Carlsbad Unifed cancels FFF contract; Is it time for the school attorneys at Fagen Friedman Fulfrost to change the name of their firm again?

What did Fagen Friedman Fulfrost law firm do to cause the Carlsbad Unified school board to cancel its contract? The explanation can be found right here. I am impressed with the community of Carlsbad for drawing a line regarding the ethical behavior of school law firms. I don't feel so alone anymore in my quest to get schools to hire lawyers who will advise them to honor policies, laws and contracts instead of hiring lawyers who will help them get away with violations.

The question now becomes, who will end up doing the $100,000 worth of legal work that was going to go to FFF, and will the new firm behave any differently than FFF? Or will the district simply approve a new contract for FFF when no one is looking? After all, a law firm with two former Carlsbad Unified officials working for it could offer some special advantages. Communication could be more easily accomplished through back channels. I'm hoping Rachel Stine of Coast News will keep watching.

CUSD cancels contract with law firm...
By Rachel Stine
Coast News
Sep 12, 2013


“How did this get so far and missed?” Trustee Lisa Rodman, right, asked staff members... Photo by Rachel Stine

CARLSBAD — The Carlsbad Unified School District (CUSD) Board of Trustees voted to cancel its contract with the law firm that hired a former trustee and prioritized Prop P infrastructure projects at its Sept. 11 meeting.

The Board was presented with the opportunity to continue, scale back, or cancel its $100,000 annual contract with the law firm Fagen, Friedman, and Fulfrost LLP after the firm hired former trustee Kelli Moors. Fearing conflict of interest accusations, the Board had decided to re-vote on the firm’s contract after realizing that Moors had voted to support the contract 12 days before announcing her resignation to accept her position with the firm.

The Board had contracted with the law firm to handle special education and personnel matters since 2006.

The four current trustees voted unanimously to cancel the contract without discussion at the meeting.

Board President Elisa Williamson had previously expressed that she intended to recommend that the Board reduce the scale of the firm’s contract with the district to only current cases that would be too costly to transfer to other firms.

After the meeting she explained that she had changed her mind to recommend canceling the contract with the firm after learning from Superintendent Suzette Lovely that the firm was not working on any cases that would be difficult to transfer to another firm, and that numerous alternative firms had been identified.

After voting on the law firm contract, the Board considered how to prioritize its remaining $33 million in Prop P money for building projects throughout the district’s campuses.

Projects up for consideration were split between infrastructure improvements at various CUSD campuses and a new aquatics center or performing arts center at the new Sage Creek High School.

District staff primarily presented information regarding the cost of building and operating an aquatics center or performing arts center, and some details about potential revenues for each facility.

They ultimately concluded that the performing arts center would be the least costly to operate and most likely to be used by more students.

But they also mentioned that the funds could be used to update several sites throughout the district that do not meet current building standards set by the Division of the State Architect, including safety and handicap accessibility criteria.

William Morrison, a senior project manager for Gafcon, explained that while all buildings in CUSD meet the standards that existed at the time of their construction, any buildings that are remodeled would have to be improved to meet current codes. So while all buildings are compliant with state regulations, any infrastructure improvements would be accompanied by most likely costly adjustments to meet the newest standards.

He cited the district’s Cultural Arts Center, which was built in 1980, as one of the primary sites in need of safety and accessibility upgrades.

“Basically when you walk into the entrance, that’s about as ADA (Americans with Disabilities Act) compliant as it is,” he said.

He explained that there is almost no way for a person in a wheelchair to get into the orchestra pit, the counter height of the ticket booth needs to be adjusted, and the fire suppression system is in need of some upgrades.

Board members expressed shock that these upgrades were not included in the facility’s most recent interior remodel.

“How did this get so far and missed?” Trustee Lisa Rodman asked. “I’m surprised we’re here.”

Morrison said that those in charge of the last project maintained that compliance issues did not fall within the spectrum of what they were upgrading.

The trustees voted to send out a request for applications from architects to address the building safety and access issues at current facilities and asked for staff to come forward with more information about the revenue earning potential of a new aquatics center and performing arts center at Sage Creek High School.

How Fagen Friedman Fulfrost managed to lose its contract with Carlsbad Unified: both Democrats and Republicans are disgusted

UPDATE: FAGEN FRIEDMAN FULFROST LOSES CONTRACT WITH CARLSBAD UNIFIED DUE TO ETHICAL QUESTIONS

On September 11, 2013 the Carlsbad Unified School District canceled its contract for legal services from Fagen, Friendman and Fulfrost. I am amazed that there were negative repercussions for unethical behavior by school attorneys (see original post below). I thought school attorneys could act with impunity in every case.

Let's hope that the law firm that gets the work will understand that the Association of School Boards and Council of School Attorneys won't always be able to protect them, and that the public is starting to get wise to what is going on behind the scenes.

ORIGINAL POST: Whose side am I on? Fagen Friedman Fulfrost or Carlsbad Unified School District candidate Sage Naumann? Neither!

See all posts about Kelli Moors and Fagen Friedman Fulfrost.


