Part of the Bay Area News Group

MDUSD board to make several appointments tonight

By Theresa Harrington
Wednesday, August 13th, 2014 at 7:21 pm in Education, Mt. Diablo school district.

Here is the agenda for tonight’s Mt. Diablo school board meeting, which is at 7:30 p.m. in the district office at 1936 Carlotta Drive in Concord:

“1.0 Call to Order

1.1 Board Member, Brian Lawrence, will participate via teleconference from Philadelphia Marriott Downtown, Business Center, 1201 Market Street, Philadelphia, PA 19107 Info
1.2 President Will Call the Meeting to Order at 5:00 p.m. Info
2.0 Announcements
2.1 In Closed Session, the Board will consider the items listed on the Closed Session Agenda. Info

3.0 Public Comment
3.1 The public may address the Board concerning items that are scheduled for discussion during Closed Session only. These presentations are limited to three minutes each, or a total of thirty minutes for all speakers or the three minute limit may be shortened. Speakers are not allowed to yield their time. Info

4.0 Adjourn to Closed Session at 5:00 p.m.
4.1 The Board of Education will adjourn to Closed Session at 5:00 p.m. to consider items listed on the Closed Session Agenda. Action
5.0 Closed Session Agenda
5.1 (Item #1) Expulsion of Student #14-14 from all regular schools of Mt. Diablo Unified School District. Action
5.2 (Item #2) Discipline, Dismissal or Release of Public Employee Action
5.3 (Item #3) Discipline, Dismissal or Release of Public Employee Action
5.4 (Item #4) Negotiations – The Board may discuss negotiations or provide direction to its representatives regarding represented employees, pursuant to EERA (Govt. Code Section 3549.1) Agency negotiators: Julie Braun Martin and Deborah Cooksey, Agencies: MDEA, CSEA, Teamsters M&O, Local One CST, MDSPA, and Supervisory. Info/Action
5.5 (Item #5) Existing Litigation – Conference with Legal Counsel pursuant to Gov’t. Code Section 54956.9 (d)(1) regarding the matter of California Taxpayers Action Network v. MDUSD, MSC14-00996 Info/Action
5.6 (Item #6) Existing Litigation – Conference with Legal Counsel pursuant to Gov’t. Code Section 54956.9 (d)(1) regarding the matter of Rhinehart v. MDUSD, USDC 4:13-CV-05919-CW Info/Action
5.7 (Item #7) Existing Litigation – Conference with Legal Counsel pursuant to Gov’t. Code Section 54956.9 (d)(1) regarding the matter of John Does v. MDUSD, Case Nos. MSC14-00262, MSC14-00289, MSC14-00312 Info/Action
5.8 (Item #8) Existing Litigation – Conference with Legal Counsel pursuant to Gov’t. Code Section 54956.9 (d)(1) regarding the matter of Kovasti v. MDUSD, EEOC Charge No. 555-2009-01175 Info/Action
5.9 (Item #9) Existing Litigation – Conference with Legal Counsel pursuant to Gov’t. Code Section 54956.9 (d)(1) regarding the matter of Richard Heyer v. MDUSD, Case No. MSC11-01425 Info/Action
5.10 (Item #10) Existing Litigation – Conference with Legal Counsel pursuant to Gov’t. Code Section 54956.9 (d)(1) regarding the matter of Roaldson v. MDUSD, MSC11-02675 Info/Action
5.11 (Item #11) Anticipated Litigation – Conference with Legal Counsel pursuant to Gov’t. Code Sec. 54956.9(b, Significant Exposure to Litigation: 2 cases Info/Action
5.12 (Item #12) Conference with Negotiator(s) pursuant to Gov’t. Code Section 54957.6; Agency Negotiator: Barbara Oaks; Unrepresented Employee: Superintendent Info/Action
5.13 (Item #13) Conference with Negotiator(s) pursuant to Gov’t. Code Section 54957.6; Agency Negotiator: Dr. Nellie Meyer; Unrepresented Employee: Director Info/Action

6.0 Reconvene Open Session at 7:30 p.m.
6.1 Reconvene Open Session at 7:30 p.m. Info
7.0 Preliminary Business
7.1 Pledge of Allegiance and Roll Call Info

8.0 Report Out Action Taken in Closed Session
8.1 (Item #1) Expulsion of Student #14-14 from all regular schools of Mt. Diablo Unified School District. Action
8.2 (Item #2) Discipline, Dismissal or Release of Public Employee Action
8.3 (Item #3) Discipline, Dismissal or Release of Public Employee Action
8.4 (Item #4) Negotiations – The Board may discuss negotiations or provide direction to its representatives regarding represented employees, pursuant to EERA (Govt. Code Section 3549.1) Agency negotiators: Julie Braun Martin and Deborah Cooksey, Agencies: MDEA, CSEA, Local One M&O, Local One CST, MDSPA, and Supervisory. Info/Action
8.5 (Item #5) Existing Litigation – Conference with Legal Counsel pursuant to Gov’t. Code Section 54956.9 (d)(1) regarding the matter of California Taxpayers Action Network v. MDUSD, MSC14-00996 Info/Action
8.6 (Item #6) Existing Litigation – Conference with Legal Counsel pursuant to Gov’t. Code Section 54956.9 (d)(1) regarding the matter of Rhinehart v. MDUSD, USDC 4:13-CV-05919-CW Info/Action
8.7 (Item #7) Existing Litigation – Conference with Legal Counsel pursuant to Gov’t. Code Section 54956.9 (d)(1) regarding the matter of John Does v. MDUSD, Case Nos. MSC14-00262, MSC14-00289, MSC14-00312 Info/Action
8.8 (Item #8) Existing Litigation – Conference with Legal Counsel pursuant to Gov’t. Code Section 54956.9 (d)(1) regarding the matter of Kovasti v. MDUSD, EEOC Charge No. 555-2009-01175 Info/Action
8.9 (Item #9) Existing Litigation – Conference with Legal Counsel pursuant to Gov’t. Code Section 54956.9 (d)(1) regarding the matter of Richard Heyer v. MDUSD, Case No. MSC11-01425 Info/Action
8.10 (Item #10) Existing Litigation – Conference with Legal Counsel pursuant to Gov’t. Code Section 54956.9 (d)(1) regarding the matter of Roaldson v. MDUSD, MSC11-02675 Info/Action
8.11 (Item #11) Anticipated Litigation – Conference with Legal Counsel pursuant to Gov’t. Code Sec. 54956.9(b, Significant Exposure to Litigation: 2 cases Info/Action
8.12 (Item #13) Conference with Negotiator(s) pursuant to Gov’t. Code Section 54957.6; Agency Negotiator: Barbara Oaks; Unrepresented Employee: Superintendent Info/Action
8.13 (Item #12) Conference with Negotiator(s) pursuant to Gov’t. Code Section 54957.6; Agency Negotiator: Dr. Nellie Meyer; Unrepresented Employee: Director Info/Action

9.0 Board Member Reports
9.1 Board Reports Info

10.0 Superintendent’s Report
10.1 Superintendent’s Report Info

11.0 Reports/Information
11.1 Presentation by the Pleasant Hill Green Team Info

12.0 Public Employee Appointment
12.1 Appointment of Director, Special Education Action

12.2 Appointment of Director, Personnel Action

12.3 Appointment of Vice Principal, High School – Concord High School Action

12.4 Appointment of Vice Principal, High School – Mt. Diablo High School Action

12.5 Appointment of Vice Principal – Northgate High School Action

12.6 Appointment of Vice Principal – El Dorado Middle School Action

12.7 Appointment of Vice Principal – Riverview Middle School Action

12.8 Appointment of Vice Principal, Elementary – Bel Air Elementary and Delta View Elementary Action

12.9 Appointment of Vice Principal, Elementary – Cambridge Elementary Action

12.10 Appointment of Vice Principal, Elementary – Meadow Homes Elementary Action

12.11 Appointment of Vice Principal, Elementary – Mt. Diablo Elementary School and Ygnacio Valley Elementary School Action

