Bertha Lopez opens her personnel file--but she illegally refused to let me see my own CVESD personnel file

In 2002 I sued Chula Vista Elementary School District for violations of the labor code and other illegal actions. Bertha Lopez refused to produce my personnel file.

What are she and the rest of the CVESD board hiding? Is it something that's in the file, or, more likely, is it something that's missing from the file? Among the very few documents produced by CVESD were documents that were altered, pre-dated or post-dated. CVESD hid or destroyed other documents, and failed to create any paper trail at all on important occasions.

Bertha Lopez violated the law in a regular manner during her years as a CVESD board member.

Jaime Mercado, on the other hand, is clearly a person of decency who doesn't step on other people to get ahead. He cares enough about others to give a pay advance to an employee whose salary schedule included two months with no pay each year.

Former superintendent Ed Brand and Bertha Lopez are very much a part of the unethical and greedy inside circle that controls schools in San Diego County.

Here's today's SDUT article about Bertha's request to open personnel files:

Candidates open personnel files; 1 has reprimand
By Chris Moran
SAN DIEGO UNION-TRIBUNE
October 25, 2008

CHULA VISTA – Rivals in the race for a seat on the Sweetwater Union High School District board opened their personnel files to The San Diego Union-Tribune, revealing overwhelmingly positive evaluations of the 30-plus years each has spent as an educator in South County public schools.

The file of candidate Bertha Lopez, a National School District teacher, contains positive evaluations and no reprimands.

In addition to positive evaluations, incumbent Jaime Mercado's file contains a 2002 letter reprimanding him for using Associated Student Body money to make a loan to an employee. Mercado was principal of Palomar High School in Chula Vista at the time.

Then-Superintendent Ed Brand declined to suspend Mercado in part, he wrote, because “although your judgment was poor, your actions were not self-serving.”

Mercado said he authorized the loan because the employee faced two months without a paycheck because of a lag in the district's payroll system. Mercado said the employee told him that without the money, he would not be able to pay his rent.

The money was restored to the account a month later. Mercado said he used his own money to pay back the account and that the employee reimbursed him in installments.

In a letter of response to the reprimand, Mercado wrote at the time, “I was making up for a payroll system that has for years shamefully abused the basic right of employees to get paid in a timely manner.”

In an interview this week, Mercado called the reprimand letter retaliation by Brand.

[Blogger's note: Ed Brand has become famous for illegal retaliation. He was connected to widespread wrongdoing when he was superintendent of SUHSD, including the Mary Anne Weegar case, in which he retaliated against an administrator who complained that the law was not being followed by the district. He suddenly resigned from San Marcos Unified School District in August 2006. I'm not surprised to hear about more illegal retaliation by Ed Brand.

In the months before the letter was issued, another Sweetwater principal had filed a sexual-harassment claim against a high-level district administrator, and Mercado had agreed to make a declaration that the same administrator had mistreated him. The principal eventually filed a lawsuit alleging that she was wrongfully demoted in retaliation for the sexual-harassment complaint. The district paid $150,000 to settle the lawsuit.

Lopez asked the Union-Tribune to review the files after being asked about a petition dated April 21 signed by her co-workers at John Otis Elementary School. It states that Lopez “is not a team player, and in actuality she has worked assiduously at creating division and tension among staff members.”

Lopez transferred to another school in August, and her personnel file shows that she volunteered for the transfer. The petition and its allegations are not part of her file.

Patrick Judd accused of sexual harrassment

Update: My source turned out to be absolutely correct regarding Patrick Judd's sexual harassment of an employee at Mountain Empire Unified School District. The employee was a principal who was fired after she complained about Judd's behavior. She was awarded $150,000 in San Diego Superior Court.

Several months ago I became aware of a rumor that former Mountain Empire School District superintendent Patrick Judd had been accused of sexual harrassment, but I didn't print it because it was simply a rumor. Judd went on some kind of leave early in 2008, then never went back to work, and retired in June.

One Mountain Empire board member, apparently someone trying to cover for Judd, said that he was on sick leave.

