Attorney: FCPS budget director warned of problems, was put on leave in retaliation

Ann Sampson-Grimes, budget director for Fayette County Public Schools, is accusing her superiors of ignoring her warnings about the cash-strapped district’s budget problems and then retaliating against her by placing her on administrative leave, her lawyer shared in a letter to district leaders Wednesday evening.

“Each time Ms. Grimes advised that budget cuts must be enforced, her peers and superiors pushed back on her suggestions, claimed she was incorrect, or flat-out ignored her sound and correct advice,” attorney Brandon Voelker said in a letter to FCPS Superintendent Demetrus Liggins and Tyler Murphy, chairman of the school board.

Voelker, who has offices in Covington, provided the letter to the Herald-Leader. He described her administrative leave as being “retaliatory and discriminatory.”

“The administrative leave stemmed from a long history of Ms. Grimes reporting waste within the Fayette County School District’s budget, her persistent advocacy for budget cuts, and her mere existence as a woman in the workplace,” Voelker said in the letter.

“Ms. Grimes consistently provided advice in good faith,” he said. “The placement of her on administrative leave in retaliation for her reports of possible waste or mismanagement, was ...prohibited under the Kentucky Whistleblower Act.”

Voelker demanded in the letter that Sampson-Grimes be taken off administrative leave and returned to her position as executive director of budget and financial planning.

Whispers of Sampson-Grimes employment status have circulated for several days. When the Herald-Leader asked FCPS officials on Aug. 25 about her employment status, district spokesperson Miranda Scully said, “FCPS does not comment on personnel matters.”

Throughout 2024 and 2025, Sampson-Grimes “consistently and frequently” advised district officials that budget cuts must be initiated to comply with the board policy of having 6% of the budget included in a contingency fund, Voelker’s letter said.

Her recommendations have not been made to the school board, “nor has proper disclosure” been shared, placing the board in a position of having inaccurate information, the letter said.

Voelker told the Herald-Leader Wednesday night that school board members should ask Sampson-Grimes to come and tell them “why they’re in the position they are.’’

He said Sampson-Grimes’ warnings to district officials dating back to February 2024, “basically just fell on deaf ears. “ “My client has a lot more extensive notes and guidelines that she’s more than happy to share with the board of education,” Voelker said. “These issues could have been discovered back in February of 2024.”

The district’s financial woes have dominated headlines throughout the summer. The five-member school board is holding a public meeting Thursday to discuss the balance fund for the $848 million budget for fiscal year 2026 that began July 1.

Earlier this month, Liggins revealed the district’s contingency for emergencies and unexpected costs was likely significantly smaller than originally expected. It was estimated to be about $42 million, but may be as low as $15 million to $22 million, he has said.

That fund, local business and community leaders have recommended, should be tapped to bridge the district’s estimated $16 million budget shortfall.

District officials said Wednesday they know what the fund balance is, but would not provide an amount.

As budget director, Sampson-Grimes was required to assist key administrators in review of the budget, assist in the execution of the enacted district budget, prepare analysis of district budget requests and program proposals.

She also was required to advise Liggins on budget-related policies, rules and regulations, the letter said.

Voelker’s six-page letter alleges:

On Feb. 13, 2024, Deputy Superintendent Houston Barber advised Sampson-Grimes the budget needed to be reduced by 5%. Actually, she replied, more than 5% was required. Barber did not accept Sampson-Grimes’ recommendation; nor did he adhere to his 5% direction.

Barber refused to allow reductions to the tentative budget, even though he had acknowledged the need for at least 5% in cuts.

Later that year, Barber advised the working budget would not include cuts because Liggins needed to get a new contract and school board elections were looming. Liggins contract was renewed in January of this year.

On July 1, 2024, Sampson-Grimes again informed Barber that reductions for the fiscal year 2025 were needed. That same month, Sampson-Grimes advised finance director Rodney Jackson and Barber the fund balance was going to be much lower and action needed to be taken.

