The Orange Juice team turned out for tonight’s Santa Ana Unified School District (SAUSD) Board of Trustees meeting. Thomas Gordon, Sean Mill and I all were in attendance and Ryan Gene Williams joined us afterwards. We did not leave disappointed.
The meeting started late, at about 6:25 p.m. Rob Richardson, the Board President, strolled in and he was later joined by Dr. Audrey Yamagata-Noji and Jose Hernandez. John Palacio came in just after the Pledge of Allegiance. Rosie Avila never showed up.
SAUSD Superintendent Jane Russo got the ball started with her opening comments, when she stated that, with regard to the class size reduction (CSR) program, “at no time have false rosters been submitted.”
Russo then bleated about how this is the first time that the district has had a traditional calendar in 25 years. She then noted that there are two options when it comes to CSR. In the first option you actually do CSR – but that option is predicated on the amount of classrooms available. The second option involves using credentialed teachers to assist primary teachers with reading and math. Apparently this is being done in 27 out of 36 schools in the district.
Russo admitted that all of the questionable practices have been stopped – which begs the question, why was the district involved in questionable practices in the first place? She then said that the district hopes to continue with CSR in grades 1 – 3.
Russo then said that an audit would be conducted and that it would include grade 9 CSR classes too.
After Russo went over a bunch of calendar items, we were subjected to a truly farcical presentation. A bunch of stiff looking executive types got up and talked about a proposed Orange County Charter School, to be based in Santa Ana. The concept they were touting includes only two days of instruction in an actual school, and then three days at home, essentially being home-schooled.
All of the statistics these guys cited pertained to rich communities in northern California, such as Palo Alto. Most of their ideas sounded like hokum to me, but the bottom line is that they are asking the district to approve transfer of public resources to their charter school so that they can teach the elite. Do you really think that the working class families in the district will be able to participate in this program? I think not.
I got up and spoke out against the program, which is backed by Costa Mesa Mayor Allan Mansoor and State Senator Lou Correa, amongst others.
One of the speakers, the son of one of the principals, said he graduated from Biola University. Doesn’t Rosie Avila serve on their Board of Education too? I wonder if the fix is in? I guess we will find out when the board votes on this.
One brave teacher spoke out against the charter school too. He said he grew up in public schools and that he has been a success – he has a Master’s degree in education and he teachers both at Santa Ana High School and at Santa Ana College.
A mother also got up and spoke about the CSR issue. She asked if it was fair for the district to hire its own auditor? Good question!
Thomas Gordon also spoke about the CSR issue. He read from an email he got from a teacher who basically said that Russo and the district are lying – there are empty classrooms that are not being used. In other words the district resorted to Option 2 instead of Option 1, for no damn reason.
Then we got to hear from the infamous Mr. Don Trigg, the Associate Superintendent of Business Services, whatever that means. He said that the state did pick the auditor as they are CPA’s – I kid you not that is what the guy said. He said it makes sense to use them as they are already the district’s external auditors. He said that they will decide what schools to go to and what classes to audit. And he said that the 9th grade could be added to the audit.
Russo then piped in that the district needed to move quickly and she moved on her own to select an auditor. Trustee John Palacio then said that usually the board has to declare an emergency in order for a contract to be issued without an RFP process. He also pointed out that according to district paperwork Russo selected the auditor before she even spoke to the board.
Russo then said that the board was informed and that the auditor falls under “professional services” and as such she could select the auditor without an RFP.
Palacio then asked if the auditor had fraud examination experience. Good question! That is the problem with what Russo did. She prevented the board from doing their job – they should have been able to scrutinize and select the auditor, period.
Palacio also pointed out that if “team education” did not work with CSR, how do we know that it isn’t working with special education and the English Learner program? He also brought up the No Child Left Behind program, which the district may have violated while screwing up in so many ways.