JUDD REFUSES TO BE ACCOUNTABLE TO VOTERS ABOUT SEVERAL VERY SERIOUS ISSUES

Judd said it wasn't sick leave, but he wouldn't say what it was. Yet Judd had the nerve to run for re-election as trustee of Chula Vista Elementary School District, apparently on a platform of silence. This much is clear: Judd does not believe in openness or honesty.

And neither does Lowell Billings, superintendent of CVESD.

Lowell Billings (photo at left) is Judd's employee in CVESD. But the reverse relationship holds true at The Accelerated School (TAS) in Los Angeles, where Billings is on the board. Apparently Billings felt sympathy for Judd, or political obligation to Judd, and hired Judd as a consultant at the Accelerated (Charter) School.

Recently I read a letter written to the San Diego Union Tribune. It said in part:

"...Every educator in Mt Empire and the entire east county seems to be aware that the former Superintendent (P. J.) did not go out on sick leave because of an illness, but rather because of the same type of claim that Mr. Sandoval, Mr. Lopez and Mr. Poveda would be familiar with, he was not sick rather he was in hot water. You should ask some questions in Mt. Empire and perhaps request a copy of the claim..."

I am inclined to differentiate between true sexual harrassment, the abuse or exploitation of a human being, and the less serious problem of enthusiastic admiration of an attractive individual, which is sometimes inappropriately labeled.

A HISTORY OF CONTEMPT FOR WOMEN

Patrick Judd has a history of abuse of and contempt for women. One example is the Danielle Cozaihr case. Last December CVESD was ordered to pay $1 million for Lowell Billings' and Patrick Judd's actions against a young teacher who made the mistake of having a baby at a program improvement school.

Another example of Judd's misplaced loyalties is the Fred Kamper case.

John McCain and the CVESD board--which one fomented hysteria?

Why didn't CVESD board membersw or CVE leaders Jim Groth and Peg Myers act more like John McCain when the rumor was going around that a teacher at Castle Park Elementary was on the verge of committing mass murder?

Here's what John McCain said:

"No. No, ma'am. He's a decent family man with whom I happen to have some disagreements."

McCain said this to a woman in Minnesota who said she was scared of Barack Obama because "he's an Arab."

Both the district and the teachers union was determined to keep the Castle Park Elementary staff functioning like serfs during the Dark Ages, uneducated, superstitious, prone to hysteria.

CVESD and Maura Larkins: a summary of the case

>Many people have told me that my case is so complicated that they simply don't understand it. They have asked for a summary, and here it is.

Maura Larkins v. CVESD was the result of an odd confluence of circumstances, and at the same time it was a typical event in the system that prevails at many schools across the United States. This system values politics and personal loyalty among adults over the duty to educate and protect children.

MY EX-SISTER-IN-LAW WANTED TO BE MANAGER OF MY FATHER'S APARTMENTS

I had been teaching at Chula Vista Elementary
School District for 27 years when the problem began.
It started with a family problem: I was
co-administrator of my father's estate,
and one of my brothers was secretly
unhappy about it. He and his ex-wife decided
to use the police to remove me from my position.

MY TROUBLED EX-SISTER-IN-LAW IS TAKEN SERIOUSLY BY THE DISTRICT

I was removed from my classroom
on February 12, 2001 due to a false police report
(see "A False Police Report" on this page)
made by my mentally-ill and substance-abusing
ex-sister-in-law. However, the district didn't
want to admit this, since using the
illegally-obtained police report
(no charges were filed against me)
was a misdemeanor.

THE DISTRICT DECIDES TO COVER-UP ITS MISTAKE

There is no chance that the district
would have been charged with a crime
for its silly little misdemeanor
(Labor Code section 432.7), but the district
decided it would rather spend $100,000s
of tax dollars to pay its lawyers to cover up the mistake
than to simply admit it made a mistake.

THE DISTRICT COMES UP WITH A STORY

The reason given by the district for my removal was that
two teachers had called assistant superintendent Richard Werlin
at home on a Saturday evening and said they believed
I might be about to kill them. Oddly, the district
created NO DOCUMENT at this time to explain
the reason I was removed from my classroom,
nor did it investigate the alarming report.