12.12 Appointment of Vice Principal, Elementary – Shore Acres Elementary and Hidden Valley Elementary Action

12.13 Appointment of Program Specialist, Categorical Programs, Site Based – Meadow Homes Elementary Action
13.0 Consent Agenda Action

13.1 (Item #1) Items listed under Consent Agenda are considered routine and will be approved/adopted by a single motion. There will be no separate discussion of these items; however, any item may be removed from the consent agenda upon the request of any member of the Board and acted upon separately. Action
13.2 (Item #2) Recommended Action for Certificated Personnel Action
13.3 (Item #3) Request to Increase and Decrease Full Time Equivalent (FTE) for the 2014-2015 School Year Action
13.4 (Item #4) Recommended Action for Classified Personnel Action
13.5 (Item #5) Classified Personnel: Request to Increase/Decrease Full Time Equivalent (FTE) for the 2014-15 School Year Action
13.6 (Item #6) Fiscal Transactions for the month of June 2014 Action
13.7 (Item #7) Correction of Funding Source for Director of Measure C Action
13.8 (Item #8) Increase of days per year for the position of Director, School Support & Accountability Action
13.9 (Item #9) Approve contract between Mt. Diablo Unified School District (MDUSD) and Maxim Healthcare Services, Non Public Agency (NPA) for the 2014-2015 school year. Action
13.10 (Item #10) Execution of Non-Public School Contracts for the 2014-15 School Year Action
13.11 (Item #11) Internship Agreement between San Francisco State University and Mt. Diablo Unified School District Action
13.12 (Item #12) Internship Agreement between Brandman University and Mt. Diablo Unified School District for Multiple Subject, Single Subject and Education Specialist Internship programs. Action
13.13 (Item #13) Student Teaching Agreement between University of Phoenix and Mt. Diablo Unified School District Action
13.14 (Item #14) Internship and Fieldwork Agreement between Brandman University and Mt. Diablo Unified School District for School Counseling and School Psychology programs. Action
13.15 (Item #15) Internship Credential Program Agreement between National University and Mt. Diablo Unified School District Action
13.16 (Item #16) Student Placement Agreement between Saint Mary’s College of California and Mt. Diablo Unified School District. Action
13.17 (Item #17) Approval of 2014-15 independent contract with Carol Teltschick-Fall for $55,000 as S3 Grant Coordinator for College Park High School. Action
13.18 (Item #18) Partial Award RFP #1683: Supplemental Student Transportation – Ambulatory Action
13.19 (Item #19) Partial Award of RFP #1683: Supplemental Student Transportation – Ambulatory and Non-Ambulatory Action
13.20 (Item #20) Partial Award of RFP #1683: Supplemental Student Transportation – Sports and Field Trips Action
13.21 (Item #21) Award of Bid #1682: Building E Window Replacement at CPHS Action
13.22 (Item #22) Williams Quarterly Summary Report Action
13.23 (Item #23) Approve textbook for Career Choices High School course. Action
13.24 (Item #24) Education Code 44263 – Board Authorization Action
13.25 (Item #25) Amended Certificate of Signatures Action

14.0 Consent Items Pulled for Discussion

15.0 Public Comment
15.1 The public may address the Board regarding any item within the jurisdiction of the Board of Education of the Mt. Diablo Unified School District that is not on this agenda. These presentations are limited to three minutes each, or a total of thirty minutes for all speakers, or the three minute limit may be shortened. If there are multiple speakers on any one subject, the public comment period may be moved to the end of the meeting. Speakers are not allowed to yield their time. Info

16.0 Communications
16.1 District Organizations – At regular Board meetings, a single spokesperson of each recognized district organization may make a brief presentation following the Consent Agenda. Items are limited to those which are informational. Info

17.0 Business/Action Items

17.1 Opportunity for public response to the additional Sunshine Proposal from Teamsters Local Union #856 (M&O) to Mt. Diablo Unified School District Action

17.2 Approve Memo of Understanding between Maintenance and Operations, Teamsters Local No. 856 and Mt. Diablo Unified School District Action

17.3 Conduct Public Hearing Regarding Draft Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for College Park High School Athletic Facility Improvements. Action

17.4 Creation of Board Policy 5131.62 and Administrative Regulation 5131.62 to prohibit students against tobacco use. Info

17.5 Revision of Board Policy 3513.3 and Administrative Regulation 3513.3 Info

17.6 BP 6174 Education for English Learners AP 6174 Education for English Language Learners Info

17.7 Revise Job Description for Assistant Director, College and Career, Adult Education Action

17.8 Mt. Diablo Adult Education seeks approval to submit a grant application for $75,000 to Outreach and Technical Assistance Network (OTAN) Action

17.9 Meeting Extension Action

17.10 Approve agreement between Mt. Diablo Unified School District and Santa Clara County Office of Education Action

17.11 Memorandum of Understanding with City of Concord to co-fund School Resource Officers for the 2014/2015 School Year at District High Schools in Concord Action

17.12 Legal Services Contracts Action

17.13 Adoption of Middle School Math Common Core Courses of Study. Info/Action

17.14 Approve course name change from Algebra Readiness to Math 8. Action

17.15 Community Facilities District # 1 (Measure A) Action

17.16 Hold Public Hearing and adopt Resolution of Intent to Dedicate an Easement at Clayton Valley Charter High School Action

17.17 Approve Short Term Facilities Lease Agreement with YMCA of the Central Bay Area at Strandwood ES. Action

18.0 Future Agenda Items
18.1 Future Agenda Items Info

19.0 Closed Session
19.1 Items not completed during the first Closed Session will be carried over to this closed session. Action

20.0 Reconvene Open Session
20.1 Reconvene Open Session Info

21.0 Adjournment
21.1 Adjourn Meeting Info”

What items are of most interest to you?

[You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.]

145 Responses to “MDUSD board to make several appointments tonight”

  1. Doctor J Says:

    Willie Mims blasts the Supt and Board for the obvious ongoing issue — lack of diversity in the appointments, especially with schools that have lopsided suspension rates. Watch at 1:09.

  2. Jim Says:

    “Lack of diversity in the appointments”? Please. Capable school administrators are rare and difficult to recruit under any circumstances, but particularly so at dysfunctional, long-troubled districts like MDUSD. Like almost any school district, I’m sure they’d jump for joy to have more diverse candidates in the pool. (School administrators, recruiting firms — everybody, really — knows that diverse candidates are very, very desired.) By harping on diversity, you are essentially asking MDUSD to scrape even further toward the bottom of the barrel — if that is indeed possible in their case.

    And you know you are playing with fire with the “lopsided suspension rates” comment. You know that the US Dept of Ed, and therefore now Sacramento, are on the warpath to hound districts to eliminate “lopsided suspension rates”, despite all of the socioeconomic reasons why such suspensions may impact different categories of students differentially. And you know how districts like MDUSD will respond under pressure: by trying to make sure that suspension rates for all groups are “equal”, even if that means leaving more disruptive students in the classroom. After all, as we have seen, these administrators are accountable to no one, so anything that smoothes over differences with the micro-managers in Sacramento and D.C. and keeps their career options open is worth consideration.

    Dr. J, I am no fan of big school district monopolies like MDUSD. They are simply a disaster for too many students. And I’m not one of those who expects all comments to be “constructive”, because MDUSD is, frankly, probably beyond help. But I do think it helps no one to offer the two courses that you suggest above.

