Chula Vista Educators president Manuel Yvellez is wrong about Common Core, and how to teach sixth-grade math

Manuel Yvellez, President of Chula Vista Educators (CVE)

See all posts regarding Common Core.

CVE president Manuel Yvellez won office last August by promising to protect teachers from the District's implementation of Common Core standards. He said he'd insist on extra pay for teachers since they would have to design their own curriculum for Common Core.

But how does he propose to show that any given teacher actually designed an effective curriculum?

Here's an obvious way to figure out which teachers designed a good curriculum for Common Core: look at the test scores of their students. Would you agree to that, Mr. Yvellez? Unfortunately, the teachers union (CTA) has been reluctant to approve effective evaluations of teachers, with or without test scores.

WHY IS TEACHING MATH SO DIFFICULT FOR SO MANY TEACHERS?

I've been thinking about Mr. Yvellez' complaints about the strict timelines for sixth grade Common Core math lessons. This led me to ask myself why teaching math is so difficult for so many teachers.

Of course, there are many reasons, including the fact that most teachers were poorly taught when they themselves were students.

But another reason is that teachers simply don't want to be bothered. They have their way of doing things, and anyone who does things differently should get out of their school or, better yet, out of their district. I have noticed a couple of what I call "lazy teacher syndromes" among teachers at CVESD:

Lazy teacher syndrome #1: I can't be bothered with kids who are behind

At Castle Park Elementary, I was on the math committee with the Teacher of the Year. She stated, without embarrassment, "I don't have time to teach the kids who are behind." Many teachers can't be bothered to figure out how teach more than one level at a time. These teachers certainly shouldn't be paid by the district to develop curriculum.

Lazy teacher syndrome #2: It's not cool to know math

At other schools I taught at, teachers frequently boasted about how they couldn't do their own offspring's elementary math homework. They felt no shame, no embarrassment. They didn't sit down and study their kids' math books. It was apparently considered cool to be a college graduate and math teacher who couldn't do elementary math.

Another teacher at CVESD announced at lunch that there was a problem in the third-grade math book that she couldn't do, her students couldn't do, and none of the parents could do. "It can't be done," she stated. I offered to help her, and after school she showed me a word problem. As soon as I explained to her that the problem involved a number sequence, and that she just had to figure out what number came next, she immediately knew the answer.

This teacher wasn't lazy. And she appreciated the help I gave her.

But other teachers resented my thinking that I could solve a third-grade math problem. It is simply not considered cool among many CVESD teachers to be able to do elementary math. Being clueless is the way to popularity.




MUST MATH BE TAUGHT IN THE EXACT SEQUENCE CONTAINED IN MR. YVELLEZ' TEXTBOOK?

Mr. Yvellez complains in his campaign speech (see video below) that Common Core sixth-grade math topics such as fractions and decimals are taught in a different sequence than in his text books.

The Common Core timelines will work just fine if teachers teach basic number concepts in depth, WHILE TEACHING KIDS SIMPLY TO VARY THE WAY THE NUMBERS ARE WRITTEN, AS SEEN HERE:

There is no need to do advanced fractions before starting decimals and percentages and ratios. In fact, each concept can easily be combined, and should be combined, with the other concepts.


The sixth grade math Common Core standards that Mr. Yvellez rants about in his video (see below) specifically instruct the teacher to use VISUAL AIDS.

JUST DRAW A PICTURE! USE THE WHITEBOARD! THAT'S WHAT IT'S FOR!

AND THEN, HAVE THE KIDS DRAW A PICTURE!

MATH CAN BE BOILED DOWN TO ONE SIMPLE GOAL: finding different names for a number.

2 plus 2 is one name for a specific number. 4 is another name for that number. If you draw a picture, you see that 2 is half of 4.

The relationship between any two quantities can be expressed as a fraction, decimal, percentage or ratio.

And teachers should constantly use number lines, all kinds of number lines, showing fractions, decimals, whole numbers, etc.

TEACHERS SHOULD CONSTANTLY REVIEW BASIC CONCEPTS

ALL students can benefit from review of basic concepts. After the teacher has presented the basic concept, the advanced students can be challenged with more complicated problems on one side of the whiteboard, while proceeding with more basic ideas for the kids who are at or below grade level.

It can be done. I know, because I did it for years.