THE DISTRICT CHANGES ITS STORY

Within a month, the district changed its story,
saying that only one teacher, Jo Ellen Hamilton,
had called Richard Werlin about me. Hamilton later
testified under oath that she had simply called
Werlin at his invitation to discuss a planned meeting.

THE FAX THAT CAUSED CVESD TO DO AN ABRUPT ABOUT-FACE

On April 3, 2001 I sent a
fax to the district. The next day I was abruptly
asked to return to work, and at the
same time the district belatedly
prepared a document to explain why
I had been removed from my classroom
in the first place. The document
contained a new, completely false
accusation by Richard Werlin and
never mentioned the teacher reports.

I GO BACK TO WORK

I went back to teach in April 2001 because
it seemed clear that my accusers had
been deemed unreliable (either crazy
or dishonest or some combination of the two),
and I assumed that the fabricated excuse in
Richard Werlin's document , was merely
an effort by an embarrassed human resources director
to cover up his mistake.


But I was wrong. It was more than a cover-up;
it was, in fact, a set-up.

BIZARRE NEW ALLEGATIONS

A week after returning, Linda Watson, one of the
teachers who had accused me earlier,
and a new accuser who made a written report,
came forward with bizarre allegations.

AN IMPENDING ELECTION CAUSED THE TEACHERS UNION TO ABANDON ITS OBLIGATIONS

I did not know it at the time, but the teachers
union, Chula Vista Educators, was
working with my accuser Linda Watson. CVE President
Gina Boyd had worked at my school until 1995, and
although she did not share the motivations
of her friends at Castle Park Elementary,
she was running for reelection and felt she
needed to keep them happy in order to win.
This effort was supported by California Teachers
Association Board of Directors member Jim Groth.

Richard Werlin, with the approval of the cabinet
(including Libia Gil and Lowell Billings),
had triggered an all-out hysteria at my school.
Two staff members told me that many teachers were afraid
that I was "going to come to school and shoot everybody.”

DISTRICT DOESN'T BOTHER TO INVESTIGATE MASS MURDER RUMOR THAT CAUSES HYSTERIA AMONG TEACHERS

Without making any effort to
establish that a Columbine-type
event was not in the offing, the
district demanded that I come back
to work in September of 2001. This
time I refused.

My lawyer demanded an investigation
to clear my name and cool down the crucible
that Castle Park Elementary had become, but
the district refused. It was clear that anyone
could make any accusation against me, and it
would be believed and acted on: I was not
safe at work.

SCHOOL ATTORNEY MARK BRESEE GETS HELP FROM DANIEL SHINOFF

Attorney Mark Bresee, who was then working with
Parham & Rajcic and was recently chosen as chief counsel
for Terry Grier at SDUSD, had been giving legal advice
to CVESD up to this point.

When I filed a tort claim on October 4, 2001, attorney Diane Crosier and claims adjuster Rodger Hartnett of San Diego County Office of Education Joint Powers Authority, along with their favorite attorney, Daniel Shinoff of Stutz, Artiano Shinoff & Holtz, became involved.

THE DISTRICT RETALIATES WHEN I FILE GRIEVANCES

I filed 3 grievances on November 13, 2001. The very next day the
district threatened me with dismissal. This was a violation of
the Elementary Education Relations Act (EERA) and other laws.

The district took no action on its
threats, however, until I filed a
lawsuit on March 12, 2002. On May
7, 2002 Patrick Judd, Cheryl Cox,
Pamela Smith, Bertha Lopez and
Larry Cunningham voted to dismiss
me, thus violating California Labor
Code section 1102.5 which prohibits
retaliation against employees for
reporting wrongdoing. This was also
a violation of the constitutional right
to petition for redress of grievances.