Sage Naumann, 18, listens to CUSD Board member Kelli Moors condemn his negative campaign tactics at the Aug. 14 meeting. Naumann has been critical of current board members since he began his campaign in January 2013 for election to the CUSD Board...
Photo by Rachel Stine CUSD to appoint new board member Coast News Aug 15, 2013

[Irony alert: Kelli Moors voted for a school district contract with Fagen, Friedman & Fulfrost law firm, then 12 days later went to work for the firm. She apparently wants citizens to leave the negative tactics to the lawyers. Efforts to silence complaints by the public have also been going on at Sweetwater Union High School District, where lawyer Dan Shinoff lectured members of the public on civility and wrote a threatening letter to a member of the bond committee.]


Fagen Friedman Fulfrost (FFF) law firm founder Howard Fulfrost,
member of the School Attorney Advisory Board

Mr. Fulfrost, partner in Carlsbad Unified's law firm Fagen Friedman Fulfrost, is famously loyal to school officials. So loyal, in fact, that a federal judge has accused his former firm of lying and obstruction. This is a big deal to me (Maura Larkins), and I've provided some information about FFF below that has not been mentioned by the media during the current brouhaha--though it should have been.

Nevertheless, I believe that some things are more urgent than the sisyphean task of finding an ethical firm of school attorneys for Carlsbad Unified.

Although I am similar to Sage Naumann in that I demand accountability from school board members, right now I'd like to set aside the issue of corruption in schools and talk about something more important: teaching and learning!

Sage Naumann is right that school districts are corrupt.

But so is almost every other institution in the city, the state, and the world. Most human beings are greedy and shortsighted, and they abuse power when they get it. And it is true that corruption tends to lower the average quality of teachers and administrators since personnel decisions are so deeply influenced by politics. But good teachers and good ideas are struggling to be heard, and we need to listen. We can't stop everything to try to eliminate a problem that has existed as long as human beings have existed.



Mr. Naumann is wrong on the most important current issue: implementing Common Core standards in classrooms.

Once in a while people actually work for the common good, and Common Core is the product of one such effort. The designers worked hard because they want students to understand their world and know how to navigate it.

Our education system is a failure, and it's not just the fault of kids and families. Most teachers are mediocre, and many are downright bad. Few of them have received adequate training, not to mention a real education. Common Core is a system that helps teachers do a better job.

The main idea of Common Core is that instead of rapidly introducing a long series of facts, American teachers will imitate successful schools in successful countries, and deeply explore a smaller number of ideas. Quick learners can learn how to fully analyze information, and slower learners will have a chance to really learn something, instead of being lost most of the time.

And big money is being offered to help teachers do this.

I oppose Sage Naumann for one reason: he opposes Common Core. But he's right about all that other stuff.


CARLSBAD UNIFIED TRIES TO DEFEND ITSELF, BUT SHOOTS ITSELF IN THE FOOT

Carlsbad Unified claims that it hired Fagen Friedman & Fulfrost immediately after the law firm was formed (by Howard Fulfrost and other lawyers who were sanctioned by a federal judge for lying in the Moser case when working for Lozano Smith). Soon after that ruling, Lozano Smith shut down its special education section. Basically, FFF is Lozano Smith under a new name. And Carlsbad Unified is using this to defend themselves? Just how smart are these people?


CUSD Board President Elisa Williamson

CUSD Board President Releases Statement on Law Firm Contract
Posted by Deanne Goodman (Editor)
August 26, 2013
Patch

The following is written by Elisa Williamson [and was also posted on the district's website]:

We are aware that concerns have been raised regarding the relationship between the school district and the law firm of Fagen, Friedman, & Fulfrost in light of that firm's hiring of Trustee Kelli Moors. Although the Board is not privy to the details surrounding the timing of Ms. Moors' discussions with the firm, in an abundance of caution, the contract that was voted on at our July 24 meeting will be brought back for a re-vote at our meeting on September 11. Re-voting on the contract renewal after Trustee Moor's departure will obviate any questions about the validity of the Board's ultimate vote under the law.

The school district has utilized the services of Fagen, Friedman & Fulfrost since the firm was founded in 2006. The bulk of expenditures over the past seven years have been for legal services related to Special Education and Personnel matters. Prior to 2006, the partners in Fagen, Friedman & Fulfrost provided legal assistance to CUSD while working for another firm.

[Maura Larkins comment: The firm that Ms. Williamson is referring to without naming it--for good reason!--is Lozano Smith. Carlsbad Unified chose to hire a law firm whose previous incarnation used lying and obstruction to deprive a special education student of an appropriate education. See following article.


Melanie Petersen of FFF

Ms. Williamson also says that "partners in Fagen, Friedman & Fulfrost provided legal assistance to CUSD while working for another firm." I think she may be talking about Melanie Petersen.]

Despite the district's long-standing relationship with the firm, on August 7th I informed the Superintendent that, at the September 11, 2013 Board meeting, I will be recommending that the District limit its use of the services of Fagen, Friedman, & Fulfrost to only those areas that staff deems critical to the District.

Elisa Williamson, President
Board of Trustees

ELAINE YAMA WORKED FOR HOWARD FULFROST AT LOZANO SMITH

Attorney Elaine Yama, sanctioned along with Howard Fulfrost for lying and obstruction when they were at Lozano Smith

Article about Moser v. Bret Harte High School District on the Parent Advocates website:

California Federal Judge Sanctions Law Firm For Lying in a Special Education Case
Fresno law firm Lozano Smith billed the school district $500,000 for a case that could have been settled years ago for $8,000. How this makes sense is beyond us. Betsy Combier

Lying, obstruction cited in sanctions for law firm
Fresno's Lozano Smith, attorney ordered to train in ethics
By Erin Kennedy
The Fresno Bee
January 18, 2005

Fresno law firm Lozano Smith and its attorney Elaine Yama have been sanctioned by a federal judge for lying, misrepresenting law and facts, and intentionally dragging out a case involving a school district and a special education student.

