Voice of San Diego has provided an insightful analysis of former SDEA President Camille Zombro's open letter to teachers in San Diego Unified School District attacking current SDEA President Bill Freeman.
See all Camille Zombro posts.
'Our Union May Be on the Verge of Accepting Deep … Cuts'
May 14, 2012
By Will Carless
Voice of San Diego
...2. Zombro Lashes Out at Her Successor [as President of SDEA]
When my presidency ended in 2010, I proudly passed the torch to Bill Freeman, a site Association Rep. who told all of us he believed in (and campaigned on) our model of strong, member-driven unionism. Unfortunately, it is increasingly obvious that Bill is no longer committed to that vision. Rather than lead an aggressive fight to hold the School Board accountable for their unnecessary layoffs, he is now taking dramatic and abrupt steps to systematically dismantle the very foundation of the powerful union we have built: our democracy, our transparent communication with membership, and our tough stance in defending our jobs and our contract.
The SDEA became increasingly hard-line and isolated throughout the tenure of Zombro and her ally, Leedham. Apart from some subtle hints at reconciliation with the district, however, Freeman hasn’t offered much to suggest publicly that there is the sort of rift at the SDEA that Zombro is alleging. He has appeared in public with Zombro and has continued to say at board meetings that concessions are not the answer to the district’s problems.
3. There’s a ‘Tug-of-War’ Going on at the Union
Zombro writes:
Those of us inside the SDEA building have seen this coming for some time, resulting in a tug-of-war within the office over the fundamental direction of our union. On one side of SDEA’s tug-of-war have been Craig and I and thousands of you, fighting to keep SDEA’s contract closed while saving our valuable coworkers’ jobs. On the other side are Bill, a portion of the SDEA Board and a portion of the SDEA staff who want to “collaborate” with the District, possibly open the contract, resulting in significant salary and benefit concessions in the hopes that the District will reduce layoffs.
Again, this is fascinating because it gives some insight into the decision-making going on within the union. The organization, which has prided itself on presenting a united front in the face of recent financial storms, is clearly wrestling with the latest round of bad news, according to Zombro’s account.
We’ve seen signs before that there is division within the union’s membership. Earlier this year, two teachers sent us an open letter calling for the SDEA to change its firm position against concessions.
This is the first public recognition that those divisions go all the way up to the top of the union.
4. Zombro Claims She and Leedham Have Been ‘Purged’ From the Union
She writes:
Unfortunately I am writing to you today because our democracy — the open and sometimes raucous debate that defines us — is being threatened as current SDEA leadership shifts the direction of our union while actively working to discredit those who are speaking up against these actions.
Further: The stark reality is that Bill is driving out the opposition — me, Craig, and anyone else who pushes back. Bill has led the SDEA Board to demand Craig’s resignation after two months of unexplained paid administrative leave, and threw me out of the meeting where the decision was debated. Despite a permanent, legally binding contract (much like the one you and I enjoy), and a perfect performance record, Craig is being forced out with no just cause or progressive discipline, no chance to tell his side of the story, and without ever even being told what, if anything, he had been accused of. That should horrify anyone who believes their contract protects their employment status.
For the last two months, I have also experienced a level of personal harassment and villification that I won’t detail, but that no worker deserves to experience in the workplace or in her union.
To recap: Zombro was voted out of office earlier this year in the union’s elections. Leedham was placed on administrative leave, and the union has been extremely tight-lipped about what, exactly, they claim he has done to warrant his removal.
I’ll be pushing the union for more details on Leedham’s ouster in the coming days, in the light of these accusations from Zombro.
5. A Pressure Group Has Been Formed to Push the SDEA in a Certain Direction
Zombro writes:
So how do we get through this with our union intact? We step up our involvement and we stay involved. I sent this email to just about every teacher in the District I personally know. I know a lot of people… and so do you! Forward this email, tell them to forward it, and follow up with conversations because, as I always say, a flier or an email are only as good as the conversations that go with them.
Link arms with other SDEA members — don’t wait for someone to tell you what to do! In just one example, a group of teachers from several schools across SDUSD have formed the “Breakfast Club” (which SDEA leadership will likely discredit as a “splinter group” or a “divisive force”). They are a passionate and articulate pocket of SDEA members who are working together to push back against layoffs AND concessions — the core of the SDEA agenda — and I will be proud to start getting involved with their efforts as they grow.
So, Zombro appears to be calling on her union brothers and sisters to step away from the SDEA and join this new group that she may be willing to lead...
[Zombro’s replacement [as vice-president of SDEA], Lindsay Burningham, has also made clear that she hopes to work more closely in union with the district.]