It's simple. You just divide the whiteboard in half, and let kids decide which problems they want to do, the easy ones or the hard ones. I liked to put my low-achievers in the front of the room, and the high achievers in the back. I went from side to side of the whiteboard, teaching one type of problem while the other group worked on its own.

I also had a clipboard with every child's name on it. I'd instruct the kids to cover their answers as soon as they were done. I'd come around and they'd show me, and I'd mark down if they had it right.

Then I'd go to the front and give the right answer. (Kids need feedback right away, right at the teachable moment.) I'd tell them to give themselves a star if they had it right, and to change the answer and then give themselves a star if they had it wrong. I wanted right answers, not wrong answers, on their papers.

My kids did terrific on standardized tests.

And we had fun. We all loved math.

Here's the 9 minute 16 second campaign video of Mr. Yvellez from YouTube. In it, Mr. Yvellez talks about how Common Core math standards might hurt students:



No teacher should teach in a way that harms students, and then blame Common Core. There is simply no excuse for such behavior.

And what about the District's responsibility?

The school district insists that teachers carefully evaluate their students' abilities, but the district doesn't even bother to find out if the teachers can do elementary math. Why not give teachers a math test? Then the teachers who do well can give some classes to the teachers who do poorly. But for heaven's sake, CVESD, don't do what you usually do: bring in some consultant and give him huge amounts of tax revenue to do what your teachers can do.

Note: Mr. Yvellez' CVE election victory was probably also helped by his PERB complaint about election irregularities. Here is a partial decision from the PERB board that includes a mention of this and other CVE problems, including the bizarre mid-term exit of former CVE President Peg Myers.

ORIGINAL POST:

Are some school districts misusing Common Core, rejecting the idea that concepts should be taught in depth?

I've been thinking about this issue, and I believe that Common Core is NOT being misused. Teachers can and should teach basic concepts in depth. They just can't go on and on for months teaching the details of a single basic concept. They have to create a broad understanding in their students of multiple basic concepts.

Common Core timelines can work is to teach basic concepts in depth by teaching the relationships between a variety of numerical conventions, such as fractions, decimals, percentages and ratios at a simple level for kids who are behind, while at the same time giving advanced students more difficult problems. It can be done. I know, because I did it for years. ALL students can benefit from review of basic concepts. Then the advanced students can be challenged by presenting more complicated problems on one side of the whiteboard, while proceeding with more basic ideas for the kids who are at or below grade level.

Comment on "Teachers can be bullied, too"
by Margaret Berry
Teaching Tolerance
3 November 2013

No one ever said teaching would be easy, but I never dreamed that with more than 27 years under my belt I would be treated like an outsider.

When I first read Common Core Standards I thought they would free me to teach my students what they needed when they needed it. I thought that with careful scaffolding and time, they would make progress. Little did I know that my school district would make Common Core more restrictive than a basal reading program. Who knew that someone with years and experience would be told, "not to worry, that mastery isn't necessary.... they will catch up next year or the next".

Stutz Artiano Shinoff & Holtz v. Maura Larkins defamation suit finally takes a step toward wrapping up

Good news for Bertha Lopez three days after her arraignment.

Today Stutz law firm finally filed a request for judgment in the Stutz Artiano Shinoff & Holtz v. Maura Larkins defamation case. The lawsuit has been going on for over five years, and it has already gone to the Court of Appeal once, resulting in a loss for Stutz in its effort to enforce a bizarre injunction.

Stutz waited over five months to file for judgment since my answer was stricken on July 27, 2012. I have know idea why they waited so long.

I imagine Judge Judith Hayes wasn't happy about the long wait. Here are some quotes from the court transcripts showing how intensely Judge Judith Hayes wants to silence me.

Judge Hayes absolutely refused, even when striking my answer, to state whether she was aware that she was accusing me of currently publishing statements that had actually been erased from my website or were from public court records.

Even James Holtz seems to have some qualms about the judge's actions. He actually waived the $5000 sanction she gave me on May 30, 2012.

I am very confident that her decision to strike my answer will be overturned on appeal.

There is good news for each of the 100 people sued without being named by Stutz Artiano Shinoff & Holtz in its defamation case against me. They've all been dismissed from the case!