Palacio also nailed it when he asked what has been communicated to the schools from the district re CSR – and what were the options they were given? Again, great questions. Never mind the audit, what we really need is a thorough investigation – who did what, and when, and what did they put in writing. I fully expect that Russo and her hacks have been very busy shredding the real evidence in the meantime.
As Palacio put it, something changed overnight. What was it? Thomas Gordon has received over 100 emails from teachers noting all kinds of fraud. Are they lying? Why would they? We know that the board was told about the CSR problem in February – why didn’t they act sooner? Why indeed.
Rob Richardson finally woke up and asked a few questions too. He asked Trigg when the audit would be scheduled. Trigg said they would have something by the next board meeting on the 24th or the one after that.
Richardson then asked about the auditor’s credentials. But he did not press the issue about Russo unilaterally selecting the auditor without board approval.
Palacio asked if the audit was random. Trigg said they all are, but Palacio asked pointedly why we wouldn’t just investigate the actual cases we know of. Russo said it was important to go beyond the list. Sure…
Palacio then asked why the auditors are focusing on kindergarten classes instead of grades 1-3. Richardson then asked Trigg to see what the auditor’s methodology is.
At this point Hernandez finally chimed in. He said he did not want to belabor the point, but he was concerned about th
e way the auditor was picked and he was anxious to see how the auditor was picked. He cited a lack of communication and direction from the district and said that we should treat this as a wake up call – and things need to change. Bravo! Well said.
Then Noji finally opened her mouth. She said we need to figure out how best to implement CSR with an imbalance of students. She said option 2 may have failed due to the use of substitutes. Nice oversimplification – and smokescreen. She asked that the county department of education be asked to monitor the audit. Trigg said that they gave it their blessing, but Noji said she wanted to make sure the auditors go to the county if they have questions, not to the district.
Noji did admit that something went wrong and we need to figure out what it is. But she slipped in a qualifier – SAUSD is not the only district that has struggled with the implementation of CSR. Perhaps – but we might be the only district to engage in full-scale fraud, and get caught.
Richardson then said that it seems to him that on a couple of levels we have some serious problems. We have an obligation to parents, teachers and students and that classes ought to be as CSR statutes mandate. We need to know what went wrong, what was supposed to be done, and we have an obligation to follow the rules and correct the lapses.
Richardson closed his statements by saying he is not expecting a clean bill of health from the auditors. Sounds like he knows more than he is letting on to.
My sources by the way tell me that the school principals are finding out that they are going to be audited, in advance, and that they are not making themselves available for the audits. God only knows what kind of shenanigans are going on. I have absolutely no faith in this audit, or in Russo, or anyone else in her administration. This mess is screaming for state or federal investigations and multiple arrests, in my humble opinion.
UPDATE
Times reporter Seema Mehta has written an article about the meeting as well. As usual, she did a fine job. Here is one quote she shared, that I overlooked, “If there was an issue at the beginning of February 2007 and we were running into some choppy waters
Good reporting.
Art,
After reading your article, it reminded me of a phenomena called “on the road to Abilene” or the “Abilene Paradox”. This is basically where a group makes wrong decisions publically.
http://www.cymbalholic.com/forums/showthread.php?t=18209
Imagine a committee of bright people making a stupid decision. We know from talking with each person alone that each and every one of them thinks it’s a stupid thing to do. When the committee votes, however, they choose to do the stupid thing! Later, usually much later, when the decision backfires, the committee tears itself apart in its search for a culprit. The group desperately needs someone or something to blame, long after the very preventable decision was made.
This describes a group in agreement, not in conflict. They all agree privately, and individually, about the true state of affairs. They do not communicate their feelings to one another, however. Then publicly, in the presence of each other, they all deny the agreement that they don’t know exists among them.
That’s the paradox: private vs. public versions of reality. In fact, this is the mismanagement of agreement, not disagreement. It’s all made possible by a public silence regarding what each individual knows to be true.