Saturday, June 2, 2012
Friday, June 1, 2012
D.A. won't charge accused Capistrano Unified coaches
D.A. won't charge accused coaches
By SCOTT MARTINDALE AND DAN ALBANO
THE ORANGE COUNTY REGISTER
May 31, 2012
A group of former Capistrano Unified high school coaches accused of taking part in an elaborate kickback scheme involving a sports equipment company will not face criminal charges, authorities announced Wednesday.
The Orange County District Attorney's Office said it would not file charges against the Capistrano Unified coaches who did business with Lapes Athletic Team Sales in Laguna Hills, including three who were fired from their full-time teaching jobs in February.
Former San Clemente High head football coach Eric Patton talks to his team during practice in 2010. Patton, a 12-year veteran of the program had been working as head coach until he was put on leave in August 2011. Patton was fired in February by Capistrano Unified trustees from his job as a full-time English teacher at the school.
"Based on the evidence submitted to us, we did not feel there was sufficient evidence to prove a criminal case," D.A. spokeswoman Farrah Emami said. "We need to be able to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that a crime occurred."
Capistrano coaches and teachers Charles "Chi Chi" Biehn, Brent Melbon and Eric Patton were terminated after the school district accused them of stealing tens of thousands of dollars of taxpayer money.
Four other coaches and teachers – Ken Goldstone, Jeff Veeder, Joe Wood and Ken Workman – were formally reprimanded after being put on leave from their coaching duties.
Patton, the former head football coach at San Clemente, said he was pleased by the District Attorney's decision.
"We have maintained our innocence all along," he said. "I'm just very gratified that the Orange County Sheriff's Department and District Attorney have issued this (statement). It exonerates the coaches and validates our position."
Patton also said he hopes the decision will help restore his reputation.
"I would love to ask (Capistrano Superintendent) Dr. (Joe) Farley what door I walk through to get my good name and reputation back," he said.
Biehn, the former football coach at Capistrano Valley, added: "Obviously, if I'm not going to jail, it's great news."
An eight-month Capistrano Unified investigation concluded that the coaches maintained personal spending accounts with now-defunct Lapes Athletic, allowing the coaches to convert district funds into personal credits that they could spend as they saw fit, without district oversight.
A Register investigation last year found much of the taxpayer money appeared to have been spent on athletic programs, but the district concluded thousands of dollars went to buy personal gear for the coaches, a violation of district policy.
In the coaches' termination reports, Capistrano Unified indicated at least nine state and federal laws had been violated.
Capistrano attorney Daniel Shinoff said the D.A.'s decision not to file charges was unrelated to and had no bearing on the district's disciplinary decisions.
"The D.A. is looking at a burden of proof that is beyond a reasonable doubt, so they are looking at it from a very different perspective," Shinoff said. "What we're looking at was whether there was violation of school district policy and whether the violations of those policies rose to a level that someone should be subjected to termination."
After the district completed its internal investigation last year, the Orange County Sheriff's Department launched a probe. The sheriff's findings, which were never made public, were turned over to the D.A.'s office about a month ago.
In deciding not to file criminal charges, D.A. investigators cited "a lack of sufficient evidence to show criminal intent or a diversion of funds for personal use."
Emami declined to elaborate on that statement or to confirm which coaches were investigated. But she said the D.A. would reopen the case if additional evidence or information were to come forward. "I'm innocent," Patton said. "Due process is about proof, and this is part of the due process." Patton and Biehn both confirmed that they have appealed their terminations. Patton said he believes the D.A.'s decision will help them succeed in their appeals.
"I realize there is another process involved here but it is based on the same evidence and the same facts," Patton said. "I just hope this whole thing can be over for everybody who is facing further hearings."
Neighboring Saddleback Valley Unified is conducting an internal investigation into its employees' involvement with Lapes Athletic. That investigation, which has spanned about a year, is ongoing, said spokeswoman Tammy Blakely.
Saddleback College in Mission Viejo, meanwhile, disciplined one athletic department employee in the Lapes Athletic matter, while Irvine Unified completed an investigation but determined no wrongdoing on the part of its employees.
By SCOTT MARTINDALE AND DAN ALBANO
THE ORANGE COUNTY REGISTER
May 31, 2012
A group of former Capistrano Unified high school coaches accused of taking part in an elaborate kickback scheme involving a sports equipment company will not face criminal charges, authorities announced Wednesday.
The Orange County District Attorney's Office said it would not file charges against the Capistrano Unified coaches who did business with Lapes Athletic Team Sales in Laguna Hills, including three who were fired from their full-time teaching jobs in February.
Former San Clemente High head football coach Eric Patton talks to his team during practice in 2010. Patton, a 12-year veteran of the program had been working as head coach until he was put on leave in August 2011. Patton was fired in February by Capistrano Unified trustees from his job as a full-time English teacher at the school.
"Based on the evidence submitted to us, we did not feel there was sufficient evidence to prove a criminal case," D.A. spokeswoman Farrah Emami said. "We need to be able to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that a crime occurred."
