Dear Friends,

We would like to take this opportunity to thank all of you who have supported the campaign to recall Cindy Warren, Cynthia Lane, Ines DeLuna and Carolyn Martini as members of the St. Helena Unified School District Board of Trustees. We were tremendously successful this summer in collecting petition signatures, and now the recall election is set for February 23, 2010. The voters now have the opportunity to decide whether change is needed with respect to how our school district is operated and managed. While we have accomplished so much already, there is still a lot of work to be done until the election, and there are many ways in which you can help, including:


· Speaking with friends, neighbors and acquaintances about the recall and encouraging them to vote yes on the recall when ballots are mailed out;


· Writing a letter to the St. Helena Star and/or Napa Register in support of the recall;


· Encouraging others to join our published supporter list;


· Donating money to help fund lawn signs, flyers, ads, etc. Donations may be mailed to: Citizens for Quality Education, 1241 Adams St. #1010, St. Helena, CA, 94574 ;


· Agreeing to place a Yes On Recall sign in your yard or at your business; and


· Volunteering to hand out flyers and/or make phone calls to voters encouraging them to vote yes on the recall.


If you are interested in doing any of the above, please contact Citizens for Quality Education at Citizens4qualityed@gmail.com. Again, we sincerely thank you and look forward to your continued support.



Sincerely,

Citizens For Quality Education

1241 Adams St. #1010

St Helena, CA 94574


Email: Citizens4qualityed@gmail.com

Website: http://citizensforqualityed.blogspot.com/

What The Recall Is Really About

By Jim Haslip
Tuesday, November 10, 2009

The “recallers” and I have been misrepresented by recent commentaries and letters. Forty registered voters wrote the following charges that were printed on the petition to recall the board:

• “you demonstrated a complete lack of fiscal responsibility, as evidenced by your approval of exorbitant salaries to administrative personnel and the perpetuation of unnecessary administrative positions while funds for instructional materials to be used for our schools are being cut due to the current economic crisis;

• “ you failed to act with transparency and failed to provide the public with clear and accurate information and you, in some instances, misled the public with respect to financial, academic, and administrative matters;

• “you failed to work with the public as your administrative policies require and you completely disregarded all of the input that the public has provided to you;

• “you failed to adequately and properly supervise administrative staff, including, but not limited to, the Superintendent;

• “you allowed the administration to grossly mismanage fundamental school programs, such as special education and vocational programs...”

The exorbitant salaries are well-documented. The highest superintendent salary for a district of our size or smaller was cited by district supporters as $160,000 in Kentfield (other districts cited are up to three times larger than ours). Gordon retired at $264,000. Haley is making $205,000 base salary. (The district claims he makes $189,000, an exorbitant amount for someone who was subject to an extremely rare “vote of no confidence” at his last district, but they fail to disclose another $16,000 that he receives “on payroll” for “expenses.”)

I estimate that if (former Superintendent Allan) Gordon had been paid at the same rate as the Kentfield superintendent, without his retirement gift (however “legal” it may be), the children of St. Helena would have had access to over $650,000 for supplies, materials, and programs that have been cut. This is what “exorbitant salaries” means. This is what “misleading the public” implies.

Research by many sources, including former trustee Bill Swanson, shows that we overspend on administration by no less that $900,000 year in and year out when compared to other districts of similar size and income. A former superintendent here publicly stated that when he was superintendent (and we had more students), he had four people in the district office and now there are many, many more. This is what “the perpetuation of unnecessary administrative positions” means.

Research shows that 14 programs have been reduced or eliminated in recent years. The last teacher with a Vocational Education credential was two years ago. I am happy that agricultural studies is doing well but what about all those other students that are not going to college? This is what “mismanagement of vocational education” means.

The district had spent under $30,000 a year on legal fees. It is over $700,000 over the last 3 years. Meanwhile, we continue to sue the County rather than cooperate with them on special education, vocational programs, group purchasing, and staff development. This is what “lack of fiscal responsibility” means. We blame this on the County and on a few special education parents when competent administrators have demonstrated elsewhere that cooperation is more fiscally responsible that confrontation.

The recall is not about my term on the board or a few “recallers.” It is about our children and how your tax dollars are spent. I did not leave the Board to run away. Rather I have chosen the side of our children. When the Recall vote is taken in February, please join us.

(Jim Haslip is a former trustee of the St. Helena Unified School District. He lives in St. Helena.)

Kevin Alfaro Wins School Board Election

By Jesse Duarte
STAFF WRITER
Thursday, November 05, 2009

Election results show that Kevin Alfaro has defeated Roger Adams for a seat on the St. Helena School Board by a 2-1 margin.

Alfaro has received 1,463 votes — 67.6 percent — compared with 696 votes — 33.2 percent — for Adams, according to preliminary results released Tuesday night by the Napa County Elections Department.

The votes already tallied represent 36 percent of the 6,039 registered voters in the school district boundaries. Between 175 and 275 ballots received after Saturday, Oct. 31 still haven’t been counted, said Registrar of Voters John Tuteur.

The remaining ballots will be included in a final certified count, which will be released Monday, said Tuteur. He said he hopes to deliver the certified canvass to the school board at their next meeting, set for 6:30 p.m. Thursday, Nov. 12 at Vintage Hall.

Superintendent Robert Haley said that after the district receives the election certification, the elected boardmember will be sworn in at the next regular meeting. Right now the district is anticipating getting the certification before the meeting and swearing in Alfaro on Nov. 12, said Haley.

Alfaro thanked his family and everyone who worked on his campaign, helped hand out flyers and wrote letters to the editor on his behalf.

He credited Sean Maher, Jeanne DeVincenzi, Nell Hungerford, Diane Beltrami, Kelly Rios, Kathy Zelazny, Maria Stel, Pavi Lawson, Lisa Pelosi, Molly Morales, and Alexandra and Jim Haslip, whose resignation created a vacancy on the board in May.

The campaign has benefited the community by raising important issues and getting people more engaged, said Alfaro.

“It’s neat to see how the community has embraced school district issues and really started paying attention and asking good questions,” he said. “That’s already affected how the board interacts with the community — they’ve changed how they run the meetings a little and more information is getting out.”

When contacted Wednesday morning, Adams said, “I just wish him well.”

Alfaro said his strategy during the first few school board meetings will be to “listen and learn.”

“I need to get up to speed on how the board interacts, how it handles information and how it works with the administration,” he said. “The first few months will be a learning process for me.”

“I’m so proud that Kevin not only complains about what needs be changed, but he also rolls up his sleeves and gets involved to make the change,” added Sallie Alfaro, Kevin’s wife. “It takes an engaged parent and community member to put their money where their mouth is. He questions and he looks for the right answers.”

Kevin Alfaro Speaks Out On Legal Issues With SHUSD

KEVIN ALFARO FOR SCHOOL BOARD

If elected to as a School Board Member in the St. Helena Unified School District, I will work tirelessly to make our schools the best that they can be for all of the children in our community. This is a long term commitment for me.

Recently, false statements have been made about my on going legal problems with the District. I feel compelled to set the record straight. 1) The District began legal proceedings against my family first. We were forced to hire an attorney to respond and protect our rights. 2) The District refused to mediate (they have admitted this in paperwork they filed with the court). 3) The District made a written settlement offer to us which we signed and promptly returned. The District then withdrew the offer and forced us all to participate in a long and expensive 10 day hearing. All we have ever wanted from the District is a fair and appropriate education for our children.

Being involved in litigation with the District has been very difficult for my entire family and we desperately want it to end. In fact, I continue to make overtures to the District to try to resolve things OUT of the court room WITHOUT lawyers, but the District refuses to do so.

