Judge Whitney dissolves restraining order obtained by Escondido School District against Jose Fragozo

On March 25, 2016 San Diego Superior Court Judge Richard Whitney dissolved the restraining order obtained by Escondido Union School District against its own board member Jose Fragozo.
From the Superior Court website:

	03/25/2016	Minutes finalized for Hearing on Restraining Order heard 03/25/2016 01:30:00 PM.
	03/25/2016	Temporary Restraining Order dissolved.
	03/25/2016	Restraining order as requested denied without prejudice.

See story: EUSD denied restraining order against Trustee Jose Fragozo 

See my original post HERE.

San Diego Union-Tribune story about the case:
Fragozo makes case to lift restraining order
By Pat Maio
Feb. 10, 2016

— Escondido elementary school district Trustee Jose Fragozo testified in Vista Superior Court on Wednesday that he never yelled or threatened school officials who want him banned from district property.
Fragozo’s testimony came near the end of a weeks-long hearing into whether a temporary workplace violence restraining order filed against him by district administrators should be made permanent... Fragozo, 50, is the first Latino elected to the school board. He has said officials want to silence his concerns about declining enrollment, minority issues and what he has said are deficiencies in teaching English language learners...

Rankins-Ibarra, and trustees Zesty Harper and Paulette Donnellon, testified last month that Fragozo has harassed administrators with bullying text messages, emails, finger-pointing antics and name-calling. The superintendent has said the behavior has caused him to fear for his life.

Fragozo said in court Wednesday that he believes his board colleagues are discriminating against him because of his race. 

Superior Court Judge Richard Whitney has presided over the hearing and is expected to issue a ruling in March...

School district, Fragozo face off in court

Update: 
On March 25, 2016 San Diego Superior Court Judge Richard Whitney dissolved the restraining order obtained by Escondido Union School District against its own board member Jose Fragozo.


From the Superior Court website:

	03/25/2016	Minutes finalized for Hearing on Restraining Order heard 03/25/2016 01:30:00 PM.
	03/25/2016	Temporary Restraining Order dissolved.
	03/25/2016	Restraining order as requested denied without prejudice.

Original story:

It seems we have familiar shenanigans going on in San Diego school districts. Escondido Union School District is trying to silence a whistle-blower by destroying his political career.

Here's a pathetic accusation against Jose Fragozo, a board member in Escondido Union School District: "violating personal space."  How is this an offense that deserves a restraining order? 

Then we have "pointing a finger"! Seriously--pointing a finger. 

And my personal favorite, "demeaning staff."  Demeaning staff is normally considered de rigour behavior in school districts. 

Other school officials have committed actual crimes and yet managed to maintain the full support of their districts, and immunity from prosecution. 

I assume this entire case is based on political conflicts.


School district, Fragozo face off in court
by Steve Puterski
Coast News
December 23, 2015

VISTA — The battle between the Escondido Union School District and trustee Jose Fragozo went before a judge on Dec. 18 at the San Diego County Superior Court.

Fragozo is subject to a temporary restraining order filed by Superintendent Luis Rankins-Ibarra with supplementing statements from three other EUSD administrators on Dec. 2 after the four alleged threatening and harassing behavior from Fragozo. The district is attempting to make the order permanent.

During last week’s hearing, EUSD Board of Trustee Zesty Harper testified Fragozo’s behavior grew increasingly volatile over the last year.

The hearing lasted several hours and was continued until Dec. 23.

Trustee Zesty Harper testified as a witness for the district and Rankins-Ibarra saying Fragozo’s demeanor behind closed doors increasingly grew more aggressive, intimidating and threatening over the past year.

Harper, who was elected last year, said she saw several incidents of Fragozo violating others’ personal space, pointing a finger in faces and demeaning staff during meetings.

The district’s attorney, Daniel Shinoff, told the court his clients suffered through tirades and threats of physical violence from Fragozo. In addition, Shinoff said Deputy Superintendent Leila Sackfield felt, at one point, she had been falsely imprisoned, while Assisatant Superintendents Kelly Prins and Kevin Rubow were targets of bouts of yelling “as close as possible” with Fragozo pointing his finger in their faces.

