CTA Legal Dept
Michael Hersh
Hi Michael:
My goodness, you’re not your old self lately! You’ve been following a more imaginative course of action than CTA’s time-honored practice of continually insisting that you weren’t properly served. I was impressed by your filing responses to my lawsuit when you knew I was working on a first amended complaint, and I didn’t plan to serve the original complaint. Tricky! Who gave you that idea?
I called up the court today and found out that you filed pleadings on July 10, 2007 and July 13, 2007. Apparently the court has not filed my motion to dismiss (enclosed) or your motion to declare me a vexatious litigant. But I’m sure it will all get straightened out. There are many different ways to deal with this case, all of which, I trust, will eventually lead to good outcomes for everyone.
I will argue, of course, that you have no right to attorney’s fees or court costs when you were not even served with a summons. It was your choice, your wish, done for your own purposes.
I will also argue that you left out the most significant case of all in terms of vexatious litigants: my suit against Kathleen Elton for filing a false police report. That suit was settled in my favor for $75,000, as you well know, and precludes my being labeled a vexatious litigant.
Have your new advisors ever mentioned that you might want to deal with true facts in this case? Do you really think you can keep the truth hidden forever by continually playing legal games? Are you really that cynical about the justice system? Are you completely convinced that you and Beverly can hide your crimes indefinitely?
Beverly Tucker and CTA certainly made vexatious litigants of themselves in the Turlock case. That case demonstrated how little CTA cares about kids, how much it cares about power, and what a pathetic lapdog Bob Thompson is to Beverly Tucker.
The current case is just a small part of a larger battle between those who want education to be fixed, and those who want to maintain the status quo in the vastly powerful California Teachers Association, which, you once told me, “is not going to change.”
Yours truly,
Maura Larkins
[Note: The Turlock case was about CTA members wearing buttons in the classroom to campaign against the efforts of teachers to have another union replace CTA in the Turlock School District. The administrative law judge at the Public Employees Relations Board (PERB) ruled against the teachers. The judge's decision was clearly correct, since the California Court of Appeal had decided the question of campaign buttons in the classroom in a case from San Diego. But the PERB board overruled its own judge. When Turlock School District appealed, Bob Thompson, general counsel at PERB joined with CTA head lawyer Beverly Tucker to fight the appeal. They lost.
But Bob Thompson and Beverly Tucker did prove that they care more about the power of those who control CTA than they care about the taxpayers or children of California. How did they prove this? They used tax dollars to fight this self-serving lawsuit during the 2003 budget crisis in California.
Bev and Bob lost; the decision is HERE. So what did they do then? They appealed to the state supreme court and lost again. These are truly vexatious litigants.]
Thursday, July 19, 2007
Saturday, July 07, 2007
Does Chula Vista need new leadership?
I found this interesting comment about the Chula Vista Gaylord project on Scott Lewis' blog on Voice of San Diego.
"Maggie" wrote on July 7, 2007:
There are other factors about this project's demise that many aren't taking into consideration, much of which VoSD helped uncover: The failure of the LLC created to manage the project, in which Gaylord had 10% ownership, was killed.
The only Chula Vista staffer involved, Laurie Madigan, was exposed for involving her husband's business partners in the deal.
The City Manager, Dave Rowland, who initiated the deal was fired and it took the City a year to hire a replacement. Political leadership was not at the table to facilitate stakeholder negotiations.
And lastly, but probably most importantly, the EIR port staff and Laurie Madigan produced was insufficient and would never have past muster with the Coastal Commission and Statelands Commission.
And labor wasn't smart enough to realize they were being baitd and eventually faulted for killing the deal. This deal was done a long time ago!
"Maggie" wrote on July 7, 2007:
There are other factors about this project's demise that many aren't taking into consideration, much of which VoSD helped uncover: The failure of the LLC created to manage the project, in which Gaylord had 10% ownership, was killed.
The only Chula Vista staffer involved, Laurie Madigan, was exposed for involving her husband's business partners in the deal.