Despite my problems with the District, be assured that my intentions for being on the School Board are not self-serving but are motivated by a desire to bring positive changes to our District.

Why Recall Is Justified

WHY RECALL IS JUSTIFIED
Monday, October 19, 2009

Editor: Recent letter writers have stated that, since the District Attorney determined that former superintendent Allan Gordon didn’t break the law by planning his own early retirement package, our school board must be doing a good job.

Is this how far the bar has been lowered for school board members? As long as no one has committed a crime under their watch then they’ve upheld their responsibilities?

Putting aside the fact that Mr. Gordon signed the document that awarded him almost $200,000 in early retirement benefits three months later, what seems to have been forgotten in these letters are the many other issues that started and reinforced the recall movement, which began long before the conflict of interest issue regarding Mr. Gordon came to light.

In April, community members spoke out against the board’s insistence on summarily offering Dr. Rob Haley the superintendent position. Ignoring pleas from the community to perform a search and offer Haley an interim contract, the board immediately appointed Haley and awarded him a contract with an automatic renewal provision that gives him virtually perpetual employment.

Subsequently, many in the community were alarmed to hear of the high salaries paid to Mr. Gordon (approximately $264,000/year) and our current superintendent (approximately $205,000/year), while teachers were told to be extremely conservative in ordering instructional materials for the 2009-2010 school year.

Then came the realization that our district, with approximately 1,300 students, greatly increased the number of administrative positions (coupled with lucrative salaries) to unnecessary levels.

Meanwhile, the district cut or severely limited valuable school programs, such as vocational and special education programs, and had to cancel the after-school tutoring program due to lack of funding. All the while, the district asked our community to donate money to our schools to pay for school field trips, teacher supplies, library books, computers, etc.

Instead of addressing these issues, the board took a “we know better than you” approach, dismissing community concerns.

These are the reasons that the recall is justified, regardless of whether anyone believes that Mr. Gordon committed a crime.

Tim Stel

Leslie Ellis

Kelly Rios

Kathy Zelazny

Gene & Denise Armstead

Tiny Boak

Molly Morales

Dan & Diane Beltrami

Joanne Yates

Alexandra Haslip

Gayle Davies

Lisa Pelosi

Cherie Melka

Pavi Lawson

Reasons For Recall Are Offered

Four reasons for recall are offered

By Jeanne DeVincenzi
Monday, October 19, 2009

There has been talk recently by school board members and their supporters regarding the Napa County District Attorney’s press release addressing former Superintendent Allan Gordon’s actions with respect to the early retirement plan he put into place, and from which he shortly thereafter benefited.

These same individuals state that, if Mr. Gordon didn’t act illegally, then the recall is baseless, and the school board members have adequately lived up to their responsibilities to the district and the community.

What the board members and their supporters are ignoring is the fact that the recall movement is based on so many more issues than Mr. Gordon’s conflict of interest regarding the retirement plan. Whether you support the recall or not, it’s important to understand the goals of the recall and why more than one-third of the registered voters in our district signed petitions based on the belief that a recall election is necessary.

Fiscal responsibility

One of those goals is to bring more fiscal responsibility to the school district. Curbing the current excessive administrative spending in our district could free up hundreds of thousands of dollars that could be allocated to programs that develop all levels of education for all the students in our community.

Cutting back on unnecessary administrative positions, excessive administrative salaries, unnecessary legal fees and unwarranted early retirement benefits for select administrators would allow our district to fund the valuable programs that have been cut or curtailed in recent years by the district, and perhaps additional programs could be funded to provide our students with more tools that they will need to achieve their goals.

With the current economic situation, it is more important than ever to bring more fiscal responsibility to our district so that not a penny is wasted on unnecessary expenses. By making the right financial decisions now, we can ensure that our students will be able to participate in and enjoy valuable programs for many years to come.

More accountability

Another goal of the recall is to introduce more accountability and transparency to the school board. While closed session meetings of the board are important to maintain confidentiality with respect to school personnel, students and other private matters, discussions regarding issues that do not fall within those areas should take place out in the open.

The community needs a heads-up as to decisions the board intends to make. The public has the right to be timely and properly informed of all of the issues that the board will address at a meeting. Public trust is lost when board members call special meetings to correct their failure to properly inform the community of an issue that was discussed and decided at a previous meeting. The board members should also be able to adequately explain the reasoning behind their decisions.

Better relationships

Many people who support the recall do so with an objective of building a more collaborative relationship between the district and the community. An open dialogue between the board and parents, teachers, staff and other community members is crucial to building a culture of trust and respect in our schools and community.

It is important to have a school board that is willing to listen to, and take in, all points of view before making decisions. Eliminating any fear of retaliation for bringing concerns before the board and the administration is another critical step toward promoting trust and integrity in our district.

Independent thinking

Finally, recall supporters have advocated for a board that thinks and operates independently from the administration. Our school district deserves board members who are willing to dig deeper into issues and administrative recommendations instead of accepting them at face value.

Section 9000 of the board’s bylaws states that the board is “elected by the community to provide leadership and citizen oversight to the district.” How can a school board provide oversight if it doesn’t question proposals and information provided to it by the administration?

The recall effort started and has remained strong because the current SHUSD school board has failed to provide fiscal responsibility, accountability, transparency, open communication and independence to this district. Recall supporters believe that these goals shouldn’t be a wish list for our district, they should be a given.

This is why so many in this community have come together to bring a positive change to our school district. This is why the recall became and still is necessary.

(Jeanne DeVincenzi is an attorney who has lived and practiced law in St. Helena for 11 years. She is the president of the Elementary School Site Council, a member of the RLS School Site Council, on the board of directors of the St. Helena Public Schools Endowment Trust, and the immediate past Vice-President of the St. Helena Primary and Elementary Schools Parent Teacher Group.

Ms. DeVincenzi and her husband have three children who attend the schools in the SHUSD.)

Ballots Have Been Mailed!

All registered voters within the St. Helena Unified School District should have received your mail- in ballot for the open seat for the St. Helena School Board.

We encourage you to vote early! As you know C4QE endorses Kevin Alfaro for this seat.

All ballots should be deposited in the mail by October 30th. Also, please be sure to sign the outside of the envelope too!

If you have not registered to vote you can still do so- the deadline is Monday, October 19th by 5pm.

Thank You for your support and for participating in the voting process.

St. Helena Star's Editorial Board: Elect Kevin Alfaro

ELECT KEVIN ALFARO

Thursday, October 01, 2009

The Star’s editorial board interviewed school board candidates Roger Adams and Kevin Alfaro this week seeking the candidate who can best serve children, parents and other taxpayers who expect their trustees to oversee a top-notch education for all students, at the best cost, while keeping the teachers, administrators and support staff working in harmony.

Ballots will be mailed to all district voters beginning Monday.

Although the two candidates have opposing views on this winter’s pending recall election — Adams is against the recall while Alfaro helped organize it — the editorial board focused instead on this special election, called to fill the seat vacated by Jim Haslip’s May resignation.

The board was looking for a candidate who can analyze budgets, improve communication between the district and the community, act diplomatically, lead the administration rather than follow, visualize school improvements despite fewer dollars, and make a commitment to stick around.

Although both candidates share a sincere interest in improving the school district, their approach to the job differs greatly.

Aside from tweaking the public comments policy at board meetings, Adams seems pleased with the district as it is.

While Adams said he would not seek re-election, basically becoming a lame duck upon his election, Alfaro said he would seek re-election in November 2010. He said he was planning to run next year even before Haslip resigned.

