Los Angeles school officials are going back 40 years in their internal review of teacher discipline cases - perfect lie to cover firing older higher paid teachers

THIS IS IMMEDIATE FUTURE OF PUBLIC EDUCATION...

Los Angeles (CNN) -- In an expanding investigation into teacher misconduct, Los Angeles school officials are going back 40 years in their internal review of teacher discipline cases in an effort to determine whether any of the instructors should also be referred for possible license revocation, a school spokesman said Friday.

Los Angeles School Superintendent John Deasy has asked the principals at more than 1,000 schools to search the files of the past 40 years for "any cases of possible employee misconduct," spokesman Tom Waldman told CNN.

The 40-year period is a significant expansion from the past four years of misconduct cases that the system has already reviewed.

So far, Los Angeles school officials have referred the discipline cases of 604 teachers from the past four years to state authorities who have powers to revoke a teacher's credentials, officials said.

Of those 604 cases (THIS NUMBER IS FROM HR AT LAUSD, THE ACTUAL NUMBER OF TEACHERS IN LAUSD "Rubber Rooms" MAY BE TWICE THAT FIGURE. )  in which teachers were fired or facing discipline, 60 teachers were accused of sexual misconduct with pupils on or off campus or with minors who weren't students, school officials said.

The California Commission on Teacher Credentialing will investigate 366 of the 604 teacher cases to determine if licenses should be revoked, which is a six-month process, spokeswoman Anne Padilla said. Most of the cases focused on allegations of teacher misconduct that involved student safety.

Padilla said Friday that 122 of the 604 cases were referred back to the school district for further information because the state agency didn't have the authority to investigate.

She also told CNN that 103 of the 604 cases were duplicates and were already being investigated by the agency's committee on credentials. "For the vast majority, no final action has been taken. They are still in process," Padilla said about the 103 cases.

The referral of the cases to state licensing investigators comes as the nation's second largest school system deals with a crisis of teacher misconduct. The district has been reeling from a scandal at Miramonte Elementary School, where two teachers have been charged with lewd acts on pupils, including one teacher accused of putting children in adult-like bondage situations and placing semen-filled spoons at their mouths.

The state license of that teacher, Mark Berndt -- who has pleaded not guilty to 23 counts of lewd acts on pupils -- has been suspended as the state agency monitors his criminal case, and a license revocation occurs upon a conviction, Padilla said. If an appeal to a conviction is made, the suspension of teaching credentials continues, Padilla said.

This week, the California Senate approved a bill that would empower school boards to fire teachers for misconduct and expedite the firing process of instructors accused of offenses involving sex, violence or drugs, said Democratic state Sen. Alex Padilla, who authored the legislation.

The bill now goes to the State Assembly for a vote.

"Because a school board is ultimately responsible for ensuring a safe learning environment, the school board should be empowered to dismiss employees they determine to be a serious threat to the health and safety of students," Sen. Padilla said in a statement.

The lurid allegations at Miramonte prompted the Los Angeles system to do an internal review of its handling of past teacher misconduct cases, and the district determined that 604 cases needed to be referred to state licensing authorities for review, though "a substantial number" of other misconduct cases had already been reported to the state, school officials said.

One parent, Alvaro Salgero, told CNN that he was concerned about child abuse in the school system.

"It tended to be a safe place, but from what I hear, it seems that's not happening in some places," Salgero said. "There isn't sufficient security for children.

"We're able to realize that there wasn't much of an investigation with teachers and they didn't investigate them before giving them a job, and those who suffer are the children, the pupils," Salgero said.

The 604 cases include teachers who were disciplined or were about to face discipline since July 2008, according to Ira Berman, Los Angeles Unified School District director of employee relations, and Vivian Ekchian, the district's chief human resources officer.

The cases also include teachers who were fired by the school board or who left the district after termination proceedings were initiated or while an allegation of misconduct was pending, Berman and Ekchian said.

The system doesn't know whether any of the teachers who were fired or who left the district are still in the classroom in other school districts.

The 604 figure also includes teachers who were suspended for 11 days or more for a variety of reasons not involving sexual misconduct with students, the two officials said.

"The safety of our students is our No. 1 priority," Ekchian said in explaining why the system referred the 604 cases to the state.

The system's internal investigation arose after parental outrage after charges were filed against former Miramonte teacher Berndt, who resigned from the system last year but was not referred to the state for possible license revocation, district spokesman Waldman said.

Berndt, 61, pleaded not guilty in February to allegations he bound young students, then photographed them with semen-filled spoons held at their mouths and three-inch cockroaches crawling across their faces, among other graphic depictions.

"We had not informed Sacramento to revoke Mr. Berndt's credentials," Waldman said.

Berndt is being held on $23 million bond and faces 23 counts of lewd acts on a child. The 23 victims were between 7 and 10 years old, and all but two of them were girls, the Los Angeles County District Attorney's Office said.

Authorities have said they have discovered roughly 600 images allegedly taken by Berndt in his classroom. Los Angeles Unified School District Superintendent Deasy has said Berndt was removed from his teaching job in January 2011 after school officials learned of the police investigation. A teacher for 30 years, Berndt initially challenged the school district's decision to dismiss him. But he eventually dropped his appeal and resigned last spring.

His arrest in January led to broader fallout over the adequacy of safeguards for the school's students and the prospect of more victims.

Days after Berndt was taken into custody, another Miramonte Elementary teacher -- Martin Springer, 49 -- was arrested and charged with three felony counts of lewd acts with a girl younger than 14. He has pleaded not guilty.