The City Manager, Dave Rowland, who initiated the deal was fired and it took the City a year to hire a replacement. Political leadership was not at the table to facilitate stakeholder negotiations.
And lastly, but probably most importantly, the EIR port staff and Laurie Madigan produced was insufficient and would never have past muster with the Coastal Commission and Statelands Commission.
And labor wasn't smart enough to realize they were being baitd and eventually faulted for killing the deal. This deal was done a long time ago!
Does Cheryl Cox need to sit in on a 6th grade vocabulary lesson?
Former CVESD board member Cheryl Cox, who is now mayor of Chula Vista, has the attitude that the wonderful developer who was going to put a huge hotel on the Chula Vista bayfront gathered his marbles and went home because the unions were too demanding. Gaylord Entertainment said that union demands would add $50 to $75 million in costs to the project. Cheryl Cox failed to point out that public agencies were planning on investing $308 million in the project as part of the deal, and that agreeing to union demands would mean that the deal would only give Gaylord $233 to $258 sheer profit at the outset.
Cheryl Cox is being criticized for taking the developers side in this matter. Rob Davis of Voice of San Diego reported that U.S. Rep. Bob Filner, D-Chula Vista, said he was "shocked at the lackadaisical role Cox had taken in negotiations and lambasted her for turning labor leaders into scapegoats for Gaylord's withdrawal.
"It's not the mayor's job to take the side of Gaylord versus labor," Filner said. "It's the mayor's job to ... help that agreement come to pass. She was aloof until the end here. I don’t think that's leadership. And I was shocked by that."
"Cox responded that she did not believe it was her role to be involved as a negotiator.
""I'm a little perplexed by his comments," Cox said of Filner."
Poor Cheryl seems always to be perplexed. She's always claiming she wasn't invovled with the current scandal, and knows nothing about it.
Last night on San Diego's Channel 8 News I heard Cheryl say that the union "blackmailed" Gaylord. That's fascinating, Cheryl. What was the dirty secret that the union was holding over Gaylord's head? Or...is it possible that Cheryl doesn't know the meaning of the word "blackmail?" Perhaps Cheryl is trying to say that the union "made demands of" Gaylord. That's right, Cheryl. That's what unions do. Individual workers can't make demands of huge corportations, so the workers unite and then they make demands. That's how it works. Unions don't just demand money, Cheryl. They also demand worker safety. And in this case, they demanded that Gaylord use local workers. That's apparently where the negotiations broke down. What have you got against Chula Vista workers, Cheryl? Why was that an unacceptable demand?
Cheryl Cox is being criticized for taking the developers side in this matter. Rob Davis of Voice of San Diego reported that U.S. Rep. Bob Filner, D-Chula Vista, said he was "shocked at the lackadaisical role Cox had taken in negotiations and lambasted her for turning labor leaders into scapegoats for Gaylord's withdrawal.
"It's not the mayor's job to take the side of Gaylord versus labor," Filner said. "It's the mayor's job to ... help that agreement come to pass. She was aloof until the end here. I don’t think that's leadership. And I was shocked by that."
"Cox responded that she did not believe it was her role to be involved as a negotiator.
""I'm a little perplexed by his comments," Cox said of Filner."
Poor Cheryl seems always to be perplexed. She's always claiming she wasn't invovled with the current scandal, and knows nothing about it.
Last night on San Diego's Channel 8 News I heard Cheryl say that the union "blackmailed" Gaylord. That's fascinating, Cheryl. What was the dirty secret that the union was holding over Gaylord's head? Or...is it possible that Cheryl doesn't know the meaning of the word "blackmail?" Perhaps Cheryl is trying to say that the union "made demands of" Gaylord. That's right, Cheryl. That's what unions do. Individual workers can't make demands of huge corportations, so the workers unite and then they make demands. That's how it works. Unions don't just demand money, Cheryl. They also demand worker safety. And in this case, they demanded that Gaylord use local workers. That's apparently where the negotiations broke down. What have you got against Chula Vista workers, Cheryl? Why was that an unacceptable demand?
Friday, July 06, 2007
Chula Vista Educators' past president Gina Boyd in hiding?