Although Adams offers years of experience as a former superintendent, principal and teacher, he lacks specific knowledge about St. Helena’s school district. Alfaro — a parent with three kids in the school system, seven years of experience as treasurer of the Boys and Girls Club and currently a member of the RLS Parent Group — has first-hand knowledge of the district’s workings.

Adams should be applauded for his willingness to serve the community in a time of turmoil, and he is sincere about wanting to do a good job for the children, teachers and principals of the district, but he admitted he lacks understanding of the International Baccalaureate program, the district’s administrative overhead or how to use computers.

Asked what he knows about the IB program, Adams replied, “I don’t have a good concept of that.” Asked about his use of computers, Adams said he doesn’t use e-mail because he prefers “face-to-face” discussions. Asked his assessment of district spending on administrators, Adams didn’t directly answer the question, but rather spoke about the need to preserve its television/audio-visual department.

Alfaro, on the other hand, had specific ideas about how to reduce spending in the event of further funding cuts. He said he would think twice before offering early-retirement payments to retirees. He said he would use his experience as a certified public accountant to help the board understand financial options. He said he would ask the board to take a hard look at reducing the administrative staff inside Vintage Hall.

Also, Alfaro said that, while Superintendent Rob Haley is a skilled administrator, he needs to work on improving communication, developing people skills and getting more involved in the St. Helena community.

“I’d rather be judged on my skill sets and merits — I know finance, I’m a parent and I’m open-minded,” Alfaro told the editorial board.

Alfaro demonstrates clear qualifications for this position. Despite his leadership in the recall and his involvement in litigation over special education, the editorial board was assured, based on Alfaro’s calm demeanor and diplomatic nature, that he will work to smooth relations between the school board and the community.

As he intends to seek re-election in November 2010, Alfaro should use his first year as a trustee to prove he has the temperament to play peacemaker and work to help the board focus on the business of running the district.

We recommend Kevin Alfaro to school district voters.

(Editor’s note: St. Helena native Tom Giugni participated in the Star editorial board interview with candidates Alfaro and Adams. Giugni, a former school superintendent who currently advises school districts throughout the state, served on the Star editorial board from 2006-2008.)

C4QE Back Kevin Alfaro

RECALLERS BACK ALFARO

Thursday, October 01, 2009

Editor: The Citizens for Quality Education would like to take this opportunity to thank our supporters and to clarify the next steps related to the upcoming school board elections.

First, although we weren’t able to speak with all of the St. Helena Unified School District registered voters, we were able to meet with over a third of our district’s constituents. We thank you for giving us the time to present our reasons for the petitions, regardless of whether you signed or not, and we look forward to speaking to more of you in the coming months.

Those voters we did speak with understand that the recall is not meant as a personal attack against any board member. They know that our issues with the Board are related to fiscal accountability, transparency, trust and respect.

Secondly, within the next few weeks, you will be receiving a mail-in ballot to vote for a new school board member. This is NOT the recall election, but rather an election to fill the position left vacant when former board member Jim Haslip resigned.

Citizens for Quality Education endorses Kevin Alfaro for this election.

In January or February, the recall election will be held and voters can choose to either recall and select replacements, or to retain sitting members. There will be many opportunities to learn more about the new candidates later this year. Please visit our blog for upcoming events and news. (www.citizensforqualityed.blogspot.com.)

Finally, we sincerely appreciate the support we have received as we strive to continue to improve our schools, and in particular, their governance. We look forward to a time in the near future when the School Board will be truly responsive to all of us, the parents and citizens of the St. Helena Unified School District.

Denise and Gene Armstead
Dan and Diane Beltrami
Tiny Boak
Jeanne DeVincenzi
Alexandra and Jim Haslip
Molly Morales
Kelly Rios
Maria Stel
Joanne Yates

Recall Heads to Ballot

By Jesse Duarte
STAFF WRITER, St. Helena Star

Thursday, September 24, 2009

Supporters of the recall campaign against the St. Helena school board collected enough signatures to put the recall on the ballot, Registrar of Voters John Tuteur announced Tuesday.

Proponents submitted the petitions to Tuteur Sept. 14. They claimed to have collected more than 2,000 valid signatures in support of recalling each trustee, well over the 1,515 needed. There are 6,016 registered voters living within the school district boundaries.

In the past week Tuteur and his staff determined that the petitions were valid, based on a random sampling process spelled out in the state election code.

Tuteur will officially notify Trustees Ines DeLuna, Cynthia Lane, Carolyn Martini and Cindy Warren at the board’s next regular meeting on Oct. 8. Trustees will then have 14 days to call an election. If they don’t, state law requires Tuteur to call it himself.

The board can decide between a polling place election and a mail-only election. It must take place between 88 and 125 days after the election is called.

If Tuteur notifies the school board on Oct. 8, that would put the election sometime in January or February.

“Obviously I am very disappointed that this is what the community has decided,” said Warren. “It has created a huge rift in our town and pitted parent against parent. Pro-recall parents are not letting their children play with kids whose parents are on the other side. Little League parents sat on opposite sides of the stadium.

“I don’t think this is a healthy thing for our community. Let us not forget that two-thirds of the voters chose not to sign the petition.”

Despite phone messages left Tuesday and Wednesday morning, the other trustees didn’t respond in time for the Star’s deadline.

“We are extremely excited and proud to learn that the recall petitions have been certified and the voices of the community have been heard,” said Molly Morales, speaking on behalf of the pro-recall Citizens for Quality Education. “This is an example of democracy in action.

“We would like to thank the community for welcoming us into their homes and listening to us discuss the important issues that affect our school district.”

The ballot will include four yes/no questions as to whether each trustee should be recalled.

Following each question will be a list of the candidates who filed to replace that trustee.

The voter information pamphlet will include the proponents’ statements in favor of the recall, the trustees’ responses, and statements by each candidate who writes one, including the trustees.

After the election is ordered, Tuteur will release information about how to file as a candidate. Each candidate will have to specify which trustee’s seat they are running for.

Recall Supporters Submit Petitions

Recall supporters submit petitions

By Jesse Duarte
STAFF WRITER, St. Helena Star

Thursday, September 17, 2009

Proponents of the recall campaign against the St. Helena School Board say they have submitted enough signatures to trigger a recall election against all four trustees.

Recall supporters turned in the petitions to Registrar of Voters John Tuteur’s office on Monday. They say they collected at least 2,000 signatures for each of the four recall petitions, 30 percent more than the 1,515 required to trigger a recall.

Tuteur has until Oct. 26 to verify that the petitions meet the standards set forth in the state election code.

If the petitions pass the test, Tuteur will inform the proponents and the trustees in writing and make an announcement at a regularly scheduled school board meeting.

The board will then have 14 days to order an election. The board can choose between a traditional polling place election or a vote-by-mail contest. The election must take place 88 to 125 days after the board orders the election.

“We feel confident that the recall is going to be certified and that the community’s voices will be heard,” said Molly Morales, a representative of the pro-recall group Citizens for Quality Education.

Supporters say they collected 2,026 signatures in support of recalling Ines DeLuna, 2,022 for Cynthia Lane, 2,012 for Carolyn Martini; and 2,009 for Cindy Warren.

Signature gatherers worked from voter rolls to make sure people who signed the petition were eligible, said Morales. There are currently 6,016 registered voters living within the school district boundaries, said Tuteur.

Tuteur said just two people contacted him asking to have their names removed from the petitions.

A core group of about 12 people led the canvassing effort for more than four months, said Morales.

“When we were going door-to-door there were a lot of people who consistently said, ‘Our voice isn’t being heard’ or ‘We asked and weren’t told’ or ‘We feel intimidated.’ Finally those voices are being heard,” said Morales.