U.S. District Court Judge Oliver Wanger fined the law firm, Yama and Bret Harte Union High School District in Calaveras County $5,000 each. He also ordered Yama to take 20 hours of ethics courses and Lozano Smith to conduct ethics training for all of its attorneys and shareholders...[Click HERE to see the whole article.]

CSBA AND ELAINE YAMA AND ELISA WILLIAMSON AND KELLI MOORS

So, whom do you think the California School Boards Association (CSBA) chose for its legal team? You guessed it--Elaine Yama.

And who trained Board President Elisa Williamson AND trustee Kelli Moors? Right again--CSBA. It gave them each a "Masters in Governance".

So who actually runs the district--the lawyers or the officials? It's hard to unscramble the egg, isn't it? But here's a clue: school board members come and go, but the lawyers remain the same.

The thing I can't understand is why Carlsbad Unified and Elisa Williamson thought nobody was going to find out the backstory about FFF after the Kelli Moors story broke. But there's another backstory I'd like to learn about. What did the board member who abstained from voting on the FFF contract know about FFF? Very likely she knew more than I know.

Elaine Yama-Garcia joins CSBA legal team
April 30, 2012

CSBA’s new associate general counsel is Elaine Yama-Garcia, a mid-career professional with more than 15 years experience practicing law in the areas of education, special education, and labor and employment. Along with General Counsel Keith Bray, she will manage the Education Legal Alliance and respond to corporate legal issues for CSBA and its affiliates.

Yama-Garcia has practiced with the Law Offices of Bennett & Sharpe in the Central Valley, where she represented clients in the areas of labor and employment and special education law. Before that, she worked for the law firm of Lozano Smith in Fresno, specializing in education law, and until recently she managed her own law firm representing school districts and county offices of education.

She earned her law degree from the San Joaquin College of Law in Fresno.

Born and raised in Fresno, Yama-Garcia is married and has an adult married son, a step-son attending college in Costa Rica, and a teenage step-daughter.

“I am thrilled to be part of CSBA’s legal team,” said Yama-Garcia. “I look forward to the many exciting and positive changes we can make to benefit school districts and county offices of education in the state.”

[Maura Larkins comment: I'll give credit to Ms. Yama for one thing. At least she doesn't claim to be trying to benefit students.]




Richard Riehl

Politics Enters Carlsbad School Board Race
Richard J. Riehl
San Diego Reader
August 10, 2013

In the 2008 election I voted for 19-year-old Evan Delaney Rodgers for the Carlsbad City Council. I was sad to see her lose because of the youthful energy and positive attitude she would have brought to that gang of mostly good old boys.

After Kelli Moors announced her retirement from the Carlsbad School Board a few days ago, 18-year-old Sage Naumann declared he's more than eager to take her place. But unless you favor contentiousness and political grandstanding, Naumann has already revealed he wouldn't be the right choice.

Unlike Rodgers' city council campaign, filled with dozens of practical suggestions for improving the city's quality of life, Naumann has begun by smearing two highly respected school district retirees, former Superintendent John Roach and board member Moors. Here's what he posted on his Facebook page:

"Is it just me, or does it seem suspicious that both our Superintendent and a board member have jumped ship to take jobs with a law firm that taxpayers are actively paying for? That’s why I am emailing you. Should I assembly (sic) my team to begin looking deeper, or does this just seem like a harmless coincidence? I’m eager to hear your response."

He urged his followers to reply to "Our mailing address: Sage Naumann for Carlsbad School Board 2014, 2307 Fenton Parkway, Suite 107-114, San Diego, CA 92108.

To paraphrase the young candidate, is it just me, or does it seem suspicious that a candidate for the Carlsbad School Board has a campaign headquarters address next door to Qualcomm Stadium? Email your response to fogcutter1@yahoo.com.

The law firm to which Naumann refers is Fagen, Friedman & Fulfrost, which contracts with the school district for legal advice and hired Roach and Moors as consultants after they left their positions with the district. In the style of Congressman Darrell Issa's discredited witch hunt of the IRS, Naumann makes no accusations, since he has nary a shred of evidence of legal or ethical misbehavior. He simply rallies his supporters with the implication of corruption. Those of us of a certain age remember how effectively Joe McCarthy used that technique.

Naumann's outrage that "taxpayers are actively paying for" the services of a law firm reveals both his naiveté and misuse of an adverb for exaggeration. Would he be less offended if taxpayers paid the law firm inactively?

[Maura Larkins' comment: Defenders of CUSD might want to be careful when criticizing the critical-thinking and writing skills of a recent graduate of Carlsbad High School. It's sort of a two-edged sword. And the phrase "actively paying" sounds perfectly fine to me. It conjures an image of money flowing. I call that good writing.]