[Maura Larkins' comment: Sackfield "felt" she was falsely imprisoned? Why didn't she call the police? Why didn't she file a criminal complaint? I suspect the accusation was dreamed up long after the event in question. Has anyone questioned Sackfield's propensity for paranoia?]

Shinoff also cited 158 school shootings since 2013 including three local shootings have given the four added reasons for concern, but Fragozo’s attorney, Laura Farris, blasted Shinoff for attempting to link her client and mass shootings.

During Farris’ opening statement, she said her client has not threatened any district official and his passion for the district stems from wanting the best for its students. She added Rankins-Ibarra is overly sensitive to others in disagreement with how to approach the district’s issues.

In addition, Farris claims the district has prevented Fragozo from performing his duties and “obliterated” his constitutional rights.

“He demanded accountability for test scores,” Farris said. “They are using the shootings to get Mr. Fragozo out of the picture.”

Update from Superior Court files:

12/23/2015 Court request to continue the Hearing on Restraining Order and reissue the temporary orders was granted. The Hearing on Restraining Order was continued to 01/08/2016 at 09:00 AM in Department N-21. For more on Escondido Union School District, see Coach Carter case.

From the archives: California Attorney General disagrees with law firm hired by Grossmont-Cuyamaca College

Maura Larkins' note: A few months ago I depublished about 400 posts, and I'm gradually republishing them. I'm working to censor certain allegations against Stutz Artiano Shinoff & Holtz law firm while continuing to make information available about the actions of public officials.

Why did Grossmont-Cuyamaca Community College fire non-voting student trustee Rick Walker from his job as a web analyst for the college?  The reason they gave was that he had a conflict of interest if he was employed at the same time that he sat on the board. But he didn’t even vote! All he could do was talk?


Who was it who really had a conflict of interest?

Clearly, the board wanted to silence him.

The California Attorney General issued an opinion that there was no conflict of interest.

Leonel Sanchez of the San Diego Union Tribune wrote on Sept. 11, 2007, "A spokesman for the California Community Colleges Chancellor's Office said he was not aware of student trustees at other colleges being told they could not serve on governing boards while working for their districts."

Rick Walker took down his website in or about December of 2007, right after I was sued for defamation by the lawyers for GCCCD.

The "Rethinking"

Nothing much happened when GCCCD trustee Deanna Weeks "rethought" an issue. [Update: Ms. Weeks decided not to run for reelection after several embarrassing episodes when scrutiny of her actions became too uncomfortable.]


October 4, 2007
The "rethinking" allegedly done by GCCCD trustees regarding their firing of non-voting student trustee Rick Walker apparently resulted in no new insights. Certainly, it resulted in no new actions. The board decided to ignore the opinion of the California Attorney General.

Rick Walker succeeded in making GCCC officials at least go through the motions of reevaluating their actions in the light of a California Attorney General legal opinion that contradicts the opinion of Stutz law firm attorney Jack Sleeth.

If GCCCD board members stay true to form, the "reexamination" will result in no action at all.

What they should do, of course, is pay damages to Rick Walker for wrongfully harming him. Especially when they harmed the college by punishing a student trustee for bringing up issues that needed to be addressed for the good of the college.

Leonel Sanchez is doing a great job covering the story for the San Diego Union Tribune.

Here's his September 19, 2007 report:

"The Grossmont-Cuyamaca Community College District will again review the issue of whether a student trustee can serve on the district's governing board while holding a job in the district.

"The last time the district looked at the conflict-of-interest issue, it led to the firing of former Grossmont College student trustee Rick Walker, who was let go from his job as a Web analyst in December 2005.

"Walker, speaking to the board last night, repeated his claim that he was unjustly fired...

"District officials said Walker was fired after district lawyer Jack Sleeth reviewed state education code and concluded that student trustees should not be allowed to be district employees...

"“You will ultimately find out what the law is if somebody will bring some litigation on this,” Sleeth said.

"Walker has threatened to take legal action. State Sen. Christine Kehoe, D-San Diego, requested the legal opinion from the Attorney General's Office at his request.

"Trustee Bill Garrett said he found the attorney general's opinion “persuasive” and proposed changing the district's policy to reflect that opinion. No action was taken on his proposal..."


Leonel Sanchez: (619) 542-4568; leonel.sanchez@uniontrib.com

I can't believe that SDCOE-JPA executive director Diane Croiser has suspended attorney Dan Shinoff

Update: See San Ysidro v. Stutz Artiano Shinoff & Holtz complaint on U~T San Diego website.