Capistrano coaches and teachers Charles "Chi Chi" Biehn, Brent Melbon and Eric Patton were terminated after the school district accused them of stealing tens of thousands of dollars of taxpayer money.
Four other coaches and teachers – Ken Goldstone, Jeff Veeder, Joe Wood and Ken Workman – were formally reprimanded after being put on leave from their coaching duties.
Patton, the former head football coach at San Clemente, said he was pleased by the District Attorney's decision.
"We have maintained our innocence all along," he said. "I'm just very gratified that the Orange County Sheriff's Department and District Attorney have issued this (statement). It exonerates the coaches and validates our position."
Patton also said he hopes the decision will help restore his reputation.
"I would love to ask (Capistrano Superintendent) Dr. (Joe) Farley what door I walk through to get my good name and reputation back," he said.
Biehn, the former football coach at Capistrano Valley, added: "Obviously, if I'm not going to jail, it's great news."
An eight-month Capistrano Unified investigation concluded that the coaches maintained personal spending accounts with now-defunct Lapes Athletic, allowing the coaches to convert district funds into personal credits that they could spend as they saw fit, without district oversight.
A Register investigation last year found much of the taxpayer money appeared to have been spent on athletic programs, but the district concluded thousands of dollars went to buy personal gear for the coaches, a violation of district policy.
In the coaches' termination reports, Capistrano Unified indicated at least nine state and federal laws had been violated.
Capistrano attorney Daniel Shinoff said the D.A.'s decision not to file charges was unrelated to and had no bearing on the district's disciplinary decisions.
"The D.A. is looking at a burden of proof that is beyond a reasonable doubt, so they are looking at it from a very different perspective," Shinoff said. "What we're looking at was whether there was violation of school district policy and whether the violations of those policies rose to a level that someone should be subjected to termination."
After the district completed its internal investigation last year, the Orange County Sheriff's Department launched a probe. The sheriff's findings, which were never made public, were turned over to the D.A.'s office about a month ago.
In deciding not to file criminal charges, D.A. investigators cited "a lack of sufficient evidence to show criminal intent or a diversion of funds for personal use."
Emami declined to elaborate on that statement or to confirm which coaches were investigated. But she said the D.A. would reopen the case if additional evidence or information were to come forward. "I'm innocent," Patton said. "Due process is about proof, and this is part of the due process." Patton and Biehn both confirmed that they have appealed their terminations. Patton said he believes the D.A.'s decision will help them succeed in their appeals.
"I realize there is another process involved here but it is based on the same evidence and the same facts," Patton said. "I just hope this whole thing can be over for everybody who is facing further hearings."
Neighboring Saddleback Valley Unified is conducting an internal investigation into its employees' involvement with Lapes Athletic. That investigation, which has spanned about a year, is ongoing, said spokeswoman Tammy Blakely.
Saddleback College in Mission Viejo, meanwhile, disciplined one athletic department employee in the Lapes Athletic matter, while Irvine Unified completed an investigation but determined no wrongdoing on the part of its employees.
Discovery suddenly stayed in Stutz Artiano Shinoff & Holtz v. Maura Larkins
See all posts re Stutz Artiano Shinoff & Holtz v. Maura Larkins
I got a minute order from the San Diego Superior Court in the mail today. The timing is very, very strange. The last hearing in the case was March 9, 2012--two months and three weeks ago. My discussion with Commander Darin Fotheringham in the Santa Barbara Sheriff's office two days ago is the only event that I can connect even remotely to this bolt out of the blue.
June 1, 2012
Commander Darin Fotheringham
Office of the Sheriff of Santa Barbara
Dear Commander Fotheringham:
I was amused that on the very day I contacted you about my subpoena for business records from the Sheriff of Santa Barbara showing that Deputy Michael Carlson and his sister Robin Donlan involved Chula Vista Elementary School District in criminal actions, Judge Judith Hayes suspended all discovery in the case at issue.
My, my. The timing is fascinating. No papers had been filed asking that discovery be stayed. In fact, no papers had been filed in this case for two months.
I bow to your amazing—what shall I call it?—luck, perhaps?
Sincerely,
Maura Larkins
Note: I tried to fax the above letter to the fax number Commander Fotheringham gave me on May 30, 2012 for faxing the subpoena to him. My fax machine dialed the number, then the call was picked up. Next I heard a raspberry sound, and soon a man was telling me that if I'd like to make a call, I should hang up and dial again. I guess the guys who work for the Sheriff of Santa Barbara like to have fun. They seem to be really funny guys.
