School Board Set to Honor and Investigate Foster on the Same Night

School Board Set to Honor and Investigate Foster on the Same Night

Mario Koran

Voice of San Diego

September 26, 2015

On the same night members of the San Diego Unified school board will discuss an independent investigation into possible wrongdoing by board president Marne Foster, board members will double down on their support for Foster by honoring her with a proclamation...

Comment by Dennis:

 

...Despite the shady shenanigans at SCPA, has Marne Foster been a good board member for her area? If so, maybe she deserves a slight break here?

Maura Larkins' comment to Dennis--and to Richard Barrera, who "will ask the board to consider which issues are truly relevant to the school district":

 School officials who get rid of good employees for political reasons are seriously undermining the welfare of students. Schools need officials who keep their personal agendas out of their decision-making process.

In my opinion, SDUSD is no worse than other school districts. 

I'm asking myself why is it that "shady shenanigans" seem to be rarely investigated when the perpetrators are white. 

Officials have been allowed to resign suddenly in other county school districts with no reasonable explanation being given, yet officials of color seem to get investigated. My theory is that the discrepancy is NOT CAUSED BY RACISM, but rather by the fact that people of color don't have the political clout that allows them to accomplish their goals behind closed doors.

Internal investigator at San Diego Unified fired for refusing to cleanse a report about sexual assaults in boys bathroom

I have long argued that there is too much secrecy in schools. A new lawsuit (see NBC 7 article below) makes the same case.

The Michael Gurrieri lawsuit (see NBC 7 article below) against Cindy Marten, the superintendent of San Diego Unified School District, claims that Marten knew and approved of the firing of Gurrieri, an internal investigator who looked into a serious sexual molestation problem at an elementary school. The district wanted Gurrieri's report to be cleansed to cover-up the fact that the principal failed to act to protect children. Gurrieri refused to censor his report as the district demanded, and he was fired.

Marten has filed a Motion to Dismiss herself as a defendant in the case, claiming that Gurrieri has no proof that Marten was involved. I think Marten is a pretty good superintendent; it is the system itself that is bad. In my experience, almost all school districts simply do whatever they want to do, and then have their lawyers protect officials from responsibility. The question of Marten's involvement in personnel actions has been raised regarding the removal of another principal. Many believe that a principal was removed from her school in retaliation for failing to make sure that board member Marne Foster's son got a good college recommendation.

The District Deeds blog and Voice of San Diego have written about recently discovered emails showing that Marten was informed of Marne Foster's wishes.

The following is from the District Deeds blog:

"Regardless of the reason why she removed Lizarraga, the latest emails show that Marten was aware of Foster’s overreach at the school.”
-- Reporter Mario Koran – Voice of San Diego 

Koran has proven, through multiple emails and communication between Trustee Marne Foster and former Chief Student Services Officer Joe Fulcher that copied Supt. Cindy Marten, that BOTH FOSTER AND MARTEN VIOLATED SDUSD Board of Education Policy which states:

"The board will not give direction to any employee other than the superintendent and any other employee who may report directly to the board.”

There is INDISPUTABLE PROOF in the emails that Trustee Foster GAVE DIRECTION to Joe Fulcher …AND THAT CINDY MARTEN IMPROPERLY MADE IT HAPPEN!!! 

Here is a story about the Gurrieri case:

San Diego Unified Lawsuit Moves Forward
Rory Devine and R. Stickney
NBC 7
Aug. 13, 2015

See federal complaint here.

After the San Diego Unified School District paid $105,000 to settle a lawsuit alleging sexual assault in a boy's bathroom, a new suit has been filed relating to the case.

 

A former employee who alleged a "cover up" of student-on-student sexual misconduct at SD Unified will soon be heading to settlement talks with the district.

A September 24 date has been set for settlement negotiations in the suit brought by former school district investigator Michael Gurrieri. He was hired by SDUSD in March 2014 as a probationary internal investigator.

Gurrieri claims he uncovered a problem of student-on-student sexual assaults within the district as he was looking into an allegation at Green Elementary School in San Carlos.

In May 2013, parents of a kindergartener said their son was sexually assaulted by another kindergarten student in the boy's bathroom at Green Elementary. The parents were awarded $105,000 to settle a lawsuit in the case, and the district did not admit guilt.