Original Post:

Officials at SDCOE-JPA have worked closely--and almost exclusively--with attorney Dan
Shinoff for decades, but have now cut him off from new case assignments!   What???
SDCOE itself should be investigated if Dan Shinoff should be investigated. 

Dan Shinoff always had SDCOE officials looking over his shoulder as he
conducted cases.  SDCOE administrators sat in the courtroom during trials, made
decisions with Mr. Shinoff.   SDCOE-JPA executive director Diane Crosier,
Assistant Superintendent for Business Services Lora Duzyk, and
Superintendent Randy Ward are responsible for Shinoff's actions.  They
oversee him.  Why aren't they being investigated?

Schools office suspends law firm
2015-03-16
U~T San Diego

A law firm that does legal work for school districts across San Diego County has been
suspended from new assignments by the agency at the Office of Education that taps
attorneys for certain liability cases....
[Diane] Crosier wrote to [Dan] Shinoff...
"Due to the severity of the allegations [by San Ysidro School District] we feel it is
in the best interest of our members to suspend any new assignments until the
lawsuit and bar complaint are resolved. We appreciate your many years of
dedicated work for the JPA membership."

...Shinoff told the U-T on Friday that the San Ysidro actions were baseless. He issued
this statement today, in response to the JPA reaction:
   The JPA felt it was in everyone’s best interest to suspend new assignments to the firm
until all issues have been resolved. We certainly understand why the JPA feels this is
necessary, given the misguided action of one of its school district members. We have
had a long and successful relationship with the JPA members. We expect a speedy
resolution to these issues and look forward to our continued relationship with its
members.

In comments on the Watchdog’s story about how the legal work is distributed, personal
injury attorney Daniel Gilleon spoke up for Shinoff and attorney Randy Winet, who
receives the second largest helping of legal work from the JPA.

“Randy Winet and Dan Shinoff represent the school districts for a simple reason,”
Gilleon said, “they are two of the best attorneys in San Diego, and their ethics are
beyond reproach.”
Maura Larkins note:

The San Diego Union Tribune reports in the above article that the SDCOE-JPA
is now " known as  the San Diego County Schools Risk Management JPA." Since when????
It's always been known as the SDCOE-JPA.
It sounds to me like SDCOE is trying to distance itself from its own JPA.
 A few short years ago it was easy to find
documentation about the JPA on the SDCOE website, but the whole operation
has become very secretive.
The UT also says the JPA "is governed by a board of
administrators from the school districts that use its services.  

The truth is that SDCOE gives orders to the school
administrators, not the other way around.  For example, it has
ordered them to DENY ALL CLAIMS!!!! "See Rick Rinnear's directive to all SDCOE-JPA schools."

Also, as the UT itself reported recently sometimes the "board members" don't even know that they're on the board, and they don't know when the (rare) meetings
are held.

Sweetwater approves campaign finance reform; all it took was a few indictments; now what about other school districts?

An image captured in January 2012, at one of the many heated meetings of the Sweetwater trustees.

Sweetwater School Board to Consider Campaign Finance Reform
Under the current rules, a board member can accept an unlimited amount of money from a contractor seeking or performing work with the district.
By Wendy Fry
NBCSanDiego
Jan 14, 2014

The Sweetwater Union High School District will vote on campaign finance reform Tuesday in the wake of a two-year criminal probe into relationships between contractors and South County politicians.

The community has been persistent in getting the item on the agenda, despite being blocked in the past by the board and superintendent.

The proposal would limit campaign contributions to $750 for a single election contest for candidates for the board of trustees.

It also seeks to ban candidates running for school board to take contributions from anyone other than individuals or political party committees.

...This comes after three Sweetwater Union High School District board members were accused of accepting thousands of dollars on gifts and meals, allegedly for awarding construction contracts to contributing companies.

No limits are currently in place. Under the current rules, a board member can accept an unlimited amount of money from a contractor seeking or performing work with the district. For example, during his 2010 reelection campaign, Board President Jim Cartmill accepted a $20,000 contribution from SGI Construction Management, which working at the time for the district under the voter-approved $644 million bond measure.