THE OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS SEEMS TO HAVE A GIFT FOR COMEDY

My dismissal was upheld by the
Office of Administrative Hearings.
Judge H. James Ahler conducted
a hearing that was almost as comical
as it was illegal. At one point
Judge Ahler jumped up and
ordered the panelists to join him in a
side room, where he told them to
disregard my testimony. I heard his
words because I was sitting on the
witness stand a few feet from him.
The court reporter and all the rest of us
sat at attention during the ten
minutes the panel was in the little
room, but the judge's words were
not included in the transcript
because the reporter couldn't hear
them.

The school district spent many tax
dollars, and the California Teachers
Association spent plenty of teachers'
dues, to get my lawsuit thrown out.
Perjury by employees was also
required, but the effort seemed to pay off
for the district and CTA when my lawsuit was
dismissed in 2005.

DISTRICT LAWYERS BRING THE CASE BACK TO COURT IN 2007

As fate would have it, however, my case
is back in court. CVESD’s law firm,
Stutz, Artiano, Shinoff & Holtz,
brought this case back to San Diego Superior Court
in 2007 by filing a defamation suit against me
for publishing this website.

So it’s still possible that justice and sanity
will find their way back to Chula Vista Elementary
School District.

by Maura Larkins

Following the Money Trail at Sweetwater Union High School District

If you are one of the people who has been wondering why Sweetwater Union High School District built two gyms for $10 million each while classrooms were overcrowded and inadequate, you will be happy to read SAVE SWEETWATER, a website on which one can find some hard evidence about what is going on.

SUHSD has long been famous for corruption. Chula Vista Elementary has only recently come to rival Sweetwater's reputation.

Mary Anne Weegar and Ed Brand at Sweetwater Union High School District

Sweetwater Union High School District is being faced with a hostile takeover effort by Bertha Lopez, a Chula Vista Elementary Board member and, in that capacity, a fan of lawyer Daniel Shinoff of Stutz, Artiano Shinoff & Holtz, who litigated the Mary Anne Weegar case (below). Bertha has spent $100,000s on Shinoff's firm to cover up wrongdoing at CVESD, and it appears that she can be counted on to do the same at SUHSD. Sweetwater would do well to keep current trustee Jaime Mercado, and let Bertha continue her work with the cynical incumbents at CVESD.

From the SAVE SWEETWATER website
$678,000 Worth of Wrongful Termination

Mary Anne Weegar was the head of categorical programs for the Sweetwater Union High School District until 1999. Categorical programs are programs and money allocated for specific educational purposes by both the state and federal governments. Sweetwater received over $2.5 million in categorical aid from the Federal government and over $4.5 million from the state of California in fiscal year 2001. There are stringent requirements on how categorical money can be used and Weegar attempted to see that the money was spent properly. This was not appreciated by those above her and her authority as watchdog over categorical spending was slowly eroded. A computer whiz student aide who helped Weegar with her computers noticed a form in the Superintendent’s part of the computer network called “Reacquiring of categorical funds” When it was discovered that someone had accessed this part of the network, Weegar was locked out of her office, forced to retire,and the young computer whiz was accosted in the parking lot by a well known Sweetwater sociopath and threatened with denial of graduation. The young man’s father was a cop and soon straightened that out, but Weegar was out of a job and soon filed a wrongful termination lawsuit against the District.

The main witnesses called from the district were Superintendent Ed Brand and Chief Financial Officer Barry Dragon. Dragon was formerly with Arthur Anderson and when he was asked recently by a concerned citizen what the Superintendent’s annual salary was, ($200,000), since no one else at the District Office knew, he reacted as if the concerned citizen had threatened to crash a plane into the District Office. When reminded that he and the Superintendent were public servants and that their salaries were from public funds, his venom and hostility subsided and he belatedly divulged the evidently little known fact that Brand (at $200,000 per year) makes more than the Governor of California ($175,000 per year).

When Brand testified, he stated that he had a vast and thorough knowledge of all of Sweetwater’s policies and regulations, but when asked which policy gave him the authority to lock Weegar out of her office, he sat slack-jawed and speechless for over a minute and never could come up with any legal justification for locking out the 30 year veteran employee.

For some board members at Sweetwater Union High School District, it's not about the kids

For many school board members, keeping their power and position is more important than the education of students. Few board members can hold a candle to Jim Cartmill, the favored recipient of developer dollars in Sweetwater Union High School District.