The LAUSD board subsequently shut Miramonte for two days, during which the board reconstituted the entire staff in the 1,400-student school. Miramonte is in unincorporated Los Angeles County within the Florence-Firestone area, about six miles south of downtown Los Angeles.

"Because a school board is ultimately responsible for ensuring a safe learning environment, the school board should be empowered to dismiss employees they determine to be a serious threat to the health and safety of students," Sen. Padilla said in a statement.

READ THIS: For every seven teachers brought up on charges by the average school district, one has anything directly to do with students. However, of the former seven teachers, 90% are at or near the top of their pay scale. Of that seven less than 15% are prosectuted by police. STILL, 100% WILL BE EFFECTIVELY FIRED OR DRIVEN OFF.

While time is showing it is actually easy to fire a teacher w/o a cause that would stand up in crimminal or civil court, the same district can't keep one single high school student safe from the violence, gang activities or the drug use on its own campuses. Not a single student can be kept safe until they graduate. IS THIS ABOUT PAYROLL SAVINGS OR REAL STUDENT SAFETY?

The lurid allegations at Miramonte prompted the Los Angeles system to do an internal review of its handling of past teacher misconduct cases, and the district determined that 604 cases needed to be referred to state licensing authorities for review, though "a substantial number" of other misconduct cases had already been reported to the state, school officials said.

One parent, Alvaro Salgero, told CNN that he was concerned about child abuse in the school system.  "It tended to be a safe place, but from what I hear, it seems that's not happening in some places," Salgero said. "There isn't sufficient security for children 

"We're able to realize that there wasn't much of an investigation with teachers and they didn't investigate them before giving them a job, and those who suffer are the children, the pupils," Salgero said.

The 604 cases include teachers who were disciplined or were about to face discipline since July 2008, according to Ira Berman, Los Angeles Unified School District director of employee relations, and Vivian Ekchian, the district's chief human resources officer 

The cases also include teachers who were fired by the school board or who left the district after termination proceedings were initiated or while an allegation of misconduct was pending, Berman and Ekchian said.

The system doesn't know whether any of the teachers who were fired or who left the district are still in the classroom in other school districts.

The 604 figure also includes teachers who were suspended for 11 days or more for a variety of reasons not involving sexual misconduct with students, the two officials said.

"The safety of our students is our No. 1 priority," Ekchian said in explaining why the system referred the 604 cases to the state.

The system's internal investigation arose after parental outrage after charges were filed against former Miramonte teacher Berndt, who resigned from the system last year but was not referred to the state for possible license revocation, district spokesman Waldman said.

Berndt, 61, pleaded not guilty in February to allegations he bound young students, then photographed them with semen-filled spoons held at their mouths and three-inch cockroaches crawling across their faces, among other graphic depictions.

"We had not informed Sacramento to revoke Mr. Berndt's credentials," Waldman said.

Berndt is being held on $23 million bond and faces 23 counts of lewd acts on a child. The 23 victims were between 7 and 10 years old, and all but two of them were girls, the Los Angeles County District Attorney's Office said.

Authorities have said they have discovered roughly 600 images allegedly taken by Berndt in his classroom.

Los Angeles Unified School District Superintendent Deasy has said Berndt was removed from his teaching job in January 2011 after school officials learned of the police investigation.

A teacher for 30 years, Berndt initially challenged the school district's decision to dismiss him. But he eventually dropped his appeal and resigned last spring.

His arrest in January led to broader fallout over the adequacy of safeguards for the school's students and the prospect of more victims.

Days after Berndt was taken into custody, another Miramonte Elementary teacher -- Martin Springer, 49 -- was arrested and charged with three felony counts of lewd acts with a girl younger than 14. He has pleaded not guilty.

The LAUSD board subsequently shut Miramonte for two days, during which the board reconstituted the entire staff in the 1,400-student school. Miramonte is in unincorporated Los Angeles County within the Florence-Firestone area, about six miles south of downtown Los Angeles.

ADDENDEM TO "AN OPEN LETTER TO GOVERNOR JERRY BROWN"

State panel OKs demotion; fatal crash involved judge

By Onell R. Soto

SAN DIEGO UNION-TRIBUNE

September 21, 2002

(NOTATIONS IN ITALICS ARE PURELY THE OPINION OF THE POSTER)

Judge H. James Ahler, 54, of Escondido, hit and killed a pedestrian in Escondido within an hour of drinking three glasses of wine a year ago,  (BULLSHIT, AHLER IS 6'2 AND ABOUT 260 LB.S. THERE IS PHYSIOLOGICAL WAY THAT A MAN THAT SIZE COULD HAVE REACHED PT. 15 PERCENT BLOOD ALCOHOL, TWICE THE STATE LIMIT ON THREE GLASSES OF WINE. SOUNDS LIKE ANOTHER AHLER LIE: MY OPINION. AT .15 PERCENT MOST DRUNKS ARE SEEING DOUBLE AND SLURRING THERE WORDS. yet THE DA SAID ALCOHOL HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH AHLER HITTING AND KILLING THAT PEDESTRIAN. I REITERATE... BULLSHIT) according to the decision by the California State Personnel Board.