The proposed campaign finance rules would do nothing to curb the often big amounts of money spent on behalf of candidates through independent committees. A political party could, for example, spend as much as it wants independently to promote a candidate, as long as the campaign was not coordinated with the candidate.

Sweetwater board approves campaign reform
By Allison Sampite-Montecalvo
SDUT
Jan. 14, 2014

CHULA VISTA — The Sweetwater Union High School District school board, with three members facing criminal charges in a pay-to-play case brought by the District Attorney’s Office, voted unanimously Tuesday in favor of campaign finance reform.

The reform was supported by trustees Jim Cartmill, John McCann and Bertha Lopez. Trustee Pearl Quiñones was absent. Cartmill, Lopez and Quiñones have been indicted in the corruption investigation.

Many residents consider the reform decision a huge step forward in transparency and restoring trust. Community member Maty Adato said the vote was a move in the right direction.

“This is the fifth time this issue have been on the agenda in two years,” she said. “They’ve never wanted to adopt it.”

The decision limited campaign contributions that can be made to board candidates to a maximum of $750. Only individual donors would be allowed to make contributions. Previously there was no limit on the amount or type of campaign contributions that a school board candidate could accept.

The resolution makes it “unlawful for an individual to make, or for a candidate or a controlled committee to solicit or accept” a contribution more than $750 for a single election contest.

“The limit would apply to both campaign committees and also to legal defense funds, which are additional separate fundraising mechanisms that elected officials may use when they’re facing particular illegal matters related to their office,” said Christine Cameron, an attorney who works for the district. Cameron also said the knowing solicitation of district employees for contributions is prohibited.

“The resolution also provides that at a later time the board would develop procedures for investigating violations of the rules but in the meantime a complaint submitted to the superintendent and signed by the complainant would have to be investigated using an independent investigator,” she said.

A controversial item on how to fill a board seat vacated by a member who pleaded guilty in the corruption case didn’t make it to a vote Tuesday. Although the members present formed a quorum, a decision on the vacant seat issue requires the support of three or more board members, and that appeared unlikely, so the matter was delayed. Board members also felt it was important to include Quiñones in the decision.

The vacancy was created when Arlie Ricasa resigned after pleading guilty Dec. 19 to a misdemeanor charge of accepting gifts above state limits. The Sweetwater indictments were among others at the San Ysidro School District and Southwestern College.

The board decided it would try and get in touch with Quiñones as soon as possible and set another meeting to either decide on a process for a provisional appointment or go forward with a special election.

But the trustees are up against a ticking clock.

The school district’s attorney, Dan Shinoff, said that according to board bylaws, members must fill the vacant seat within 60 days, or Feb. 17. The more time that passes the more likely it is a special election would be held, which Shinoff said could cost up to $1.5 million for a nine-month appointment (when Ricasa’s term would have expired). Shinoff said the special election would cause “a significant fiscal impact on the district.”

San Ysidro School District wants no mention of cash handoff, burning records or criminal charges in EcoBusiness case

San Ysidro Schools doesn't think opposing attorneys should be allowed to see public records showing how much San Diego County Office of Education has paid to San Ysidro's lawyers for work in the EcoBusniess case. See also story at bottom of this post of punishment of a teacher who called in law enforcement when he saw documents burning in a San Ysidro school dumpster.

See all posts re Manuel Paul.
See all posts re Dan Shinoff.
See all posts labeled San Ysidro School District; also, a few stories are listed under "San Ysidro SD".
See all posts re Ecobusiness or Manzana/Ecobusiness.

MORE EFFORTS TO CONCEAL EVENTS IN SAN YSIDRO SCHOOLS AS CIVIL AND CRIMINAL CASES PROCEED

Our school tax dollars are hard at work in San Ysidro School District where the public is paying lawyers to tell the Superior Court that the burning of district records had nothing to do with a pending $18 million lawsuit about San Ysidro School District's decision to drop a contractor.

Photo: Aaron Burgin, SDUT

San Ysidro's lawyers also told the court that a cash handout from a contractor to Superintendent Manuel Paul sheds no light on how San Ysidro officials make decisions about contractors.

Stutz law firm was chosen by San Diego County Office of Education's Joint Powers Authority, which provides legal liability insurance to schools.

