There was no improper accounting of money. All money was appropriately accounted for,

Until the rule can be proven improper he should be bound to it.

None of this money was placed in water and sewer surplus, and it therefore had no impact on the fund balance.

It was improper to dismiss him for having consensual relationships with former students.

The whole premise of these committees is to appropriately place them? There are no geographic boundaries limiting the enrollment of non-public schools.

At least at that point they had no problem with the accounting.