Chula Vista Elementary School District is part and parcel of the case. My website discussed in detail the illegal actions of Bertha Lopez, Pam Smith, Larry Cunningham, Cheryl Cox and Patrick Judd. Nobody wants to believe that there is corruption in schools (that's where we send our babies!), and I was slow to believe it myself, but White Chalk crime is real.

In 2008, Bertha Lopez and the rest of the CVESD board gave tax dollars to support Stutz law firm in this case, although it is illegal for public entities to sue for defamation. CVESD hired Stutz to quash my deposition subpoenas for board members. Why didn't they pay one of their other law firms to do it? Perhaps they didn't want their other lawyers to know the facts of the case.

The request is a bit odd in some respects.

Stutz sued me in October 2007, but its prove-up of damages only mentions hits on my website for December 2010 and beyond. Where are the damages that Stutz claimed to have in 2007 when it filed suit? How about 2008, 2009 and 11 months in 2010?

Isn't it likely that by suing me, they themselves caused my website to have more hits?

WHY DO PEOPLE FIRE THEIR LAWYERS?

Also, I imagine most people look at my site and think, "Ah! A disgruntled ex-employee!" Of course, other people might think, "Ah! Only the disgruntled ex-employees will tell the truth about what's going on inside their place of employment."

But the point that Stutz is supposed to address in its prove-up is whether it was actually damaged. Did it lose clients because of my website? How can they tell? It is true that some clients left, such as Grossmont-Cuyamaca Community College, but wasn't it most likely a result of all the legal problems that the college had when Stutz represented them? (Think Omero Suarez, David Agosto.) If they'd been happy with Stutz, they wouldn't fire their law firm just because I had issues with Stutz. I'm sure Grossmont-Cuyamaca knows much more about Stutz than I do.

Latest correspondence in Stutz v. Larkins defamation suit

Here's the message I just send to Stutz law firm regarding its demands for changes in my website, pursuant to its defamation suit against me.

June 9, 2009

Dear Stutz, Artiano, Shinoff & Holtz:

A person can disagree with Stutz without saying or implying that Stutz' actions are illegal or unprofessional. Obviously, there was a parting of the ways between Stutz and Bob Gallagher. Bob clearly did not see eye to eye with Dan Shinoff, Ray Artiano, James Holtz, etc. There's nothing in the court order that prevents me from saying so. People are allowed to dislike Stutz law firm, and they're not legally required to keep their feelings secret.

And, conversely, Stutz is allowed to nurture whatever hostile feelings it wishes against me and others.

Some Stutz lawyers get so angry that one would hardly be surprised to see smoke rising from the top of their heads. Ray Artiano was so mad during his deposition that his face kept twitching. Kelly Angell pointed both her index fingers at me in court, with thumbs cocked as if she were shooting me with two guns at once. (And I'll bet Stutz doesn't even charge the taxpayers for the theatrics. Rage and fury are thrown in for no charge!)

Citizens are allowed to criticize the actions of public entities and other organizations, such as tax-free educational institutions like Californians Against Lawsuit Abuse. America is what it is because of freedom of speech. You have no authority to stop me from presenting my ideas about education and the justice system.

Stutz obtained a summary judgment that it didn't deserve in its defamation case against me. The judge didn't consider my evidence, and relied on the declaration of a man (Dan Shinoff) who refused to be deposed and refused to produce documents. I would think that Stutz wouldn't want to push this too far.

If I were Stutz, I'd quit while I was ahead. But I guess that sort of advice is lost on Stutz. Stutz has had so many chances to quit while it was ahead in my case, but didn't take advantage of any of them. You know when the perfect time would have been to settle with me? Feb. 11, 2003, the day my OAH decision came out. Or Dec. 18, 2004, when my Superior Court case got thrown out.

At that time I probably would have exchanged confidentiality for a song.

Why did Stutz wait until I was back up and running, with a successful website, and THEN ask me to keep my information under wraps? Honestly, sometimes I wonder if the guys in charge of your firm have common sense.

I've heard that Daniel Shinoff considers "The Art of War" to be his personal bible, but I don't think he's read it carefully. Charging ahead with as many weapons as you can muster is not always the best plan. Sometimes you can defang an opponent with a smile and a handshake.

Can you believe that our trial date is just a month away? Maybe that's what we should be focusing on, rather than whether it is defamatory to say that Bob Gallagher left the firm because he didn't like Stutz' tactics.