The signature-gathering campaign was fueled by concerns over the board’s fiscal management, the awarding of retirement packages to former Superintendent Allan Gordon and former high school Principal Jim Zoll, and the appointment of Robert Haley as superintendent without an outside search for other candidates.

Morales said the campaign isn’t a personal attack on the trustees, and she hopes the debate over school issues can remain civil.

Candidate Platform by Kevin Alfaro

I’m running for the school board of the St. Helena Unified School District because I believe that we have a great school district, but that it can be even better by incorporating more fiscal responsibility, community interaction, transparency, accountability and independence.

As a member of the school board, I would provide fiscal responsibility and oversight regarding our district’s $22 million budget.

As a certified public accountant and a local community bank board member, I understand numbers and budgets. I’ve devoted numerous hours to learning the fiscal demands and responsibilities of a public educational institution. I’ve done this by poring through our district’s 151-page budget document and conducting independent research to gain a full understanding of what our district needs.

I’ve also taken the time to ask district and county officials questions. I’m ready for the continued challenge to learn more about the process, especially as our state continues to look for ways to cut precious dollars from our budget.

As a board member, I’ll work to put more money in the teachers’ hands to educate our kids by reducing administrative bloat. From my own research, and information recently published in the Star by a community member as well as our district’s CBO, it’s very apparent that we have room for cost savings regarding administrative expenses. In spite of our declining enrollment, our administrative costs continue to soar while some of our kids’ programs have been cut and will be subject to further cuts.

Now is the time to reexamine our fiscal priorities. We need to prepare our district for the difficult economic times ahead and I would like to be involved in that process. Part of that process includes staying informed about Basic Aid legislation. As California continues to feel pressure to reduce the deficit, education and, in particular, Basic Aid districts like ours are in jeopardy of losing funds. The board and the administration need to stay active and informed on this issue and I intend to do just that.

If elected to the board, I’ll engage the community through open dialogue and promote board meetings where public comments are considered in the decision making process. I believe that board meetings can be an opportunity for give and take with the community. Unfortunately, the current procedures regarding board meetings don’t take advantage of this opportunity.

The board meetings should invite open dialogue with the community by allowing people to speak and interact with board members at the appropriate time. I would help make this process more inviting and assist in establishing guidelines and deadlines for board responses to community questions.

As a member of the board, I’ll ask administrators the tough questions and keep the administration accountable in order to promote a board that leads rather than follows.

I’ll approach board matters with thoroughness and intellectual curiosity, and ask constructive and productive questions when the opportunity arises.

I’ll make it a priority that all recommendations by the administration have clearly stated objectives and are supported by factual data.

I also believe a board member needs to go beyond asking the administration for the answers, and that independent fact-finding and problem-solving are critical attributes of a board member. I would therefore also take steps to independently verify the information provided by the administration. Additionally, if a recommendation of the administration is subsequently approved, I will follow up to determine if the desired outcome has been accomplished.

While I believe in the importance of working together with people to achieve a common goal, I also feel that it’s extremely important to incorporate independent thoughts and ideas into the process. I intend to vote independently and act with transparency if elected to the board. Board members should be able to clearly explain the reasons behind why they voted for or against an issue.

I believe that I’m qualified to sit on our school board. I have children who attend St. Helena public schools. I’ve spent my entire working life as a business person/CPA, which gives me added insight into what the term “fiscal responsibility” means.

For the last seven years, I’ve been the treasurer of the Boys and Girls Club. I also currently sit on the boards of Napa Community Bank, RLS Parent Group and Napa Valley Wine Library Association.

I’d be truly honored to serve on the St. Helena school board. I look forward to meeting you and answering questions. I can be reached at 707-318-9494 or kevin@gjscollp.com.

Why Alfaro's Counter-Sued

Kevin Alfaro, candidate for a school board seat in the Nov '09 election, had a letter in the Star this week clearly explaining the "lawsuit" with the district. (below).

WHY ALFAROS COUNTER-SUED

Thursday, August 06, 2009 St Helena Star

Editor: There has been talk recently regarding my family’s legal issues with the district. I’m committed to running for Jim Haslip’s seat and, since there are unfounded rumors being spread about this matter, I feel the need to set the record straight.

• On Nov. 7, 2008, the district filed suit against us because we decided to move our child from the SHUSD to another school that could meet her needs. Before filing suit, the district refused to discuss a meaningful resolution with us. We were then forced to hire an attorney.

• To protect our child’s educational rights and preserve some important administrative rights, we subsequently had to counter-file in the district’s lawsuit. The district proposed that we waive some of our administrative rights. We didn’t agree, since we felt it necessary to try to meet and work this out so that no one had to waste time and money on lawyers.

• The district refused mediation. We were told by a top district official, “I don’t believe in mediation.”

Ten days before the hearing, the district tendered a written offer to settle the matter. We accepted. They acknowledged receipt of our acceptance. The next day, the district unlawfully withdrew the offer.

• The hearing lasted 10 days. We lost most issues, but won one. According to statistics, districts win 9 out of 10 of these sorts of hearings. The cards were stacked in the district’s favor. They knew it, and we didn’t have a choice.

• On July 14, we filed a claim against the district concerning their unlawful withdrawal of the settlement offer. The July 14 document is what the district recently gave the Star. Unfortunately, that document contained confidential information regarding our child. The district could have easily edited out this information to protect our child, but chose not to do so.

All district children deserve respect and a right to representation. More personal attacks will be made about whether it’s appropriate for someone to sue the district and then run for the board. I’m prepared and have nothing to hide.

Kevin Alfaro

Update on Fair Political Practices Commission Complaint‏

Dear Community Members:

As many of you know, a complaint was submitted to the Fair Political Practices Commission concerning the issues that were raised in June about the PARS retirement plan. Unfortunately, there was a technical problem with the filed complaint (the incorrect Government Code Section was referenced) and it will have to be resubmitted.

Rest assured, we will resubmit it next week and this error will not in any way impact our position. Please also know that the FPPC has NOT reviewed or considered the substance of this matter yet and, contrary to an e-mail that is being circulated on this point, the SHUSD school board has NOT been exonerated.

Citizens for Quality Education

Robert Haley Superintendent Employment Contract 2009

[converted into a word document for purposes of posting on this site. Please send an e-mail to
citizens4qualityed@gmail.com for a .pdf copy of the signed agreement]

I. CONTRACT OF EMPLOYMENT
This Contract of Employment is entered into by the SAINT HELENA UNIFIED
SCHOOL DISTRICT (“District”) BOARD OF TRUSTEES (“Board”) and Dr. Robert A.
Haley (“Superintendent”).

1. Term
A. The Board, pursuant to its action duly taken on May 14, 2009 and
recorded in its official records of proceedings, ratifies its decision to
employ Dr. Robert A. Haley to serve as Superintendent for a term of 24
months that begins on July 1, 2009 and ends on June 30, 2011.

B. Following receipt of a satisfactory evaluation, as defined herein, or in the absence of an evaluation, by August 30 of each year, an additional year shall be added to the term of employment. Superintendent shall provide written notice to each Board member of the August 30 deadline no later than the preceding June 30. If he fails to provide such notice, this provision is null and void for the year in question.

2. Salary.
A. The Board agrees to pay, and Superintendent agrees to accept an annual salary of $l89,000. The salary is to be paid in 12 equal installments, each installment to be paid on or about the last day of each calendar month during the term of this Contract.

B. Following receipt of a satisfactory annual evaluation by the Board, or in the absence of an evaluation, the Superintendent shall receive without further action of the Board in each fiscal year thereafter the same raise in salary as that received by the teachers of the District.