The word "irresponsible" comes to mind when characterizing Naumann's character attacks on Roach and Moors. The words "empty promises" best describes his "Back to Basics" campaign theme. In a breathtaking leap of logic, he promises in one paragraph to "do everything I can to question purchases, staff and faculty additions, and other funding that seems unnecessary," to stop the "reckless spending," and to "be a taxpayer's "watchdog." In the next he promises to "keep class sizes small, " "materials available" and "teachers stress-free and able to concentrate on their students, " while "no longer will we look to slashing department budgets to fill shortfalls."

Naumann ignores the district's most pressing challenge: putting in place a plan to implement the Common Core of expected learning outcomes. But we have a glimpse of what he feels about it.

In a Guest Commentary in the conservative blog San Diego Rostra, "Putting the Carlsbad School District Back on Track," Naumann assures a reader: "I have already pledged my support against CCSS, and I will continue my advocacy against it throughout my campaign and if I am elected."

At its July 24 meeting the school board learned CUSD will received approximately $2.1 million in state funds to implement the Common Core during 2013-2015. Judging from his vow to be the taxpayer's watchdog, it sounds as if Naumann will do what he can to turn down the funding. So much for his promise to "Keep cuts away from the classroom."

Naumann's platform calls for making connections with the community. A look at a list of his supporters tells us much about the connections he's already made and what Carlsbadians can look forward to from the influence of his network of colleagues.

Topping the list is Carl DeMaio, former member of the San Diego City Council. He's followed by city council members from Vista, Encinitas and Imperial Beach (none from Carlsbad thus far), School Board members from La Mesa/Spring Valley, Encinitas and Dehesa (none from Carlsbad).

The Vice Chair of the California Republican Party heads a list of 10 San Diego GOP Central Committee members, including Sherry Hodges, whose campaign Naumann staffed.

The list of those with titles ended with the president of the Oceanside Rotary Club and the former president of the Oceanside Chamber of Commerce. Curiously missing from the entire list were Carlsbad officials.

See a pattern here? If you liked the vicious tactics of the failed Sherry Hodges campaign and don't mind having a political operative with an agenda joining a non-partisan school board with a history of civility, than Naumann's your guy.

And that would be a sad day for Carlsbad schools.

Richard J. Riehl writes from La Costa.

Kelli Moors, who started the current scandal
when she voted on a contract for FFF,
then 12 days later left CUSD to work for FFF

THE CALIFORNIA SCHOOL BOARDS ASSOCIATION (link: CSBA),
FFF AND CARLSBAD UNIFIED ARE PRETTY MUCH INSEPARABLE:

Friday, November 30 [2012]- CSBA [California School Boards Association] Annual Education Conference
Exhibitor Table Talks
Boards, the Brown Act and Cyberspace

As education leaders turn to social media for timely communication, well-intentioned board members can find themselves in violation of the Brown Act when cyber communication conveys information coming up for vote. If used improperly, social media starts the slippery slope into online serial meetings, resulting in costly, embarrassing legal consequences, and can be subject to public records requests. Attend this workshop to learn how to avoid social media pitfalls in your governance capacity.

--Kelli Moors, Board Member, Carlsbad USD; Christopher Keeler and Namita Brown, Partners, Fagen Friedman & Fulfrost, LLP

See all posts about Kelli Moors and Fagen Friedman Fulfrost.



Here are some links to FFF cases:

Palo Alto, FFF and the Office of Civil Rights regarding bullying

FFF loses against teacher Pamela Lukkarila in Jurupa School District:
http://mauralarkins.com/files/LukkarilaMyPERB2283E.pdf

FFF loses against teacher Ermine Nelson in Jurupa School District

FFF wins against student and parent in Carlsbad School District:
http://www.californiaspecialedlaw.com/wiki/hearing-decisions/oah-2011120317

School investigation in Claremont USD a waste of taxpayer money?

HOWARD FULFROST, THE PARTNER AT FAGEN FRIEDMAN AND FULFROST WAS PAID HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF CCUSD MONEY TO STOP STUDENTS FROM GETTING THERAPY

The Accrediting Commission for Community and Junior Colleges has disgraced itself again

The Accrediting Commission for Community and Junior Colleges sometimes shows more interest in protecting board members, insurance companies and lawyers than in helping students.

In San Diego, the ACCJC got involved in the bizarre scandal at MiraCosta College, in which the majority board members eventually spent about $1.5 million on an out-of-control investigation of $305 of stolen water. Then it spent another $1.5 million on lawyers and a settlement that was invalidated in court.

The ACCJC also silenced minority board members on the board by threatening to take away the college's accreditation if they continued to speak out. Apparently they did this in order to protect the majority board members and San Diego County Office of Education's Diane Crosier and her pal Daniel Shinoff.

See all posts for Accrediting Commission for Community and Junior Colleges (ACCJC).

U.S. faults panel that criticized City College of San Francisco
U.S. Department of Education gives the panel a year to correct problems after it comes under fire for moving to revoke accreditation of City College of San Francisco.
By Carla Rivera
LA Times
August 14, 2013

A panel that moved to revoke the accreditation of City College of San Francisco is under fire, accused of violating several federal regulations in its review of the campus.

In a letter to the Accrediting Commission for Community and Junior Colleges, the U.S. Department of Education took issue with many aspects of the agency's review process, including the lack of faculty on its teams, among others.

The accrediting agency decided in July to end City College's official recognition next year after finding that the two year-school had failed to improve its fiscal planning, administration and student support services, among other programs.