    And as for Willie Mims, must everyone continue to patronize him and his time-wasting at school board meetings? Other than reliably monopolizing air time, how have his monologues advanced the discussion on either of these issues?

  3. Doctor J Says:

    Jim, there is zero real effort by MDUSD to recruit diversity other than to post a job on EdJoin. The Board should be asking these questions publicly. If MDUSD had voting districts for board seats, I believe we would see more action and involvement by all of our community groups, and more diverse involvement can only lead to improvement. But for MDUSD to tout the Bancroft experiment in bilingual education where the principal doesn’t have a single EL parent on the School Site Council and doesn’t have a separate ELAC, is hardly a decent effort at improving the status of ELL. The irony of NAACP’s Willie Mims comments are that the black population in MDUSD is only at 7% but the Latino population is 36%. Where are the Latino leaders to speak up for their majority ? Disproportionality is more than just suspensions. It takes cultural understanding to generate momentum to get the parental necessary to see significant improvements.

  4. Doctor J Says:

    Board acts on my suggestion and will have open session on Nellie’s evaluation plus report on goals for 2013/14 plus goals for 2015. In other late night activity, Oaks and Hansen abstained in direction on lawsuit of Richard Heyer v MDUSD pending since 2011, and Oaks abstained on authority to settle Roaldson v MDUSD pending since 2011.

  5. J Lo Says:

    Such a narcissistic view of why or why not the board would take such action. In your twisted world do you really believe that the people you routinely insult and slander would initiate something at your behest. When your identity is revealed you won’t have any friends left…the clock is ticking.

  6. Doctor J Says:

    LOL. Lo, I knew that would pop you out of your cubicle ! There is an election and keeping one’s promises of transparency is now at the forefront. Aren’t you glad that last night Barbara validated that the new website is not giving everyone access to Board agenda documents ? Perhaps Nellie should have hired professionals instead of free teenage interns ? BTW, have you figured out how they are going to offer 2500 5th graders free instruments with no budget ?

  7. tmharrington Says:

    Roaldson deals with College Park HS, I believe. Heyer was a former vp of Northgate HS.

  8. J Lo Says:

    A legend in your own mind, Barbara did not vindicate you as she stated she was able to read the document, just not on all her devices. If that is vindication then you are more mentally deranged than I thought. Now you have insulted the very students you serve, what kind of an educator are you? You do realize Barbara’s seat is not up for reelection this year. Like I have said before, when your identity is revealed you will not have any friends.

  9. Doctor J Says:

    I am sorry you can’t refrain from name calling.

  10. tmharrington Says:

    As previously stated, I reserve the right to edit or delete comments that include personal attacks. J Lo, you are correct that Ms. Oaks (and Ms. Hansen) said they could not read the Williams Report on their iPads.

  11. Doctor J Says:

    Hung jury on 11 victims, Martin found not guilty as to 3 victims. Waiting for a detailed article from CC Times.

  12. Guest Says:

    Article posted. Not guilty on 21 counts; hung on 95 counts. The case had strategic problems. It was probably overcharged; that was an overwhelming number of counts for jury to work through. The civil cases created argument for bias on part of victims. The conduct, while serious, was not as factually alarming as other molestation cases. Sachs probably helped Martin a lot with her testimony by building him up as a great teacher and discrediting Pate as a vicious gossip. I thought the internet searches would sink Martin, however. Would like to know what the numbers were on votes for conviction v. acquittal. No doubt this has major implications for civil cases and helps MDUSD. Feel sorry for victims and parents.

  13. Doctor J Says:

    Recent update: “For the charges involving 10 of the victims, the jury voted 9 not guilty to 3 guilty, while voting 11 not guilty to 1 guilty for the charges involving the 11th victim.”

  14. Guest Says:

    I think it is over. With those numbers, I don’t see a retrial. I imagine he also keeps his teaching credential. And doesn’t the District have to give him his position back with back pay because he is tenured, unless they move for dismissal? That would be ironic given the civil cases. It seems the fat lady has sung.

  15. Doctor J Says:

    It’s hard to tell, but the district may have already terminated him. Despite numerous promises there are still no minutes for the majority of 2013.

  16. J Lo Says:

    Not all over quite yet as there is a little matter of damages owed to a man declared “not guilty”. I wonder if the defense will file claims against the blogs that allowed his client to be slandered and tried by public opinion? Do you think Martin will ever be able to work as a teacher again?

  17. Guest Says:

    It was not an acquittal across the board because the jury hung on 95 counts. Is it your position that his conduct with the children as demonstrated at trial was professional and appropriate? I respectfully disagree: based on what was reported, it was still unprofessional conduct that could justify a loss of his credential. But I agree with you on the rush to judgment that is a larger part of our culture, e.g. Casey Anthony, George Zimmerman, and the current case out of Missouri.

  18. Doctor J Says:

    “Not Guilty” alone does not justify “damages”. do you think Martin should sue the District Attorney that prosecuted him ? the Judge who set the bail at $10,000,000 and still keeps him in jail for at least a couple of more months ? Who do you think should pay “damages” to Martin ? The children who said they were victims ? Who ? who ?

  19. Doctor J Says:

    Still advertising 8/18: “Director of Personnel Services”; principals at Northgate HS and Oak Grove MS. All vacant since June. School starts next week. BTW, what HR experience did Leyla Benson have to qualify her for “Director, Personnel” ? And the difference between these two jobs with nearly identical titles is ? Meanwhile Lois Peterson continues to be listed as “Director, Personnel Services”: which job is that ?

  20. Doctor J Says:

    Let’s see if Nellie and the Board will be TRANSPARENT in sharing the number of substitute teacher days whether for illness, training or any other reason teachers are out of their regular classrooms and children are left to the whim of substitutes ? In SF, teachers absentee rate is nearly double that of children. Show us the numbers.

  21. tmharrington Says:

    Contra Costa County Superior Court judge has ordered district to turn over eight documents to BANG by Friday related to Martin case:

  22. Doctor J Says:

    Thank you Theresa. Please don’t forget to post the April/May documents. I hope you will post the documents ordered to be produced so we can see why the district stonewalled. When will the attorney fees be awarded ?

  23. Doctor J Says:

    Nellie evicts Julie B-M from her spacious walnut paneled office and sends her down to Wing C to occupy the less than private fishbowl office most recently occupied by Bill Morones and previously by Susan Petersen. Feeling a little cramped Julie ? Never a dull moment at Dent.

  24. Doctor J Says:

    Which job did the Board appoint Leyla Benson to ? Her email signature line: “Leyla Elizabeth Benson
    Director of Personnel Services”. To make matters even more confusing! her telephone extension is 4136 which Julie B-M had until a few says ago which means Leyla must be occupying Julie’s old office — with no Human Resources experience.

  25. tmharrington Says:

    I just spoke to Supt. Meyer and she said they both have the same title, but Peterson reports to Benson. Apparently, they are still trying to work out the distribution of duties. Meyer said a similar situation exists in the technology dept. with dual directors, where one reports to the other.

  26. Doctor J Says:

    What genius Nellie ! Two jobs with identical titles — the new job description approved May 28 doesn’t say one supervises the other. Perhaps Nellie would share Lois Peterson’s secret job description. Afterall, at least Julie B-M occupied Lois’ current position to train her to be Asst. supt. Instead, we get Leyla Elizabeth as head of personnel without any HR experience and with Board members thinking they are voting for the lower position. As the kids say — Genius. Haste makes waste.

  27. Brian Lawrence Says:

    If a member of MDUSD cured cancer, I get the feeling that the so-called Doctor would immediately lament all the oncologists and funeral directors who now lacked employment.

