Larry Anderson placed on administrative leave at Tri-City Medical Center

Click HERE for more on the story, and for video and the facts behind Anderson's pals at Becker's Hospital Review choice of Tri-City as a top 100 hospital. US News and World Report gave TRi-City Medical Center a very low score.


Tri-City Hospital puts CEO on leave
Hospital directors provided no reason for decision.
By Paul Sisson
SDUT
Sept. 5, 2013

OCEANSIDE — Hospital directors put Larry Anderson, Tri-City Medical Center’s chief executive officer, on paid administrative leave Wednesday night, according to board chair Larry Schallock.

Saying it was a personnel matter he could not discuss, Schallock declined to provide a reason for the decision.

“Larry Anderson is on paid administrative leave in relation to a personnel matter. Other than that, I have no comment,” Schallock said.

Anderson did not respond Thursday afternoon to a request for comment left on his personal cellphone. Shallock said Casey Fatch, the hospital’s chief operating officer, is serving as interim CEO.

Anderson joined Tri-City as interim CEO in late 2008, after the hospital board sidelined most of its executive team during a closed-session meeting. Most of the executives were eventually fired, though the investigation that led to that action was never made public.

Anderson has worked over the last four years to turn Tri-City’s finances around and had some success in previous years before running into financial difficulty this year. As of June, the hospital had posted a $11 million loss for the budget year that ended in July.

Though finances have sometimes been a challenge, the hospital has posted decent quality scores with Anderson at the helm. For example, the Leapfrog Group, a nonprofit that rates hospitals on a spectrum of safety measures, grades the facility a solid B.

But the CEO has come under increasing fire for his management style.

In October 2012, for example, Steven Daniel Stein, the hospital’s former vice president of legal affairs, filed a multimillion-dollar federal lawsuit against Tri-City alleging that Anderson was abusive to employees, berating some for taking time off work for medical reasons. In June a federal judge denied Tri-City’s motion to dismiss a key claim of Stein’s suit — that he was fired in fear that he would blow the whistle to authorities regarding workplace discrimination.

Background

Tri-City surgery deal falls short of projection
Hospital CEO accused of railing against medical leave
Tri-City building deal in jeopardy
Tri-City profits have tamed of late
Suit: hospital CEO berated the unhealthy

It was not clear Thursday whether the lawsuit or Tri-City’s budget shortfall had anything to do with the board’s decision Wednesday night.

Schallock declined to say how many board members voted to put Anderson on leave, how long that hiatus might last or whether there is an investigation. The hospital board met in closed session at Wednesday evening with only a discussion of “potential litigation” on the agenda.

After leaving closed session, the board did not report its decision to the public in open session.

Open meetings law requires public bodies like the Tri-City board, which is composed of seven elected directors from Vista, Oceanside and Carlsbad, to report any action taken behind closed doors. However, Greg Moser, Tri-City’s attorney, said the law does not require the board to report its vote to the public until after an employee has exhausted all possible “administrative remedies.”

Those remedies are spelled out in Anderson’s 16-page contract, which runs through Aug. 16, 2014. A clause in the document allows Anderson to terminate the agreement if the board makes “any material diminution or modification” of his duties as CEO.

Moser said Anderson’s duties did change when he was put on leave.

“He is not currently exercising all of the authority that he otherwise would have,” Moser said.

According to the contract, if Anderson terminates the agreement for cause, he would receive a severance agreement equal to 18 months of salary.

According to the state controller’s office, Anderson made a base salary of $515,553 in 2011 and a total compensation of more than $666,000 when retirement payments and other types of pay were taken into account. The hospital did not provide a more current compensation figure for the executive Thursday afternoon. It was not clear whether any potential severance payment would be calculated based on Anderson’s base salary or total compensation.

Rialto Unified superintendent and deputy placed on leave to make sure investigation of embezzlement is unbiased

Something similar to this happened at my school, Castle Park Elementary. The PTA president embezzled $20,000 but she wasn't charged. The San Diego DA seems to have a special, and odd, relationship with the south county. (So does the media in San Diego.) Stories about embezzlements in other parts of the county are common, but south country seemed to lie in a zone of silence. But while embarrassing embezzlements weren't allowed to roil the waters of Republican school board members like Cheryl Cox, the DA's Public Integrity Unit has focused on Democratic officials in South County.


Rialto Unified School District Superintendent Harold Cebrun, right, denies any criminal wrongdoing during a school board meeting at Preston Elementary School in Rialto on Aug. 14, 2013. He and Deputy Superintendent James Wallace, left, were placed on paid administrative leave... (Rachel Luna/Staff Photographer)

Rialto Unified superintendent and deputy placed on leave
By Beau Yarbrough
The Sun
09/12/13

Schools Superintendent Harold Cebrun has been placed on administrative leave in connection with the investigation into a former district accountant accused of embezzling from the district.