If the college, the largest in the nation, loses its accreditation, it also could lose state aid and could close. It remains unclear, however, what effects the education department's letter may have on the status of City College.

The accrediting agency was faulted for not clearly identifying deficiencies and allowing the college to be out of compliance with standards for more than two years. And the department identified the appearance of a conflict of interest because one of the evaluating team members was the husband of commission President Barbara Beno.

Beno could not be reached for comment Wednesday.

The commission was given one year to correct the issues "in order to avoid initiation of an action to limit, suspend or terminate ACCJC's recognition," Kay W. Gilcher, director of the Department of Education's accrediting group, wrote in the letter that was sent Tuesday.

The education department launched its inquiry after faculty unions filed a 300-page complaint. On Wednesday, the faculty groups urged the commission to withdraw its action against the 78-year-old institution.

"This letter powerfully validates our complaints … and confirms what we have known now for some time, that the ACCJC has operated as a rogue agency and created a climate of fear and retaliation throughout the community college system," Joshua Pechthalt, president of the California Federation of Teachers, said during a telephone news conference.

The accrediting commission, a private, nonprofit regional agency that is part of the Western Assn. of Schools and Colleges, must be recognized by the federal government to review colleges. An application to renew its authority will be heard in the fall.

In a press release, the commission said it was disappointed in the department's findings and would make "necessary policy changes to appropriately address the department's concerns."

But the agency said the findings included some factual errors. It defended its actions, saying, for example, that it acted in a "timely fashion" in moving last month to terminate City College's accreditation after a 2012 review.

The commission also questioned the department's finding on faculty representation, saying "directions to accreditors remain vague and will require clarification."

California Community Colleges Chancellor Brice W. Harris appointed a special trustee last month to govern the multi-campus institution, which traditionally has served more than 80,000 students annually.

The Department of Education doesn't have the authority to require the commission to change any accreditation decision it has made, spokeswoman Jane Glickman said.

Many educators and others have become concerned at the large numbers of community colleges cited by the commission for failing to maintain standards.

Harris created a task force to study ways to smooth accrediting procedures at two-year schools. Rather than wade into the commission dispute, he is focused on fixing the problems that exist at City College, spokesman Paul Feist said.

On the first day of classes Wednesday, enrollment of about 25,800 students was down 10% compared to last fall, Feist said. Fallout from the accreditation fight is one of many factors for the decline that officials said could also include more people choosing to work rather than attend college.

A City College faculty representative said spirits on campus were lifted somewhat by the recent events.

"The first day of the semester is really about focusing on students, getting them into classes, so the excitement of that first day of school is really there," said English instructor Alisa Messer, who is president of the campus faculty union. "The mood is relatively positive even under challenging circumstances."

The Poway deal gets fishier

I already knew that school boards hired lawyers to help them get away with violating the law, but in Poway they took this practice to a whole new level. This is the district that called kids "depraved" for cheating on tests.

The Poway deal gets fishier
By Felix Salmon
Reuters
SEPTEMBER 26, 2012

Remember Poway, and the exorbitant interest costs it was paying on its debt? At first glance, those costs were so huge because of the way the deal was structured: there were no interest or principal payments before 2033, and the final payments weren’t due until 2051.

In reality, however, there was something else going on as well: while Poway claimed to have only borrowed $105 million, they were lying about that: in fact, they borrowed $126 million, taking a $21 million kickback on top of the $105 million they were ostensibly borrowing.

As such, in reality they’re “only” paying $855 million of interest on a $126 million principal amount, rather than the $876 million of interest on $105 million in principal that we originally thought. But this is not a good thing. In fact, Will Carless — who’s been pushing this story hard, and has done a huge amount of work in reporting and explaining it — makes a very persuasive case that it’s illegal.

After all, the whole point of pushing the repayment dates back to 2033 and beyond was that Poway had already maxed out everything it was allowed to borrow before that. “When voters allow a school district to issue bonds,” Carless explains, “they set what appears to be a strict dollar limit on how much can be borrowed”. But somehow, that cap on the amount the district can borrow does not seem to be well defined. Somewhere along the way, definitions got fuzzy.

It should be pretty simple, this question of how much someone has borrowed: you just look at how much money they received when they did the borrowing. And to determine how much interest they’re paying, you take all the money they repay, and subtract that initial amount.

But Poway isn’t doing that. Instead, it’s defining the amount that it’s borrowing as the face value on the bonds. Set a bond with a low face value, and you get to borrow much more than face value, without going over the borrowing limit set by voters.

And that’s exactly what Poway did. By artificially jacking up the interest rate on the bonds — and the longest-dated bond, remember, had an interest rate of a whopping 7.2% — Poway managed sell the bonds at a substantial premium to par. That action, according to a formal letter filed by the California attorney general’s office, was not legal. The AG’s office didn’t prosecute Poway, on the grounds that doing so would cause Poway to incur substantial litigation costs. But it explicitly said that Poway’s behavior was unlawful, and that if this kind of thing became a habit, then it might indeed end up being prosecuted.

What’s more, if Poway sold these bonds at 120 cents on the dollar, there’s no way it could buy them back at 105 cents or less, as I suggested a few weeks ago: unwinding this deal is going to be expensive. Not $850 million expensive, of course, but tens of millions of dollars all the same. I was going on the fact that Bondview shows the bonds trading at about 101 cents on the dollar, but there might be something weird going on there.