    “Theresa, stop the presses! The Board has violated the Brown Act! The meeting must be cancelled!!!!!” Oh, wait, I actually just didn’t click on the correct link on the website.

  28. Doctor J Says:

    Brian, please get the facts straight. The Board appointed Leyla Benson to be “Director, Personnel” an identical position held by Lois peterson. The Board did not vote on the position of “Director of Personnel”. As for the mess created by the new website, even Barbara admitted she could not pull up documents on the agenda with her I Pad but could with the windows based PC. I could not pull up the agenda on Sunday night and suspect it’s due to some glitches — as I told Barbara. But as a computer guru, perhaps you can solve the current mess with Outlook after the upgrade applied without testing the myriad of orphan computers in the district inventory. Your insensitivity to cancer victims and survivors is beyond the pale.

  29. Doctor J Says:

    The Agenda says “Director, Personnel”; The ESB motion says “Director, Personnel”. These are legal documents. Only a non-legal document says “Director of Personnel”. You can’t change the stripes on a Zebra.

  30. J Lo Says:

    Now J is resorting to insulting Board members, all these outbursts because J has nothing relevant to post. No inside information, no juicy gossip, just sour grapes. If the Martin Defense attorney makes good on their promise it won’t be long before J’s identity will be revealed and as an ultimate comeuppance for a deserving slanderer and rumor mongerer, J might just get used to spending time in the new Personnel Directors Walnut office being disciplined.

  31. Doctor J Says:

    I can’t wait to read the Supt’s email to Board members ordered by the Judge to produced, along with the other documents. How much did the Board spend to hide those documents ? I believe the victor gets their attorney fees from the loser. How much will that cost the district right out of the classrooms ? Theresa any idea when they will be posted ?

  32. g. de la verdad Says:

    Brian, isn’t this kind of comment a bit beneath your “elected” position? Did you post from your “available by phone at xyz hotel location?” How’s your oversight of the Measure C committee going?

  33. J Lo Says:

    Beneath an elected board member? How about an employee? Is it beneath an employee without a clue to be caught insulting Board Members?….I think you will be joining J in then Walnut Office being disciplined. Remember J is a failure as a leader in the district, and you are a proven failure at your role. When as you called her (she) is outed and you will be shortly after, after all the legitimate people you have insulted do you think you will have any friends left to back you up?

  34. g. de la verdad Says:

    1st Amendment…and all that…highly suggested reading material.

  35. J Lo Says:

    LOL! First ammendment..but what are you going to do about it when your identity is posted?

  36. Doctor J Says:

    Lo, you probably aren’t familiar with the works of Francis Bacon or Thomas Jefferson who both loved the truth that “knowledge is power.”

  37. Brian Lawrence Says:

    Agendas? Great, let’s talk about agendas. My agenda is to improve this district and help our students. What is your agenda, “Doctor” J? It appears to be to relentlessly attack everything and everyone in MDUSD.

    I have no idea if you are a Doctor or not. I do know that Dr. Meyer earned the title. That’s why I find it mystifying that you mysogynistically demean her and Ms. Bensen and other women by refusing to acknowledge their positions and achievements.

    You try to classify yourself as a whistle-blower. People like John Parker, John Ferrante, Wendy Lack and Dan Reynolds have come before the Board and spoken inconvenient truths. Sometimes I disagree, sometimes I am embarrassed, sometimes I am frustrated by their remarks, but I always appreciate their conviction and sense their intent to improve the district. There is a difference between a whistle-blower and a relentless gadfly with an ax to grind. Where do you think you fall?

    G states that I’ve missed meetings and called in to others. That is correct. I wish I had been able to attend every meeting and event, but there are times that is not possible for me. I have attended over 300 district events and meetings in the past two years.

    G also states that it is beneath an elected official to respond. That may also be true. However, there are too many people who have been demonized on this blog and subjected to scurrilous attacks. “Dr.” J and others have dragged innocent employees, their spouses, ex-spouses, children and friends through the mud. These people have committed the crime of entering in to public service to help children and failing to achieve perfection. Perhaps the most egregious example was when a mother who recently lost her child was subjected to unsubstantiated allegations of adultery on this blog. Sickening.

    “Dr.” J- I have no idea if you are a district employee. If you are, then it seems rather obvious to me that you are guilty of theft and misappropriation of public funds by your relentless attacks on your employer during work hours. The taxpayers deserve better.

    I’m a flawed human being and a flawed board member. I’ve made mistakes. I’ll make more in the future. But I sleep well knowing that I am trying to make a positive difference in this world. I vastly prefer that to being someone who looks in the mirror and says: “I destroyed the reputation and career of another victim today.” Perhaps these virulent attacks fill the gaps for someone who feels powerless and inadequate in so many other ways. It is rather sad and pathetic.

    I realize that my comments here will ignite another round of attacks. I take comfort knowing that a couple of anonymous bloggers and a handful of sycophantic followers don’t reflect the feelings of the vast majority of people. And the beauty of a democracy is that there is a remedy. Go ahead and start an effort to recall me. Of course, you’d actually have to have the courage to sign your own name to the petition……

  38. Doctor J Says:

    Brian, the Agendas I am talking about are Brown Act mandated legal documents. My goal is the same as always: sunshine the truth. Telling the truth never hurts a person unless it exposes a lie. The reason that 4 out of 5 Board members, including you, campaigned on transparency is because there was a culture of dishonesty in the district and to some extent that still exists. You falsely accuse me of dragging people through the mud implying that I told untruths about them. Never. You opened the can of worms. Please name one untruth I have posted on this blog about a specific individual. Never happened. Yes, some of the untruths that I have exposed, were not pleasant to those “caught”. Every sin has consequences. And in case you didn’t notice, on many occasions I have backed your occasional efforts to be more transparent in hiring protocols.

  39. Doctor J Says:

    District financial reserves not to be lowered leaving less money to be spent after all the massive raises and promotions. This time it was democrats blocking republican efforts.

  40. Jim Says:

    Brian, I admire your willingness to serve on the Board and to tackle the many problems that MDUSD faces. It is a pretty thankless and potentially overwhelming job (as the agenda above reflects). It is unfair, and unwise, for people to criticize you for participating remotely in some of the meetings. If people want competent management of complex institutions, they need to obtain the services of people who have experience running complex institutions. Those individuals are often business people with full schedules and significant other responsibilities, including travel. We should welcome Board service from people like you and be flexible enough to accommodate it.

    That said, I would hope that you, and others on this blog, would welcome informed comments from any source. The entire community has vested interests in how MDUSD is managed. We cannot know what motivates specific critics, and really, why should motivations matter, if their observations and insights are accurate? And if someone is speaking from an informed perspective, does it truly matter if we know that person’s real name? The potential for retribtuion is quite real in MDUSD, and I can understand the reluctance of parents and employees to expose themselves to it. Too often, in public discourse these days, input is criticized based on who it comes from, rather than on the substance of the facts and ideas that are put forth.

    I have not always agreed with Dr. J, but I have welcomed his/her facts, observations, and insights. MDUSD has been plagued with lack of transparency for years and years, and even now struggles with some of the most elementary steps that could enhance transparency. As someone who is reasonably familiar with how schools operate, I have found Dr. J’s “inside” information to be quite credible, and given the public nature of MDUSD, extremely welcome at times. Democracy is messy. Perhaps our debates could be a bit more tidy if we speculated less on “motivations” or “real identities” and focused more on the substantive questions around this district’s management — questions that MDUSD so reliably and abundantly raises in the minds of our citizenry.

  41. Brian Lawrence Says:


    I agree that MDUSD has often fallen short in the area of transparency. I believe it is headed in the right direction, but there is still room for improvement. I continue to welcome suggestions and criticisms that are delivered in a respectful manner. My experience is that you have always done that and I appreciate it.

