to the Commissioners in making a ﬁnal determination. If oral argument is allowed, the
Commission will inform you of the time and place for presenting oral argument.
In the Matter of Glenna M Zarnekee, OAH Case No. 119059 _
Page 7 of 10

. .
APPENDIXA 1
LIST 0F EXHIBITS CITED 1
Ex. A-2 Final Order of Default revoking G. Zarnekee’s license dated May 23, 1995
Ex. A-3 Letter from Lorenz to Myton dated July 26, 1995 %
Ex. A-4 Letter from Myton to Zarnekee dated April 21, 2000 Z
Ex. A-5 CCB complaint form ﬁled against G. Zarnekee dated November 15, 2001
Ex. A-6 CCB investigative report dated November 23, 2001
Ex. A-7 CCB investigative report dated December 6, 2001 1
Ex. A-8 CCB Final Order dated December l4, 2001 5
Ex. A-9 Release of Judgment dated July 15, 2002 ‘
Ex. A-lO Transcript of TSPC interview with G. Zarnekee dated September 9, 2002
. Ex. A-Il Letter to G. Zarnekee ﬁom V. Chamberlain, ED of TSPC re: reinstatement
requirements dated February l9, 2003 1
Ex. A-12 G. Zarnekec’s Application for Educator License Form C-l dated March t
26, 2003
Ex. A-l3 Veriﬁcation of G. Zarnekee’s teachers license in Washington '
Ex. A-l4 Letter from S. Nisbet to G. Zarnekee dated May 12, 2003
Ex. A-lS Transcript of voice message from G. Zarnekee dated May l9, 2003 f
Ex. A-16 Transcript of voice message from G, Zarnekee dated May 20, 2003 i
Ex. A-l7 Transcript of voice message ﬁom G. Zarnekee dated July 3, 2003 ;
Ex. A-l9 Letter from S. Nisbet to G. Zarnekee dated February 12, 2004
Ex. A-20 Letter from P. Newton, Esq. to G. Zarnekee dated May 25, 2004 .
referencing an Order Setting Aside Arrest Record
Ex. A—21 Unswom affidavit from G. Zarnekee with exhibits regarding her character,
employment status and teaehing abilities
O
In the Matter of Glenna M. Zarnekee, OAH Case No. 119059
Page s of 10 ‘

Ex. A-22 Letter from S. Nisbet to G. Zarnekee dated July l9, 2004 i
Ex. A-23 NJIN printout dated December 1, 2003 i
Ex. A-24 NJ IN printout dated May 9, 2003 ‘
Ex. A-25 Letter from G1 Zarnekee to D. Myton dated July 11, 1995 §
Ex. R-l Correspondence and application from TSPC to G. Zarnekee dated April
21 , 2000 §
Ex. R-2 Letters of thanks from elementary grade students to G. Zarnekee a
EX. R-3 Data Directory dated January 10, 2000 regarding G. Zarnekee i
Ex. R-4 Computer print out of days worked by G. Zarnekee in Evergreen School ‘
District as a substitute teacher since 1999 5
In the Matter of Glenna M Zarnekee, OAH Case No. l 19059
Page 9 of l0

*"w
CERTIFICATE 0F SERVICE i
I certify that on March 30, 2005, I served the attached Proposed Order by mailing in a sealed
envelope, with ﬁrst class certiﬁed postage prepaid, a copy thereof addressed as follows: i
GLENNA MARIE ZARNEKEE ~ -‘
3022 NW 14TH ST
PORTLAND OR 97212 g
VICTORIA CHAMBERLAIN ‘
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR Z
TEACHERS STANDARDS AND PRACTICES ‘
465 COMMERCIAL ST NE ;
SALEM OR 97301
JOE GORDON McKEEVER
ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL i
DEPARTMENT 0F JUSTICE §
1162 COURT ST NE Q
SALEM OR 97301-4096 i
M," .
- Lucy Garcia, ministrative Specialist
Ofﬁce of Administrative Hearings ;
Transportation Hearings Division
In the Matter of Glenna M Zarnekee, OAl-I Case No. 119059
Page 10 of 10 .