The California Bar Association says that public entity lawyers have no obligation to the public and are only beholden to the public officials they represent. If they are right, as they may well be, perhaps the law needs to be changed.

I think a school district belongs to the people who pay for it and the people for whose benefit it was created, not to the officials and others who have obtained power in its hierarchy.

P.S. I am wondering why the San Diego Union-Tribune laid off Watchdog reporter Aaron Bergin. It probably didn't help when Bergin wrote about another school attorney firm, Fagen Friedman Fulfrost, and its shenanigans at Carlsbad School District. SDUT owner Doug Manchester perhaps decided he had one Watchdog too many.

CNN reports that education attorneys at Lowndes County Schools insist the video they released recently of the day student Kendrick Johnson died is "a raw feed with no edits."

However, forensic video analyst Grant Fredericks says, "(The surveillance video has) been altered in a number of ways, primarily in image quality and likely in dropped information, information loss," he said. "There are also a number of files that are corrupted because they've not been processed correctly and they're not playable. I can't say why they were done that way, but they were not done correctly, and they were not done thoroughly. So we're missing information."

--Maura Larkins



San Ysidro tries to limit testimony
District wants cash handoff, criminal charges excluded from civil matter
By Jeff McDonald
SDUT
Nov. 17, 2013

Manuel Paul, 61, San Ysidro schools superintendent, is accused of filing false documents, perjury, and accepting gifts above state limits Manuel Paul, 61, San Ysidro schools superintendent, is accused of filing false documents, perjury, and accepting gifts above state limits.

Lawyers for the San Ysidro School District filed several motions last week in an $18 million lawsuit over solar installations, attempting to exclude any mention of cash handoffs, burning of district records or criminal charges against officials.

Daniel Shinoff, the attorney defending the South County district in a dispute with EcoBusiness Alliance, asked a judge to bar from the upcoming trial references to former Superintendent Manuel Paul’s admission that he accepted $2,500 in cash from a contractor looking to secure business.

Paul has said the money was for political signs, and the motions also ask the judge to omit references to amended campaign disclosure forms filed by trustees after Paul testified that’s what the money was for.

The district argues that its former superintendent is not involved in the lawsuit.

“First, this is a breach of contract action between the San Ysidro School District and EcoBusiness Alliance,” one motion states. “Manuel Paul is not a party.”

The documents also ask the judge to exclude witnesses and references to an FBI investigation into district business practices and an FBI probe into the burning and shredding of documents on district property in July.

The motions have yet to be ruled on by the judge hearing the suit, in which EcoBusiness Alliance is objecting to the 2012 cancellation of its $18 million contract to install solar power systems at district campuses.

The company is attempting to prove that the contract was canceled in part because officials maintain a “pay to play” culture that awards contracts to vendors who contribute gifts or cash to top district officials. The district rejected that claim, saying the deal fizzled because the company did not act on the agreement.

The attorney representing EcoBusiness Alliance called the motions a ploy and a waste of public funds.

The lawsuit is unrelated to criminal charges filed against Paul and Trustee Yolanda Hernandez, who were among 15 South County educators indicted by the grand jury a year ago on corruption charges. The DA is attempting to prove a pay-to-play atmosphere regarding school construction contracts in South County, at San Ysidro and two other districts.

Hernandez has pleaded guilty to one misdemeanor charge of filing a false form. Paul has pleaded not guilty to six remaining corruption charges.

The criminal case is scheduled for trial in 2014. The civil suit is expected to go to trial early next year.


MORE EFFORTS TO SILENCE REPORTS OF EVENTS IN SCHOOLS



Did Manuel Paul illegally burn San Ysidro School District papers?
Whistleblower placed on administrative leave
By Susan Luzzaro
San Diego Reader
Aug. 4, 2013

Curious reports continue regarding burned papers retrieved from a burn barrel in the maintenance yard of the San Ysidro School District...

A new twist to the story, however, is that the district has placed the whistleblower on administrative leave.

The sequence of events on July 3 began when a San Ysidro school teacher got a call from his union president who informed him of the possible burning of documents. He called his acquaintance, Art Castanares, one of the owners of EcoAlliance, a solar-power company. EcoAlliance has filed a breach-of-contract suit against the district.

The teacher and Castanares showed up at district headquarters at about the same time and found the burn barrel. They called the FBI and the San Diego police.