Board member Jaime Mercado has opposed the shameful use of bond money to build two gyms for $20 million instead of building classrooms, the advertised purpose of the bond.

San Diego Magazine
February 2003
Walking the Districts
By Thomas K. Arnold

...In November 2000, South Bay voters approved a $187 million bond measure to pay for improvements at 21 middle and high schools through a property tax surcharge for 25 years. But more than two years later, the only big-ticket projects that have been completed are new gymnasiums at Mar Vista High in Imperial Beach and Sweetwater High in National City.

Officials with the Sweetwater Union High School District, with nearly 38,000 students, maintain the two gyms—each costing more than $10 million—were put on the fast track at the behest of committees of students, parents, teachers and community members. But that hasn’t silenced critics like Bryan Felber, a graduate of district schools who lost his bid for a seat on the Sweetwater board in last November’s election (in which all three incumbents won).

Felber believes it’s time for an outside audit to determine where, exactly, all the Proposition BB money is going. He accuses trustees of building the gyms as a “monument” to impress the community. “Everyone sees the gyms right away, at basketball games and rallies,” he says, “while the community at large can’t go into classrooms. This way, they can point to the gyms, say, ‘Look at what we’ve done’ and pat themselves on the back.”

Meanwhile, conditions are steadily worsening at South Bay schools. Parents in the community of EastLake say their 10-year-old high school is woefully inadequate for the population explosion occurring in the area. Enrollment exceeds the school’s capacity of 2,400 by more than 1,000, and at the beginning of this school year, students were forced to sit on window ledges because there weren’t enough chairs. Sixteen classroom trailers have since been moved on campus to help alleviate overcrowding.

Similar overcrowded conditions exist at Rancho del Rey Middle School, while teachers at Chula Vista Middle School have drawn picket lines to protest the building of an administration center before a new cafeteria to replace the previous one, which had burned down. There’s also grumbling over the fact that a new high school was built in San Ysidro before one in Otay Mesa that was supposed to be built first. The San Ysidro school opened with just 576 students.

“The number-one question I heard when I was out walking precincts,” Felber says, “is ‘Where are the funds? Why aren’t they building classrooms?’”

Board member Jim Cartmill responds, “We formed community-based committees to determine priorities at each school site. Because of the logistics of moving students during construction and the needs of the schools, Sweetwater and Mar Vista opted to build their gyms first, with classrooms attached. The next phase will include additional classrooms and infrastructure improvements.”...

Sweetwater: The Best School Board Money Can Buy?

If you are one of the people who has been wondering why Sweetwater Union High School District built two gyms for $10 million each while classrooms were overcrowded and inadequate,

SUHSD has long been famous for corruption. Chula Vista Elementary has only recently come to rival Sweetwater's reputation.


SAVE SWEETWATER is a website on which one can find some hard evidence about what is going on.

Bertha Lopez and CVESD incumbents rely on spoilers to split the anti-incumbent vote

CLICK HERE FOR ELECTION UPDATE NOVEMBER 5, 2008


Below is a discussion that took place in the comments section of "Jaime Mercado, board member of Sweetwater Union High School District."

I am surprised that anyone connected with the CVESD board would have the nerve to bring up the subject of getting people to run to split the anti-incumbent vote.

The CVESD board incumbents and their cronies at Chula Vista Educators seem to keep Norberto Salazar on speed dial for the frequent occasions when they need a spoiler to split the anti-incumbent vote. This year they also seem to have recruited Aurora Murillo-Clark in an effort to stop Russell Coronado. I guess Felicia Starr wasn't available.

HERE IS THE DISCUSSION:

Anonymous said...
I have read a lot of your columns. While I don't always agree with your point of view, I respect it. However this action of endorsing Jaime Mercado in light of the blatant and Felonious activities he has participated in, and admitted to, you have lost all credibility in my mind that you aren't really the corruption fighter you claim, you simply have a personal vendetta against those you feel have wronged you and you are just as bad as all the others. So much for reading any more of your stuff.

You SHOULD have endorsed the campaign of Stephanie Alcaraz, who although seems to be politically naive, hasn't broken the law in the last 3 months.

10:39 PM


Maura Larkins said...
I'm willing to learn. Please tell me more about your point of view. I will consider changing my mind.

8:17 AM

[Maura Larkins adds: I've met Stephanie Alcaraz, and she is a gentle person who, I suspect, has no idea how dirty the politics are in Chula Vista Elementary School District and Sweetwater Union High School District, and is almost certainly not associated with the person who started this discussion. That person is obviously opposed to Jaime Mercado, but is not really a Stephanie Alcaraz supporter. A friend wouldn't call the candidate "naive."]


Anonymous said...
I get that you have a problem with those on CV board, including one of Mr Mercado's opponents.

From a standpoint of Integrity and Honesty, breaking the law by encouraging someone to run in his race (where there is only one winner) simply to confuse the voters is very disapointing. While it may not be purjury, it is, according to the Attorney General's office, is against Election Law. At least the stool pigeon he put up to the task turned around and admitted to what they had done. He needs to admit what he did was wrong, instead of spinning some BS about getting more people to run and then apologize to the electorate for assuming that we were idiots.

I don't want someone with that kind of disregard to the law, or our intelligence, and quite frankly other vunerable people, making descisions about the education of my children, and spending my tax dollars.

Again, I know you don't seem to have the time of day for Bertha Lopez, but to simply endorse Mercado given what he has done smacks of anything but Lopez.

1:13 AM


Maura Larkins said...
Thank you for responding. It appears that your accusation is that Mr. Mercado encouraged Trini Lopez to run in order to confuse Bertha Lopez supporters. In fact, Bertha Lopez is guilty of wrongdoing far more serious than this. She has suborned perjury and has spent $100,000s of taxpayer dollars to cover up wrongdoing at CVESD.

11:27 AM

[Maura Larkins adds: When you talk about getting someone to run to split the vote, you need to admit that CVESD board members are the worst offenders, having done precisely this time and again. They have a habit of getting someone who actually supports the incumbent to run in the race in order to split the anti-incumbent vote.

Example 1: Trying to stop the smart and passionate Archie McAllister from unseating David Bejarano, the spoiler is Norberto Salazar, who is on the ballot as an alternative to David Bejarano. Norberto spent the evening of October 1, 2008 singing Bejarano's praises. He is clearly not trying to unseat Bejarano. Norberto Salazar did the same thing in 2006, running as a spoiler to protect incumbent Larry Cunningham from outsider Steve Yagyagan. And Norberto Salazar isn't the only candidate with no apparent reason to run (except to split the anti-incumbent vote).

Example 2: Trying to stop experienced and talented educator and administrator Russell Coronado from unseating Patrick Judd, the spoiler is Aurora Murillo-Clark, an unknown who has no apparent reason for running except to protect the disreputable and longterm incumbent Patrick Judd. Judd recently left work as Superintendent of Mountain Empire School District under mysterious circumstances, and then after a few months announced his retirement. His explanation? None at all--except to say that he was not on sick leave. Judd was also absent from the candidate forum on Sept. 30, 2008.]



Anonymous said...
So you are simply going to endorse the crooked one that didn't work for the district that fired you?

Oh well, check your credibility flying out the window.

12:27 PM


Maura Larkins said...
Okay, you clearly want me to explain why I'm not supporting Stephanie Alcaraz. I know that candidates like to accentuate the positive, but Ms. Alcaraz has taken that dictum too far. She has not expressed any concern about SUHSD's relationship with corrupt lawyers. If Ms. Alcaraz has the courage and determination to refuse to bow to the pressure of those lawyers, she has kept those qualities well-hidden under a facade of docility. If Ms. Alcaraz is naive about what's going on at Sweetwater, then she is not likely to change anything. I don't have a vendetta against anyone, but I am fighting a system of corruption in schools. Bertha Lopez has supported that system with every decision she has made. Why is Lopez challenging Jaime Mercado? Clearly, because he is a challenge to her group of corrupt friends. Why is Stephanie Alcaraz challenging Jaime Mercado? Perhaps she thinks he's too liberal. She says she wants more focus on patriotism and the pledge of allegiance, which sounds nice, but why not more focus on American Government? Too many people think they are patriots, but they don't really want kids to learn too much about American history and values, because then the kids might notice that many flag-wavers are actually hostile to basic American values. Kids need knowledge, not indoctrination.