The Rialto Unified school board made the decision in closed session at its meeting Wednesday night.

Cebrun’s chief of staff, Assistant Superintendent of Student Services James Wallace, was also placed on administrative leave.

“The superintendent and the deputy superintendent are on administrative leave with pay,” district spokeswoman Syeda Jafri said Thursday. “The board of education will make its recommendation after the conclusion of the investigation.”

The investigation in question revolves around Judith Oakes, the former Rialto Unified accountant recorded on video stuffing school lunch money into her bra. She was arrested on Aug. 7 on suspicion of embezzlement.

Associate Superintendent of Business Services Mohammad Z. Islam was appointed acting superintendent for the district, according to Jafri.

When reached for comment Thursday evening, Cebrun said he agreed with the board’s decision.

“They wanted the investigation to be fair and clean and, especially if I was around, or Jim was around, the public might think it would be tainted in (some) way,” he said. “No one can say I interfered or offered any barriers to them getting what they needed to do.”

The Rialto Police Department, San Bernardino County District Attorney’s Office San Bernardino County Superintendent of Schools Office and a private investigation firm hired by the Rialto Unified school board are all conducting audits of Rialto Unified’s Nutrition Services Department.

The board expects to receive the audit from Rancho Cucamonga-based Stewart Investigative Services Inc. in time for its Sept. 25 meeting.

“That’s what we’re waiting for, that next report, to guide us in the right direction,” board President Joe Ayala said. “Then we’ll be in a better position to make a decision.”

At the board’s Aug. 14 meeting, Cebrun hotly denied any involvement in Oakes’ alleged crimes.

“I have not violated any district policy,” he said. “I have not committed a crime, been associated with a crime or had knowledge of a crime.”

No charges had been filed against Oakes as of Thursday afternoon.

The board also voted on independent legal counsel for board members behind closed doors.

“On issues where (the school board) may need guidance and advice on legal issues ... if there are attorneys representing the district, there can be a conflict of interest at times, depending on circumstances,” board member Nancy O’Kelley said Thursday. “It’s very common for boards to have separate legal counsel.”

Cebrun’s absence from the district office isn’t new. He’s been out on bereavement leave since Aug. 21, according to Jafri.



Judith Oakes

Search warrant: Rialto Unified accountant stuffed money in her bra
By Joe Nelson
San Bernardino Sun
08/30/13

A former Rialto Unified School District accountant suspected of stealing thousands of dollars in student lunch money was caught on video surveillance on at least two occasions stuffing large amounts of cash into her bra, according to a search warrant affidavit.

Judith Oakes, 48, resigned from her job as accountant for the school district’s Nutrition Services Department the day after her Aug. 8 arrest on suspicion of grand theft, embezzlement and burglary. Police allege that Oakes had been stealing money from the district since June, possibly longer.

Oakes had worked for the school district for 16 years.

Derek Harris, the school district’s risk manager, called police on Aug. 7 after Oakes’ supervisor, Cindi Stone, told him she saw Oakes on video surveillance on at least two occasions concealing large amounts of cash in her bra, according to the affidavit, filed Wednesday in San Bernardino Superior Court.

Thousands of dollars in student lunch money passed through Oakes’ hands daily as it was collected from district schools and sent to her to inventory and deposit into the district’s bank account. Daily bank deposit slips dating back to June, obtained in the initial stages of the police investigation, noted a discrepancy of $2,000, according to the affidavit.

Oakes had a private office with access to a department-issued desktop computer, according to the search warrant affidavit, but police on Friday said it was premature to suspect Oakes of fudging the Nutrition Services Department’s accounting records.

Rialto police Capt. Randy DeAnda said his team of detectives working the case are awaiting an audit of the Nutrition Services Department from the school district before making that determination.

“We’re hoping to find out if there were any other financial discrepancies,” DeAnda said Friday. “That’s what the forensic audit will reveal — if there are any abnormalities or discrepancies in the accounting in which Judy Oakes would be responsible for.” v The District Attorney’s Office is conducting a forensic audit of its own, and the San Bernardino County Superintendent of Schools Office announced this week that it too would be conducting an audit of the school district’s Nutrition Services Department.

Police received authorization from Judge John Tomberlin to search Oakes’ San Bernardino home, the Nutrition Services Department and Oakes’ personal banking records at Arrowhead Credit Union, where, according to the search warrant, she has an account for herself and joint accounts with her two sons.

Oakes had a large amount of cash in her possession the day she was arrested, and a subsequent search of her home turned up more cash and other evidence related to her position with the school district, police said.