It appears that former CVE president Gina Boyd is hiding out in Seattle, thinking that I can't serve a summons on her when she's up there. She truly believes she's going to get away with her criminal actions against a union member she was pretending to represent. I don't know for sure what the future holds, but I believe it's quite likely that the truth will come out in this matter.
I wonder if Gina is living in a bunker in Seattle, like a small time Dick Cheney. She and Cheney have a lot in common: they seem to consider themselves to be a separate, untouchable branch of government, one that doesn't have to answer to the justice system. Still, no one who was involved in my case, not even Gina Boyd, demonstrated more contempt for the justice system than Peggie Myers. She didn't even try to pretend that she had any respect for the Superior Court or the laws of California.
Did you know that 54% of Americans think Cheney should be impeached? The American public is so fickle in its affections, isn't it? You don't think that they could also turn against CTA, do you?
Update: It appears that Ms. Boyd came back to San Diego a few days after I posted the above post.
I wonder if Gina is living in a bunker in Seattle, like a small time Dick Cheney. She and Cheney have a lot in common: they seem to consider themselves to be a separate, untouchable branch of government, one that doesn't have to answer to the justice system. Still, no one who was involved in my case, not even Gina Boyd, demonstrated more contempt for the justice system than Peggie Myers. She didn't even try to pretend that she had any respect for the Superior Court or the laws of California.
Did you know that 54% of Americans think Cheney should be impeached? The American public is so fickle in its affections, isn't it? You don't think that they could also turn against CTA, do you?
Update: It appears that Ms. Boyd came back to San Diego a few days after I posted the above post.
Sunday, July 01, 2007
Why did CVESD's Lowell Billings approve this fraudulent document?
TO SEE THE DOCUMENT THIS ARTICLE REFERS TO, CLICK HERE.
When he was Assistant Superintendent for Business Services at Chula Vista Elementary School District, current Superintendent Lowell Billings ignored a teacher's report that she had been tricked by a man who had been chosen by the district to go into classrooms and talk to teachers about investing. The man was Anthony Pavia.
Fortunately, the teacher was able to get her money out of the account that had been sold to her as a different type of investment.
But it turned out to be a double swindle. It wasn't until much later that the teacher discovered that money was being taken out of her paycheck every month for an account which she had specifically disapproved. Pavia presented the teacher with a form that had two companies names written on it. The teacher had never expressed any interest in the first company. She did want to invest in the second company.
Pavia told the teacher that he didn't have any extra forms, so she would have to cross out and intital the name of the company she didn't want. Then he said the company she did want would also have to be crossed out and initialed and its name had to be rewritten on the first line, above the crossed-out words.
Then came the real fraud.
Without the teacher's knowledge, Pavia (or his assistant) wrote in the name of the company the teacher did not want. Lowell Billings approved this bizarre document, and money started flowing out of the teacher's paycheck every month. She didn't notice it for a long time, because she was not in the habit of carefully examining her pay stubs.
How many such documents, with both first and second lines scribbled out, did Lowell Billings approve? How many complaints did he get from teachers? Why did he refuse to talk to teachers who complained? Did Billings have an account with Anthony Pavia that gave Billings financial advantages in return for looking the other way as Pavia swindled teachers?
When she reported the second swindle, Lowell Billings again refused to talk to the teacher. Billings even refused, until after repeated requests, to give her a copy of the document that had allowed the monthly withdrawals from her paycheck.
When he was Assistant Superintendent for Business Services at Chula Vista Elementary School District, current Superintendent Lowell Billings ignored a teacher's report that she had been tricked by a man who had been chosen by the district to go into classrooms and talk to teachers about investing. The man was Anthony Pavia.
Fortunately, the teacher was able to get her money out of the account that had been sold to her as a different type of investment.
But it turned out to be a double swindle. It wasn't until much later that the teacher discovered that money was being taken out of her paycheck every month for an account which she had specifically disapproved. Pavia presented the teacher with a form that had two companies names written on it. The teacher had never expressed any interest in the first company. She did want to invest in the second company.