I think that it is highly unlikely that Commander Fotheringham or Sheriff Bill Brown contacted Judge Hayes. Here's the scenario I came up with for what most likely happened:
Commander Fotheringham may have talked to Michael Carlson. Michael Carlson went into cover-up mode (again). Carlson seems to have no remorse at all, not even for causing problems for the Sheriff of Santa Barbara. My guess is he thinks of himself as a victim. He has never indicated any regret for all the problems his actions caused to me, to my school district (including $100,000s in legal fees to defend Carlson's sister and others), and to the children in my school.
I imagine Michael Carlson would have called his attorney, Deborah Garvin, after Commander Fotheringham spoke to him. And perhaps his sister, Robin Donlan, who turned his misdemeanor into a huge mess for Chula Vista Elementary School District.
Deborah Garvin and Robin Donlan would probably each have contacted Dan Shinoff of Stutz Artiano Shinoff & Holtz, with whom they worked in the earlier case involving Carlson.
And that's where the chain of likely events gets murky for me. What happened next???? I'm simply unable to conjure an explanation for what could have happened.
The minute order I received from Judge Hayes says that discovery is stayed.
But actually it's a lot more complicated. Hayes also finally made a decision about two of the three March 9, 2012 motions. After almost three months of silence, she finally denied my motion to set aside the summary adjudication, even though I was able to provide documentary evidence proving that the decision was deeply flawed.
For the past two months and three weeks she pretended that discovery was open--even gave us a discovery cut-off date--but obviously it was never really open, since the summary adjudication was never set aside. I suspected that I would be shut down the minute I started discovery, so I gave myself a long vacation (including a month in Washington DC) and waited as long as possible to start discovery.
Judge Hayes is still delaying (until August 27, 2012) her decision on Stutz' motion to strike my answer. There is absolutely no case law to support such a decision in a case with a history like this one.
I got a minute order from the San Diego Superior Court in the mail today. The timing is very, very strange. The last hearing in the case was March 9, 2012--two months and three weeks ago. My discussion with Commander Darin Fotheringham in the Santa Barbara Sheriff's office two days ago is the only event that I can connect even remotely to this bolt out of the blue.
June 1, 2012
Commander Darin Fotheringham
Office of the Sheriff of Santa Barbara
Dear Commander Fotheringham:
I was amused that on the very day I contacted you about my subpoena for business records from the Sheriff of Santa Barbara showing that Deputy Michael Carlson and his sister Robin Donlan involved Chula Vista Elementary School District in criminal actions, Judge Judith Hayes suspended all discovery in the case at issue.
My, my. The timing is fascinating. No papers had been filed asking that discovery be stayed. In fact, no papers had been filed in this case for two months.
I bow to your amazing—what shall I call it?—luck, perhaps?
Sincerely,
Maura Larkins
Note: I tried to fax the above letter to the fax number Commander Fotheringham gave me on May 30, 2012 for faxing the subpoena to him. My fax machine dialed the number, then the call was picked up. Next I heard a raspberry sound, and soon a man was telling me that if I'd like to make a call, I should hang up and dial again. I guess the guys who work for the Sheriff of Santa Barbara like to have fun. They seem to be really funny guys.
I think that it is highly unlikely that Commander Fotheringham or Sheriff Bill Brown contacted Judge Hayes. Here's the scenario I came up with for what most likely happened:
Commander Fotheringham may have talked to Michael Carlson. Michael Carlson went into cover-up mode (again). Carlson seems to have no remorse at all, not even for causing problems for the Sheriff of Santa Barbara. My guess is he thinks of himself as a victim. He has never indicated any regret for all the problems his actions caused to me, to my school district (including $100,000s in legal fees to defend Carlson's sister and others), and to the children in my school.
I imagine Michael Carlson would have called his attorney, Deborah Garvin, after Commander Fotheringham spoke to him. And perhaps his sister, Robin Donlan, who turned his misdemeanor into a huge mess for Chula Vista Elementary School District.
Deborah Garvin and Robin Donlan would probably each have contacted Dan Shinoff of Stutz Artiano Shinoff & Holtz, with whom they worked in the earlier case involving Carlson.
And that's where the chain of likely events gets murky for me. What happened next???? I'm simply unable to conjure an explanation for what could have happened.
The minute order I received from Judge Hayes says that discovery is stayed.
But actually it's a lot more complicated. Hayes also finally made a decision about two of the three March 9, 2012 motions. After almost three months of silence, she finally denied my motion to set aside the summary adjudication, even though I was able to provide documentary evidence proving that the decision was deeply flawed.
For the past two months and three weeks she pretended that discovery was open--even gave us a discovery cut-off date--but obviously it was never really open, since the summary adjudication was never set aside. I suspected that I would be shut down the minute I started discovery, so I gave myself a long vacation (including a month in Washington DC) and waited as long as possible to start discovery.
Judge Hayes is still delaying (until August 27, 2012) her decision on Stutz' motion to strike my answer. There is absolutely no case law to support such a decision in a case with a history like this one.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