C. Based upon performance by the Superintendent, the salary of the Superintendent may be changed by mutual consent of the parties hereto for the remaining period during the term of this Contract. Such a change in salary shall not constitute the creation of a new contract nor extend the termination date of the Contract unless so stipulated.

3. Work Year.
A. The Superintendent shall be required to render 220 duty days per year of full and regular service to the District during the term of this contract. Non-duty days shall be scheduled by the Superintendent so as to avoid, as much as reasonably possible, disruption of his duties.

B. The Superintendent shall submit his annual work-year calendar to the Board President by August 1 of each year of this contract. The Superintendent may alter the calendar upon at least 15 working days prior notice to the Board, except in case of emergency.

4. Fringe Benefits.
A. Superintendent shall be eligible for benefits at the level accorded to certificated employees of the District.

B. Superintendent shall receive an allowance of $500 per month to compensate him for all use of his personal automobile in the performance of District business while in Napa County. He is eligible for mileage reimbursement for travel on District business outside of Napa County. In addition, he will be reimbursed for actual and necessary travel expenses incurred in the performance of his duties. To obtain reimbursement, he shall submit documentation pursuant to the requirements of Board Policy applicable to all District employees.

C. The Board shall pay the Superintendent’s annual dues for membership in appropriate national, state, and local organizations and the Superintendent’s attendance at meetings of these organizations. The Superintendent shall give prior notice to the Board when he attends a function outside of the State.

5. Expenses.
A. The Superintendent shall receive an additional amount of $10,000 for expenses related to conducting District business to be paid on payroll.

B. The District shall reimburse the Superintendent for actual and necessary expenses, incurred by the Superintendent within the scope of employment, for conference fees, travel and lodging or these may be paid directly by the District. All other expenses of this type shall be bone by the Superintendent.

6. Duties.
A. The Superintendent agrees to perform at the highest professional level of competence, the services, duties and obligations required by this contract, the laws of this State, and the rules, regulations and policies of the Governing Board.

B. Superintendent shall give his exclusive professional services to the District during the period of time such services are to be rendered to the District except as otherwise provided herein.

C. Superintendent shall serve as the chief executive officer of the District and administer the instruction services, business affairs, personnel, and property management with the assistance of the employee staff of the District, which shall include, but not be limited to, the nomination for employment and the assignment of all employees in accordance with the laws of the State of California and the appropriate rules and regulations of said State agencies and those of the Board of the District.

D. The Superintendent is directly responsible to the District Board of Trustees. It is his responsibility to facilitate communication and information among the administrators, the Board, staff parents and community, and set a positive tone for the District.

E. The Board encourages the Superintendent to maintain and improve his professional competence by all available means including subscription to and reading of professional journals, membership in professional organizations, attendance at professional meetings, and other continuing education activities.

F. The Board encourages the Superintendent to attend workshops and
conferences put on by the Small School Districts Association, attend the
Association of California School Administrators Superintendents’
Symposium and conferences of the Northern California Superintendents’
Association.

7. Physical Examination
A. Superintendent shall have a comprehensive medical examination at least once every two (2) years from the initial date of employment with the School District, unless otherwise authorized or directed by the Governing Board. Said examination shall be conducted by a licensed physician designated by the Governing Board. Any report of the medical examination shall be given directly and exclusively to the Superintendent. Upon request by Board President, said examination will be provided to the Board.

8. Evaluation.
A. Not later than September 1 of each year, Superintendent and Board shall meet to develop goals, objectives and priorities for the Superintendent for the coming school year. On a quarterly basis, the Board and Superintendent will meet to review the Superintendent’s progress. The Board will formally evaluate the performance of the Superintendent and his working relationship with the Board in writing not later than August 30 of each year. Superintendent shall provide written notice to each Board
member of the August 30 deadline no later than the preceding June 30. Failure to meet these deadlines shall not invalidate an evaluation.

B. All written evaluations shall be delivered to the Superintendent and a copy of the evaluation, along with any written comments from the Superintendent, shall be placed in the Superintendent’s personnel file in a sealed envelope marked, “Confidential: To Be Opened by Authorized Personnel Only.”

9. Limitation on Payments at Termination
A. Pursuant to Government Code Section 53260, in the event of termination of this Contract for any reason, no cash settlement may be made in an amount which exceeds the salary remaining under the contract or salary for 18 months, whichever is less. This amount shall not be construed as a guarantee or minimum entitlement.

B. Pursuant to Government Code Section 53261, in the event of termination of this Contract for any reason, no non-cash benefit may be conferred in settlement except for employer-paid health benefits which may be provided for a period not to exceed the monthly period by which any cash settlement is measured. In any event, employer-paid health benefits shall be discontinued if and when the employee obtains other employment before the measuring period has expired.

10. Governing Law.
A. This Contract is made subject to the laws of the State of California, the lawful rules and regulations of the agencies of the State and those of the District, all of which said laws, rules, and regulations are by reference hereto incorporated herein as if set forth in full.

11. Entire Contract
A. This Contract contains the entire Contract and understanding between the parties. There are no oral understandings, terms or conditions, and neither party has relied upon representations, express or implied contained in this Contract. This Contract can be changed or modified only by a written document signed by both parties.

12. Ratification
A. The Superintendent and the Governing Board agree that this Contract is not binding or enforceable unless it is ratified by the Governing Board at a meeting of the Governing Board.


/s/ Robert A. Haley /s/ Ines DeLuna
DR. ROBERT A. HALEY, Superintendent FOR THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES
Date: 5/14/09 Date: 5/14/09

Ratified in an open session of the Board of Trustees on: 5/14/09

Allan Gordon Superintendant Employment Contract

[converted into a word document for purposes of posting on this site. Please send an e-mail to
citizens4qualityed@gmail.com for a .pdf copy of the signed agreement]


EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT
Superintendent

THIS AGREEMENT is made this November 16, 2006, by and between the
Governing Board of the Saint Helena Unified School District (“District’ or “Board”) and Allan E. Gordon (“Superintendent”), hereinafter “Superintendent.”

1.Term. The parties hereto agree that the Employment Agreement between the District and the Superintendent, dated February 14, 2006 and effective for the term of July 1, 2005 through June 30, 2009 is hereby terminated and the Superintendent is reelected for a new term commencing July 1, 2006 and ending June 30, 2010, subject to the terms and conditions set forth below.
The Superintendent shall be required to render 220 “duty days” per year of full and regular services to the District during the terms of this Agreement. Non-duty days shall be scheduled by the Superintendent so as to avoid, as much as reasonably possible, disruption of his or her duties. Reasonable sick time is allowed and it is considered reasonable not to exceed twelve (12) duty days per year. The Board wilt need to be notified if unusual circumstances occur.

2.Salary. The Superintendent’s annual salary shall be $235,058 per year payable in twelve (12) equal monthly payments,. The Superintendent shall receive without further action of the Board in each fiscal year hereunder the same raise in salary (reflected as a percentage cost of living adjustment or other type of payment) as that received by the teachers of the District. The Board reserves the right to increase the Superintendent’s salary for any year or any portion of a year of this contract with the mutual written consent of the Superintendent and the Board. Such a change in salary shall not constitute the creation of a new contract nor extend the termination date of the Agreement.

3.Fringe Benefits
a. Health. The Superintendent shall be entitied to purchase, at his own expense, any or all of the health, dental, vision benefits as are provided to other certificated employees of the District. The Superintendent may have his payments for any such benefits deducted from his salary pursuant to the District’s IRC 125 Plan.
b. Term Life Insurance Policy. The Superintendent shall purchase a term life insurance policy in which the District shall be named as co-beneficiary up to the amount of $25,000.
c. Expense Reimbursement. The District shall reimburse the Superintendent for actual and necessary expenses, incurred by the Superintendent within the scope of his employment, for conference, travel, lodging and dues (md. ASCA) or these may be paid directly by the District. All other expenses of this type shall be borne by the Superintendent.
d. Mileage Reimbursement. The District shall reimburse the Superintendent for mileage incurred for work related travel at the rate established by Board policy.