When Gurrieri filed his report, he claims he was told to remove allegations of incidents of abuse in the school that the principal was aware of and didn't do anything about, according to his attorney.

Gurrieri was terminated from his job because he objected to the district's “cover- up,” his attorney claims.

The lawsuit originally named Superintendent Cindy Marten, Executive Director of the Quality Assurance Office Carmina Duran and the district's General Counsel Andra Donovan as defendants because the district cannot be sued in federal court under the claims of First Amendment violations.

A judge is considering a motion to remove Marten and Donovan that claims Gurrieri failed to prove he had a conversation with either Marten or Donovan regarding his report.

However, Gurrieri's attorneys say the judge has yet to make a final decision on whether Marten and Donovan will be defendants.

Duran did instruct Gurrieri to focus his report on one student's allegations, court documents show.

The district ended Gurrieri's employment in October 2014, court documents show. The district has said it will not comment on pending litigation.

No lateral moves allowed between health systems: an illegal conspiracy in North Carolina--or the future of medicine that UCSD is aggressively seeking in California?

Is this the future in California if UCSD wins its poaching lawsuit against Dr. Paul Aisen regarding Aisen's decision to transfer his Alzheimer's study to USC? Is it unlawful restraint of trade? Science magazine reports on what happens when health systems collude to stop their employees from moving to other institutions.

“[L]ateral moves of faculty between Duke and UNC are not permitted.”
–UNC's chief of cardiothoracic imaging

An academic 'poaching' lawsuit from a scientist who didn’t move
By Beryl Lieff Benderly
Science
September 10, 2015

In August, we reported on the lawsuit brought by the University of California, San Diego (UCSD), against the University of Southern California (USC) in Los Angeles, in an effort to stop USC’s alleged attempt to bring a multimillion-dollar Alzheimer’s disease research project along with its new recruit, neuroscientist Paul Aisen, from UCSD to USC. We noted that though some observers view universities’ efforts to bring major researchers to their campuses from elsewhere as effective recruiting, others see it as harmful poaching.

In North Carolina, meanwhile, another scientist’s effort to move from Duke University in Durham to the University of North Carolina (UNC), Chapel Hill, has also resulted in a lawsuit, but for an entirely different reason. Danielle Seaman, an assistant professor of radiology at Duke, claims that “an illegal conspiracy” among Duke, UNC, and the two universities’ health systems not to raid each other’s talent barred her from consideration for an advertised opening at UNC, according to the complaint filed with the court.

Allegedly, the institutions’ goal was to “suppress the compensation of their employees,” according to the complaint. “Without the knowledge or consent of their employees, [Duke’s] senior administrators and deans entered into express agreements [with UNC] to eliminate or reduce competition … for skilled medical labor” by not “hir[ing] or attempt[ing] to hire” from each other. This deal, the complaint argues, constitutes an unlawful restraint of trade.

When UNC advertised a position in cardiothoracic imaging, the complaint claims, Seaman wrote to the division chief to express interest in applying. As quoted in the complaint, he wrote back saying “I agree that you would be a great fit. … Unfortunately, I just received confirmation today from the Dean’s office that lateral moves of faculty between Duke and UNC are not permitted. There is reasoning for this ‘guideline’ which was agreed upon between the deans of UNC and Duke a few years back. I hope you understand.” (Emphasis is in the original.) Seaman did not understand, so she wrote back to ask about this “reasoning.” The guideline arose, the division chief allegedly replied, “in response to an attempted recruitment by Duke a couple of years ago of the entire UNC bone marrow transplant team; UNC had to generate a large retention package to keep the team intact.” (Emphasis is in the original.)

The universities have not commented on the case, according to The Chronicle of Higher Education. Still, The Chronicle quotes a former senior vice president for public affairs and government relations at Duke as saying, “[i]n my time in the administration, there was a general practice that we did not recruit aggressively at the other institution, and vice versa. … It was based on thinking both institutions were better if each institution was strong.”

Seaman is represented by a North Carolina law firm and also by Lieff, Cabraser, Heimann & Bernstein (no relation to this reporter), the San Francisco-based legal powerhouse that won a $415 million settlement against tech giants Google, Apple, Intel, and Adobe for colluding to keep wages down by not hiring each other’s workers. Seaman’s complaint requests a jury trial and approval of the case as a class action “on behalf of a class of similarly situated individuals,” presumably the employees of Duke and UNC. Stay tuned for developments.