“Abilene” is the Texas city in the Abilene paradox. It refers to the retelling by Harvey of a lousy decision by his family. On a hot summer day, the family piled into a car without airconditioning and drove too many miles to Abilene to try a new diner. The heat was oppressive; the food was lousy. But no one dared to speak in those terms until later that night back home. Finally, the matriarch of the family broke the silence by complaining about the food. Then everyone chimed in with their complaint–the car was hot, it was stupid to try an unknown restaurant. It turns out that no one wanted to go in the first place, but no one said so when it mattered. Eventually, they all blamed the father for suggesting the drive.
To Harvey, whenever a group is about to do the wrong thing, despite knowing it’s the wrong thing, it is a group “on the road to Abilene.”
Whoa!
WHO came up with this “questionable practice” in the first place? There needs to be a score card to find out where these ideas are generated from. WHO is important. Name names.
Has this “questionable practice” occured in previous years?
Asking Jane Russo about the process of how she came to act on the decision involving the auditor might have been helpful: “Ms Russo, can you tell us how you were made aware of the problem and the steps that you personally took in order to begin to solve it?”
That kind of open endedness will give you insights if it was truly her decision (it certainly could be) or if there were others in the decision making process (which could be as well… and those names could be noted for future reference).
This particular group of district decision makers at the top made up of board members and cabinet personnel are a collective mob of ineptitude. It is time to start teasing out who makes good decisions and who wants to cut corners and is willing to break laws.
Thanks for the good reporting, Art. It would be nice if it could be televised or videotaped in the future.
Art –
Thanks for the informative update.
Question: When the Remington tardy scandal surfaced two years ago, who authorized the hiring of the audit firm to perform the Remington audit? And what audit firm peformed the audit?
I think it would be helpful for the public to review the Remington audit for the purpose of learning the district’s process of addressing questionable rosters at that time.
It appears Richardson rang the warning bell about not expecting a clean bill of health from the auditors.
Gordon’s photo of Bratcher asleep at the wheel should be the poster for this scandal and state of the district.
What did you think of the joint use presentation?
Why do you suppose Audrey speaks so contemptuously about the city, and how is it that the chief of the school district police department (AKA mall police), instead of concerning himself with issues of school safety has instead become a property manager for the district’s ball fields?
For anyone who had followed the illegal activities by the Capistrano district, one of the major conclusions was that there was a lack of accountability.
Lack of accountability is evident in SAUSD. There should be no more excuses for “not knowing” by any of the administrators from this point forward.
From the times link: Teachers and union officials have said they were concerned that auditors were accompanied by school principals, which they described as “intimidating.”
Benkert said the sample size was large enough to ensure a thorough investigation, and Hernandez said the principals’ presence with the auditors was no cause for concern.
“If someone walks in, who better than the principal to give a tour of the school?” he said in an interview Monday. “There’s no reason for [teachers] to be intimidated. The district is taking full responsibility for what happened.”
For Mr. Hernandez to say that there is no basis for teachers to be intimidated shows a disconnect. He lacks awareness of what has been going on in this district and why this problem has gotten this far -precisely because of intimidation by principals and other authorities. Why is Mr. Hernandez already discounting teacher and union concerns so early in the game?
Hernandez needs to get up to speed.
I believe that the district website used to have email addresses for the board members. I can’t find any of them now. How are teachers and community members supposed to communicate directly to the board?
Kudos to the Los Angeles Times for continuing the in-depth reporting.
The audit process if flawed from the beginning. Only if the auditors visit all classes, and teachers are interviewed without an administrator being present, will the truth emerge. Selecting only one class at each school is not a thorough audit. Having the principal, or any administrator present, when the auditor speaks with teachers is akin to interviewing a child about possible molestation with the alleged perpetrator present in the same room.
Where can I find Gordon’s email list for teachers who want to reveal fraud and lying?
I’d like to address the big lie thatg Juan Lopez keeps telling about lack of substitutes.