    In addition to the above, I stand behind my previous statement.

  42. J Lo Says:

    Untruths you have posted? Where do we start? How many times have you claimed the district violated the Brown Act when you could not click a link? Remember 18 months ago when you posted an accusation about SASS administrators and inappropriate relationships? (Thankfully Theresa must have removed that post). How about the accusations of Mr. Martin and accusing the district of stonewalling? As it turns out with Mr. Martins recent victory in court the district was prudent in making sure that all documents turned over was handled in fairness to Mr. Martin and the alleged victims. The Martin case will be your undoing as the Defense Attorney also feels that posts like yours have damaged his client. It is only a matter of time that hiding behind first amendment rights while lying and slandering are illegal. Your time is coming J.

  43. Doctor J Says:

    Lo, besides your pointing to non-existent posts, you should read the Court Order posted by Theresa. 8 documents never previously identified until the court ordered the lists, have now been ordered to be produced by today. The court may other attorney fees be paid by the district to MDUSD. How much ? Maybe $50,000 ? Where does this money come from ? The classrooms. Who paid the district lawyers ? Read the monthly warrant reports. Where does that money come from ? The classrooms. Again, name a single person I have made false statements about and cite me the location where the public can read it. Search the archives if you must. But don’t rant without specifics.

  44. g. de la verdad Says:

    Obsessed with outing identities much “J-Lo”? You may laugh at the First Amendment, but in defense of public employees free speech rights as citizens, Justice Thurgood Marshall said it best in “Pickering.” Blogs may well be the answer to Justice Kennedy’s attempt to squash the free speech rights of public employees in “Garcetti”. I say, if you can’t say it at work without the threat of retribution — say it anonymously in print. It’s hard to have a conversation in a letter to the editor, but ah, ya gotta love the blogosphere!

    You will note that Brian did not mention my reference to Measure C in his own defense. He couldn’t justifiably do so!

  45. J Lo Says:

    Specifics? Remember your diatribe about illegal lease leasebacks in Measure C? All the links you posted while frothing at the mouth never amounted to a single thing. Not illegal as you claimed. As for the nonexistent post, you are lucky it was removed as you slandered a Director in SASS. While we are at it what about your allegations claiming that the district was not filing Williams Reports….the list goes on and on and on. And please spare us from your fist amendment delusions, and references by you and your hand puppet G. comparing yourselves to the founding Fathers and the Federalist papers would be comedic if it was not narcissism. All of this amounts to public employees wasting money on the taxpayers dime.

  46. Giorgio C Says:

    If an employee of the MDUSD believes that anyone affiliated with their employer has engaged in unlawful activity in the course of their duties, has that employee been given instructions (yearly if possible) on how and where to formally report such concerns and-or observations? Is this whistle blower information posted in teacher break rooms? I only ask because of some of the comments posted here. I am guessing that the oversight process includes the County BOE, the State Superintendent, and the CCC Grand Jury.

  47. Doctor J Says:

    @Lo, before you libel me again, stop guessing at my prior posts — be specific. G is a person who does not throw out insults in order to attack another. G speaks in specifics about issues not name calling, which has got you previously censored and likely you are in line for more punishment for boorish behavior.

  48. J Lo Says:

    LOL!”Libel me”? And who would that be? Right now you are nobody… ohhh are you going to cry to Theresa that calling you nobody is “name calling”? I liked Brian’s term of sycophant, but then again you or your puppet G. fail to make your points outside of spellathons, rolling of the eyes and apparel critiques.

  49. tmharrington Says:

    Speaking of oversight, the WCCUSD Bond Oversight Committee will meet Wednesday and discuss factors used in determining the direction and sequence of bond projects, its annual report:

  50. tmharrington Says:

    Here is the agenda for Wednesday’s MDUSD meeting, where trustees expect to appoint principals of Northgate HS and Oak Grove MS, along with vice principals for Concord HS and Pleasant Hill MS and to approve the CPHS athletic facility improvement project:

  51. tmharrington Says:

    The district has asked for an extension to Sept. 5 to produce the documents:

    Please note that we have not yet received this order signed by the court.

  52. Doctor J Says:

    Board goes to Closed Session after losing BANG lawsuit — the public has a right to know how much was spent out of the classroom and how much the district will owe BANG for its attorney fees. The board should be held responsible for such poor decision making.

  53. Doctor J Says:

    Who is driving the busses tomorrow the 27th from noon thru all day on the 28th ? D,P Leyla has authorized the release of All Teamsters for informational meetings and all day voting. How many children were not picked up yesterday for the first day of school ?

  54. Doctor J Says:

    The SEC Subpoena to WCCUSD is very comprehensive. Could MDUSD be next in line ? Interesting question since Bond Counsel formerly associated with Matt Juhl-Darlinton, the friend of Former GC Rolen has now merged with Larry Schoenke’s firm he left to join MDUSD, and is being recommended for renewal tomorrow. I thought the district pursued refunds of attorney fees ?

  55. Doctor J Says:

    Larry Schoenke spent millions on outside lawyers in San Diego and is doing the same in MDUSD: “In San Diego Unified School District, the nearly $2.5 million spent on litigation in 2012-2013 was nearly one quarter of the amount the very large district spent on all materials and supplies.” The public deserves a breakdown of what lawyers on what cases are being paid from MDUSD taxpayer money that should end up in classrooms, not line the pockets of Schoenke’s lawyer friends.

  56. g. de la verdad Says:

    Can that be legal? Isn’t Schoenke still a stockholder at Dannis et al? Conflict of interest????

    When Dannis Woliver and Kelley was Miller Brown and Dannis both Juhl-Darlington and Greg Rolen were attorneys there. Now DWK has taken on Juhl-Darlington and his second Johnson in “of counsel” positions — not exactly what I would call a ‘merger’ but certainly for the purpose of defending MDUSD (and maybe even Taber?) in Kevin Carlin’s lawsuit against Taber and the district. Can another increase of the legal budget be far behind?
    And Yes, when Rolen left MBW and came to the district, he led the charge against his former firm to get the district to not write new contracts with MBW and even helped prove that the district had been overbilled for years when there had not even been an updated contract in several years.
    It was a stinky fight at the time.

  57. Doctor J Says:

    Read the Agreement with Dannis — minimum fees start at $20,000 and go up from there — it’s not an hourly contract. It doesn’t state if these fees start all over again. What is wrong with asking for bids ? Save money for pencils and paper in the classrooms that teachers beg for donations because the district does not pay for the supplies needed by the teachers ! There is something wrong when the lawyers suck money from the classrooms.

  58. g. de la verdad Says:

    Could it be that Schoenke sold all of his DWK stock — in order to recommend this dividend/profit paying contract? When in San Diego, he recused himself from recommending DWK, but instructed his second in command to do it. Why did he feel it was OK to recommend a contract with them here? Oh, never mind – Rubber Stamp.

  59. Doctor J Says:

    Maybe since Dannis will be paid with Bond money, this might be something for the SEC to subpoena and investigate ?

  60. Doctor J Says:

    Hey parents, like those combo classes with Common Core ? It’s like mixing oil and water — not so good. Just the district loading classrooms to the max allowed by MDEA contract to save money to pay for administrator raises and promotions. Never mind the teacher only can teach one group at a time so the other group twiddled their thumbs. Then there is the problem with cross over recesses, and independent lunches. Do not despair, those children issues are all less important than infringing upon teachers prep time and uninterrupted lunch times — MDEA will save the day ! And what is swept under the rug ? You guessed it — the Class Size Reduction promised by Nellie.