After the fatal Sept. 18, 2001, crash, he served ONE night in jail, pleaded  guilty to "misdemeanor drunken driving," paid $1,200 in fines and had to  attend counseling and ONE session in which victims described the impact of drunken driving on their lives and those of their loved ones, court records show. Ahler has been an administrative law judge with the Office of Administrative Hearings in San Diego since 1994, typically hearing  similar cases in which professionals have their licenses suspensions or revoked

BUT HOW AHLER  SUFFERED HE CLAIMS!
 Because of his conviction, Ahler – who had been promoted in June  2001 from a position paying $102,614 annually to a higher rank as an  administrative law judge specialist, which pays $107,641 – was demoted. HE HAS SINCE MADE UP THAT SALARY DIFFERENCE MANY TIMES OVER - UNLIKE the "discipline" shoveled out to MOST OF AHLER'S VICTIMS OTHER WISE KNOWN AS  "DEFENDANTS" when FORCED INTO AHLER'S KANGAROO COURT. 

WWHATEVER  THE AGENCY WANTS.  PAID FOR BY HUGE LAW FIRMS FOR THESE "Agencys" i.e. Government or school district employees. 

But H. JAMES AHLER KEPT HIS JOB!  How many paychecks a month does Alher get? (Or perhaps he's paid in cash for his services to these agencies and their attorneys?) Ahler told officers when he was arrested that he drank three glasses of  wine within an hour of the crash, according to documents from the  personnel board, which hears appeals from state employees who feel they've been wrongly disciplined.

In Vista Superior Court, Ahler admitted his blood-alcohol level at the time of the crash was .15 of a percent, nearly twice the .08 of a percent at which California motorists are presumed to be too drunk to drive.

Compare "Dickless" James Ahler's own behavior with the average "discipline" afforded most drunks who kill another human while driving intoxicated! Don't take my word look this up yourself. But don't bother asking Sacramento! No one seems to want to talk about Ahler's Behavior. This includes the AG's office, Jerry Brown's office, the supervising ALJ appointed by Brown.

Ahler was not charged with killing 67-year-old Charles Ames of Escondido because his drinking didn't contribute to the death, said prosecutor Evan Miller. He admitted to being drunk while driving but that drunken driving didn't contribute? WOW, I want to be President of a local bar, no pun intended, association.

Miller said Ames (the pedestrian), whose own blood-alcohol level was reported to be .28, crossed against a red light in a dark corner wearing dark clothing. None of a half-dozen witnesses to the crash saw him before impact, he said. (Sorry but that  sort of surprise on the road happens 2-3 times in the experiences of most drivers ,SOBER drivers and in similar circumstances almost NEVER end up in a COLLLISION LET ALONE A FATALITY involving a pedestrian at an intersection. Most are lit anyway.)  How the hell were there six witnesses at four A.M. anyway? Were they all
NNorth County San Diego attorneys?

Defense lawyer Daniel Cronin said Ahler was "not responsible for the death." )

"The pedestrian ran out in front of him,"Cronin said. "It would have happened if he was stone cold sober." (AND NOT PAYING ATTENTION TO THE ROAD, TRAFFIC LIGHTS OR HIS VEHICLES SPEED.)

Ahler challenged the demotion, which took place during the standard probationary period relating to the June 2001 promotion (SO INSTEAD OF REMORSE, ALJ H.JAMES AHLER IMMEDIATELY STARTED TO WHINE AND BITCH IN PUBLIC ABOUT NOT GETTING A $102 DOLLAR A WEEK RAISE)

In his defense, Ahler argued that his supervisors should have simply written a letter disapproving his actions, not taken away his promotion.  He said that, except for the conviction, he continues to do his job well.

Lawyer Everett Bobbitt, who represented Ahler before the personnel board, said the demotion was too harsh, especially because Ahler continues handling complicated cases and deserves the higher rank.

"It's really not a demotion. They're just taking money away," Bobbitt said. "The work hasn't changed at all." But an administrative law judge with the State Personnel Board ruled Ahler violated his duty as a judge by driving drunk. (Yep, he's still doing a piss poor job  that his reputation demands)

"Such conduct does not comply with the law, does not promote public confidence in the integrity of the judiciary and demeans the judicial office," Judge William A. Snyder wrote two weeks ago, paraphrasing the Canons of Judicial Ethics in his decision upholding Ahler's 

demotion.

Snyder said some of the people coming before Ahler might question his impartiality. He noted that Ahler and his colleagues decide whether OR NOT TO FIRE AND DESTROY THE LIVES OF AHLERS JUCICIAL VICTIMS IN MUCH THE WAY HE KILLED THAT PEDESTRIAN - WITH IMPUNITY.

WHY DOES JERRY BROWN AND KAMELA HARRIS ENDORSE THIS FOOL'S BEHAVIORS BOTH ON AND OFF THE BENCH... PROBABLY BECAUSE THEY DON'T WANT TO ACKNOWLEDGE HE AND HIS BEHAVIOR ON THE BENCH EXIST AT ALL. IGNORE IT AND IT WILL GO-AWAY. 

H. JAMES AHLER IS NOT GOING ANYWHERE HIS PRESENCE WITH OAH IS THE FAULT OF THE GOVERNOR AND  ATTORNEY GENERAL KAMELA HARRIS. AHLER WILL BE THEIR RESPECTIVE LEGACYS IN MY MIND WHEN I THINK OF JUDCIAL MISDEEDS

.http://schoolcounselingvideocast.blogspot.com/2012/09/blog-post_14.html

OPEN LETTER TO GOVERNOR JERRY BROWN - FIRE JUDGE H. JAMES AHLER

August 12, 2012

Honorable Governor Jerry Brown,

Honorable Kamala Harris, Attorney General of California

Honorable Linda Cabatic, OAH supervising ALJ

PRA coordinator

Full Disclosure, Chief News Editor

CNN Regional News Editor

Let me ask what I am sure is and has been known in Sacramento for a decade. What circumstances has allowed a man convicted of killing a pedestrian while driving intoxicated, (by State standards), to remain as an Administrative Law Judge until now? To my knowledge, he was never disciplined for the manslaughter of the pedestrian in Vista, CA where he sits at the head of the North County Bar Association. 