Pavia told the teacher that he didn't have any extra forms, so she would have to cross out and intital the name of the company she didn't want. Then he said the company she did want would also have to be crossed out and initialed and its name had to be rewritten on the first line, above the crossed-out words.
Then came the real fraud.
Without the teacher's knowledge, Pavia (or his assistant) wrote in the name of the company the teacher did not want. Lowell Billings approved this bizarre document, and money started flowing out of the teacher's paycheck every month. She didn't notice it for a long time, because she was not in the habit of carefully examining her pay stubs.
How many such documents, with both first and second lines scribbled out, did Lowell Billings approve? How many complaints did he get from teachers? Why did he refuse to talk to teachers who complained? Did Billings have an account with Anthony Pavia that gave Billings financial advantages in return for looking the other way as Pavia swindled teachers?
When she reported the second swindle, Lowell Billings again refused to talk to the teacher. Billings even refused, until after repeated requests, to give her a copy of the document that had allowed the monthly withdrawals from her paycheck.
Saturday, June 30, 2007
Werlin revealed that Linda Watson committed perjury
Hearing transcript reveals perjury at CVESD
Former Assistant Superintendent Richard Werlin had a little trouble sticking to his script at the Office of Administrative Hearings.
Castle Park Elementary teacher Linda Watson swore under oath that she was not one of the two teachers who called Richard Werlin at his home on Saturday night February 10, 2001 and claimed Maura Larkins might kill them. She and current Chula Vista Educators president Jim Groth filed a grievance to prevent Werlin from revealing the truth to Linda Watson's victim.
Werlin agreed to hide Watson's involvement. But a story becomes complicated once you start lying.
Under oath, Werlin revealed that Linda Watson was deeply involved at a very early time in the illegal actions against Maura Larkins.
On page 59 line 14 through page 60 line 5, of the January 6, 2003 Office of Administrative Hearings transcript, Werlin was asked:
Question: And after this [Feb. 12, 2001] meeting with Maura Larkins and others, subsequent to the phone call that you received, did you follow up conducting addition inquiry or investigation at Castle Park?
Answer: Yes.
Question: And can you describe generally what you did?
Answer: We had numerous conversations with the principal where we had an opportunity to ask her about her perception of the relationship that Maura had with Mrs. Hamilton. We also had a chance to speak with Ms. Hamilton again who continued to be very concerned for her welfare, very concerned for her safety, and several other teachers had come up and talked with me wile I was at the site about similar concerns.
Question: Do you recall who some of those teachers were?
Answer: Linda Watson, Rick Denmon, librarian Ms. Scharmach.
Former Assistant Superintendent Richard Werlin had a little trouble sticking to his script at the Office of Administrative Hearings.
Castle Park Elementary teacher Linda Watson swore under oath that she was not one of the two teachers who called Richard Werlin at his home on Saturday night February 10, 2001 and claimed Maura Larkins might kill them. She and current Chula Vista Educators president Jim Groth filed a grievance to prevent Werlin from revealing the truth to Linda Watson's victim.
Werlin agreed to hide Watson's involvement. But a story becomes complicated once you start lying.
Under oath, Werlin revealed that Linda Watson was deeply involved at a very early time in the illegal actions against Maura Larkins.
On page 59 line 14 through page 60 line 5, of the January 6, 2003 Office of Administrative Hearings transcript, Werlin was asked:
Question: And after this [Feb. 12, 2001] meeting with Maura Larkins and others, subsequent to the phone call that you received, did you follow up conducting addition inquiry or investigation at Castle Park?
Answer: Yes.
Question: And can you describe generally what you did?
Answer: We had numerous conversations with the principal where we had an opportunity to ask her about her perception of the relationship that Maura had with Mrs. Hamilton. We also had a chance to speak with Ms. Hamilton again who continued to be very concerned for her welfare, very concerned for her safety, and several other teachers had come up and talked with me wile I was at the site about similar concerns.
Question: Do you recall who some of those teachers were?
Answer: Linda Watson, