What’s with South County trustees and the Brown Act?

Capo district violates open-meeting laws for 5th time (OC Reg)

An Orange County judge has ruled that Capistrano Unified's school board violated the state's open-meeting laws in August 2008 when it held a closed-door evaluation of its then-superintendent, the fifth time the governing body had been reprimanded in the past three years for Brown Act violations.

Superior Court Judge David McEachen ... said last week that CUSD did not properly prepare the agenda for the closed-door meeting and thus failed to inform the public that it was holding a discussion about whether to put then-Superintendent A. Woodrow Carter on paid administrative leave. The agenda referred only to a "performance evaluation," not disciplinary action.
. . .
McEachen also ruled that trustees should have provided notice they were bringing in a non-district employee for the evaluation session – school-law attorney Spencer Covert – who served as a one-time, pro-bono consultant during the meeting.

Capistrano Unified's school board has been sternly reprimanded five times for repeated Brown Act violations, the first four by the Orange County District Attorney's Office.

The board was reconstituted entirely between the first four violations and the most recent one, with the new "reform" trustees pledging a new era of accountability and transparency.
. . .
Trustee Mike Winsten stressed that the most recent Brown Act violation was not of the same magnitude as in the past, when the D.A.'s office issued four consecutive stinging reports, the last of which said some former trustees had exhibited "disturbing disdain, if not outright contempt" for constituents when meeting behind closed doors. (Continued)

About a dozen years ago, the SOCCCD board engaged in "persistent and defiant" misconduct re the Brown Act--the anti-secrecy in government law. Or so said the judge.

Their lawyer? That would be CUSD's attorney: Spencer Covert.

CUSD's attorney these days? Phil Greer. Yep. Mathur and Williams' recent advocate.

BTW: The Capo district's current board is dominated by trustees affiliated with Education Alliance. Our own Don Wagner sits on EA's board.

A Greer is a Greer, oh dear, oh dear

$25K for sleazy lawyer.

This story concerns the agenda for Thursday's board meeting, which is available at the district website home page; find the blue box at right (on the home page); click on the link to the agenda.

Back in early February, I reported that the district was paying ethically-challenged attorney Phil Greer (see at left) $25,000 for his recent efforts on behalf of Raghu P. Mathur.

Naturally, I explained who Greer is:

A big fat card on [Tom Fuentes’] Rolodex is dedicated to one Phil Greer, attorney to the right-wing OC stars, such as the ethically challenged OC Treasurer, Chriss Street, the junket-loving and incompetent OC Guardian/Administrator, John Williams, all but one of the brainless OC Supes, and—well, Raghu P. Mathur.

Greer is the OC Republican mafia's consigliere. He's a total creep.

I’ve been assured by a reliable source that the SOCCCD recently paid the fellow $25,000. What for? Well, for participating in that heart-warming endeavor called the “Mathur settlement,” aka the Twilight Zonean saga of Mathur playing every desperate card up his sleeve (and one or two cards that he only imagines) while determined former admirers hustle him forcefully out the door, and for good.

I went on to ask, “Now, what manner of ethics do you suppose [Phil Greer] has?”

The answer: none. I directed readers to a Times article about Greer’s ethical lapses: Rebuked O.C. lawyer keeps busy (H.G. Reza)

Well, anyway, I just glanced over the agenda for the March meeting of the South Orange County Community College District board of trustees (Thursday night). Item 5.12 is the usual “purchase orders/confirming requisitions”:

Well, the $25,000 "Greer" item has finally appeared! Here’s how it appears on the agenda:

I think it's odd, to say the least, to have this particular attorney working for the district.

Beyond that, it is scandalous that the district is paying a lawyer $25,000 just to help Raghu Mathur negotiate his exit.

Too bad they can't just drop him off somewhere on the San Diego Freeway.



Pictured: Greer, Supervisor Moorlach, Treasurer Chriss Street (from OC Reg)

Take a Letter, Maria

Rebel Girl can no longer remember just how it came up but in the days immediately preceding Spring break, talk in the A-200 building turned to letters of recommendation.

To be more specific, letters of recommendation for the IVC Foundation Scholarship program.

You know, those handy email notifications that arrive in our virtual mailboxes with cheerful hot links and helpful reminders as the the deadline approaches. She likes the system. It works.

Rebel Girl writes about a dozen letters a year. She's happy to do so. She was a scholarship student herself and knows what kind of difference a few bucks can make. She's happy to advocate for those who may not be able to make their best case themselves -and perhaps add a bit of sobering assessment of others who might, ahem, exaggerate their own charms and abilities. You know.

She attends the scholarship program so she can see her students get big checks and meet their families and congratulate them. (Though no, for the record, she does not bow her head and pray. Never has.)

This year, she had no requests.

She thought it might be due to the fact she was on sabbatical in the fall and perhaps all her former students simply forgot about her. She is pretty forgettable. Out of sight, out of mind. Not like some.

But then she asked around. An informal survey revealed that no one she spoke to in the halls in A-200 had been asked to write a single letter. Not a one. (Check out our poll on the sidebar.)

Maybe all our students are losers, someone quipped.

We groaned. Not likely.

Something else then.

But what?

A change in policy? Letters of Rec no longer required? Or needed?

But wouldn't that undermine the integrity of the process that facilitates the dispersal of thousands of dollars to deserving students? But wouldn't we be informed of such a change in policy?

Or???

Who knows?

We certainly don't.

Stay tuned.

*

Lucky Canada

Canadian University Warns Ann Coulter (Inside Higher Ed)

Ann Coulter, whose past statements have offended a wide range of groups, has been warned by a Canadian university where she will appear today that Canada has different views about free speech and hate speech than does the United States. Francois Houle, vice-president academic and provost at the University of Ottawa, sent an e-mail to Coulter that was obtained by The National Post. "Our domestic laws, both provincial and federal, delineate freedom of expression (or "free speech") in a manner that is somewhat different than the approach taken in the United States. I therefore encourage you to educate yourself, if need be, as to what is acceptable in Canada and to do so before your planned visit here.... Promoting hatred against any identifiable group would not only be considered inappropriate, but could in fact lead to criminal charges.... I therefore ask you, while you are a guest on our campus, to weigh your words with respect and civility in mind." Coulter was not available for comment. But the Post noted that her targets have – in addition to Muslims – included Canadians. She once said that "they'd better hope the United States doesn't roll over one night and crush them. They are lucky we allow them to exist on the same continent."

Adjuncts Are Committed to Teaching, Despite Work Conditions, Survey Finds (Chronicle of Higher Education)

A national survey released today by the American Federation of Teachers reveals that a majority of adjunct professors hold their jobs mainly because they like teaching, not for the money, a finding that echoes the results of a similar survey conducted last year byThe Chronicle. Yet responses from the 500 adjuncts who participated in the federation's survey confirm that their working conditions leave much to be desired. For instance, about 41 percent said their job security did not meet their expectations, while just 28 percent said they received health insurance on the job. The federation will discuss adjunct-faculty issues and more in a joint meeting with the National Education Foundation in San Jose this week.