Barber instructed Sampson-Grimes she was not to say that cashflow was going to be an issue, and she was directed not to speak of the issues, her lawyer outlined in the letter.

Sampson-Grimes also advised her superiors that if spending was not reduced, the district would fall below the board policy of 6% contingency, as well as the state required 2% contingency and that eventually could lead to FCPS falling under state management.

On July 31, 2024, Barber instructed Sampson-Grimes not to tell the public that cashflow was an issue for the district.

On Aug. 26, 2024, Sampson- Grimes again informed Barber that budget cuts of at least 10% or more must be made for fiscal year 2025 that ended June 30.

On April 23, 2025, Sampson-Grimes informed Barber and Jackson that expenditures were outperforming revenues, and federal funds may be decreasing.

On May 2, in a meeting between Barber, Jackson and Sampson-Grimes, she was effectively prevented from suggesting to the board that budget cuts may be a suitable method in order to effectuate the board’s desired 1% raise for teachers.

Instead, Barber and Jackson reported that the only way to achieve the 1% raises was through an increase of the occupational license tax.

On May 2, 2025, Sampson-Grimes reported to Barber and Jackson the district could not afford a 1% raise for teachers and an additional $3 million in cuts were needed.

“Ms. Grimes attempted to bring these matters before the board, but was silenced by Dr. Barber and Superintendent Liggins, who changed key parts of Ms. Grimes’ dialogue and presentation to omit any need of budget cuts,” Voelker’s letter said.

On May 27, Barber amended the fiscal year 2026 salary schedule to include the 1 % pay increase, which Sampson-Grimes repeatedly advised could not be afforded.

On June 6, Jackson received a new title of senior executive director without an interview as part of a reorganization. Neither Sampson-Grimes, nor any other female on staff, was informed about the creation of this new role nor provided an opportunity to interview, despite being well-qualified. Her lawyer accused the district of sexual and age discrimination related to Jackson’s promotion.

On Aug. 7, Sampson-Grimes and her team were supposed to meet with Liggins to discuss the fiscal year 2026 working budget, but the superintendent refused to meet with them.

On Aug. 15, Sampson-Grimes received a letter signed by Liggins, placing her on administrative leave with pay for a period of 20 workdays.

“The provided reason for placing Ms. Grimes on leave was alleged inappropriate conduct. However, this alleged misconduct, if any, was not further detailed or explained,” Voelker’s letter said.

“Furthermore, when Dr. Barber, Ms. Grimes’ then-superior, spoke to her about her administrative leave on Aug. 13, 2025, Dr. Barber reported that the reason for the administrative leave was ‘an issue of leadership and not an issue of [Ms. Grimes’] performance.’”

On Aug. 19, Liggins called Sampson-Grimes and said her administrative leave was not an issue of her performance.

Her lawyer’s letter to district officials said Sampson-Grimes is protesting her employment status and the way she was treated. She is making claims under Kentucky’s Whistleblower Act, discrimination and harassment claims and violations of her due process rights.

A lawsuit has not been filed.

Voelker’s letter said Sampson-Grimes had been “suspended to ensure her information is not presented to the Board.”

Voelker’s letter raised the question: If she did not have any performance issues, what is the reason for her administrative leave, when board policy requires a reason.

“The actions directed to Ms. Grimes are retaliatory and discriminatory in violation (of) applicable law and/or policy,” the letter said. “The actions against Ms. Grimes continue and she remains on ‘administrative leave,’ for no reason, other than to continue to ensure the Board is not properly advised of the financial situation of the District.”

Along with the leave, Sampson-Grimes has been directed not to speak at a board meeting or be on district property all in violation of her First Amendment rights.

“Based on the facts and applicable law, Ms. Grimes demands a full reinstatement of her previous position, with no further retaliatory and/or discriminatory practices directed towards my client,” the letter said.

This is a developing story.

This story was originally published August 27, 2025 at 10:19 PM.