Police seized from Arrowhead Credit Union a CD containing Oakes’ financial records that could be useful in their investigation, according to the search warrant affidavit.

A police inventory of what was seized during the search of the school district’s Nutrition Services Department remained under seal with the court.

Do ethical lawyers prepare orders for a judge to sign that indicate that their motion was granted when it actually was denied?

Do ethical lawyers sometimes write a proposed order for a judge to sign that doesn't mention that their motion was denied?

I am interested in hypothetical situations. If you figure things out ahead of time, it makes it easier when push comes to shove to make the right decision.

So I've been working on this imaginary scenario in which a lawyer believes he can get a judge to sign an order that is significantly different from the minute order prepared by the judge. In this fantasy, a judge has denied the lawyer's motion without prejudice, and given the opposing party a very specific instruction. But the lawyer never mentions in his proposed order that his motion was denied, and he adds significant details to the judge's instructions.

Is this something an ethical lawyer would do? Hmmm. Do readers have any thoughts on the matter?

Millions spent to pay teachers not to teach; why not spend the money on evaluation so bad teachers can be fired and good teachers protected?

When Schools Pay Teachers Not to Teach
By EMILY ALPERT
Voice of San Diego
June 30, 2009

Lynne Holyoke knew her principal wanted to fire her. The retired art teacher said the two had often sparred over her teaching style. But instead, Holyoke said the school district made her an offer: Take a year off with pay and resign at the end of it. Holyoke agreed and spent the year on paid administrative leave, doing art therapy, volunteering and mulling her future...

Holyoke is not the only educator who has been pulled from her classroom but paid nonetheless. Fifty-six educators have been put on paid administrative leave in San Diego Unified over the last six years, taken out of their ordinary jobs but kept on the payroll for anywhere from a few days to more than four years.

Some teachers have been accused of crimes or inappropriate behavior and are removed from their classes until the charges are proven or disproven. Some are awaiting hearings that decide whether they will be fired. A small number are suffering medical problems.

And others such as Holyoke are paid as part of a settlement to avoid the expensive process of firing them, especially when the cases against them are difficult to prove in court.

School district attorney Mark Bresee said that teachers sometimes make formal pacts -- agreeing to resign in exchange for staying on paid leave for a fixed time -- and sometimes simply agree informally to resign after time...

While still uncommon in the sprawling school district, the frequency of paid administrative leave has increased significantly in the past two years, along with its costs. Estimates done by voiceofsandiego.org based on data provided by the school district found that the practice cost more than $2.1 million over the past six years. Costs have risen from an eventual payout of an estimated $262,000 for three teachers put on leave in the 2003-2004 school year to more than $716,000 -- and counting -- for 26 educators in 2008-2009.

Staffers call the uptick a fluke and say that school district practices haven't changed. Pulling educators from their jobs but keeping them paid has many purposes: It removes teachers, counselors and administrators who are suspected of foul play from the classroom, separates employees when harassment is alleged, and ensures that workers are not penalized for allegations that go nowhere. Human resources and legal staffers, not principals, must approve the decision for leave.

"If we have people that we fear are not good for kids, we want to make sure that they're not working with kids," said Tim Asfazadour, a human resources officer.

It is sometimes mandated by California law, which limits the circumstances when teachers are pulled without pay. Attorneys said it can also be cheaper than firing educators, an extensive process during which teachers are typically still on the payroll...

"This is just wrong," said William Wright, vice chairman of San Diego Unified's audit and finance committee, when told about the practice of buyouts. "It's just happening because it's so hard to fire somebody. They're buying them off with the taxpayers' money."..

"If a principal has an issue with a teacher, they can accomplish their goal of getting rid of them," Holyoke said. "If they really mean to get you out, it's just too tortuous (for teachers) to go through."

Unlike the notorious "rubber rooms" in New York City, where hundreds of teachers under investigation sit idle, Asfazadour said that San Diego Unified educators on paid leave are usually still working, if not in their usual jobs. Some evaluate books or file supplies in a lending library for teachers, others work in the cafeteria or do data entry...

Asfazadour said the recent increase consisted of cases involving accusations that needed to be investigated, not settlements...

Teachers are often put on paid leave when someone accuses them of a crime or inappropriate behavior...Investigations are done by city or school police detectives and can be lengthy: One teacher accused of choking a student has been out on leave for more than nine months. Others end quickly.

"A child said something happened and they called in a police officer and investigated," said Donna Chateau, a retired teacher who was put on leave for less than two weeks before returning to the classroom...

Other employees are put on paid leave not because of alleged crimes, but because they are in the pipeline to be fired... actual firings are extraordinarily rare in San Diego Unified... A teacher would not lose pay until that commission ruled against them...