In my opinion, he unofficially sits as paid "in-house Judge" for the likes of a private law firm, Friedman, Fagan and FulFrost. This firm represents almost 420 school districts. Ahler has the well-deserved reputation as executioner over the lives and careers of hundreds of educators. Almost all of these educators are denied the legal due process demanded by law, contract, the CTC and California Ed Code standards for disciplining educators. 

Ahler appears oblivious. Yet H. James Ahler's victim's family is denied closure or justice because Ahler appears to have skated under the radar by virtue of his office and connections made while in that office, according to The San Diego Tribune. Governor Brown, how can someone convicted of a misdemeanor for killing a man walking home while Ahler was about on a drunken stupor - BEHIND THE WHEEL - ever sit in judgment of anyone’s employment?

I have started investigating Judge Ahler’s association with large law firms representing (Government funded) public schools and against educators all at the top of their districts pay scale. Ironic? I am sure I will have a considerable amount more to ask once the investigation is concluded. However Governor Brown Sir, the question remains. How does a man like Ahler sit as lawfully employed Judge in any venue in California under your watch?

Under your watch Sir, you appointed Linda Cabatic to replace the former OAH supervising judge. I am sure you saw the need for change of the quasi-constitutional and quasi ethical tribunal. Despite your efforts, nothing of substance has changed and Administrative Law Judges like James Ahler sit in judgment and in Ahler's case specifically; while having escaped fair judgment himself. Ahler is an example why the OAH is universally seen as the new extension to Public School District’s hiring and firing process and their ability to cull highly paid Educators from the payroll. In turn more educators are having to sue their districts in Civil court to find a remedy. Ultimately, this ends up costing the local tax payers hundreds of thousands of dollars in unnecessary attorney’s fees and judgments every year.

 No Educator enters this process expecting any semblance of 'justice,' especially when agency attorneys can depend on the strategy of a last minute motion to remove a presiding ALJ and without notifying the defendant, pull Ahler in. 

Ahler himself has been suspended for his overt acts to control the outcome of OA hearings in favor of the agency (e.g. OAH hearing Maura Larkins, San Diego.) As Governor, why would you allow the likes of H. James Ahler to represent the OAH of our State? Yet, Ahler remains a dirty little secret of California's legal system. Ahler represents a significant stain on your administration and bane to the CTC's efforts to keep good educators. I hope you will order an investigation of H. James.

FDN’s video “The Cost of Courage.” Richard I Fine's fight against judical corruption, Los Angeles and California.

Thank you for your personal attention to this matter.

Sincerely,

Zero tolerance for intoxicated drivers - except Judge H. James Ahler. The fact he killed a pedestrian on that drive seems to matter even less!

California Administrative Per Se- Facts (Zero tolerance for intoxicated drivers - except Judge H. James Ahler!)

Administrative Per Se (DUI) Background

Prepared by DMV Research and Development Branch

In 1990, California became the 28th state to implement an immediate driver license suspension law for alcohol-impaired drivers, also referred to as an “Administrative Per Se (APS)” or “on-the-spot” license suspension law.  The California APS law requires the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) to suspend or revoke the driving privilege of persons who are arrested for driving with a blood alcohol concentration (BAC) of .08% or more, or who refuse a chemical test upon arrest.  In January 1994, California implemented a companion driver license suspension law, known as the “zero tolerance law,” which requires DMV to suspend for one year any driver under age 21 with a BAC of .01% or more as measured by a preliminary alcohol screening test, or who refuses or fails to complete the test.  These administrative actions are independent of any criminal penalties imposed in court for conviction of the driving-under-the-influence (DUI) offense.  Upon arrest, or detention (as applicable in the .01% APS law), the driver’s license is immediately confiscated and an order of suspension or revocation served.

For either law, due process is allowed by the issuance of a 30-day temporary license intended to provide the driver with sufficient time to challenge the suspension through DMV administrative review.  (Oh, yeah. Ahler was DMV staff attorney before becoming a quasi-judge) The time allowed to challenge the suspension was reduced from 45 days on July 1, 1993.  As of January 1, 1993, offenders who are dismissed for insufficient evidence or are never charged by the court may request an APS dismissal hearing to consider setting aside the associated APS action.  Under the .08% APS law, when a driver submits to and “fails” a BAC test and has no prior DUI convictions or APS actions (within 7 years prior to September 20, 2005 and within 10 years thereafter), a 4-month license suspension is imposed.  Following 30 days of “hard” suspension, and providing they first demonstrate proof of insurance, show proof of enrollment in an approved alcohol treatment program, and pay all penalty fees, the law provided for such drivers to obtain a 5-month restricted license that allows only driving to and from an alcohol treatment program, and to, from, and during the course of employment.  A 1-year suspension is imposed on drivers having one or more prior DUI convictions or APS actions within 7 years prior to September 20, 2005 and within 10 years thereafter, with no provision for a restricted license. 

Under this law, for offenders refusing a BAC test, a 1-year license suspension is imposed for a first offense, a 2-year revocation is imposed for a second offender refusal, and a 3-year revocation is imposed for a third-or-subsequent offender refusal (within 7 years prior to September 20, 2005 and within 10 years thereafter).  There are no provisions for issuance of a restricted license following a BAC test refusal.

