Sweetwater Education Association

N.B.: For ongoing coverage of the San Diego D.A.'s charges and indictments of SUHSD Board and Administration personnel, the SEA has set up a dedicated page here

 

Limits on campaign contributions,
Election Tampering &
the DA's Corruption Hotline (619) 531-4000

Dear SEA Members,

On January 31, 2012, the Rep Council of the Sweetwater Education Association adopted the position that the District should adopt campaign contribution limits for School Board races. In December of 2011, before the DA raids took place, the Board had an opportunity to institute campaign contribution limits. An item was on the agenda that would have established contribution limits of 500 dollars per individual or organization to any candidate. Several members of the public, including myself, spoke in support of the motion. After the public speakers spoke, the motion died as there was not a board member willing to move the item for approval or discussion. Last Monday, there was a special school board meeting. The topic was government ethics. I informed the School Board of our position on limits. Later in the week, the superintendent asked if I would send him a copy of our position statement that was adopted by our Rep Council. I am hopeful that campaign contribution limits will find a way back on to a School Board agenda. SEA would have to abide, if passed, by the same rules. That's fine. The current system is flawed. An attorney and several firms desiring to make a financial profit from our District, coupled with School Board members and candidates willing to "pay to play" have perverted the current system. It is time for a change.

Corruption. The District used public funds to influence the School Board election of 2010. Our Rep Council adopted a position that Jim Cartmill, John McCann and Arlie Ricasa should resign. The invoices that were submitted by Alevy Communications, a PR firm used by the District to assist them in negotiations with SEA, clearly indicate that SUHSD paid to influence the results of the 2010 election. Cartmill, McCann, and Ricasa were elected in November 2010.

Examples of services rendered in 2010 as indicated on the Alevy invoices that were submitted to our District:

• 9/15 Discussion of National City Issues with John McCann and briefing on community concerns. Discussions with Bonny Garcia on logistics and strategic outreach plan.
• 9/24 Campaign issues discussion with two school board candidates.
• 11/1 Developed analyzed and distributed election trend information to key team.
• 11/2 On hand at Election Central for trending and reports to key team. Discussion with key influencers…..

The Vega report appears to place the blame on Bonny Garcia, our District's former Chief Legal Counsel for a lack of oversight of Alevy. The reality is the invoices were approved of by high level administrators in our HR and Finance Departments. Our District willfully engaged in election tampering. Cartmill, Ricasa, and McCann should resign because of this.

The District Attorney should pursue this matter. I contacted the District Attorney's office via their corruption hotline at (619) 531-4000. I spoke with one of the attorneys that is handling the "Sweetwater pay to play" cases to express my concern regarding election tampering. After a pretty lengthy discussion with him, I sensed that the election tampering of 2010 is not a priority. It appears that the politics are thick at the DA's office as well.

I am requesting that you contact the DA's corruption hotline at (619) 531-4000 and request that they pursue a thorough investigation of our District's financial involvement in the School Board election of 2010.

---

Alex Anguiano   SEA President

 

 

"Ethics is in origin the art of recommending to others the sacrifices required for cooperation with oneself."
   -Bertrand Russell

"In law a man is guilty when he violates the rights of others.
 In ethics he is guilty if he only thinks of doing so."
   -Immanuel Kant

 

Dear SEA Members,

A special School Board meeting has been called for tonight. The agenda is pretty simple. The Board will participate in a government ethics workshop.

What I hope is explained to the Board is that honoring an existing agreement is the ethical thing to do. Under the leadership of our former superintendent, the Board allowed construction of master schedules at a staffing ratio higher than called for in an existing MOU. The schedules for semester 1 of this school year should have been constructed from the get-go at a ratio of 31:1 instead of the 34:1 ratio that was used. At the last minute, the proper ratio was implemented. It was a too late. The end result was the worst start of the year, as far as master schedules go, that I have ever seen. Our students paid the price for a Board that was willing to following our former superintendent's strategy.

Many teachers were brought aboard after the year had started. They should have been hired earlier to replace our 141 bargaining unit members that took advantage of the retirement incentive package that we negotiated. More than ever, master schedules were changed after the start of the year. Many students had to endure multiple program changes which made starting the year a challenge for everybody. The chaotic start of the year could have been avoided if the district would have built master schedules properly by honoring the existing MOU. Instead, they unethically followed the strategy set by our former superintendent.

Will the Board learn to be ethical tonight? Will the presenter write the learning target on the white board and constantly check for understanding? I hope that adhering to an existing legal document, such as an MOU, is one of the topics covered. Honoring agreements is the ethical thing to do.

Although the Agreement between the Sweetwater Union High School District and SEA (our contract) expires on June 30th of this year, the MOU on staffing ratio does not expire. Will we have to endure a start of the school year that was as bad as this year's? We will if the Board allows for this to happen again. The issuing of pink slips by March 15 will be an indicator that the Board did not learn to become ethical tonight. I have been informed that the District is reviewing individual contracts and credentials for the potential issuing of pink slips. My question to the District has been, "Do you intend to honor the MOU on staffing ratio in the construction of the master schedules for the upcoming year?" I have not received a clear answer.

If the District constructs master schedules at the agreement ratio and does not underestimate student enrollment, like they often do, they will discover that pink slips are not an option.

Sincerely,

---

Alex Anguiano   SEA President