Respectfully,
Maura Larkins

[Maura Larkins' comment: A report I found on NPR today helped me understand what's going on here. "Through their research, Kahneman and Tversky identified dozens of these biases and errors in judgment, which together painted a certain picture of the human animal. Human beings, it turns out, don't always make good decisions, and frequently the choices they do make aren't in their best interest...In other words, if the human brain is hard-wired to make serious errors, that implies all kinds of things about the need for regulation and protection."

Harsh disciplinarian=secret rule breaker?

Have you ever noticed that the teachers who are the most harsh disciplinarians of children, severely punishing minor infractions, are often also the most likely to break rules themselves?

In the teachers lounge at Castle Park Elementary a few years ago I saw the aftermath of a food fight by teachers on the last day of school. It took the custodians a week to clean the sticky soda, whipped cream and other food from the walls, carpets and upholstery. One of the participants in the fight explained to me that "we needed to let off steam." How could this teacher pass the age of forty without discovering some form of stress relief that didn't involve vandalism? And how could she show so much contempt for kids who failed on one occasion to finish their homework (she called them "losers"?

This teacher was a charter member of "The Castle Park Family," five of whose members were administratively transferred out of the school in August 2005. These teachers were not into good behavior, they were into power. They didn't lose their jobs; they were simply transferred to another school. But they themselves had caused a good many excellent teachers and principals to lose their jobs or be transferred out of the school.

The behavior of the Castle Park Family (a group that now has taken over Chula Vista Educators) is bullying, dishonest and disruptive, the sort of that would earn children a trip to the principals office for a lecture on playing well with others.

Not surprisingly, this same type of relationship, in which rule-breakers harshly enforce the rules over those below them, occurs in the relationship between CVESD district administrators and teachers.

The situation is somewhat analogous to the village in the new movie The White Ribbon which just won the grand prize at the Cannes Film Festival. (Is this analogy allowable, Mr. Shinoff? I'll grant you that the children in the movie are the generation that grew up to perpetrate the actions you don't want me to discuss, but surely I'm allowed to discuss the Palme d'Or prize winner without getting sued by your law firm!) Reuters describes the setting for the story: An inhuman, never questioned moral code holds sway, especially over the children who are constantly punished, both physically and psychologically, for the slightest infraction. The women are similarly brutalized and under the thumb of the village's unabashed patriarchy. The male adults, on the other hand, engage in clandestine acts of evil and cruelty that are kept hushed up...One day the order of things begins to unravel.

That last part about hushing up wrongdoing makes the analogy with Castle Park Elementary and CVESD complete.

Voice of San Diego breaks story of relationship of Stutz lawyers Daniel Shinoff and Jeffery Morris to Diane Crosier of SDCOE-JPA

Photo by Sam Hodgson, Voice of San Diego

What's up with attorneys Dan Shinoff and Diane Crosier at the San Diego County Office of Education JPA? Some interesting shenanigans, it appears. Why has SDCOE Superintendent Randolph "Randy" Ward covered up these problems by refusing to release (to this blogger) public records of billings of Shinoff's firm, Stutz Artiano Shinoff & Holtz?

The Schoolhouse Lawyer Who Helped Hire His Overseer
VOICE OF SAN DIEGO
by Emily Alpert
March 2, 2009

Lawyers from a firm that has received millions of dollars in business from a public agency that handles lawsuits for school districts have, at least twice in recent years, helped it screen potential employees who later oversaw outside attorneys' work.

The Risk Management Joint Powers Authority, a public agency composed of dozens of local school districts and run through the San Diego County Office of Education, has paid the law firm of Stutz, Artiano, Shinoff & Holtz nearly $7 million between July 2002 and July 2008 to handle lawsuits brought against school districts.

Two shareholders in the firm, Daniel Shinoff and Jeffery Morris, have helped screen job applicants for the agency by sitting on the first of two interview panels that candidates undergo before being hired. Such interviewers don't make the final hiring decisions, but they narrow the hiring pool by asking predetermined questions provided by the human resources department and ranking candidates based on their responses.

Including the attorneys in the interview process means that in at least two instances, an employee has owed his or her job, in part, to one of the firms that he or she is hired to monitor.

The practice is among a bevy of complaints lodged in a lawsuit by a former authority employee, Rodger Hartnett, who alleges that the Stutz Artiano firm received a disproportionate share of work "based on personal relationships" in the office rather than merit. Harnett, who was interviewed for his job by a panel that included Shinoff, claims in his wrongful termination suit against the County Office of Education that he was fired because of his complaints about Stutz Artiano...