The .01% BAC law requires a 1-year suspension and provides for a hardship restriction only if a BAC test was completed and the driver can demonstrate a critical need to drive.

As of September 20, 2005 commercial drivers arrested in a noncommercial vehicle and having no 
prior DUI convictions or APS actions (within 7 years prior to September 20, 2005 and within 10 years thereafter) are handled no differently than other first offenders and are no longer granted an automatic restriction to drive to, from, and during the course of employment following a 30-day “hard” suspension as they originally were.  (A noncommercial vehicle is one not requiring a commercial driver license, or heavy-vehicle operator’s license, to drive.) 

A DESPERATE PLEA FOR HELP TO CTA PRESIDENT DEAN VOGEL FROM ONE TEACHER OUT IN JURUPA USD, RIVERSIDE CA.

Subject: Teacher Abuse in the Jurupa Unified School District by CTA representatives and JUSD Administration
Date: Thu, 5 Jul 2012 07:47:58 -0700

Dear Mr. Vogel,

We at Jurupa Unified School District need your help, desperately!!!

The Union is in collusion with the district.

One example:  I was terminated by JUSD, (but the decision was overturned in Superior Court).
Throughout the entire 2+ year process, I begged and pleaded for legal help from my Union, John Vigrass President, and Ed Sibby CTA representative.  I was repeatedly told that "if the district chose to go for termination" then I would receive legal help.  Despite repeated written requests, text messages and verbal phone calls begging the union to be proactive rather than reactive, I was lied to and ignored.  The Union President usually said he would "ask the Assistant Superintendent, Tammy Elzig, what to do" and get back to me.  The same is true for Ed Sibby.

I was forced to pay inordinate amounts of money for private lawyers.  The Union did nothing.

I was placed on a 9-month administrative leave without being told why; was denied my Weingarten Rights, being told by Tammy Elzig that I was not in trouble, so I was not entitled to Union representation, but to say nothing.  I told the Union and they did nothing.

I was forced to undergo a psychiatric evaluation in violation of Ed Code.  I was not provided a list of doctors.  The evaluation was held in the district office in a room adjacent to the Assistant Superintendent's office.  No psychometric evaluations were administered.  The "Dr." kept leaving the room to consult with the Assistant Superintendent during the evaluation. I told the Union and they did nothing.

I was not provided a Skelly prior to my CPC hearing, and the Union did nothing.

Unverified evidence was presented in the hearing, a violation of CA Ed Code, and the Union did nothing.

Evidence which was over 10 days old, which had never been presented and shown to me prior to the hearing, was presented and the Union did nothing.

I was not allowed to gather exculpatory evidence or interview witnesses prior to the CPC hearing, and the Union did nothing.

Proper discovery did not occur, and the Union did nothing.

False information was added to my personnel file during the course of the proceedings.  The Union did nothing.

I was denied access to my personal posessions, classroom, records and even my right to associate with other unit members, and the Union did nothing.

All Union communications are sent via District email.  I was blocked from using District email.  I complained to both John Vigrass and Ed Sibby, and the Union did nothing.

I filed numerous grievances which were denied at level one, and the Union did nothing.

I was not paid for the last month of my administrative leave and the Union did nothing.

I was not compensated for disciplinary meetings held outside my workday and the Union did nothing.

When terminated, I begged for help with an appeal.  The Union attorney who was finally assigned to me, Marianne Reinhold, told me to find a job outside of education.  The Union did nothing.

The Union President kept telling me to take early retirement, as suggested by the Assistant Superintendent.  I was not eligible, and will not be until September 2012.

I appealed in Pro Per via Writ of Administrative Mandamus.  I retained an attorney after the second amended complaint was filed and prevailed.  On Dec. 2, 2011, the judge ordered that I be reinstated, paid back pay, back medical, out of pocket costs, attorney's fees, etc.  I told the Union President, John Vigrass, his response was that I was in no way shape or form employed by the school district, that the district would, of course, appeal, and only if I prevailed in the District's appeal would I receive help from the Union. 

 One cannot even get assistance when one prevails! 

Why did I pay Union Dues for almost 28 years?  (I was unable to pay while not receiving a check.)

I have a "Right to Sue Letter" against the Union from DFEH.  I will file more PERBs, none of which was or will be done with any Union assistance.

There are over 20 of us in JUSD who are part of a representative group action against the district.  All of us have undergone most if not all of what I have described in the foregoing list of injustices.

I do not want to engage in a legal battle with those whom I paid to protect me for almost 28 years.  Please, for God's sake, help us! 

ANN (LAST NAME WITH HELD) 

Any Public School with Such a Record of Abuse, Corruption, and Anti-Social Malfeasance Would have been Shut Years Ago

Any Public School with such a record of abuse, corruption, and anti-social malfeasance would have been Shut Down Years Ago.  Why Did Authorities Look The Other Way For "Oakland Charter?"

 From the Oakland Tribune:

Published in Schools Matter, 6/17/2012

The head of an Oakland charter school organization that has made national headlines for its low-income students' outstanding test scores is now faced with mounting evidence that he used his position to enrich himself and his family. 

A state investigation into allegations of operational fraud and other unscrupulous activity by Ben Chavis -- a businessman who has also served, off and on, as director of three publicly funded but independently run charter schools named American Indian -- and his wife, who provided financial services to the school, cited numerous examples of financial conflicts of interest and fraudulent expenditures.