In any case, the more we learn about this Poway bond, the smellier it gets. And of course officials aren’t talking:

“The simple fact is that [Poway Unified] did not borrow any more funds than those approved by the voters,” Superintendent John Collins wrote in an email on August 29.

Collins wouldn’t elaborate on this position. He and the Poway school board did not respond to several requests for interviews. Nor did Poway officials agree to interviews with their legal or financial staff.

Well done to Carless for pushing on this; I hope his piece causes enough of a stir that Poway is going to be forced to answer for its actions in some forum. But in the meantime, it would be great to get some clarity on which bonds in particular ended up selling at well above par, and where those bonds are trading today. If, that is, they’re trading at all.

Sweetwater Activist Cleared of Allegations Made by Boardmember

UPDATE MARCH 20, 2013: Superintendent Ed Brand's claim that this matter would cost the district $2,400 was way off. The actual amount, revealed by Susan Luzzaro on March 20, 2013, was $6,336. But why should Mr. Brand worry about such details when the money is coming from taxpayers?

Occupy Sweetwater Activist Cleared of Allegations Made by Boardmember
By Susan Luzzaro
San Diego Reader
May 10, 2012

For weeks, activist Stewart Payne has had headlines written that pertain to him: “Violent Threats By Occupy Sweetwater Result in Restraining Order” (San Diego Rostra), “Keep Payne Away” (The Star News), and “Court Protects Sweetwater Board Member” (U-T San Diego).

All of this because, on the night of April 16, before a meeting of the Sweetwater Union High School District, Payne and the group Occupy Sweetwater initiated a recall petition against boardmember John McCann and two other trustees.

After the meeting, words were exchanged in the parking lot, and McCann called the police to report Payne had physically threatened him. (Payne had gone home before McCann made the call to police.)

McCann subsequently received a temporary restraining order against Payne and sought a permanent one. On May 9, judge Ana Espana determined that Payne had not threatened McCann and denied the injunction.

Aside from why certain media outlets seemed to mischaracterize Payne's role in the incident, other questions remain. Should the temporary restraining order ever have been issued? And why were inconsistencies in the police report — which became crucial during the hearing — overlooked?

Here are the details of what happened: After the April 16 board meeting, McCann gave an interview with KUSI. During the interview, McCann criticized the people who went to the San Diego district attorney — Payne among them — alleging corruption in the Sweetwater district. McCann characterized the activists as “disgruntled employees” and during the interview said Payne was someone who had been looking for work in the school system.

After the interview, according to the police incident report, “McCann made his way over to Stewart Payne and extended his hand to Payne. McCann stated he wanted to use this as a gesture that there were no hard feelings and as a way to hopefully resolve the tension between the two.”

In a May 9 interview, Payne reasoned with McCann's statement and actions, saying, “Why would you throw me under the bus on camera and then try to come shake my hand? It doesn’t make sense.” Payne said the hearing that resulted in the judgment in his favor centered on inconsistencies in the police report and a follow-up investigation report.

A follow-up investigation, during which Chula Vista police detective Michael Varga interviewed McCann, states, “Payne then raised his balled and clenched fist in preparation to strike McCann.”

However, Varga’s follow-up report with security guard Jorge Sanchez states, “I asked Sanchez about Payne’s physical posture…. Sanchez stated that Payne had one hand extended, and one finger of that hand extended, into McCann’s face…. I asked Sanchez if Payne’s hands were balled into a fist, or if Payne was in any type of fighting stance. Sanchez did not see Payne’s hands balled into a fist and did not recall seeing Payne in any type of fighting stance.”

Jimmy Delgado, an employee of the San Ysidro Elementary School District, provided a witness statement for McCann. According to Delgado, Payne “...aggressively pointed his finger in McCann’s face.” Delgado's description of Payne's gestures agree with Payne’s formal response.

Payne says he backed away from McCann’s advances that night: “I had retreated so far that I could feel other people on my heels…. At this point I became concerned that Mr. McCann was becoming irrational and intending to do me harm. It is at this point that I extended my hand pointing my finger to establish my personal boundary and told him not to come closer or I would protect myself.”

Payne, who defended himself during the May 9 proceedings, said, “Have you ever seen anyone who was going to hit someone with their finger?”

McCann was represented by an attorney at the hearing. According to a May 10 U-T report, “Sweetwater superintendent Ed Brand approved the legal expense. He said the affair may cost the school district around $2,400 in attorney’s fees for McCann.”

Lawyers donate to school board members, who then channel tax dollars back to them, says lawsuit against Garcia Calderon Ruiz

“Lawsuits are generally filed by people that are upset and angry,” according to Sergio Feria. I say give that man a genius award. Here's a quote from someone else: "Disgruntled ex-employees (or ex-founding partners) are usually the only ones who will tell the truth about an organization." I notice that Mr. Ruiz didn't file his suit until after he left the law firm.

Bonny Garcia has donated to the election campaigns of trustees Jim Cartmill, Arlie Ricasa and Sandoval. Campaign finance records show donations of $1,000 to Ricasa in 2001-02, $1,000 to Sandoval in 2002 and $975 to Cartmill in 2002.