12:56 PM

[Maura Larkins adds: I think there may be something to the idea that a Bertha Lopez supporter initiated this discussion. The personal animosity of the commenter simply doesn't jibe with a Stephanie Alcaraz supporter. Alcaraz isn't desperate for my support. Bertha Lopez has been desperate for years in her efforts to silence me, going so far as to force employees to commit perjury, and paying $100,000s of tax dollars to lawyers to get my case thrown out of court. That case has recently been reopened in San Diego Superior Court; the issue being litigated is whether the facts I have presented on my website are true.

The commenter is in San Diego, and uses Cox Communications IP address 72.220.104.149. The first comment was posted on September 28, 2008 at 1:00 am. This person came to my blog by doing a google search for "jaime mercado maura larkins."


It also appears that someone who works at the Chula Vista Elementary School District Office is using a CVESD computer for political activities, recently conducting searches for Sweetwater USD trustee Jaime Mercado. IP address 209.242.141.25 visited this blog just minutes before the last anti-Mercado, anti-Larkins post was made. Previously, there have been repeated visits from this IP address, which comes from a Cox Communications server called "cox-sd.net" that is different from the regular "cox.net" server. This user regularly conducts searches about people and issues connected to CVESD, but has shown little interest in the large amount of information and opinion I have posted on my various blogs about other topics. I became convinced about a year ago that this visitor was working from the CVESD office.

On a positive note, however, this public employee seems to have read my page "The Five Dysfunctions of a Team." Let's hope he/she learned something from Patrick Lencioni's excellent analysis of dysfunctional organizations, and will stop trying so desperately to cover up wrongdoing at CVESD.

I suspect that this person is high enough in the organization to be able to come forward with the truth, and to take action to stop the deterioration of Castle Park Elementary School.]


P.S. When will the San Diego Union Tribune start telling the truth about CVESD? I suppose that will have to wait until the paper finds a buyer with some integrity, and Don Sevrens gets fired.

Photos from Chula Vista Peaker Plant Protest October 2, 2008

The young man in the middle drew the colorful posters his family is holding.











The Russell Coronado family




Meanwhile, inside the council chambers, the hearing was taking place. The crowd outside could be heard now and then.





Protest planner Hugo Ivan Salazar at the hearing.

After dark, a crowd waited outside while the CEC (California Energy Commission)hearing went on.


Diana Vera spoke to the crowd.

Why 91911 residents are protesting the Peaker Power Plant

The folloring excerpts were found HERE.

"...The plant was placed practically in the Otay River, which is becoming a county regional park. It is an ugly grey building visible from Montgomery High School across the river and the bridge between Chula Vista and San Diego on Beyer Way. Montgomery High School is a year round school and we observed the heat waves from this peaker every day during the warm summer months. It was used frequently until the owners went bankrupt. The plant is so inefficient that it costs more to operate than SDGE is willing to pay.

"In 2001 the owners applied to add an additional plant of 62.4 mw to the site. This was fought by the city of Chula Vista. The city sited among other concerns Cumulative Impacts. These arguments are valid for the current proposal.

"Those of us living in this section of the Southwest must deal with a large amount of diesel fumes and the particulate matter generated by Hanson's cement making operation in the river bottom. Any additional air pollution is significant in this specific location due to the cumulative effects.

"The zip code 91911 is number 3 in the county in quantity of criteria pollutants and number 7 in toxic pollutants. Our neighborhood does not deserve any more.

"It is rather odd that the city is not making the arguments they made against RAMCO again to fight this new proposal. The council authorized the sending of the RAMCO letter on June 5, 2001. Two of the current council members were on the council then. It is difficult to understand how they could now support a 100mw plant in the same spot..."