  61. Doctor J Says:

    Another defective and Brown Act violating agenda. What time is the call to order and first public comment before the board adjourns to closed session ? Not stated on the agenda . . . .again. At top the notice says starts at 7:30 pm which is when the board convenes for open session. Can’t Nellie as Board Secretary get it right ?

  62. Doctor J Says:

    Another defective and Brown Act violating agenda. What time is the call to order and first public comment before the board adjourns to closed session ? Not stated on the agenda . . . .again. At top the notice says starts at 7:30 pm which is when the board convenes for open session. Can’t Nellie as Board Secretary get it right ?

  63. grandma Says:

    My grandson at Walnut Creek Intermediate school came home with a long list of supplies they want students to procure, including scientific calculators and all sorts of office supplies for themselves (not a donation to the classroom). The words voluntary or donation is no where listed on the letter. Is Walnut Creek exempt from AB 1575 prohibiting this practice by schools?

  64. tmharrington Says:

    Certainly not. Has anyone complained to the district about this?

  65. tmharrington Says:

    Speaking of crammed classes, I have heard from a concerned parent whose child was overflowed to another school, but the sibling wasn’t, so the working parent is having to drive to two separate schools across town from each other. The bus offered would take 45 mins to get the student across town.
    I have also heard from another parent whose child was denied an NCLB transfer because the district mistakenly told the parent it would be considered an inter-district transfer and he didn’t need to fill out the NCLB transfer form. Then, after he missed the NCLB deadline, the district said it WAS an NCLB transfer and denied it because he filed it too late.
    I’m also hearing about classes without teachers, where students are doing homework while being supervised by subs instead of learning new material.

  66. tmharrington Says:

    Confusing note to Woodside Elementary parents includes a classroom “wish list” that notes donations are optional, along with a First Grade Supply list that appears to be mandatory:

  67. Doctor J Says:

    Typical Rose Lock and Felicia S-S FUBAR.

  68. Doctor J Says:

    Cindy Mattetoni needs to read her emails from Rose Lock.

  69. tmharrington Says:

    MDUSD appointed former Northgate HS vp Christina Filios as Principal of Oak Grove MS and the former controversial assistant principal of Hercules Middle High School as vp of Pleasant Hill MS and Concord HS. The board also approved the College Park Athletic Facility Improvement Project:

  70. 2busymom Says:

    Instead of complaining to the district, complain to the state for not continually under-funding education while still requiring multiple programs and standards be upheld. As a parent, I get that I am going to have to “donate” money and supplies if I want children to get a decent education in MDUSD. This last year has been a nightmare, with schools and teachers terrified to ask for these “donations”. Field trips are being cancelled, teachers in some schools can not even make copies, as they have no paper.
    Can we please understand that this is not a new rule, simply a louder enforcement of the right to a free education? Parents who seriously think that they shouldn’t have to “donate” money or supplies because it is against the rules for teachers to ask for them need to wake up and stop complaining. And yes, I am fully aware of the fact that there are many families who absolutely can not afford to give anything. Those of us who can have always given more, so that all kids can benefit. Just about everyone can do something to help out our schools, whether it is money, time, or just a huge thank you to our teachers!
    This world is NOT black and white, there is a lot of gray.
    Now, go write that letter to the governor and your legislators!!!

  71. tmharrington Says:

    2busymom: Districts and schools are supposed to make it clear, however, that these donations are not mandatory. Certainly, there is an expectation that those who can afford to provide the supplies will. But, the note from WCI mentioned by grandma does not appear to disclose that the school cannot force parents to buy expensive supplies such as calculators.

  72. tmharrington Says:

    Dr. Meyer has alerted the Northgate HS community that they are close to hiring a new principal:

  73. Doctor J Says:

    Message now sounds like the Northgate “selected candidate” announced 11 days ago “balked” or there were Board objections or Northgate community objections ? The Board is now taking to closed session a “principal appointment” on Thursday ? Early public comment might disclose. Could this be a Christopher Nugent issue ?

  74. tmharrington Says:

    CAC agenda for tonight’s meeting does not appear to be on the district’s new website and it is not listed on the district calendar:

    Here it is from the CAC blog:

    The new special ed director will present a 2014-15 program and staff update.

  75. Doctor J Says:

    Wendi Aghily needs to quit getting her legal advice from the CAC ! The MDUSD SELPA is subject to the Brown Act — agenda must be posted on the MDUSD website 72 hours prior and physically posted too.

  76. Doctor J Says:

    How many $100k+ employees in MDUSD ? Transparent California says more than 7500 just in San Diego County — no wonder Nellie is handing out raises and promotions like Halloween candy. Read this:

  77. Annie CSEA Says:

    The CAC was posted on the Sp. Ed. department web site

  78. Doctor J Says:

    Thank you Annie. It was pretty hard to find but with your note, I finally located it in an obscure column. However, I don’t think it was posted on the website 72 hours prior to the meeting nor physically posted where it could be read for 72 hours prior to the meeting — that means 24/7 .

  79. tmharrington Says:

    It must have been very obscure. I didn’t see it when I went to the Special Ed. Dept. website.

    On another note, the WCCUSD board will approve its response to the Grand Jury report on CABs tonight (Item C.3):

    When will the MDUSD board review and approve its response?

  80. Doctor J Says:

    WHY is the Northgate principal appointment on “closed session” on a “special meeting” tonight ? I heard some select “special parents” were even told on the QT who it is — I even heard a rumor which I have a hard time giving credibility to — Steven Lawrence so he can mastermind the Northgate district creation and become that supt. What happened for last week’s meeting that couldn’t wait for six more days ? Is the new principal negotiating for the $40,000 UN money ? My best guess — the Northgate parents are muscling Nellie and so Nellie takes it to closed session where she can speak freely and let the Board choose between her and the Northgate parents. It’s an election year — watch Linda and Cheryl’s votes.

  81. Doctor J Says:

    No live broadcast ? Some transparency. Replay of welcome posted at 7:10 pm. No radio broadcast of opening.

  82. Doctor J Says:

    Report out tonight on Principal appointment: “received information only”. Guess we will know more if it shows up tomorrow on the Sept 10 agenda. Note that Nellie’s post on Northgate website cited by Theresa has been taken down. The Northgate Unified vs, Mt Diablo Unified saga grows and the general public is kept in the dark.

  83. tmharrington Says:

    When was the agenda for this special meeting posted? Normally, the superintendent’s secretary sends me an email to let me know when agendas are posted, but I didn’t receive any notification of this meeting.

    At a Northgate HS band parent meeting, Interim Principal Ron Leone said he didn’t expect to still be there. Here’s video of some of his other comments:

    Although it is not customary for MDUSD to discuss principal appointments in closed session, I have noticed that both WCCUSD and the Acalanes district boards vote on appointments in closed session, then report them out in open session.

    Back-to-School Night at Northgate was postponed from Sept. 4 to Sept. 11, the day after the next board meeting. Perhaps by then a new principal will be able to greet parents. I am also aware of at least one math class at Northgate that still doesn’t have a teacher.

  84. Doctor J Says:

    I saw it Tuesday. Brown Act requires special meetings to be noticed to the press — you might check to see where they are sending the special notices. Suggest BANG file a formal complaint — otherwise you are on the ignore list.

  85. tmharrington Says:

    I have asked the secretary to please add me back onto her list.

    On another note, the WCCUSD supt. has posted his annual back-to-school message to the community:

    And the chair of the Clayton Valley Charter Board has resigned, teacher Amber Lineweaver has been asked to resign as the result of an investigation related to complaints against her. This will all be discussed tomorrow morning during a board retreat:—2014/09_September/CVCHS%20Board%20Agenda%209_6_14_SP.pdf

  86. Doctor J Says:

    Theresa, are you going to post the MDUSD documents that were supposed to be produced by court order yesterday ?