“I can’t even have an open burn in my backyard," said the teacher in a recent interview. "It doesn’t look right for someone in the district to be doing this.” The teacher said what appeared to be legal documents were visible among the ashes.

Though the teacher declined to release his name until he meets with his attorney, he worries he is already suffering the consequences of being a whistleblower. The district placed him on administrative leave on Tuesday, July 30...

Lots on the line for Dumanis in South Bay

See Robert Brewer story below the Dumanis story.

Embezzlers of school booster club funds and PTA funds have been prosecuted all around the county, but  two separate embezzlements at Castle Park Elementary (where I taught) were not prosecuted. They occurred within a period of eight years.  The second incident involved $20,000 held by the PTA.  The PTA president was arrested, then let go almost immediately and never prosecuted.  Was this crime kept quiet so as not embarrass Cheryl Cox and her fellow board members?

Lots on the line for Dumanis in South Bay
By Aaron Burgin and Katherine Poythress
SDUT
JAN. 11, 2013

...Since 2007, only one case lodged by the unit against an elected official has resulted in criminal punishment. Former Encinitas Councilman Dan Dalager was fined $1,000 in 2011 after he pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor conflict of interest charge stemming from accepting deeply discounted appliances from a store owner, then voting in the owner’s favor in a dispute with the city. His case was prosecuted after the transaction was exposed by The Watchdog...[Dalager is conservative]

Allegations of corruption at Sweetwater schools stretch back as far as the 1980s, when officials were accused of misappropriating lottery funds, attempted bribery and the unauthorized sale of computers to schools in Mexico. These allegations ultimately led to the fall of then-Superintendent Anthony Trujillo and started the political career of Jim Cartmill — one of the officials accused of corruption today...

Slater-Price accepted free tickets while dispensing grants to the opera and the Old Globe Theatre. After The Watchdog revealed she failed to report the gifts on state forms, she was given a $2,000 administrative fine in 2010.

Slater-Price’s beneficiaries were charities, not for-profit companies. And prosecutors in South County are gathering evidence of quid pro quo arrangements. But Carlos said the parallel of taking entertainment while giving government largesse is there.

“It’s the same conduct,” Carlos said. “It’s crazy. If it is illegal for someone, it should be illegal for everyone. Apparently, however, that is not the case.”...

[The same could be said for the entire $200,000 yearly slush funds that supervisors used to award themselves to be used to give to the non-profits of their choice. They got plenty in return, including lots of free publicity.]

Salas said while she doesn’t believe the case is a conspiracy, she hopes Dumanis’ public integrity unit will probe other school districts.

“We are a very diverse community, and we are way beyond that type of thinking in California and San Diego,” she said, “but it seems to me that the kind of problems that we are facing here are something that his happening countywide, and there does seem to be an extraordinary focus on South Bay.”



Robert Brewer

Leslie Devaney's and Dan Shinoff's endorsements of Robert Brewer can be found HERE.

“I have had the great privilege of knowing Mr. Brewer for over 30 years. He is an outstanding individual who is the consummate professional who treats everyone he deals with with great respect and always is a person of tremendous integrity. The County would be most fortunate to have Robert Brewer as District Attorney.”

--Daniel R. Shinoff
STUTZ ARTIANO SHINOFF & HOLTZ

I imagine Mr. Shinoff is quite incensed at Bonnie Dumanis for indicting his clients Manuel Paul, Bertha Lopez, and others at Southwestern College, Sweetwater Union High School District, and San Ysidro School District.

Of course, it's sort of strange that Dan Shinoff feels he has to muzzle a retired teacher in order to protect his own reputation as person of integrity. (See my San Diego Education Report blog posts re Stutz v. Larkins.) Does Mr. Shinoff really think that people who have worked with him for years will think his ethics are questionable just because of something I say? Haven't these people already formed an opinion?  They probably know him better than I do.  Most of the facts that I discuss have been published in newspapers, or at least in court documents, and few people read my websites, anyway. Why does Mr. Shinoff see me as a threat to his reputation?

Sharon McClain wins against Dan Shinoff and Del Mar Union School District; award is $388,537 plus interest

Sharon McClain

See all Sharon McClain posts.

Former Del Mar Union School District superintendent Sharon McClain won her case for wrongful termination/breach of contract.