Complaints preceded raids on South County school officials
Parents, retired teachers urged prosecutors to investigate Sweetwater board members
By Jeff McDonald, Ashly McGlone
UT-SD
December 21, 2011

...Another lawsuit filed this summer raises questions about the relationship between vendors for the district and the elected officials who award public contracts.

Rogelio Ruiz, a founding partner for GCR LLP, the longtime Sweetwater legal counsel formerly known as Garcia Calderon Ruiz, is suing his former partners, claiming they used company profits to make political donations to help secure work.

In his suit, Ruiz said partners Bonifacio Garcia and Yuri Calderon used $15,000 in law-firm proceeds to fund Citizens for Good Government in the South Bay, a political action committee that supported Sweetwater board members and others.

The committee “could funnel thousands of dollars in political contributions to Calderon’s and Garcia’s friends without attracting unwanted media attention and to avoid allegations of conflict of interest and pay-to-play schemes,” the suit states.

Ruiz also accuses his former partners of donating thousands of dollars to political candidates and groups around the state “in an effort to impress and curry favor with certain elected officials,” the suit adds.

Attorney Mark Isola, who is representing Ruiz, said Garcia and Calderon “took those funds and used the monies to get business.”

Sergio Feria, the San Diego attorney representing Calderon and Garcia, denied allegations in the suit and called it an accounting dispute between former partners.

“Lawsuits are generally filed by people that are upset and angry,” he said...

ACLU sues to keep Alpine schools trustee in race

Here is a story from 2010.

ACLU sues to keep Alpine schools trustee in race
By Nathan Max
SAN DIEGO UNION-TRIBUNE
September 17, 2010

The American Civil Liberties Union has filed a lawsuit on behalf of a local school-board member to help him continue his campaign in this fall’s election.

Alpine Union School District Trustee Christopher Newcomb could be forced out of the race if the government determines his candidacy is in violation of the Hatch Act, which stipulates that federal employees cannot run in partisan elections. Newcomb is a federal employee who works for the military.

School-board elections in California, by law, are supposed to be nonpartisan. But the U.S. Office of Special Counsel informed Newcomb in an April letter that if other candidates pick up partisan endorsements, he could be deemed ineligible even though he is running as an independent.

Laughlin McDonald, the director of the ACLU voting rights project, said cases of this nature are extremely rare. McDonald said he can recall the ACLU taking on just one other case involving the Hatch Act since 1972.

Newcomb was out of the country Friday and could not be reached for comment. Phone messages left for the Office of Special Counsel were not returned.

“What’s wrong here is the federal government is saying, ‘It’s not what you do. It’s what your opponent does,’” said David Blair-Loy, legal director of the ACLU’s San Diego and Imperial Counties office. “I don’t think that’s right or fair.”

Newcomb was appointed to the Alpine Union school board on July 8, 2009 after former Trustee Scott Barr moved out of the district. There are eight candidates running for three seats, including Newcomb’s, in the upcoming November election. At least two other candidates have picked up party endorsements, leaving Newcomb’s candidacy vulnerable, Blair-Loy said.

The Office of Special Counsel wrote Newcomb that there is no clear-cut basis for determining when a nonpartisan race turns into a partisan one, and that it would have to make such a determination on a case-by-case basis. However, the letter said if other candidates pick up the support of a political party, then the race becomes partisan.

Blair-Loy argued in his motion that a candidate could simply force a federal employee out of a nonpartisan race by claiming party affiliation.

“We understand the federal government has a legitimate interest in retaining the integrity of the civil service, but this is not about that at all,” Blair-Loy said.

“We don’t think there’s anything about Christopher Newcomb running for Alpine school board that threatens that. He’s not seeking a party endorsement, and he wouldn’t take it if it was given to him. He’s an independent, and it’s a completely nonpartisan election.”

If the Office of Special Counsel finds Newcomb’s candidacy in violation of the Hatch Act, he would be forced to chose between his job and his campaign. A hearing has not yet been scheduled, Blair-Loy said.


It's Hatch Act Season
By Allan Holmes
Nextgov
09/17/10

It's election time, so that means it has to be Hatch Act time, too.

At least two federal employees are entangled in the nuances of the law, which prohibits federal employees from running in partisan elections. The San Diego Union-Tribune reported on Friday that Christopher Newcomb, identified only as a military employee, is running for the Alpine Union school board. From the Tribune:

School-board elections in California, by law, are supposed to be nonpartisan. But the U.S. Office of Special Counsel informed Newcomb in an April letter that if other candidates pick up partisan endorsements, he could be deemed ineligible even though he is running as an independent.

The American Civil Liberties Union has filed a lawsuit on behalf of Newcomb, challenging the special counsel's investigation.

In Virginia, the Alexandria Times reported this week town council member Alicia Hughes may be the subject of an inquiry by the special counsel. Hughes works for the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. Like Newcomb, Hughes is an independent with no partisan endorsements. But as the Times reported:

Hughes ran for City Council as an Independent last year but was backed by factions like the Alexandria Republican City Committee. Her photograph and name appear on the ARCC website under the heading "On Council," below Republican Councilman Frank Fannon and above a photo President Ronald Regan.

Link: November 2010 election results.

Do we need school boards?

Do we need school boards?
Lois Kazakoff
San Francisco Chronicle
October 12, 2009

...California public schools are not producing the workers our economy needs to compete.