The American Indian Model's middle schools have the best test scores in Oakland and among the highest in the state; its high school also has near-perfect scores. In his book, "Crazy like a Fox," Director Ben Chavis touts the model's success and ridicules the public school system for wasting tax dollars, arguing that schools don't need more money.

But in recent months, Chavis' own stewardship of public funds has come under scrutiny. The state Fiscal Crisis & Management Assistance Team, which produced the scathing report, was asked by Alameda County Superintendent Sheila Jordan to investigate allegations made by a former employee of financial abuses -- including a $100,000 salary he took during at least one year of his retirement.

Now that auditors have found significant evidence to back those claims, 

---

---

Chavis could soon find himself the subject of a criminal investigation. Jordan announced Wednesday she would forward the case to the District Attorney's office, as recommended by the audit team. Jordan said she also wrote a letter to Oakland Superintendent Tony Smith, asking the district to consider revoking the schools' charters.

"The lack of oversight by the AIMS board and the unethical practices by its founder are unacceptable and an abuse of the public trust," Jordan said.

Between mid-2007 and the end of 2011, the school paid Chavis, his wife, Marsha Amador, and their various real estate and consulting businesses about $3.8 million, the auditors found. Many of those payments were made with state and federal facilities grants in the form of construction contracts to Chavis' companies -- business deals for school construction work that never went out to bid.

Meanwhile, the school's weak governing board did little to stand in the way, auditors found. For a short period of time last year, Chavis served on the board while he was employed as the organization's director and his wife was handling the books.

"The lack of due diligence and internal controls by the governing board has effectively granted the founder and his spouse unrestricted access to the assets of the organization and implied authority to enter into a variety of business arrangements for personal gain," the report stated.

Other findings included the opening and closing of bank accounts without approval and $25,700 in credit card purchases billed to the school with no authorization or apparent benefit to the school. They included airfare, restaurant, hotel and retail bills from out-of-state, including the North Carolina town where Chavis owns a farm; DirecTV; Giants tickets; and costs related to another venture, which foundered after the investigation became public -- the opening of a charter school in Arizona.

Chavis announced his retirement before the start of 2007-08 school year and returned to the school as director in 2011. He said at a recent hearing that he was a paid adviser during some of the time in between.

Chavis could not be immediately reached for comment.

Although Chavis did not found the original school, his name and reputation are most closely associated with the organization. A Lumbee Indian from North Carolina, he overhauled the academic program when he took over as director of the original school in East Oakland's Laurel District in 2000.

The new curriculum emphasized reading, writing and math and eliminated much of the school's Native American cultural teachings. Chavis instilled a strict and unorthodox discipline system that would bring notoriety to the school, sometimes using humiliation to motivate students to behave.

The most famous example of Chavis' brand of discipline is a student head-shaving that took place at a school assembly, with parent permission, after the boy was caught stealing. Today, few if any of the school's students are Native American.

Chavis announced his retirement shortly after the Oakland school district's charter schools office began raising concerns about his conduct. That spring, the East Bay Express published a story about an explosive incident involving a Mills College professor and graduate students who had come to tour the school. An African-American graduate student said Chavis cursed at him and aggressively kicked him out of the school -- claims that Chavis later acknowledged to be true, saying it was because the student came late.

The Oakland school district's charter school office, under new leadership, again expressed concerns this year when one of the three schools, American Indian Public Charter School II, applied for a renewed charter. The charter office recommended that the Oakland school board deny the charter renewal, potentially closing the school.

But at a packed hearing in which Chavis entered to rousing applause, the Oakland school board went against the charter school office's recommendation and, in a 4-3 vote, allowed the high-performing school to stay open.

Chris Dobbins, an Oakland school board member who supported the school at that meeting, said Wednesday afternoon that he couldn't "tear the school apart" because of the alleged improprieties of its leader. Even now, he said, he didn't have an easy answer.
"At the end of the day, it's hard to argue those test scores," he said. "It's a really hard question."

Read Katy Murphy's Oakland schools blog at www.IBAbuzz.com/education. Follow her at Twitter.com/katymurphy.

evidence against chavis

The Fiscal Crisis & Management Assistance team published the below findings about apparent conflicts of interest and misappropriation of funds at American Indian Model schools -- mostly by its founder and current director, Ben Chavis:

Publicly funded construction contracts for school improvements with Chavis' personal businesses were "not supported by formal contracts, competitive bidding or authorization by the governing board." That is a violation of federal regulations and could result in the loss of all federal funding to AIMS schools. 

In addition to wages and construction income, Chavis collected $2.8 million from the schools through rent and storage fees he charged as the school landlord, additional construction projects and a mandatory summer program run by his private business. Some checks from a school bank account were written to Chavis' companies and signed by Chavis.

In all, the schools made $3.8 million in payments to Chavis, his wife and their businesses from 2007-08 through the end of 2011.

Chavis' wife, Marsha Amador, provided financial administrative services to the schools. Her duties included general accounting; processing accounts payable; compliance reporting to local, state and federal agencies; and assisting with an annual audit. 

Chavis' personal and unrelated business expenses were commingled with purchases for the AIMS schools.About 35 percent of the credit card purchases paid for from the schools' accounts $25,700," ...were inappropriate or lack proper authorization." Many of the purchases originated out of state.