  87. Doctor J Says:

    Agenda 16.7 new course: Beginning Guitar. District provided guitars and acc. Yet board action says “no impact to general fund”. What ? Guitars are expensive. What is the budget for this class ? Will all high schools offer this class ? How many guitars will be needed to be provided by the district ? Accessories ? How much ? AB 1575 must be complied with.

  88. Doctor J Says:

    Northgate Principal appointment has gone south — not on agenda for 9/10. What happened to the “candidate selected” disclosed two weeks ago and the one on the “closed agenda” last Wednesday ? Sounds like the inmates are running the asylum ! Did the candidate pull out because of inadequate information provided by the district ? Or did the district have heat applied by the Northgate community bound and determined to succeed from MDUSD ? Meanwhile looks like the district is considering a contract increase for Nellie, and MORE RAISES for DMA Administrators. I thought it was illegal to negotiate with DMA.

  89. Doctor J Says:

    Why is the Director of Personnel not included in Category 1 for Conflict of Interest ? This position has more direct interactions and influence in labor negotiations and job selection controlling nearly $200 Million each year — this position formerly categorized as an Ass’t Supt. was included in Category 1. Unions would be able to shower this person with unlimited gifts without disclosure on Form 700. See agenda item 16.14

  90. Doctor J Says:

    Sneaky MDUSD postpones production after getting a courtesy extension by filing a Motion for Reconsideration set for Oct 15. Incumbents must be worried about truth on the election ! Theresa, please post the motion so the public can judge for itself the shenanigans of MDUSD. This could affect the election.

  91. J Lo Says:

    LOL! So j, how are those brown act violations coming along? While we are at it how is that prediction coming along about the Northgate Principal? Your insider news flashes of the past have left you posting nonsense and conjecture. How does it feel to be alone?

  92. Flippin' Tired Says:

    Northgate wants to secede, to cut away from, to leave. They already know how to succeed.

  93. Sherry Whitmarsh Says:

    Doctor J,
    Beginning Guitar is already offered throughout the district. The action being taken by the board would allow the course to be aligned with the UC a-g requirements. I think this is a positive act for our students.

  94. Doctor J Says:

    Sherry, I agree but there is a cost associated with it that should be disclosed, which is not.

  95. Sherry Whitmarsh Says:

    I’m not sure what the cost would be. Schools currently offering it would continue. The only cost I see is if other schools decide to offer the class. That is true with any new class being offered at a school

  96. Doctor J Says:

    Exactly my point — the source of funding should be disclosed. Likely that more college bound students would choose the class which could impact the current inventory of instruments and accessories. Of course some schools like yours have booster clubs but failure to plan will result in schools being busted for illegal fees like Concord High, as they posted on their website: “Dear Concord Community,

    It was recently determined that Concord inadvertently/mistakenly assessed pupil fees for four items: 1) laundering fees for borrowed gym clothes; 2) $5.00 fee to purchase gym lock; 3) $90.00 to enroll in bowling class; and 4) $300.00 fee toward Concord’s football team. As result of its mistake, Concord has fallen out of compliance with terms with current law prohibiting pupil fees. Therefore, Concord is offering a refund to any pupil, parent or guardian that paid a pupil fee in connection with any of the four items listed above. If you are interested in receiving a refund, please send a request for a refund to the Concord Treasurer. Please include the following information in your request:
    1. Your student’s first and last name and grade;
    2. The amount of fees that you paid for any of the four items
    a. The name and contact information for the person that actually paid the fee;
    b. Proof of payment of any of the four items.
    3. Any additional information that you feel will be useful in assisting the Treasurer determine your full refund.

    We apologize for any inconvenience and hope that you will continue to support Concord high school.”

  97. Doctor J Says:

    Financial report 2013/14 still not attached to agenda item 16.3 for public review. It will be complicated — and will take time for the public to review for public comment. Another example of TINO — Transparency In Name Only.

  98. Doctor J Says:

    Hey lo, what happened to the NHS Principal “selected candidate” announced Aug 22 ?? So much for being “selected” by “the team” and then not surviving 3 Board meetings in a row !! Tell us . . . Because I know you have been told.

  99. tmharrington Says:

    I will post them. Jayne Williams’ statement contains a false statement. Also, the district has taken down numerous videos from last year.

  100. tmharrington Says:

    As you noted. the district is refusing to provide them. We’ll see how the court likes that.

  101. tmharrington Says:

    Here’s a blog post that shows innovative uses of Twitter, including a post from MDUSD Trustee Brian Lawrence letting the community know he didn’t plan to run for Walnut Creek City Council this November:

    MDUSD still hasn’t gotten around to approving its draft social media policy, which was discussed last December. However, the minutes from that meeting don’t make it clear what was approved and what wasn’t.

  102. J Lo Says:

    And here I assumed you were the all knowing, you posted claims all over this blog about the Northgate Principal appointment and now you are imploring me a total stranger for insight. It must be lonely out in left field for you, how far you have fallen from the grace of inside knowledge. How does it feel to be alone?

  103. Doctor J Says:

    Lo, Don’t skirt the issue — you know and when it comes out how you know, it won’t be pretty. I made no claims of knowledge concerning the issue — it was being held close to the vest. Obviously the administration was concerned about potential litigation and retreated to “closed session” so they would have a shield. Talking out of closed session can lead to a district attorney investigation — ask Cheryl Hansen.

  104. Doctor J Says:

    Great subjects for the candidate forum. Looking forward to seeing JW’s statement.

  105. J Lo Says:

    I am counting on you making good on this claim, as your other claims have all fizzled to nothing. Bring forth your closed session delusions and hang all accused out to dry….how does it feel to be alone?

  106. Guest Says:

    what are you talking about

  107. Doctor J Says:

    District is hiding Financial Report on 16.3 — will the Board RUBBER STAMP it without public review ?

  108. tmharrington Says:

    The minutes for June 3, 2013, show three closed session items added related to public employee discipline/dismissal/ release, but no report out on them. Video for this meeting has been removed. Why is there no report out for these items in the minutes and why have the videos been removed? Hopefully, the board will not approve these minutes without clarification on this issue:

  109. Doctor J Says:

    the only way accurate minutes from May/June 2013 can be reconstructed is by watching the videos — which the district is now concealing from the public even though on the Board web page it still shows they are available. Theresa perhaps a PRA request is in order for the videos so the public can verify the accuracy of the year old minutes just manufactured. TINO.

  110. g. de la verdad Says:

    Rubber stamp before public review? They’ll rubber stamp it without their own in-depth review (and vendor contracts with no details) . This is not the “transparent”, “clean-up the district” and “do what’s best for students, parents, taxpayers” board that we were promised, and hoped for. This is a board dedicated to a sense of “feel good” administration. Vote no on one of Nellie’s or ‘her’ staff’s recommendations? That might cause someone to not “feel good” and we can’t have any of that!

  111. tmharrington Says:

    Several videos from last year are no longer available. So much for transparency.

  112. g. de la verdad Says:

    Do you suppose some board members who knew where some bodies might be buried encouraged the appointment of John Bernard, knowing that he would be the most likely to help hide some of the district’s dirty little secrets?
    And did one or two of those board members regret what they said in open session, and encourage ‘losing’ those videos? We’ll never know, will we?

  113. Doctor J Says:

    Theresa, we need the BANG Motion by MDUSD posted ASAP ! Please !

  114. HWGA Says:

    Northgate is missing 1 principal, 1 VP, 2 math teachers and 1 Spanish teacher…. seems just like 2008 all over again! What are the chances of picking up anybody good at this late date – Zero!