Everyone knows that is the district excuse for understaffing classrooms.
Art. While you and other team members were at this meeting other Juice family members Benny Diaz and myself were at the IBEW union hall in Orange viewing the documentary movie about Wal*Mart.
Stay tuned for a possible report.
Richardson and company must go! If this was a Nativo led board do you think it would be covered like this???
Do the cops always turn up at these meetings? Or did the corrupt ones fear for their lives?
What is so confusing is that some people say the class size reduction program includes only grades 1-3 and 9th, but then some say its only Kinder thru 3rd and 9th. Go figure, SAUSD contradicts itself so much, they do NOT KNOW WHAT THEY ARE DOING! LOL
Richardson and company have brought shame on the District and the City! Things are far worse now than when Nativo was in office! Shame on all of the voters who trusted Richardson and company!
#8
sausdcorruption@gmail.com
That is T Gordon’s email for fraud, corruption and other problems in the district.
“SAUSD is not the only district that has struggled with the implementation of CSR.”
Looks like Audrey Noji is resorting to the “everybody’s doing it” defense
Trigg and his cronies probably cooked up the whole scheme to save a buck. SAUSD is proving to be the ENRON of public school districts- except the losers in this one are kids. Who has the power in the district- the one who controls the money- Look there for the origin of the scandal.
What kind of leadership culls a culture of intimidation to force employees to steal from funding sources? What kind of leadership is so disconnected from the reality that they would actually think that no one would speak up? What kind of leadership failed to see that SAEA has a new leader who is ethical? What kind of leadership completely fumbles the finances in astronomical ways and then blames the students for the lack of planning when demographics change?
Art,
I love your devotion to this story/controversy. And thanks for this report. But someone on the Santa Ana Citizens yahoogroup responded to this article with this: “I feel compelled to comment on the charter school proposal. While I know nothing about this particular proposal or even who is proposing it, it sounds very similar to a charter school option that we know of in Orange County School District. We know the teachers and some of the students. The teachers are dedicated, and the students are learning and excelling. So there are examples that are local, not just in ‘rich communities in
northern California.’ The people that we know are neither elite nor
rich. We support this concept, and think it has alot of positives.
That being said, knowing Santa Ana Unified, they would probably screw it up, but that doesn’t make the concept bad.”
I just want to agree and suggest that while the guys do look “stiff” in the photo you post, your reporting of their proposal isn’t helpful. Parents need alternatives, and charter schools and other alternatives–including homeschooling and homeschool resource centers–are currently a major growing movement in American education. I worked in one that served almost entirely working class kids. And I have visited the El Sol school here in Santa Ana and met the staff. Charter schools are PUBLIC schools, not some elite project. The average public school in South County is far more “elite” than a place like El Sol.
So a question my man: Can you tell us more about what these guys were actually proposing? I would like to know.
James,
Make no mistake my friend – this charter is simply a means for wealthy homeschoolers to take public money.
The concept, as I understand it, involves only two days of classroom instruction, and three days of homeschooling.
Here is the response I posted at Santa Ana Citizens:
Roberta,
The data that was presented at the SAUSD meeting was in fact pertinent only to northern CA – specifically Palo Alto. Palo Alto, according to Wikipedia, is 75% white. The median income is $90K.
My sister home schooled her kids and they turned out fine. My problem with this program is that they are looking for major subsidies from the local school district – that is money that will be taken away from our public school students.
I cannot imagine how most families in our city will benefit from this. Most families in our city are working class and the parents are lucky to be high school graduates.
According to Wikipedia, our city’s median income is $43K – less than half what you find in Palo Alto. Almost 20% of our population is below the poverty line,
versus only 4% in Palo Alto.
I have no problem with charters or home schooling. I do have a problem with this concept as it will only drain our district – and only the wealthiest people in our
city/area will benefit. That is most likely people who are in only two neighborhoods and in the unincorporated area of the district. That is not fair.