Memphis Consolidation Plan Trojan Horse for Urban Privatization Via Charter Schools

Tuesday, June 19, 2012

Memphis Consolidation Plan Trojan Horse for Urban Privatization Via Charter Schools

When Memphis City Schools announced it would accept $90 million from Gates to "improve teacher quality," Supt. Kriner Cash blubbered, “This is huge, this is huge, this puts Memphis City Schools in very elite territory, on the front page of the nation.”  Now almost three years later, Gates's fingerprints are on every aspect of school operations in Memphis, including a scheme to shut down 21 public schools in Memphis and turn the buildings over to corporate charter schools.  Now Cash and the Memphis City Schools are faced with a whole list of disturbing recommendations, including one that would totally disrupt the feeder school system in Memphis, which will lead to privatized high schools in the next phase of corporate takeover--if the Gates lemmings have their way.  From the Commercial Appeal:

 ...For MCS, among the most disturbing is the recommendation to cut 21 city schools and lease the space to charter schools. TPC estimates annual savings at $21 million, already plugged into the finance section to reduce an estimated $57 million deficit between the plan and revenue.

Cash insists the cuts won't save $21 million. He takes further exception that the majority of schools on the close list are in an "already underpopulated" southwest corner of the city.

"This would escalate that hemorrhaging," he said, adding that no one filed a plan with the city for refurbishing what would be gutted neighborhoods.

The list of to-close includes an inordinate number of middle schools, Cash says, which would "decimate the feeder pattern" in the southwest... .

Educator of the Year!

Educator of the Year 2011!  
CTA's Educator of the Year is Often a Great Teacher, but always a non-political, without options, without opinions and whose real qualification for the benign appointment is their ability to talk the Burlingame rhetoric (SIMILAR IN SIGNIFICANCE TO... "DO'N THE HAND-JIVE") with robot like precision. While being undeniably good at their craft, they are in fact, the "person(S) most likely if there were a real vote, to be voted "Miss Congeniality"). Actually, I believe at one time David Sanchez was Miss Congeniality. Five years straight!


So we at Disenfranchised-Educators have taken it upon ourselves to announce our own Educator of the Year. The qualities we will always seek for this entitled position are: that person be not only a good highly qualified educator whether classified, certificated, or administrative; who works hard (not 70 hours a week) and works passionately for students, their parents and and their coworkers. "Educators count too!" And it is mandatory that they have some sense of political awareness. We unreservedly embrace that idea even if theirs is a political position contrary to ours here at Disenfranchised – Educators, we must honor and investigate descention for its true utility. And unwavering foundation in a true democracy.


This year myself, our entire editorial staff (currently rumored to be somewhere in a bar near Juarez, Mexico) and our one reader – Marion where ever he is, have unanimously elected Ms. Maura Larkins of San Diego. She herself works from a blog site for educators. Our editorial staff have, in consultation with reader Marion (who in turn Bankrolled the cause - Yesterday's lunch) take great pleasure in announcing the many payments, many accomplishments and legal victories of this months winner; Maura. Tenacity and unwavering passion for doing the right thing sets her apart. Thank you Maura. "You have more admirers than you'll ever know."


 I Praetorian


Along with the many note worthy legal poundings She has given to the Southern California School Districts' special are those givin to those ignorant enough or so poorly managed that they fell prey to the cheapest choice of legal seaguls; Friedman, Flouckman and Freud. Otherwise known as the  F-UP law partners law firm.


F, F and FU have a Walmart approach toward signing and defending school districts. READ - Spending YOUR TAX DOLLARS. (even better, more than 400 School Districts nearby depend on the  F-UP GROUP who prey on simple minded HR directors and administrators, teasing them in with 200 dollars a billable hour. However, with 400 districts REPRESENTED, they don't even know the names of most of their superintendents. They actually have yet to prove they have 400 employees at all. Including the custodial staffs in two states. Still worse I hear. They keep loosing attorneys ... 


to the prison system and FEW OF THOSE ARE CAREER MOVES.  SO, IAM TOLD.




Tune in next week for Maura's Bio and Opinions on Education in California.


PLUS! Next week


"THE WORST EDUCATOR OF THE YEAR FOR 2011." You might be surprised... A first only at Disenfranchised-Educators. 

Attorney Discipline: System Must Weed Out Unethical Lawyers Who Damage Profession's Reputation

Originally Published by the

Los Angeles Daily Journal 

December 16, 2002

By James C. Turner and Suzanne M. Mishkin

In the fall of 2002, HALT - An Organization of Americans for Legal Reform released its Lawyer Discipline Report Card, the first comprehensive evaluation of the nation's attorney discipline system in ten years. The Report Card points to persistent problems that have gone largely unremedied for over a quarter of a century.

In 1970, a blue ribbon panel led by U.S. Supreme Court Justice Tom Clark conducted a groundbreaking review of the attorney discipline system, and found a "scandalous situation" that required "the immediate attention of the profession."

The Clark Committee itemized 36 defects in the disciplinary system, in particular, criticizing the practices of most disciplinary agencies, which "deliberately discourage any publication of information concerning their activities, believing that the public image of the profession is damaged by a disclosure that attorney misconduct exists."

In addition, this review found that a panel of lawyers, rather than judges or lay persons, controlled the disciplinary system, creating an institutional bias that grossly undermines the effectiveness of the entire disciplinary system.

Twenty-two years later, an American Bar Association commission, chaired by Dean Robert McKay of the New York University Law School, found that the public has a "growing mistrust of secret, self-regulated lawyer discipline."

Like the Clark Committee before it, the McKay Commission concluded that the practice of allowing bar officials to control state disciplinary systems creates the appearance of a gross conflict of interest, "regardless of the actual fairness and impartiality of the system."

Summing up the situation in 1992, the Commission criticized the entire country's lawyer discipline system as "too slow, too secret, too soft and too self-regulated."

