This Sweetwater Education Association Blog endeavors to supplement the SEA web site with timely articles of interest to its members, updates about the upcoming elections across the south bay and San Diego, news about our members, and easy access to reports on our school board meetings and other district events
Monday, October 18, 2010
Events this Week to Support Our Candidates
Timely News Articles around District Events
Overtime issue erupts into Sweetwater lawsuit
Administrator says she faced retribution
BY TANYA SIERRA
FRIDAY, OCTOBER 15, 2010 AT 7:34 P.M.
Priscilla Ryan, with her son Eric, 2, goes through paperwork involving controversies at the Sweetwater Union High School District
DOCUMENT
Download: Charlene Lemons-Shivers vs. Sweetwater Union schools and board member Bertha Lopez
Players
Charlene Lemons-Shivers: Director of Alernative Education, Sweetwater Union High School District, claims she was retaliated against for questioning a secretary’s overtime.
Ricardo Del Rio: Program manager, Alternative Education.
Priscilla Ryan: The former secretary in Alternative Education, who says her overtime was all legitimate. She has been on paid leave for over a year.
Bertha Lopez: School board member that Lemons-Shivers said retaliated against her, which Lopez denies.
Charlene Lemons-Shivers
Bertha Lopez
On a Tuesday in June, two Sweetwater Union High School district workers in Alternative Education were summoned to the department head’s office and asked a series of questions about a co-worker.
What’s her middle name?
Where does her mother work?
Does she know important people in the district?
Who are the godparents of her youngest child?
They were asked not to tell anyone that the department head, Charlene Lemons-Shivers, was involved in the questioning. One was asked to forget about the conversation entirely.
This version of events is described in a memo by the school district’s Human Resources chief, who conducted one of several reviews of infighting at the Alternative Education Department, which serves about 3,100 struggling students.
The dispute centers on a secretary’s overtime, which Lemons-Shivers questioned. The secretary has been on paid leave for a year while the issue is sorted out. And Lemons-Shivers is suing the district, saying she was retaliated against for raising questions.
The dispute has sparked four reviews — one internal and three external — and will be discussed by the Board of Education on Monday. The Watchdog is seeking under the California Public Records Act an accounting for spending on all the reviews and legal work.
“To be spending this kind of money and this kind of time is just frivolous,” former district board member Jaime Mercado said. ”It’s cheating the students, the employees and the taxpayers.”
According to the memo, the probing questions were asked by Lemons-Shivers and her second-in-command, Ricardo Del Rio.
They were trying to determine whether the secretary in question, Priscilla Ryan, had any connection to district board member Bertha Lopez.
The memo concludes, “It appears that both Ms. Lemons-Shivers and Mr. Del Rio inappropriately questioned employees regarding Ms. Ryan and her connection/relationship with Ms. Lopez. Such activities will not occur again.”
But that was not the end of it.
Lemons-Shivers filed her retaliation lawsuit in July, claiming harassment by Lopez. She claims she was singled out for questioning Ryan’s overtime. She objected to Lopez coming to her department and asking questions.
The lawsuit contends that Lopez violated a district policy saying “individual members of the board shall not exercise any administrative responsibility with respect to the schools.”
It also claims Lopez’s “questioning, probing and interference in the operation of the Alternative Education program are designed to undermine” Lemons-Shivers and “create strife within the department.”
The lawsuit said that Lemon-Shivers was placed on administrative leave after Lopez enlisted disgruntled employees to speak against her and her department at a board meeting.
Lemons-Shivers referred questions to her attorney, Joshua Gruenberg. He said his client has a long history in the South Bay and has been harassed by Lopez for “trying to protect public dollars.”
Gruenberg said he had no prior knowledge of the Human Resources memo. When he was told about it by The Watchdog, he checked with his client about complaints that she interrogated employees and said, “My client disputes her involvement in those meetings.”
The district hired an outside consultant to review Lemons-Shivers’ claims, and the board will review that report on Monday. Puente Consulting found that there was no collusion and no relationship between Ryan and Lopez. In fact, the report found, Lopez was raising questions about Alternative Education months before Ryan’s overtime became an issue.
Ryan told The Watchdog all her overtime was earned and approved. She said Lemons-Shivers asked her to work it, and signed off on it.
The Puente report concludes that Lopez does not have direct power to affect Lemons-Shivers employment and that Lopez was not seeking adverse information about Lemons-Shivers when she visited the department.
The report states that a number of employees under Lemons-Shivers “including teachers, counselors and classified staff have lodged complaints against Lemons-Shivers for a variety of concerns including complaints of harassment.”
Lopez would not discuss the lawsuit against her. She said she frequently asks questions and researches programs in her role as a trustee. Because she is a longtime teacher in another district, she is particularly interested in curriculum and students who are learning English.
“As a board member I have the responsibility to be visible in the community,” Lopez said. “I get invited to many events and after-school activities. My day is not over until sometimes 8 o’clock.”
tanya.sierra@uniontrib.com (619) 293-1705 Twitter @SoCalNewsGal
SEA declares NO CONFIDENCE in INCUMBENTS
Presented to SUHSD school board 10/18/10
DECLARATION OF NO CONFIDENCE
We, the undersigned designees of the Representative Council of the Sweetwater Education Association, do declare NO CONFIDENCE in school board members Jim Cartmill and Arlie Ricasa. We have lost all faith and confidence in their leadership for the following reasons:
- They receive significant campaign contributions from active school contractors and vendors on whose contracts they must vote.
- They make our students and campuses vulnerable to exploitation through commercial advertisement.
- They upset and distress our colleagues and their families with unnecessary layoff notices.
- They illegally raise class size.
- They bargain in bad faith in a rush to impose an unfair contract.
- They condon unfair labor practices.
- They hurt our students’ academic futures by canceling summer school.
- They disrespect taxpayers and misuse their funds by holding large sums of money in reserves rather that putting that money toward students’ needs.
- They do not believe that all people have the right to have a voice in decisions that affect them.
- They do not create a culture of integrity, respect and trust.
Therefore, the Sweetwater Education Association resolves to actively seek and support school board members who:
- Make students and their education the priority of this district and demonstrate this commitment through their decisions.
- Operate, at all times, with integrity and respect for their positions.
- Seek and apply input from all district stakeholders, including students, parents, and teachers.
- Refuse monetary support from district contractors and vendors.
- Protect students’ right to a free and equal public education.
Signed this 18th day of October in the year 2010.
______________________________________ ______________________________________
Lauren McLennan John Orcutt
SEA Representative Council Designee SEA Representative Council Designee
Thursday, October 14, 2010
Ricasa is Being Investigated by California Fair Political Practices Commission FPPC
Sweetwater school trustee being investigated
BY WENDY FRY AND JANINE ZÚÑIGA
THURSDAY, OCTOBER 14, 2010 AT 6 A.M.
CHULA VISTA — 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
- Sandoval decides not to run again for school board - 8/13/2010
- Ethics investigations still on hold in Chula Vista - 10/13/2010
- Chula Vista councilmember to run for Sweetwater school board - 8/2/2010
- Sweetwater opens campuses to corporate ads - 8/1/2010
- Sweetwater school board candidates 2010 - 10/7/2010
SUSHD Critiqued for Timing/Cost of Full Page Tribune Adverts
BREAKING: SWEETWATER SCHOOLS USING PUBLIC FUNDS TO PROMOTE RICASA DURING RE-ELECTION?
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.
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.