McClain's attorney Dale Gronemeier successfully argued that the board didn't want to admit that it couldn't get along with its superintendents, and was worried about the political repercussions of buying out two different superintendents in two years, so it sought to trump up accusations against McClain and fire her for cause. The district was unable to convince the court that the firing was justified.

On October 3, 2012 the Court issued the following order (found on the Court's website):

COURT RULING: The Court finds judgment on the Amended Complaint(First Amended Complaint) for Sharon McClain Ed D and against Del Mar Union School District in the amount of: $388537.00 principal, $0 punitive damages, $0 attorney fees, $ interest, $0 prejudgment costs and $0 other costs. Interest is awarded from the time of breach at the rate of 7%.

The transcript pretty much explains the case.

But apparently somebody doesn't want the public to see the transcript. Who could that be, I wonder? I got a message today from the court reporter telling me I should erase the transcript from my website. But how did she get my private email address?


UPDATE October 9, 2012: EXCELLENT REPORTING BY THE DEL MAR TIMES

To its shame, U-T San Diego has not reported on the trial outcome in this case, although it published the details of the district's criticisms of McClain.

It appears that education commentator Marsha Sutton was unable to bring herself to write about the conclusion of this case, although she started out with a bang. I saw Marsha in court during the trial, but something seems to have stopped her from reporting about the outcome.

Fortunately, reporter Karen Billing takes up the slack in these situations:

Judge rules in favor of former Del Mar school district superintendent
By Karen Billing
Del Mar Times
October 9, 2012

While the trial ended Oct. 3 in the case of former Del Mar Union School District Superintendent Sharon McClain versus the district, the specifics of the judgment of the wrongful termination lawsuit won’t be known for weeks.

“I won,” McClain said. “I feel vindicated. … The most important thing was the vindication to me that they did the wrong thing. I’m glad it’s been proven that they were wrong.”

McClain said she will be owed two years and three months in back payments, plus retirement from the California State Teachers Retirement System (STRS).

McClain’s attorney, Dale Gronemeier, emailed this newspaper copy from the court’s statement of intended decision that said: “The Court finds in favor of plaintiff for breach of contract in the sum of $413,500, which includes the district’s STRS contribution plus $32,000 for the tax sheltered annuity less the consulting income earned mitigation of $56,963. The total award to plaintiff is $388,537 plus 7 percent interest from the time of breach.”

However, the district’s attorney Dan Shinoff said that the judge did not blanket order those two years and three months in compensation and he believes the amount owed to be more like $156,000.

“I think that the verdict was in her favor,” Shinoff said. “I think it’s our obligation as officers of the court to make sure we’re never ever critical of a decision that a judge makes, but that doesn’t mean there still aren’t issues capable of being viewed from a different perspective.”

The Del Mar school board met in closed session on Monday. Oct. 8, to discuss the case but no action was taken. President Scott Wooden said that they are awaiting the court’s judgment and nothing will happen until that point.

“We’d all like to see it resolved,” Wooden said.

... Doug Perkins and Comischell Rodriguez are the only current board members who were a part of the previous board that fired McClain.

[Maura Larkins comment: Doug Perkins voted to fire McClain, costing the district much time and money. Comischell Rodriguez was the only board member with the courage to vote against the firing.]

...The transcript of the case will be made available later this week...

Read more: Judge rules in favor of former Del Mar school district superintendent



THE BIZARRE REPORTING OF U-T SAN DIEGO

On October 9, 2012 I added the following to this post: "To its shame, U-T San Diego has not reported on the trial outcome in this case, although it published the details of the district's criticisms of McClain."

Later that day, at 6:28 p.m., U-T San Diego published the bizarre and false headline, "Suit settled in favor of former Del Mar Superintendent."

But this lawsuit is most definitely NOT settled.

Why would anyone want the public to believe it was settled?  I think the answer is clear. Schools want to maintain the fiction that when they settle, it isn't because they violated the law, it's just to avoid legal fees, even though they never did anything wrong. The opposite is true. The system is set up so that lawyers, rather than wronged employees and students, receive the largesse of school insurer SDCOE-JPA (San Diego County Office of Education). 

A reasonable person would conclude that the court had actually overseen a settlement of the case. The word "trial" does not occur anywhere in the U-T article. The article refers to "legal proceedings" and mentions the name of the judge, and includes a recitation of board complaints against McClain.