While there has been some modest progress since these scathing indictments, sadly it has not been nearly enough to fix a badly broken system.

Just last month, Stanford University Legal Ethics Professor Deborah L. Rhode stated, "Bar disciplinary procedures are anything but user-friendly to the consumer, and most are more responsive to the profession's interests than the public's."

Similarly, judges, legal scholars, practicing attorneys and bar officials, who convened the National Conference on Professionalism at the University of South Carolina School of Law, broadly agreed that the current system of lawyer discipline has lost the public's confidence, and urged the profession to lead the way in demanding meaningful reforms.

HALT's Report Card is our effort to bring the deficiencies of the attorney discipline system to the attention of the profession and the public. The Report Card assesses the performance of disciplinary systems in all 50 states and the District of Columbia on six key factors: (1) adequacy of discipline imposed; (2) publicity and responsiveness; (3) openness of the process; (4) fairness of disciplinary procedures; (5) public participation; and (6) promptness.

The results expose an appalling pattern of toothless sanctions, unnecessary secrecy, biased procedures and endless delays.

More than 114,000 complaints were filed against lawyers in 2000, the most recent year for which the American Bar Association provides data. In that same year, the rate of formal discipline was less than 3.5 percent, and the rate of disbarment was less than one percent.

In California, 93 percent of investigated cases led to absolutely no disciplinary action. And this is not surprising given that California bar rules provide that a lawyer will only be disciplined if misconduct is proven by "clear and convincing evidence," a far more demanding standard of proof than the "preponderance of the evidence" test that applies in other civil proceedings.

In state after state, we found that most complaints are not even investigated or are dismissed on technicalities, while only a handful lead to more than a slap on the wrist in the form of a private admonition or a closed-door reprimand. With this tiny trickle of discipline, is it any wonder that a recent Columbia Law School survey found less than one-third of Americans think lawyers are even "somewhat" honest?

In most states, attorney discipline proceedings are secret, non-public hearings where a panel of lawyers sits as both judge and jury. In many states, even the person who filed the complaint does not have a right to attend.

In California, there is not even token layperson representation in disciplinary decisions - instead, only lawyers decide if and when to impose sanctions upon their colleagues.

In every jurisdiction except Oregon and Arizona, disciplinary bodies refuse to release an attorney's full disciplinary history. Officials in California will only inform consumers of whether an attorney has been publicly disciplined; records of all complaints, formal charges and informal discipline are kept under seal.

Consumers in many jurisdictions are forced into silence by gag rules that threaten fines or jail for talking about the complaint or its outcome. Even those without gag rules frequently try to restrain speech, asking complainants to keep their grievances confidential.

Justice delayed may be justice denied, but it is par for the course in attorney discipline cases. Even the state that earned our highest grade (Massachusetts with a B minus) failed to act promptly on complaints - taking an average of 681 days to issue formal charges and well over two years to impose discipline.

In Washington State, it took one victim thirteen years to get an incompetent lawyer suspended. Many states, like California, do not even keep a record of how promptly they respond to grievances.

These are national problems; of the fifty-one jurisdictions we evaluated, thirty-nine earned a C- or lower; and twenty-one of these received Ds or lower (Pennsylvania and North Carolina flunked outright). California earned a mediocre C.

Part of the problem is that lawyer discipline bodies are asked to perform conflicting missions.

For example, the mission statement for the District of Columbia disciplinary body requires it to fulfill "a dual function: to protect the public and the courts from unethical conduct by members of the D.C. Bar and to protect members of the D.C. Bar" (emphasis supplied).

A lawyer discipline system serving two conflicting masters is bound to prove ineffective.

To correct the nationwide pattern of laxity, secrecy, bias and delay that characterize this broken system, we believe four fundamental reforms are needed.

* Lawyer discipline cases should be heard by publicly controlled disciplinary panels where non-lawyers have at least a majority voice. Independent medical boards in many states offer a superior model for ensuring accountability. These medical boards, which are appointed by governors and state legislatures, rely on physicians to help them understand technical issues, but the doctors stay out of the decision-making process. Lawyers should, too.

* The discipline system must come out into the open. Private reprimands should be replaced with meaningful public discipline. Hearings should be open to the public. And complaints against lawyers and sanctions should be a matter of public record, available to every citizen.

* Disciplinary policies should more closely approximate the rules governing the civil justice system. Gag rules should be abolished. If the preponderance of the evidence demonstrates that an attorney has violated the rules of professional conduct, the attorney should be sanctioned.

* The glacial pace of attorney discipline must come to an end. Imposing real deadlines - requiring a preliminary disciplinary hearing within ninety days, for example - would be a giant step toward jettisoning bureaucratic red tape and creating a system that actually brings justice to victims of misconduct.

By adopting these simple reforms, we can replace a system that is an abject failure with one that actually protects consumers and begins to restore public confidence in the legal profession.

After thirty years of ignored calls for reform, responsible lawyers who have a real commitment to professional responsibility need to mobilize and demand action to fix the attorney discipline mess.

All who practice law have a shared interest in creating a system that investigates promptly, deliberates openly, and weeds-out unethical or incompetent attorneys who damage the profession's reputation.

By addressing long-recognized failures in the current disciplinary system, we have an opportunity to create a structure that engenders consumer trust and respect, rather than alienation and resentment. After three decades of marginal reform, can we do less?
-------------
* James C. Turner is Executive Director and Suzanne M. Mishkin is Associate Counsel of HALT, Inc. - An Organization of Americans for Legal Reform.

Labels: