Thursday, October 14, 2010

Ricasa is Being Investigated by California Fair Political Practices Commission FPPC





Sweetwater school trustee being investigated

THURSDAY, OCTOBER 14, 2010 AT 6 A.M.

— State officials are investigating a complaint filed against Sweetwater school board President Arlie Ricasa that alleges she is using new campaign funds to retire old debts.

A former school board member Jaime Mercado filed the complaint with the California Fair Political Practices Commission last month. Mercado alleges Ricasa - who is seeking re-election to the Sweetwater Union High School District board - is violating state law by using funds for that campaign to pay off debts incurred from a previous run for the state Assembly.

Ricasa denied the allegation.

“I’m raising money right now for my school board campaign,” Ricasa said. “No monies are being intermingled with debt from my 2008 Assembly campaign.”

Ricasa referred further questions about her expenses to her campaign treasurer, Kinde Durkee, who did not return several calls for comment.

Violations can carry a maximum penalty of up to $5,000, Commission spokesperson Tara Stock said.

Mercado, who is running for a seat on the Southwestern Community College governing board, said he filed the complaint because he was angry about a Sweetwater school board decision that doubled the amount it costs to file a candidate's statement.

“The intent is to minimize competition for them because not everybody has $2,000 to pay for a statement,” Mercado said. “That infuriated me.”

Mercado, a former principal, lost a 2008 re-election bid to the school district board.

Andrew Valencia is running against Ricasa for Seat 5 on the school board.

wendy.fry@uniontrib.com • (619) 293-1743 • On Twitter @WendyFry

Also in this section

SUSHD Critiqued for Timing/Cost of Full Page Tribune Adverts

The district has twice placed full page paid advertisements in the Union Tribune, in the last few weeks. The timing of it, during election season, is suspect. Read on for the Rostra blog opinion.
(A center-right blog, sdrostra focus is accountability to taxpayers. )


BREAKING: SWEETWATER SCHOOLS USING PUBLIC FUNDS TO PROMOTE RICASA DURING RE-ELECTION?

Thursday, October 14, 2010
posted by Barry Jantz

In the midst of a re-election challenge, Sweetwater Union High School District (SUHSD) President Arlie Ricasa is receiving significant positive name recognition from a taxpayer-funded public relations effort, paid by Sweetwater schools.

Ironically, the Fair Political Practices Commission (FPPC) confirmed yesterday it would investigate a complaint filed on September 20, 2010, against Ricasa for alleged improprieties associated with using funds raised for her current campaign to retire debt from a prior election. Ricasa was a candidate for the 78th State Assembly District two years ago, losing to eventual general election winner Marty Block in the 2008 Democratic primary contest.

The Union-Tribune ran a story about the FPPC complaint today. Attachedis the full complaint.

Yet, what the FPPC complaint and UT story do not address may be even more significant, while equal cause for an investigation by the appropriate authorities. In recent weeks, the Sweetwater School District has facilitated a full-fledged marketing campaign – at public expense – proclaiming its achievements, while hi-lighting the name of Board President Ricasa.

On September 29, 2010, Sweetwater Superintendent Jesus Gandaramailed a letter to district parents, celebrating increasing test scores. The letter, addressed “Dear Sweetwater family member” included enclosures of recent news clippings about the student academics, complete with a quote from Board President Arlie Ricasa.

How many parents were sent the packet of information? SUHSD should answer that question, but there is nothing in the letter to suggest that it didn’t go to every family. On its website, the district notes it has 42,000 students. Potentially, that’s a lot of mail, also very likely exceeding the state prohibition on publicly-funded mass mailings that tout the name of an elected official.

The district also ran at least one newspaper ad, of the full-page variety, on page five of last Thursday’s South County edition of the Union-Tribune, also proclaiming its positives and again giving recognition to Ricasa as the board president.

The chronology of events seems a bit coincidental. The complaint against Ricasa was filed with the FPPC on September 20. Nine days later, September 29, several thousand letters were mailed to district residents, quoting Ricasa. Sample ballots, then absentee ballots started getting mailed to voters from the County Registrar about that time, a month from the November 2 election. Then, October 7, a full page ad appeared in the newspaper, again mentioning Ricasa.

Anyone check the price to run a full-page Union-Trib ad lately, or the costs associated with printing and mailing thousands of letters? My guess is that the school district didn’t report the amounts as an in-kind contribution to Ricasa’s campaign. After all, that would be illegal.

The timing of the school district PR campaign, polishing the name of Arlie Ricasa with public monies during her re-election, all conveniently timed with sample and absentee ballots being in the hands of voters, couldn’t be more suspicious.

Ricasa faces a challenge from Andrew Valencia. The race seems to be a hodgepodge of unconventional alignments and philosophies, with the Sweetwater Education Association — the teachers union — endorsing against incumbent Democrat Ricasa, opting instead to support Republican Valencia. The local Labor Council is apparently even staying out of the race as a result of the union’s non-support of Ricasa. That’s all for another story, perhaps.

The immediate issue of interest is the mysterious timing of the school district’s marketing campaign. It must be strange politics – or internal influences – that a school board superintendent would be so ethically tone deaf as to approve pro-Ricasa letters, ads, artwork and related expenditures during his board president’s re-election, and think no one would take note. Especially given all the government “watch-dogging” taking place in the county and around the state in recent years.

###

This article also appears at the FlashReport.



2 Responses to “Breaking: Sweetwater Schools using public funds to promote Ricasa during re-election?”

  1. Barry Jantz Barry Jantz says:

    As a result of this piece, I have been contacted by parents indicating that the Sweetwater district is also funding numerous official robocalls “from Ricasa” as well, touting various district events and such, throughout the election season.

Tuesday, October 12, 2010

Local elections: Recommendations from neighboring teacher associations

If you did not receive your CTA flyer and you want to support our fellow teachers county-wide here are the recommendations for the November 2 General Election. These are made by CTA members at the local level just as we endorsed: Janney, Rivera and Valencia.

In red: our "feeder" elementary schools and our local community college.


1. Cajon Valley Union School District: Tamara Otero, Jane Alfano, Jill Barto

2. Chula Vista Elementary School District: Larry Cunningham, Doug Luffborough

3. Del Mar Union Elementary School District: Scott Wooden, Douglas Rafner, Kristin Gibson

4. Escondido Union School District: Jose Fragozo, Marty Hranek

5. Grossmont Union High School District: Richard "Dick" Hoy, Robert Shield

6. National Elementary School District: Brian Clapper, Ted Godshalk, Liz Vasquez

7. Oceanside Unified School District: Lillian V. Adams, Janet Bledsoe Lacy

8. San Diego Unified School District: Kevin Beiser and YES ON MEASURE J

9. San Dieguito Union High School District: Barbara Groth, Amy Herman, Rick Shea

10. South Bay Union School District: Julian Cook-Ly, Josie Dorado, Mealanie Ellsworth

11. Southwestern Community College District: Norma Hernandez, Tim Nader, Jesseca Saenz-Gonzalez

12. Sweetwater Union High School District: Karen Janney, Hector Rivera, Andrew Valencia

13. Palomar Community College District: Paul McNamara

14. Grossmont-Cuyamaca Community College District: Seat #1 Edwin Hiel & Seat #2 Debbie Jusleson

Wednesday, October 6, 2010

District in the News Again: Test Score Shell Game



Troubled students excluded from high school scores

Sweetwater recalculation shows test gains would have been smaller without realignment

WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 6, 2010 AT 7:54 P.M.

The state test rankings at 11 Sweetwater Union high school campuses went up 5 percent on average this year — a remarkable increase made possible in part by a controversial realignment that excluded some of the district’s most troubled students from those results.

If those students had been included, the average high school would have seen 4.3 percent growth, according to an analysis conducted by district staff in response to critics.

The alternative education students used to be included in each campus’ scores. They remain on campus, but have now been carved out for administrative purposes into a separate group called Bounce Back Independent Study High School.

That school scored 549 on California’s Academic Performance Index this year, well below the mainstream goal of 800 set by the state.

The district says the separation is for the good of the 2,200 independent study students, and had nothing to do with test scores.

Critics, including two former teachers, say the move was sleight of hand intended to scrub bad scores from each high school’s performance in a high-stakes test-score world where every point counts. Schools can face sanctions if they don’t show adequate progress each year.

The district’s own analysis of the 11 schools shows that the average campus scored 793 on the API rankings this year. Had the Bounce Back students been included in the scores, that would have been 788 instead. Either way, they say, that’s solid growth over the 756 average the year before.

At the schools that have the most Bounce Back students, the difference was more pronounced. At Castle Park High School, the state index was 812. It would have been 802 had the Bounce Back students been included. Again, district officials point to significant growth over the school’s 762 score the year before.

Sweetwater officials say their API growth is a result of district reforms and part of a trend that shows improved student achievement dating back three years.

“This is something to be proud of and this in no way deflates the gains we have made for our students,” said Diego Ochoa, Castle Park’s principal.

Maria Castilljea, the district’s executive director of curriculum and instruction, agreed, saying, “It is discouraging that somebody would discredit the work of 1,700 teachers and 200 administrators who have worked hard to close the achievement gap.”

To address the criticism, the district recalculated its state API rankings to see how inclusion of Bounce Back students would affect them. The higher rankings will remain as the official state record.

By having the Bounce Back students across the district assigned to a single principal — rather than administrators at 11 campuses — the district hopes to establish a more cohesive alternative education system.

John Brickley, an alternative education teacher who retired from the district last month, remains convinced the new Bounce Back school was a “cheap move,” designed to boost rankings at comprehensive high schools.

“These students, who are the neediest students, have been used as pawns by a district that is getting greedy about raising test scores as high as it can,” Brickley said. “The irony is that the district didn’t have to do this because the scores went up anyway. This just taints it.”

Sweetwater’s 42,000 middle and high school students made significant improvements on state tests in virtually all grades and subjects this year.

Released in August, English scores improved the most — a jump the district attributed to a new curriculum for English classes.

maureen.magee@uniontrib.com (619) 293-1369 Staff writer Ashly McGlone contributed to this report.


CAMPAIGN FINANCE DISCLOSURE --DO IT YOURSELF

Have you ever wondered who is donating to local elections?
Here is an easy way to access that information.
Challenge: Try to find the SUHSD incumbent who just recorded a $ 5,000. donation from Seville Group Inc. of Pasadena, CA.

1. Log onto the Registrar of Voters Web Site




2. Do you see the dollar sign in the middle of the page?

$ NEW Campaign Finance Disclosure Records

3. Click on that link and you will get to a page that looks like this.

http://www.sdcounty.ca.gov/voters/Eng/proceed.html

4. Once you have proceeded, you can select your candidate by last name, for example. You will be able to review pdf files of forms they have turned in with names/contributors to their campaigns.

Here is an example of Arlie Ricasa's latest filing:


Monday, October 4, 2010

Community Member Challenges Board Incumbents...

Jane McGill, member of the Sweetwater Union District Proposition O Bond Oversight Committee, suggested board members recuse themselves from voting on contracts from companies and vendors who are donating to their campaigns. Though not illegal, one cannot help but notice the obvious conflict of interest. Where are the students in this equation?

Following here are Jane McGill's notes for the request she made to the board during open session on September 24. Just an FYI, the board scheduled the agenda items that Jane McGill was addressing for later in the evening when most of the public had left. Coincidence?


"Good evening. I have had the pleasure of serving on the Sweetwater Union District Proposition O Bond Oversight Committee for several years. This has been a wonderful opportunity to see various sites updated so that students in our district will be able to attend schools that would make any community proud. Also, during a recession it has poured huge sums of money into the local economy. I am delighted to see both of these things happening.

However, I do have a concern. It is one I have brought up before and it has become much more of an issue with the huge amounts of money being spent under Proposition O. At every board meeting millions of dollars are approved for various contracts and change orders. These contracts go to architectural firms and construction companies. When we voters approved this bond measure we expected the money to be spent totally without bias. I think it is inappropriate for board members to approve contracts and then take political contributions from companies that are involved with these contracts. I think all candidates for members of the board should decline all political contributions from firms that might be involved in work on the schools.

Unfortunately, this is not the case. I have seen some contribution records and I know two of the current board members have accepted donations for their current campaigns from these companies. This is a great concern to me. The people selected for contracts to work on our schools should be selected based on qualifications and the bidding process with absolutely no personal factors influencing the decision. If a board member does take funds from an architectural firm or contractor with any ties or even potential ties to the district, the ethical approach would be for the board member to refrain from voting on any issue that impacts that company in any way. Tonight that specifically applies to K1 on page 26 and M2 on page 27. Will the members of the board take an ethical approach and pledge to refrain from voting on any and all issues that are related to their campaign donors?"

Thank you, Jane. Who is donating to SUHSD board incumbents' campaigns?






UnionTribune Endorses Tom Torlakson

An editorial this week supported:
Tom Torlakson for STATE SUPERINTENDENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION.
This is a reversal for our local newspaper! (and about time)


ELECTION 2010

Cooley , Torlakson deserve support

SATURDAY, OCTOBER 2, 2010 AT MIDNIGHT

California voters have an unusually good option in the attorney general’s race in Los Angeles County District Attorney Steve Cooley, a successful and bipartisanly admired prosecutor.

Cooley has won praise for his measured approach to “three strikes” prosecutions, which was demagogued by his opponents in the Republican primary campaign. We like his insistence on prosecutorial discretion and his less-publicized skepticism about counterproductive sex-offender residence restrictions in Megan’s Law. He also makes a welcome vow to depoliticize the Attorney General’s Office, which under Jerry Brown has seemed to function as a vehicle for Brown’s gubernatorial ambitions, exemplified by the slanted ballot descriptions Brown’s staff produces for measures disliked by Democratic constituencies.

Cooley’s Democratic opponent, San Francisco District Attorney Kamala Harris, is smart and charismatic, but her resume is simply not as strong. She is facing intense criticism over a judge’s allegations that prosecutors in her office covered up information about gross misconduct at her city’s police crime lab.

The choice is more difficult for state superintendent of public instruction. Larry Aceves, a veteran school administrator who began his education career as a kindergarten teacher in the San Diego area, is both thoughtful and blunt in discussing education orthodoxy. He disputes, for example, claims that classroom-size-reduction policies have been helpful academically.

But his opponent, Assemblyman Tom Torlakson, D-Antioch, wins our backing. The former teacher has bipartisan support, including from Assemblyman Nathan Fletcher, R-San Diego, and offers thoughtful plans for getting businesses more involved with schools to help shape a better-prepared and more productive work force.

Torlakson’s support from teachers unions should give pause to anyone who backs education reform. But those who know Torlakson best say he is an independent thinker. We hope they are right.