The name of Dan Shinoff is entirely missing from the U-T article. Interestingly, the Union-Tribune completely failed to cover the sexual harassment lawsuit of former CVESD board member Patrick Judd, former superintendent of Mountain Empire Unified School District, although the Union-Tribune had endorsed Mr. Judd repeatedly.



MAURA LARKINS NOTE: 30 DAYS MIGHT REALLY MEAN 30 DAYS

Jack Sleeth and Dan Shinoff don't seem to believe that a law requiring 30 days notice actually means 30 days notice is required. We can all be skeptics, can't we?

pages 18-22 of the trial transcript

THE COURT:

LET ME ASK YOU ONE QUESTION BEFORE YOU DO THAT AND I'M GOING TO ASK THE DISTRICT THE SAME QUESTION. WHY DIDN'T THEY GIVE HER 30 DAYS' NOTICE? THAT'S SOMETHING I NEVER UNDERSTOOD FROM THE FIRST PHASE OF THIS TRIAL.

MR. GRONEMEIER:

MY ANSWER BEFORE AND MY ANSWER NOW IS THEY MUST HAVE GOTTEN BAD ADVICE...THAT'S THE BEST GUESS I CAN MAKE. I'VE ASKED THAT QUESTION, AND THEY'VE REFUSED LET ANYBODY ANSWER IT [in depositions]...

MR. SLEETH:

I THINK THE OTHER REASON IS WE INTERPRETED THAT PARTICULAR PROVISION DIFFERENTLY AND YOU HEARD OUR ARGUMENT... YOU HEARD OUR ARGUMENT THAT THE 30 DAY NOTICE DIDN'T APPLY TO MATERIAL BREACHES OF CONTRACT...

MR. SHINOFF:

THE DISTRICT SIMPLY HAD A DIFFERENT INTERPRETATION ...

THE COURT:

WELL, OKAY...I SUPPOSE THE ANSWER IS THAT RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE BOARD AND THE COMMUNITY AND THE SUPERINTENDENT HAD DETERIORATED TO THE POINT WHERE THE DISTRICT WAS WILLING TO TAKE THE RISK THAT THE 30 DAYS MIGHT REALLY MEAN 30 DAYS.




UPDATE OCT. 10, 2012

INVASION OF THE...BROWN ACT?
STUTZ LAW FIRM ADVISES: CALL US "WHEN THE BROWN ACT INVADES"

From the Stutz Artiano Shinoff & Holtz website:
Robert Mahlowitz Presents “Dragged Into Closed Session”

Attorney Robert Mahlowitz will present “Dragged Into Closed Session: The Ins and Outs of California’s Brown Act & Personnel Discussions” at the Fall Training Institute for the Association of Chief Human Resource Officers/Equal Employment Officers (ACHRO/EEO). The event will be held at Harrah’s Lake Tahoe October 24-26.

HR Professionals are often called upon to appear in closed session with their Boards to discuss personnel issues. Limited budgets may restrict access to legal counsel when HR Administrators have concerns about whether matters have been properly noticed, what notice has been provided to an employee and what to do when the employee wants a public airing of the discussion. Concerns also arise about potential personal liability for violation of the Brown Act. For 30 years, Stutz Artiano has served as legal counsel to community college and school districts in California and we will share insights to empower senior HR/EEO professionals for those times when the Brown Act invades.

[Maura Larkins comment: Stutz provided legal counsel to MiraCosta College throughout the Victoria Richart paroxysm, and to Grossmont-Cuyamaca during the Omero Suarez scandal.

CVESD gives up its appeal of Danielle Cozaihr million-dollar verdict

It appears that Danielle Cozaihr has completed her long, hard battle for justice from Chula Vista Elementary School District. In December 2007 Cozaihr won a million dollar verdict against CVESD. Soon after, Daniel Shinoff took over the case. CVESD appealed. The case was then passed to Shinoff's partner Jack Sleeth. No opening brief was ever filed on behalf of CVESD. It appears that CVESD must have decided to either pay the verdict or to settle for some other amount.

04/08/2008 Notice of appeal lodged by CVESD
12/05/2008 Upon written stipulation filed by the parties to the appeal, the appeal is DISMISSED.