(Links in the text were added by Maura Larkins.)

Will the court quash my deposition subpoenas of CVESD officials?

I just checked online to see the Tentative Rulings on CVESD's motion to quash my deposition subpoenas of Tom Cruz and Susan Fahle (in photo at left), and found that the court has continued the motion for two weeks.

This means I don't have to put my suit on tomorrow morning and go down to the courthouse, which is a relief, even though I always enjoy visiting downtown San Diego and the stately Hall of Justice. It's just that I've got a lot going on right now.

Also, my motion to compel the deposition of attorney Daniel Shinoff will have to wait two weeks, as will the Motion for Summary Judgment filed by Stutz law firm.

CVESD still using illegal tactics to silence critics?

"...When you work for the public, as I have, you are required to be honest and serve the public..."
By Flo Samuels, Hayward, July 24, 2008 Voice of San Diego


I recently discovered what appears to be a connection between Chula Vista Elementary School District and the lawsuit by their lawyers (Stutz Artiano Shinoff & Holtz) to stop me from publishing my website.

It is illegal for a public entity to sue for defamation.

I suspect that CVESD superintendent Lowell Billings (at left in above photo), and (next to Billings in above photo) board members David Bejarano, Pam Smith, Patrick Judd, Bertha Lopez and Larry Cunningham know this very well. So why don't they operate in an above-board manner, and file a lawsuit against me as individuals?

First, I imagine they don't want to give me a chance to prove my allegations in court.

Second, they are accustomed to having the taxpayers foot the bill for their legal representation.

Stutz attorney Ljubisa Kostic denied that he made an uncustomary and lengthy visit to my website and blogs the day after I participated in a meeting at Castle Park Elementary school. Unfortunately for Mr. Kostic, I was able to match the IP address of his laptop, which he used during my deposition, to the May 28, 2008 visit. That same laptop had made very rare, and usually very short, visits prior to that date.

To top it all off, Kostic issued a Notice of Deposition to me on the very next day (May 29, 2008). He could have done this at anytime during the previous 8 months, and there is no reason to think he would have done it on that day except to retaliate on behalf of CVESD for my public appearance.

This appears to be yet another case of illegal involvement by CVESD in the justice system (see also CVESD's bizarre and successful effort to protect Stutz law firm from obstruction of justice claims), and an effort by CVESD to use intimidation to interfere with my right to free speech.

CVESD lawyers Stutz Artiano Shinoff & Holtz v. Maura Larkins trial February 2009

Stutz law firm asked the court on July 25, 2008 to delay the trial for their lawsuit against me for defamation.

One would think they'd be in a hurry to stop me if I'm truly defaming them.

Either my site isn't really hurting them, or Stutz law firm is tacitly admitting that what I say is true.


The November trial date selected by the court was changed to February 6, 2009.

The Stutz lawyer also said that a court-ordered settlement conference "would not be fruitful." The judge looked at him and said, "Well, then you'll just have to work it out yourselves."

CVESD case discussed in "White Chalk Crime"

A new book mentions CVESD's illegal actions against Maura Larkins.

From "White Chalk Crime" by Karen Horwitz (page 596)

"California NAPTA member Maura Larkins corroborates this point when she commented on my legal case and discussed the abuse used to silence her: If you had done what I did, which was to refuse to come back to work until there was an investigation, I guarantee you would have been dismissed for refusing to come to work. They were delighted that I wasn't at work for an entire year--UNTIL I FILED SUIT.

"Then they claimed they had wanted me to be at work for that entire year. In fact, my dismissal specifically stated that by filing grievances, tort claims and a lawsuit, I had shown myself to be "unforgiving," an "irremediable character defect"!

"Once they target you, neither the truth nor the law matters. I love having the above statement about why I was fired in writing. It's a clear violation of the Constitution as well as state law. Can you believe that they openly and brazenly fired me for filing grievances, tort claims, and a lawsuit?"

CVESD paid $100,000s of tax dollars to obtain this decision and cover up the truth in the case. Attorney Daniel Shinoff, who was in charge of litigation for CVESD in San Diego Superior Court, wanted the case decided in the Office of Administrative Hearings. Attorney Mark Bresee pulled the job off with the help of phony documents.