4. Superintendent’s Duties
a. General Duties The Superintendent is employed as a District Superintendent and shall perform the duties of District Superintendent as prescribed by the laws of the State of California and the District’s job description for the Superintendent, if any. The Superintendent shall have primary responsibility for execution of Board policy and responsibility for the duties prescribed by Education Code Section 35035. The Superintendent shall be the Board’s chief executive officer.
b. Personnel Matters The Superintendent shall have primary responsibility in making recommendations to the Board regarding all personnel matters, including selection, assignment and transfer and dismissal of employees.
c. Administrative Functions The Superintendent as chief executive officer, shall: (1) review all policies adopted by the Board and make appropriate recommendations to the Board; (2) periodically evaluate or cause to be evaluated all District employees; (3) advise the Board of sources of funds that might be available to implement present or contemplated District programs; (4) assume responsibility for those duties specified in Education Code section 35035; (5) endeavor to maintain and improve his or her professional competence by all available means, including subscription to and reading of appropriate periodicals and membership in appropriate professional associations; (6) establish and maintain positive community, staff and Board relations; (7) serve as liaison to the Board with respect to all matters of employer-employee relations and make recommendations to the Board concerning those matters; (8) recommend to the Board District goals and objectives; (9) unless unavoidably detained, attend all regular, special and executive session meetings of the Board.
d. Professional Meeting The Superintendent is expected to attend appropriate professional meetings at local, state and national levels and to periodically report to the Board his appraisal of such meetings. The Superintendent shall give proir notice to the Board when he attends a function outside of the County.

5. Outside Professional Activities By prior approval of the Board, the Superintendent may undertake for consideration outside professional activities, including, but not limited to, consulting, speaking and writing, so long as such outside professional activities do not, in the Board’s sole judgment, interfere with the Superintendent’s performance of his or her duties. The Superintendent’s outside professional activities shall not occur during work hours. In no event will the Board be responsible for any expenses attendant to the performance of such outside activities.

6. Evaluation The Board may evaluate and discuss the performance of the Superintendent at any time during the term of this Agreement, and provide a written evaluation report to the Superintendent at least once a year. If the Board determines that the performance of the Superintendent is unsatisfactory, the Board shall communicate, its evaluation to the Superintendent. All written evaluations shall be delivered to the Superintendent and a copy of the evaluation shall be placed in the Superintendent’s personnel file. The Superintendent’s written comments shall be filed with the evaluation in a sealed envelope in the Superintendent’s personnel file and marked as “Confidential: To be Opened by Authorized Personnel Only.”
The Board shall, if requested by the Superintendent, meet and discuss the contents of the evaluation with the Superintendent within a reasonable time after the Superintendent has heard or received the evaluation. Evaluations of the Superintendent shall only be discussed in closed session.

7. Physical Examination: The Superintendent shall undergo a physical examination at least once every other year to determine his ability to perform his duties, The report of the physical examination shall be given directly to the Superintendent; however, the examining physician shall advise the Board in writing of the Superintendent’s continued physical fitness to perform the duties of Superintendent. The costs of the physical examination shall be paid by the District unless such costs are covered by an applicable health insurance plan.

8 Termination of Contract
a. Mutual Consent This Agreement may be terminated at any time by mutual consent of the Board and the Superintendent upon thirty (30) days prior written notice provided to the other party.
b. Nonrenewal of Agreement by the District The Governing Board may elect not to renew this Agreement for any reason by providing the Superintendent with forty-five (45) days written notice prior to the expiration of this Agreement, in accordance with Education Code section 35031. The Superintendent shall inform each member of the Board of this notice requirement on or before March 1 of the year in question.
c. Termination as Superintendent for Cause. The Superintendent’s employment and all of the Superintendent’s rights under this Agreement may be terminated by the Board at any time for, but not limited to, breach of contract; any ground enumerated in the Education Code; or the Superintendent’s failure to perform his or her responsibilities as set forth in the Agreement, as defined by law, or as specified in the Superintendent’s job description, if any. The Board shall not terminate this Agreement pursuant to this paragraph (c) until a written statement of the grounds of termination has first been served upon the Superintendent. The Superintendent shall then be entitled to a conference with the Board at which time the Superintendent shall be given a reasonable opportunity to address the Board’s concerns. The Superintendent shall have the right to have a representative of his or her choice at the conference with the Board. The conference with the Board shall be the Superintendent’s exclusive right to any hearing otherwise required by law.
d. Early Termination. The Board unilaterally and without cause may terminate this Agreement and the Superintendent’s employment by providing the Superintendent a minimum of forty-five (45) days notice of termination. In consideration of the Board’s right to terminate this Agreement without cause, the District shall pay to the Superintendent his or her then current salary for the remainder of the term of this Agreement or for a period of twelve (12) calendar months following the effective date of termination, whichever is less.
9. General Provisions
a. Governing Law and Venues This Agreement, and the rights and obligations of the parties, shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of California. The parties also agree that in the event of litigation venue shall be the proper state or federal court located in Napa County, California.
b. Entire Agreement This Agreement contains the entire agreement and understanding between the parties. There are no oral understandings, terms or conditions, and neither party has relied upon any representation express or implied, not contained in this Agreement.
c. No Assignment The Superintendent may not assign or transfer any rights granted or obligations assumed under this Agreement.
e. Modification This Agreement cannot be changed or supplemented orally. It may be modified or superseded only by a written instrument executed by both of the parties.
f. Severability If any provision of this Agreement is held to be invalid or unenforceable by a court of competent jurisdiction, the remaining provisions of the Agreement shall continue in full force and effect.

/s/ Monty Reedy
President, Board of Trustees
Saint Helena Unified School District
Napa County, California

ACCEPTANCE OF OFFER
I accept the above offer of employment and the terms and conditions thereof and will report for duty as directed above.

I have not entered into a contract of employment with the Governing Board of another school district or any other employer that will in any way conflict with the
terms of this employment agreement.

I hold legal and valid administrative and teaching credentials, each of which is or will be recorded in the Office of the Superintendent of Schools of Napa County before receipt of my first payroll warrant, and I agree to maintain valid and appropriate credentials to act as Superintendent throughout the life of this Agreement. I further certify that I meet the qualifications of Education Code section 35028 and that I have read the entire offer of employment.

/s/ Allan E. Gordon
Dated: 12/1/06

Signature Gathering Retains Momentum

RECALL SIGNATURE UPDATE!

We are pleased to announce that we are on track to meet out signature goals for the month. Thank you to all of our supporters.

It is clear that our community is truly interested in the positive changes we want to bring to our school district!

Keep up the good work everyone!

YES ON RECALL

The Recall Is Going Strong

Dear Community Members:

As recall supporters have ventured out into our neighborhoods to gather signatures on petitions, they’ve been greeted by friends, neighbors, and acquaintances who are concerned about what’s going on with our school district and are sincerely interested in making a change. The recall effort seems to have united many people who may have otherwise never had the opportunity to talk with and really get to know each other. For this, we’re truly thankful.

There is no doubt that the recall is now going strong. At this early stage, hundreds of signatures have been collected, with almost all of the signers asking to sign all four petitions. Some signers have also taken this opportunity to register to vote. Signature gatherers are taking every precaution to ensure that the signatures they collect are valid and that confidentiality is preserved. They‘re also taking the time to really talk about the issues with people.

Recall organizers made the decision early on that public celebrations, such as Cheers! St. Helena, would not be used as political forums and that we wouldn’t actively gather signatures during those events. Those of us who attended the July 3^rd Cheers! were nonetheless greeted with words of support and were asked if we had petitions with us that people could sign.

The community is now more engaged in what is happening with our schools. Great schools need active community support. The recall is bringing about positive change by involving our entire community in the dialogue regarding how our schools are managed and financed.

We’re extremely thankful that this process has given us the opportunity to bear witness to how strong and dedicated this community truly is. There is an excitement in the air as people in our community band together to stand up for change; change for the better.

Petition Confidentiality

Dear Community Members:

During a regular election, if a candidate questions the validity of the election results, that candidate can inspect the ballots because they are public records. Who can forget the hanging chads in 2000? (Note: Although the ballots can be inspected, they CANNOT be traced back to the voter. This is one of our most fundamental rights.)

The process is different, however, in a recall. Because of the sensitive nature of a recall, the recall petitions are strictly confidential. The only people that will ever be able to see the petitions are the people organizing and submitting the recall petitions (the recall proponents), our registrar of voters, John Tuteur, and his staff. No one connected with the school board or the school district will have access to the petitions. Ever.

Specifically, Government Code §6253.5 provides that the recall petitions: “shall not be deemed to be public records and shall not be
open to inspection except by the public officer or public employees who have the duty of receiving, examining or preserving the petitions.”

John Tuteur has confirmed this information and if you continue to have concerns, you may contact him directly. Mr. Tuteur can be reached at 253-4459 or jtuteur@co.napa.ca.us.

YES ON RECALL

Citizens For Quality Education

Informational Meeting & Group Canvassing This Saturday

The Citizens For Quality Education will be holding an informational meeting this Saturday, July 18th, beginning at 9am in Jacob Meily Park. This will be an opportunity for community members to ask questions, get clarifications to things you may be hearing around town and to sign petitions.
At 10 am, the group will head out to canvass for signatures. All are welcome to attend!
Thank you for your support and for your voice for choice.

Important Reminders As You Gather Signatures

A few important reminders for those of you gathering signatures on petitions:

· The signer must personally complete all of the information on the petition. (For example, the circulator cannot complete the zip code, city, or any other part of the petition for the signer.)

· The printed name and residence of the signer must be legible and must match the voter records. (If a signer has recently moved, have them complete a new voter registration card.)

· The signature of the signer must match the voter records. (The registrar may check certain aspects of the signature to assure that it has been signed by the registered voter).

· If a signer is not certain how they registered, they should include more information, rather than less. (For example, if the signer is not certain if he is registered as Bob Smith, Bob E. Smith or Bob Earl Smith, have him print and sign as Bob Earl Smith.)

· For signers that are registering to vote, for their signatures to be valid, the registration date (which is located next to the voter signature) must be within the range of dates on the petition that he/she signed. (Have them sign and date the registration card when they sign the petition!)

· Every part of the circulation declaration must be completed and signed by the circulator.

· Only one circulator for each petition.

Accuracy is important! We want each and every signature to count!

YES ON RECALL

Summary of Special PARS Board Meeting

We know that many of you attended or watched the SHUSD's Special Board Meeting on Monday night. For those of you that were unable to attend or view the meeting, we thought that we would provide our perspective on what happened at that meeting.

To summarize, the PARS memo that was delivered to the Board on June 18th raised three major concerns about the PARS retirement plan that awarded approximately $327,000 in benefits to Allan Gordon and Jim Zoll:

1) The Board neither publicly disclosed nor properly authorized the inclusion of Gordon and Zoll into the PARS plan. The Board only discussed providing this plan to 6 teachers. This is a potential Brown Act violation in that the Board failed to notify the public that it would be addressing these issues, and therefore failed to give members of the community an opportunity to comment on them as well.

2) The Board failed to provide an accurate analysis of the cost of adding Gordon and Zoll to the plan. The inclusion of Gordon and Zoll actually decreased the total savings to the district by approximately $80,000.

3) Most importantly, Gordon was very much involved in the planning, negotiation, and execution of the PARS retirement plan that ultimately awarded him approximately $180,000. He should not have been involved in any way in the planning or signing of this agreement, since he would financially benefit from this plan. This conflict of interest is prohibited by California Government Code Section 1090, and any contract made in violation of such section is VOID.

On Monday night, the Board took the following actions related to the above points.

1) The Board corrected any prior missteps related to the Brown Act by listing all of the pertinent PARS plan documents on the agenda, allowing the public to comment, and officially approving the inclusion of Gordon and Zoll into the plan. The Board did this under the guise that they had only recently received some of these documents. The Board never admitted that they violated the Brown Act, despite the fact that they actually had many of these documents months ago.

2) The Board continued to argue that the PARS plan as a whole will provide a cost-savings to the district (this has never been in dispute) and that providing Gordon with the PARS plan was a reasonable way to compensate Gordon for the consulting services he will provide after retirement (the Board previously stated that such consulting services were to be provided to the district FOR FREE). The Board's attorney also made several inconsistent statements, such as that a cost savings is not necessary for the Board to implement the PARS plan.

3) Most disturbing was that THE BOARD MADE NO COMMENT WHATSOEVER REGARDING THE CONFLICT OF INTEREST ISSUE. The Board completely disregarded the grave concerns expressed by several community members during the meeting.

Although the actions taken by the Board were not surprising, they are nonetheless disappointing. While Cynthia Lane's comments during the meeting would have everyone think otherwise, the Board did have alternatives.

What is next for those of us who continue to be concerned about this issue and the Board's disregard for the public interest? We will continue to pursue the conflict of interest matter with the District Attorney, the Fair Political Practices Commission, the Grand Jury, and any other organization that may have jurisdiction. Although it is extremely difficult to entertain the idea of commencing litigation against the district, it is also very difficult to watch $350,000 walk out of our classrooms and land in the pockets of retired administrators.

To learn more about the PARS issue and the RECALL, please review the archives of our blog and as always, please feel free to email us at citizens4qualityed@gmail.com

YES ON RECALL

SHUSD Legal Fees 2005 through 2009

We have received the FYE 2005 and 2006 information and it is astonishing how much more in legal fees the district is now incurring:

· 2005 - $51,956 ($0 on special ed)

· 2006 - $102,863 ($5,476 on special ed)

· 2007 - $240,464 ($12,883 on special ed)

· 2008 - 353,487 ($178,742 on special ed) and

2009 - through April 29, 2009 for the FYE June 30, 2009 $255,39

($116,597 on special ed).

Dr. Rob Haley took over special ed the beginning of the 2008 FYE.

TRUSTEES TO APPROVE PARS RETROACTIVELY AT SPECIAL BOARD MEETING, MONDAY, JUNE 29 AT 6:30

The SHUSD School Board has scheduled a special meeting for Monday, June
29th, at 6:30 p.m. to discuss the PARS retirement plan for Allan Gordon
and Jim Zoll.  Specifically, the Board intends to retroactively ratify
all of the actions taken by the Board and Allan Gordon to include Allan
Gordon and Jim Zoll in the PARS retirement plan and award them almost
$350,000 in benefits.  The Board is taking this action despite the
serious conflict of interest issues presented to them by concerned
parents.
IT IS IMPERATIVE THAT PEOPLE ATTEND THIS BOARD MEETING 
AND TELL THE BOARD THAT THEY NEED TO INVESTIGATE
ALLAN GORDON'S CONFLICT OF INTEREST REGARDING THE
PARS PLAN AND THAT THEY SHOULD NOT RATIFY PREVIOUS
ACTIONS, THE LEGALITY OF WHICH ARE IN DISPUTE.

Contractual Conflict of Interest And Ethics Orientaion For State Officials

Copied From the Website of the Office of the Attorney General : (http://ag.ca.gov/ethics/accessible/contract.php)

Following is a list of topics we’ll cover in this lesson.

• What does Government Code section 1090 prohibit?
• Contract requirement
• Most officials covered
• Participation in the making of a contract
• Financial interest broadly defined
• Timing is crucial
• Harsh penalties and remedies

Here’s Jessica Carrington speaking with Dennis Lowery, the ethics officer for her agency. Follow along to learn more about Government Code section 1090.

Jessica: “Hi Dennis, as the ethics officer for our department, I have a question for you. Although the Political Reform Act covers a lot of ground, apparently, it is not the only conflict of interest law in this state. I’ve heard something about section 1090. What does it cover?”

Dennis: “Well Jessica, section 1090 deals specifically with conflicts of interest in the contract-making process. It does not supplant the Political Reform Act, but acts in tandem with it. Here’s what it does. It provides that an officer or employee may not make a contract in which he or she is financially interested.”

Jessica: “Does that mean a public official cannot be involved with such a contract process at all?”

Dennis: “That’s right. Any participation by an officer or an employee in the process by which such a contract is developed, negotiated and executed is a violation of section 1090. Also, there are situations where a board member’s participation is attributed even where the board member does not actually participate.”

Jessica: “Now let me make sure that I am following you. Did you say that section 1090 applies only to contracts or does it apply to other types of governmental action?”

Dennis: “For the prohibition of section 1090 to apply, there must be a contract. Section 1090 does not apply to other types of governmental action such as adopting regulations, issuing permits or licenses, conducting investigations or issuing reports.”

Jessica: “Does section 1090 apply only to written contracts?”

Dennis: “No. In addition to written contracts, section 1090 applies to all contracts, including oral contracts and purchases made outside the formal contract process.”

Jessica: “What about grants? Are grants considered separately from contracts?”

Dennis: “No. Jessica, grants generally qualify as contracts for purposes of section 1090.”

Jessica: “What happens if I discover that I have a conflict of interest under section 1090 at some point in the contract-making process.”

Dennis: “You’d want to discontinue the contract process at once. Fortunately, if a contract in which an officer or employee has a financial interest is not ultimately executed, no violation exists.”

Jessica: “Thank you, Dennis, for helping me understand a little bit about section 1090.”

Let’s Review

The Department of Technology is considering adopting regulations that would restrict access to the Internet, and thereby adversely affect stocks owned by the director. Does section 1090 apply? Yes or No.

• Answer: No. Section 1090 does not apply to regulations. Section 1090 pertains only to contracts.

The prohibition of section 1090 applies to virtually all state and local officers, employees and multi-member bodies, such as boards or commissions, whether elected or appointed, at both the state and local levels.

---

General Rule

An official participates in the making of a contract if the official is involved with its preparation at any stage in the process. The contract-making process begins at the time the idea for the contract is conceived and continues through the actual execution of the contract. That means that planning, determining the scope of the contract, drafting plans and specifications, setting contract terms, evaluating applicants, and negotiating are all included.

Under the general rule, officials may avoid a violation of section 1090 by disqualifying themselves from participation in the making of the contract whenever they have a financial interest in the contract. There are limited exceptions to the general rule that are strictly interpreted.

The Rule as Applied to Multi-member Bodies

Members of bodies with contracting power are conclusively presumed to participate in the making of all contracts under the body’s jurisdiction.

If a member of a multi-member body with contracting power has a financial interest in a contract, section 1090 generally provides that the contract cannot be made even if the member has disqualified himself or herself from actually participating in the contract.

The law does provide several limited exceptions that will permit a financially interested board member to disqualify himself or herself and allow the remaining members of the body to enter into the contract.

These exceptions are termed “remote interest exceptions.” They are quite limited and are strictly interpreted.

Let’s Review

Armando is an employee in the Network Technology Division of the department. He discussed with his supervisor recent problems encountered by the department and the benefits of contracting with a private vendor for certain services. Subsequently, the department approved the Network Technology Division’s proposal to solicit bids from vendors for the performance of such services. Did Armando’s conversation with his supervisor constitute “participating in the making of a contract” according to section 1090? Yes or No.

• Answer: Yes. Armando participated in the early idea development and reasoning stages of the contract-making process.

---

Financial Interest Broadly Defined

Section 1090 does not define when an official is financially interested in a contract. However, the courts have applied the prohibition to include a broad range of interests.

The courts have continually reiterated that no matter how twisted and winding the trail may be, if the connection between the financial interest of the official and the contract can be made, a violation of section 1090 will be found.

Under section 1090, financial interests are often defined in terms of relationships. For example, if you have an employment relationship with the person or entity that seeks to contract with your agency, you are deemed to have a financial interest in the contract. Other examples are listed below.

• Attorney, agent or broker of a contracting party;
• Supplier of services or goods to a contracting party;
• Landlord or tenant of a contracting party; and
• Officer or employee of a nonprofit corporation that is a contracting party.

The official’s interest also includes the community property and separate property interests of the official’s spouse.

Let’s Review

TRUE or FALSE: Under section 1090, the term “financial interest” is specifically defined in statutes and regulations.

• Answer: False. The term “financial interest” is not defined in section 1090 or in regulations, but rather has been given broad construction by court decisions.

TRUE or FALSE: The separate property of an official’s spouse is not a financial interest under section 1090.

• Answer: False. The separate property of an official’s spouse is a financial interest under section 1090.

As you know by now, section 1090 prohibits officials with financial interests from making contracts in their official capacity. If a person has previously entered into a contract with the state prior to appointment or employment with a government agency, the contract is unaffected by section 1090. However, section 1090 would apply to any modification, option, renewal or extension of the contract.

---

Harsh Penalties and Remedies

Any contract made in violation of section 1090 is void and cannot be enforced. An official who commits a violation of section 1090 is subject to criminal, civil and administrative sanctions.

A person convicted of violating section 1090 is also forever disqualified from holding any office in this state.

Thomson v. Call

A city council member had sold a parcel of land to a third party, which in turn re-sold the property to the city. Despite the fact that the council member had abstained from the council vote that authorized the city’s acquisition of the property, and had acted throughout in good faith, the California Supreme Court concluded that he had violated section 1090.

As a sanction, the Court required the council member to forfeit the entire sales price of $258,000, while the city was permitted to retain the property. Thus, where section 1090 is violated, the government can get its money back without having to restore any of the benefits received under the contract.

The fact that the contract is fair, or even highly advantageous to the government, is irrelevant.

People v. Honig

The State Superintendent of Public Instruction was found guilty of violating section 1090 by entering into official contracts in which he had a financial interest. Superintendent Honig was criminally convicted of this offense, and eventually was required to relinquish his public office as a result.

Let’s Review

Violation of section 1090 can lead to which of the following? Select all that apply. There may be more than one correct answer.

1. Avoid contract
2. State retains benefit; any payment received must be returned
3. Felony conviction
4. Permanent loss of office in California

• Answer: a, b, c, and d. All of the above answers are correct.

Remember These Points

Remember that section 1090 applies to contracts. Following is a list of important points to remember about section 1090.

• Participation at any stage of the process counts
• Financial interests broadly defined
• Violation voids contract, but government keeps the benefits
• Felony and permanent ban from holding office

Copied From the Website of the Office of the Attorney General : (http://ag.ca.gov/ethics/accessible/contract.php)