The problem, suggested panelist Aart J. De Geus, CEO of Synopsys, "If I look at it as if I were the CEO of education of California, I would look at a company (in terms of), "What are the resources? What are the results? And what is the management system?" I'd say, "Well, let's look at the CEO of the educational system." There is no CEO of the educational system. I know there are commissioners, and whatever they're called, but, to be a CEO, you need to have both responsibility and power."

Another panelist, Ellen Moir, executive director of the UC Santa Cruz New Teacher Center, said, "They (school board members) don't have the impetus and the drive and the focus and the control and the power to transform what's going on in (school) districts."

School boards negotiate contracts with teachers and other school personnel and hire the district superintendent. There's ongoing concern that school board decisions are at the least, not effective, and at the worst, interfere with long-term educational goals and continuity of management.

Is a democratically elected school board in the best interests of educating our youth? What do you think?

Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/opinionshop/detail?&entry_id=49434#ixzz0TrG2PZNE

"Hostile, authoritarian environment ...disrespect, intimidation and the appearance of retaliation"; Luther Burbank school sounds just like my school

Grand jury blasts San Jose's Luther Burbank school board
By Sharon Noguchi
07/11/2009

With seven years of climbing test scores, wild success in teaching reading and a record of lifting the most struggling students, Luther Burbank School District has been hailed as a model for educating poor and immigrant children.

Now the tiny San Jose district is getting noticed for something that could threaten that progress: a grand jury report that blasts Luther Burbank for a crisis of leadership and an intimidating board that may have run afoul of the law.

In a scathing report, the Santa Clara County civil grand jury awarded the five-member Luther Burbank board an F for mishandling its duties, among them firing a popular superintendent and hastily hiring a replacement without vetting.

The jury singled out board President Antonio Perez for creating a "hostile, authoritarian environment characterized by disrespect, intimidation and the appearance of retaliation." It suggested he step down as president.

The report concluded gloomily that the one-school district, which serves primarily low-income immigrant families in San Jose's central Burbank district, may not be able to change the board's systemic problems. The Santa Clara County District Attorney's Office is looking into the findings, spokeswoman Amy Cornell said, and Santa Clara County Schools Deputy Superintendent Cary Dritz is naming a committee to review and respond to the report.

The Luther Burbank school board is scheduled Tuesday to discuss the grand jury's 33-page
Advertisement
report, which has done little to change the tenor at the school: Two secretaries have taken stress leaves, a principal and five teachers have complained of harassment and parents say they are terrified to speak out.

"I'm afraid of what might happen to my children," said Maria Uribe, mother of three. Even though her youngest just finished eighth grade and will move on to high school in a different district next year, she said she and other parents fear unspecified retaliation.

Since the report's publication in June, Perez has been a frequent visitor to Luther Burbank's only school, strolling on the playground, walking into rooms or sitting in the school office.

A parent who works as a school crossing guard said Perez reported her to her boss for allegedly talking with parents about the grand jury report while on duty.

Perez said he visits school because his son is in kindergarten there. "One thing I did notice is a lot of employees expressing their First Amendment rights during working hours. I'm sure there (are) a few laws against political activities using public resources," he wrote in an e-mail to the Mercury News.

The grand jury report, culminating a yearlong investigation by the civilian watchdog, alleged multiple failures, among them:

# The board summarily fired Superintendent Richard Rodriguez and on the same evening hired an interim superintendent without proper notice or vetting.

# Perez appears to be intimidating employees who supported the former superintendent and who were summoned to speak to the grand jury.

# Layoffs and demotions, while budget related, seemed to single out those considered hostile to Perez and the new administration.

# In a potential conflict of interest, Perez voted to award district contracts to a company that his woodworking company does business with.

# The district has violated open-meetings and public-notification laws.

In a lengthy interview with the Mercury News, Perez, in his seventh year on the board and third as president, said the jury was brainwashed by Rodriguez, whom the board ousted in November. Perez said he had to bring in a new administration to clean up a fiscal mess in the district office.

Rodriguez said he left the district with a $2 million surplus. He's distressed at recent events and says the board lacks ability and "has no business whatsoever overseeing a school district."

No possibility for change in Zimbabue. How about change in America's schools?

We are different from Zimbabue. We can change.

I agree with world leaders who say that Morgan Tsvangirai should drop out of the presidential race because Mugabe will just keep killing people until his control is accepted. It's better to leave him alone.

Is the same true of those who want to change education in America? Should we give up? While some school districts use Mugabe-style tactics, like firing or arresting opposition leaders, I think America is different from Zimbabue. We can and should exercise our right to speak out--or we may lose it.

The Sunday Times, U. K.
Douglas Marle in Harare
"Zimbabwe's opposition leader, Morgan Tsvangirai, is facing an “avalanche of calls” to withdraw from this Friday’s presidential election after a campaign of murder, assault and intimidation by supporters of President Robert Mugabe.

"Tsvangirai is expected to decide tomorrow whether he will contest the election even though 85 members of his Movement for Democratic Change (MDC) have been killed and evidence is mounting of attempts to rig the voting.

"The 56-year-old former trade union leader has previously indicated that nothing would deter him from fighting the election.

"But senior party officials warned yesterday that there was little point in a contest that Mugabe is determined to steal..."