Beryl Lieff Benderly writes from Washington, D.C.

How did a bunch of complete idiots end up accidentally running a school?

Update Sept. 19, 2015:

"They didn't think he had a bomb."

by BSSanders

Daily Kos
Sep 17, 2015

Great Post Sent to Me Today
I said: it's sad they thought that kid had a bomb.
She said: they didn't think he had a bomb.
I said: yes, they thought he made a bomb and even called the police.
She said: They just wanted to humiliate a little Muslim boy. They didn't think he had a bomb.
I said: Don't be a conspiracy theorist. They might be a little prejudiced, but I'm sure they thought he had a bomb.
She said: OK.
But they didn't evacuate the school, like you do when there's a bomb.
They didn't call a bomb squad - like you do when there's a bomb.
They didn't get as far away from him as possible, like you do when there's a bomb.
Then they put him and the clock in an office: not like you do when there's a bomb
Then they waited with him for the police to arrive, and then they put the clock in the same car as the police. 
Then they took pictures of it.
I said: Damn.....They never thought he had a bomb.



Boy arrested at school for building a digital lock

"How did a bunch of complete idiots end up accidentally running a school? Were you all yanked out of a zoo and given paychecks? Learning centers are for teaching...not for ruining innocent people's lives with your racism and pathetic stupidity!..."This kid is destined to be something great if the dimwits of Irving don't ruin him first."

--Kevin McKinney

Is there something wrong with teacher culture? 
by Maura Larkins

My explanation for the disgraceful incident in Irving, Texas where a boy was arrested for building a clock is that adults in schools so rarely engage in critical thinking. A teacher who engages in critical thinking will most likely be unpopular. There isn't a place for such teachers in the powerful cliques that run schools. I have long wondered why teachers are expected to teach critical thinking to kids when so many of them seem to be incapable of it.

Also, a culture of hostility and contempt toward students is cultivated by many teachers who are zealous in their efforts to catch students being bad--and then to run to the teachers lounge to denounce the children they are paid to nurture.

This culture creates a tendency toward paranoia among teachers and administrators.

Update Sep. 17, 2015:

...Ahmed spoke about his arrest today on ABC News' "Good Morning America," describing how his English teacher and police reacted to his clock, which is still in police custody.

"She saw a clock that, in her opinion, looked like a threat to her," Ahmed said of the unnamed teacher. "It felt really weird getting arrested because I never thought I'd ever get arrested.... 

--ABC News 

Original story:

 Muslim teen creates clock, shows teachers, gets arrested

By Ashley Fantz and AnneClaire Stapleton 

 September 16, 2015

(CNN) 

When Ahmed Mohamed went to his high school in Irving, Texas, Monday, he was so excited. A teenager with dreams of becoming an engineer, he wanted to show his teacher the digital clock he'd made from a pencil case.

The 14-year-old's day ended not with praise, but punishment, after the school called police and he was arrested. A photo shows Ahmed, wearing a NASA t-shirt, looking confused and upset as he's being led out of school in handcuffs.

"They arrested me and they told me that I committed the crime of a hoax bomb, a fake bomb," the freshman later explained to WFAA after authorities released him..

No lateral moves allowed between health systems: an illegal conspiracy in North Carolina--or the future of medicine that UCSD is aggressively seeking in California?

Is this the future in California if UCSD wins its poaching lawsuit against Dr. Paul Aisen regarding Aisen's decision to transfer his Alzheimer's study to USC? Is it unlawful restraint of trade? Science magazine reports on what happens when health systems collude to stop their employees from moving to other institutions.

“[L]ateral moves of faculty between Duke and UNC are not permitted.”
–UNC's chief of cardiothoracic imaging

An academic 'poaching' lawsuit from a scientist who didn’t move
By Beryl Lieff Benderly
Science
September 10, 2015

In August, we reported on the lawsuit brought by the University of California, San Diego (UCSD), against the University of Southern California (USC) in Los Angeles, in an effort to stop USC’s alleged attempt to bring a multimillion-dollar Alzheimer’s disease research project along with its new recruit, neuroscientist Paul Aisen, from UCSD to USC. We noted that though some observers view universities’ efforts to bring major researchers to their campuses from elsewhere as effective recruiting, others see it as harmful poaching.