  115. J Lo Says:

    LOL! Per the j game book we are bored with spellathons, agenda fashions to her disliking, rubber stamping, and yet no substance or inside information like the j of old provided. Is the real issue j and her sycophants are chewing their nails about the retrial of the Martin case? If the defense attorney is kept at his word that his client was tried in the court of public opinion and certain blogs, their hosts and anonymous posters have damaged his client, we may very well see the unmasking of j and others. The BANG may very well see court orders to hand over our masked buffoons identities. What a role reversal it would be if BANG was asked to be transparent.

  116. 2busymom Says:

    How is agenda item 12.5 being funded? No source of funding is listed. An overnight trip of 40 kids and 8-9 teachers doesn’t come cheap.

  117. tmharrington Says:

    That is item 12.15. You’re right. The “funding” and “fiscal impact” are blank. The board should not approve this without getting this information. Also, I see that Bill Morones signed off on this, as the “director of secondary support.” Yet, he was appointed a “School Support Administrator” on June 25.

  118. tmharrington Says:

    It will be interesting to see if any parents speak up about these issues at Back-to-School Night tomorrow night.

  119. tmharrington Says:

    I will try to do this today. I have been researching Williams’ statement, which I can’t believe she made “under penalty of perjury.”

  120. tmharrington Says:

    Hansen, Oaks and Lawrence all ran on a platform of transparency. It was Hansen who made it her mission to get meetings videotaped. Yet, there has been no board discussion regarding taking them down. They have simply disappeared. Why?

  121. Doctor J Says:

    I hope we will hear from the candidates tonight on these issues in public comment.

  122. Doctor J Says:

    Morones forgot to change his electronic “rubber stamp”. When was the last time he held a job for more than two years in a row ?

  123. Sherry Whitmarsh Says:

    My apologies if this appears twice…
    Hansen has several examples of speaking about transparency but not actually following transparency:
    1. Minutes during her tenure as president where severely lacking or not done in a timely manner
    2. She called for meetings to be held with the entire board and the public where any topic could be discussed. Hansen frequently stated there would be no Brown Act violation, yet as board president and now as a board member she has yet to request the board to have one or spoke about it at a board meeting
    3. Hansen repeatedly thought superintendent’s evaluation she be in public session, yet not once since 2012 has this occured.
    Maybe Hansen can explain this in her board report.

  124. Doctor J Says:

    Sherry, at the last board meeting on Sep 4, the Supt’s evaluation was summarized but the written evaluation not released. When it came time to have the discussion about setting the Supt’s evaluation goals, the video broadcast was suddenly cut and there is no copy posted on the Board website. Take a look at the videos. It’s election year shenanigans at the public expense of faux transparency. TINO.

  125. Sherry Whitmarsh Says:

    Thanks for showing that my concerns about Ms Hansen being all talk and little action is proven once again.

    She is also being very vindictive. One if the action items on the agenda tonight is specifically aimed at Mayo and Lawrence.

    I can’t believe MDEA has supported her. It must be repayment for passing the contract.

  126. Doctor J Says:

    Sherry, I proposed this change 4 years ago to stop district payments for health and welfare for Board members. Part time employees have never been entitled to such perks so why should an $800 a month Board member ? You and the Eberhart machine refused to do it. Instead you cut hours of CST workers and laid off many employees while maintaining extravagant benefits to board members who were business owners or otherwise gainfully employed like Eberhart, Mayo and others. It’s about time.

  127. tmharrington Says:

    MDEA has endorsed Hansen, Mayo and former MDEA president Michael Langley:

    Are you referring to item 16.15 regarding benefits?

  128. Doctor J Says:

    “and voted in favor of our recent contract” is the basis for MDEA endorsement of Mayo and Hansen. That will turn off more voters than it attracts !

  129. tmharrington Says:

    Here is a new blog post with the agenda for tonight’s meeting, so people can comment on items there:

    Please note that I am holding off on the blog post regarding the district’s motion in the BANG lawsuit so that I can include BANG’s blistering response. I hope to post those docs later today.

  130. Sherry Whitmarsh Says:

    If this is something the board really wanted it could have made this proposal in 2012 instead of making it an election issue. I disagree with you about the number of hours board members work. I know I put in many more than just part time.

    If this was not an election issue, it would have been made phrased as all newly elected, non incumbent positions. It was easy for Hansen, Oaks, and Dennler to support as they do have medical from past public service jobs. I have no knowledge if Lawrence or Mayo have access to medical.

  131. Sherry Whitmarsh Says:

    Of course you do have to do the personal attack and show your bias to CST. You neglected to mention M&O and CSEA had reduced hours and benefits.

    I don’t consider medical an extravagant benefit.

  132. Sherry Whitmarsh Says:

    I disagree. The money that MDEA throws at an election makes it almost impossible for those they don’t support to win. They have hundreds if volunteers to campaign for them and make phone calls. It’s much more difficult if you don’t have the funding.

  133. Doctor J Says:

    Sherry, when the medical is 3 or 4 or even double times the monthly pay for Board members, it is extravagant. On you can look up the 2012 and 2013 amounts. For prior especially when Eberhart had his whole family on, you will have to look at the BANG database. Sherry it’s not a personal attack when I refresh your recollection on what you did or didn’t do as a Trustee–it’s a fact.

  134. Guest Says:

    Sherry, , the record shows that we(MDEA) gave your campaign $6725 for your 2008 campaign, Local One gave you $2000, and Committee to Re-elect Eberhart gave you $1400. What you gave us in return was the back of your hand.

  135. Sherry Whitmarsh Says:

    You are not refreshing my memory, I recall that the motion did not get a second. I did not support it. What I’m saying is that I don’t like the politics that is being played now when the could have been done in January of 2013.

  136. Sherry Whitmarsh Says:

    Recall the budget cuts from the state. What this goes to show was that I did what was needed to be done to keep the district out of bankruptcy. And it proves I was bought and sold to the unions as some have said. I’m very happy that MDUSD is now in a better position for all of its employees. That was not the case in 2008 – 2012.

  137. Doctor J Says:

    Sherry, perhaps this motion came from the public, not from staff or the trustees ? Maybe we will find out the source of this motion.

  138. Doctor J Says:

    Proof that MDEA expects a ROI — return on campaign contributions– oh my, what will the FPPC say about this ?

  139. Doctor J Says:

    My general recollection is that back in 2008, 2009, 2010 the district was giving close to $100,000 PER YEAR towards Board members Medical//Dental/Vision — money that could have gone to the classrooms or saved a couple of jobs. Theresa could probably pull my posts from the archive where I detailed the amounts. Even you Sherry was accepting the amounts even though you and your family had full coverage through your employers.

  140. Sherry Whitmarsh Says:

    The only coverage I was given via the district was vision. I tried to have it removed but was told by benefits that I couldn’t as it was part of the negotiated price with the district.

  141. Guest Says:

    Theresa, can you go back to 2008 and find out how much each board member received in health care benefits each year until this year. It is next to impossible to get anything from other sources to go back that far. As I recall both Linda Mayo and Gary Eberhart were getting their health benefits paid by the taxpayers to the tune of anywhere from $14,000 to $17,000 a year.

  142. g. de la verdad Says:

    Now, if we could just get Discus to update itself and populate the new blog post from the main page……and what’s with Recent comments bouncing up and down to different dates, etc and never the most recent comments. Very annoying and hard to follow, Theresa!

  143. Doctor J Says:

    Theresa, please find time to post the BANG lawsuit documents. Pretty please……

  144. tmharrington Says:

    I will try to do it this weekend.

  145. Doctor J Says:

    Please . . . . It’s now Tuesday. Thanks in advance.

Leave a Reply