Petersen said cases where a teacher is seen doing something egregious, such as hitting a child, tend to be easier to wrap up and end without a buyout. The most expensive cases tend to be when principals argue that teachers are just not very good at their jobs. Holyoke, for example, said her teaching was criticized. Her story was echoed by several other teachers and counselors who said they were being paid to resign after clashing with principals, but declined to give their names.

Holyoke's former principal, Susan Levy, said she couldn't talk about what happened with the teacher because of employee confidentiality. Nor was Levy aware of what occurred after the human resources department stepped in to handle things after Holyoke had left; the teacher said she took a stress leave.

"They always say, 'We'll take care of it,'" Levy said.



HERE'S AN INTERESTING LETTER TO VOICE OF SAN DIEGO:

Discouraged Temp Teachers
By Jeff Claybaugh, San Diego
June 22, 2009 |

I read your article about "The Disposable Teacher" and wanted to tell you that it is spot on.

I graduated from the University of the Pacific in 2002 with a degree in music (and a teaching credential). My dream was to be a successful band/choir director, engaging kids' minds using the arts. My first job was in Central California, and after learning lots (and signing kids up for next year's classes), I was pink-slipped in March. Being new to the education system, I did not quite understand how the administrative process worked, and so I went along with it. What bothered me most about this was that the administration led me to believe that I had nothing to worry about, because all temp teachers go through this every year, and would be rehired without issue. Well, long story short, I received a phone call during the summer break and was told that the budget didn't allow for a music teacher position and that the program was cut. It was completely demoralizing. Hard work did not pay off. And now that the school season was to start again soon, I had to scramble to find another teaching position.

This happened again at the next location where I found work. Same pink slip, same waiting to hear about the budget, same phone call. Again, I was completely heart-broken and decided that I could not work in that type of system, where your position is decided not on success or quality, but solely on available funding. I am now working in a software business where I am valued and have been working regularly for almost 4 years. Although I miss the teaching aspect of my dream, I have security and am valued for my contributions...

HERE ARE SOME COMMENTS, INCLUDING MY OWN:

I agree that teaching ability, not seniority, should be the deciding factor in who gets laid off. Unfortunately, even if a decision were made to lay off the poorest-performing teachers, it would be impossible to do so because the current teacher evaluation system is a joke. If teachers were examined as exhaustively as kids, we wouldn't be having the problems we have.

Posted by Maura Larkins | reply to this comment
June 24, 2009 3:59 pm

And how is one to judge a teacher's merit? As it is now in SDUSD's evaluation process, it's up to ONE person -- a princpal (or sometimes vice-principal). Is a teacher to be laid off because the perception of one person (the principal) is that she is an ineffective teacher? At charter schools where most teachers are not union, I've often seen it happen that teachers who go against the grain and stand up for curriculum or for students against the wishes of a principal or CEO (yes, charters have CEOs), are fired. The state legislature passed laws that called for teacher layoffs to be based on seniority -- not "merit" -- perhaps to prevent this very thing from happening in our schools! Bad teachers can be disciplined and, with due process, fired. That's good enough. Let's not base layoffs on "merit."

Posted by MMT | reply to this comment
June 29, 2009 11:41 am

I agree completely. There is no system in place to accurately evaluate teachers. Certainly the current system in which principals evaluate teachers is a joke. A reliable evaluation would need to involve observers not involved in school or district politics--perhaps from outside the district. Regular observations, well-documented, would be needed. This would be a great learning experience for evaluators as well as those being evaluated. I also think teacher interviews, in which teachers could explain what they have learned and how their thinking has evolved, should be part of the process.

Posted by Maura Larkins | reply to this comment
June 30, 2009 3:28 pm

Actually, I disagree with MMT about one thing. MMT says, "Bad teachers can be disciplined and, with due process, fired. That's good enough." The current system is most certainly NOT good enough. Teachers are rarely fired for incompetence (it was the reason only about 20% of the time according to the Los Angeles Times series "Failure Gets a Pass"). Usually the reason is political. Another frequent cause of teacher firings is moral turpitude. As long as incompetent teachers make friends with the right people, they are usually safe. This is one of the reasons that schools are such hotbeds of personal politics, and it's a reason many incompetent teachers become administrators. In many occupations, seniority is a perfectly reasonable and sensible method to determine who gets laid off, but in teaching, competence should matter.

Posted by Maura Larkins | reply to this comment
June 30, 2009 3:28 pm


The inconvenient truth is the seniority system has yielded a state rank of 34th in student education and 1st in teacher salaries. Both the state legislature and school board except copious amounts of campaign funding from the CTA and teachers receive the highest pay in the country. The children of California give no money to the state legislature and the school boards and receive the 34th best education in the U.S.

Posted by RB | reply to this comment
July 1, 2009 7:48 am