PETER BARRON STARK: SCHOOLS MASK PROBLEMS INSTEAD OF SOLVING THEM

In times of crisis, schools hire consultants to calm everybody down instead of addressing the basic problem: teachers who can't think straight.

Helix High School in San Diego Unified School District has suffered from a rash of teacher-student sexual encounters. Since this makes the news, the school is doing something about it: hiring an ethics advisor.

Castle Park Elementary School in Chula Vista also hired an advisor, Peter Barron Stark, a few years back, in the mid-90s, when teachers were so hostile to bilingual education that they were using staff meetings as an emotional outlet to scream at their opponents.

Peter Barron Stark's advice didn't them help much. It seems that Castle Park Elementary teachers needed help with thinking skills and basic human decency. All they learned was how to conduct a meeting without yelling at each other. In other words, problems were covered up instead of being addressed.

According to Stark's website, the following educational institutions have hired Peter Barron Stark and Associates.

It's hard to miss MiraCosta College and others with legal problems on the list; many of these problem schools use Daniel Shinoff as their lawyer.

Is the failure of consultants caused by the fact that these institutions were asking for the wrong thing? They wanted to keep everything calm and quiet, when open, honest discussion was needed. Instead of hiring PBS consulting, they should have hired ethical lawyers, teachers, and administrators. Clearly, CVESD needs new board members.


PBS Consulting's education client list:

...Butte County Office of Education
Cal Poly Pomona
Chula Vista Elementary School District
Edison Charter Academy
KPBS
MiraCosta College
National School DistrictPoway Unified School District
Project Concern
San Diego County Office of Education
San Dieguito Union High School District
San Diego State University - College of Extended Studies
San Diego Community College District
Soquel Elementary School District
Southwestern College
Southwestern Christian School
University of Phoenix

Mr. Stark says, "I view each client I have the privilege of working with as the beginning of a lifelong relationship. I am committed to providing you with a customized presentation that begins long before I take the stage and doesn't end until your expectations have been exceeded."

I think you have some work left to do at Castle Park Elementary, Mr. Stark. And while you're at it, a visit to MiraCosta College might be in order.

POSTSCRIPT TO YESTERDAY'S "NOTE TO LOWELL BILLINGS"

Castle Park Elementary teachers don't want to deal with reality

Dear Mr. Billings,

After I wrote yesterday's post, I engaged in further discussions about what you said on June 4, 2008 at Castle Park. I believe I now understand your message better.

It seems you said that the teachers don't want to have anything to do with me. Well, of course not.

The reasons are both clear and illegal.

1) First of all, those who were my friends in 2001 were viciously attacked by guilty teachers and administrators. In 2002, Castle Park Elementary teachers were made to understand that Chula Vista Educators (the teachers union), expected them to report to Peggie Myers any contact they had with me. (At that time, Peg Myers, the current CVE president, was CVE representative for the school.)

2) The district and its lawyers wanted to make sure that I had no access to witnesses. Daniel Shinoff and Kelly Angell of Stutz law firm even asked the court to forbid me from contacting ANY AND ALL CVESD EMPLOYEES. The judge refused. He informed the lawyers that "parties are allowed to talk" and that I had a right to contact witnesses.

3) The teachers didn't want to be contacted because they were covering up crimes. Like ostriches with their heads in the sand, they were in deep denial, ignoring the consequences of a criminal cover up. They continued to punish children for lying or other transgressions, but they believed that a different morality applied to them. They were teachers, they made the law in the school, they didn't have to follow it.

4) Sadly, new teachers have been effectively inducted into the "Castle Park Family," the group of teachers that believed that they have the right to make personnel decisions for the school. This is the reason that problems are as severe as ever at Castle Park Elementary. Teachers who have left are still powerful because they stay in contact.

The culture of the school remains the same. It is a culture of anger and hostility to anyone who would question the arbitrary power of the teachers who control the school. Like you, Mr. Billings, they believe that might makes right, and the law has little force in their decision making.

A CANCER OF IRRATIONAL ANGER PERMEATES CASTLE PARK ELEMENTARY SCHOOL AND THE DISTRICT OFFICE. YOU WON'T SOLVE THIS PROBLEM WITH "STRICTNESS." CVESD NEEDS TO DEAL WITH THE REALITY OF WHAT HAS HAPPENED, TO ADDRESS PROBLEMS HONESTLY, SO THAT IT CAN FINALLY LAY THEM TO REST.