In North Carolina, meanwhile, another scientist’s effort to move from Duke University in Durham to the University of North Carolina (UNC), Chapel Hill, has also resulted in a lawsuit, but for an entirely different reason. Danielle Seaman, an assistant professor of radiology at Duke, claims that “an illegal conspiracy” among Duke, UNC, and the two universities’ health systems not to raid each other’s talent barred her from consideration for an advertised opening at UNC, according to the complaint filed with the court.

Allegedly, the institutions’ goal was to “suppress the compensation of their employees,” according to the complaint. “Without the knowledge or consent of their employees, [Duke’s] senior administrators and deans entered into express agreements [with UNC] to eliminate or reduce competition … for skilled medical labor” by not “hir[ing] or attempt[ing] to hire” from each other. This deal, the complaint argues, constitutes an unlawful restraint of trade.

When UNC advertised a position in cardiothoracic imaging, the complaint claims, Seaman wrote to the division chief to express interest in applying. As quoted in the complaint, he wrote back saying “I agree that you would be a great fit. … Unfortunately, I just received confirmation today from the Dean’s office that lateral moves of faculty between Duke and UNC are not permitted. There is reasoning for this ‘guideline’ which was agreed upon between the deans of UNC and Duke a few years back. I hope you understand.” (Emphasis is in the original.) Seaman did not understand, so she wrote back to ask about this “reasoning.” The guideline arose, the division chief allegedly replied, “in response to an attempted recruitment by Duke a couple of years ago of the entire UNC bone marrow transplant team; UNC had to generate a large retention package to keep the team intact.” (Emphasis is in the original.)

The universities have not commented on the case, according to The Chronicle of Higher Education. Still, The Chronicle quotes a former senior vice president for public affairs and government relations at Duke as saying, “[i]n my time in the administration, there was a general practice that we did not recruit aggressively at the other institution, and vice versa. … It was based on thinking both institutions were better if each institution was strong.”

Seaman is represented by a North Carolina law firm and also by Lieff, Cabraser, Heimann & Bernstein (no relation to this reporter), the San Francisco-based legal powerhouse that won a $415 million settlement against tech giants Google, Apple, Intel, and Adobe for colluding to keep wages down by not hiring each other’s workers. Seaman’s complaint requests a jury trial and approval of the case as a class action “on behalf of a class of similarly situated individuals,” presumably the employees of Duke and UNC. Stay tuned for developments.

Beryl Lieff Benderly writes from Washington, D.C.

'What the hell are we doing?'

'What the hell are we doing?'
by Scott Lewis
Voice of San Diego
Sept. 2, 2015

That's what Assemblywoman Shirley Weber asked in April in an impassioned speech in Sacramento as she faced the fact that her bill to create meaningful teacher evaluations was pushed aside.

We're at an important moment in local education. Some schools are failing their neighborhoods. How do we recruit, retain, evaluate and support great teachers for all students?

"If we are not about the business of improving the lives of children, in multiple ways, then what the hell are we doing?" Weber asked.

We can't assume that some are lost because of their circumstances.

"If children are defined by their current circumstances of poverty, and we don't think we can change the trajectory of their lives by great teaching, then what are we doing? It impacted my life. I'm a kid raised in the projects of Los Angeles, the Pueblos, some of the poorest communities of Los Angeles. But I had great teachers. I value teachers. ... I know what the power of good teaching does," Weber said.

If you care about schools and teachers, you will want to hear Shirley Weber talk to me about them.

Listen to her story and the conversation it provokes. You can email questions to me now at scott.lewis@voiceofsandiego.org or by replying to this email.

You're not going to want to miss this conversation. Tickets are free. RSVP now.

One Voice at a Time with Shirley Weber

Tuesday, September 15
7:00 - 9:00 PM
Creative, Performing and Media Arts School
5050 Conrad Avenue | San Diego, CA 92117

Click here now to reserve your free ticket.

Doors open at 6:00 p.m. Modern Mexican cuisine from Salt + Lime food truck will be available for purchase beginning at 6:00 p.m.