See all posts about Peg Myers.

Cheryl Cox gets away with suborning perjury, but gets young man indicted for taking time off work

It must feel pretty heady for Chula Vista mayor Cheryl Cox to get away with suborning perjury (click here to see one such case involving Cheryl Cox) and at the same time be able to get District Attorney Bonnie Dumanis to prosecute someone who tried to take a picture of her for this rarely-prosecuted crime. Cheryl has played rough for a long time, but she turns out to be more vindictive than I had imagined.

Cheryl approved the actions of her favorite law firm, Stutz, Artiano, Shinoff & Holtz on behalf of CVESD. (This is Leslie Devaney's firm, to which the City of Chula Vista, of which Cox is mayor recently awarded a cozy settlement in the Madigan case.) Cheryl's decisions as school board member put extreme pressure on two law officers to commit perjury. When she received an official complaint about the crimes of Rick Werlin, San Diego District Attorney Bonnie Dumanis decided it was okay for Richard Werlin to commit obstruction of justice on behalf of Chula Vista Elementary School District.

But it's a different story when the shoe is on the other foot. Bonnie kowtowed to Cox and brought felony charges against a young man who tried to photograph Cox with Cox's disgraced family friend David Malcolm. This young man's actions pale in comparison to those of Cheryl Cox and CVESD. Bonnie claims the young man committed perjury when he said he had taken leave from his job to go to the Cox political fundraiser, where Cox and Malcolm were socializing. Bonnie says the young man was actually being paid by the City of Chula Vista at the time he was at the Cox luncheon.

For Cheryl Cox, having political power means she is above the law.

It is clear that Bonnie's prosecution of Jason Moore is politically motivated. Perjury is, sadly, an extremely common crime in our legal system. Cox's former lawyers, Stutz, Artiano, Shinoff & Holtz, use it as a knee-jerk perjury response to true allegations. Naturally, Bonnie Dumanis refused to investigate the felonies of Cheryl Cox and Rick Werlin.

Am I the only one who believes that Cox uses public money to achieve her own personal and political goals? Apparently not.

On November 2, 2006, the San Diego Union Tribune published these comments by Sharon Floyd:

"Candidate Cheryl Cox refuses to acknowledge the ties she has to David Malcolm, former Chula Vista council member and port commissioner who was jailed for corruption. Records show that she has taken tens of thousands of dollars from Malcolm.

"Cox has been a paid lobbyist, not only for developers who have business with the city, but also casinos, trucking companies and liquor stores.

"Cox likes high-rises. Her family had a deposit on a condominium in the now infamous Españada project."

Cox also approves of stretching the truth when she's not under oath. After wasting hundreds of thousands of tax dollars in Chula Vista to achieve her personal and political goals, including doing business with builders who channelled money to her campaign, she had the nerve to run for mayor of Chula Vista on a platform of fiscal responsibility and character issues. Clearly, Cox cares more about her own power than she does about the education of children, fiscal responsibility, or the law.

Cheryl Cox also put the Sheriff of Santa Barbara in a difficult position when she covered up crimes at CVESD. Cheryl weaved a tangled web of deceit after deciding to cover up Robin Doig/Colls/Donlan's crimes at Castle Park Elementary. Robin's brother and his boss, Commander Sam Gross, were pressured to commit perjury by Cox's decision.

Deputy District Attorney Patrick O'Toole, San Diego Union Tribune reporter Tanya Mannes and the grand jury involved in the Cox case will, if they have any interest in equal application of the law or journalistic ethics, take note of proof of perjury by the Sheriff of Santa Barbara to help Cheryl Cox cover up crimes.
They will also look at supporting pleadings in this perjury case, which was thrown out because plaintiff did not correctly plead the alteration or destruction of documents.

Did you know that there is one--and only one--crime that anyone can commit and not be liable for civil damages. It is perjury. You have to have power to get someone prosecuted for perjury. The reason for this is, of course, that perjury is committed all the time at the behest of many lawyers and by witnesses who want to cover up wrongdoing. The only time such perjury is litigatible is when documents are destroyed or altered. Such destruction of documents occurred at Chula Vista Elementary School District when Cheryl Cox voted to violate the law and cover up crimes.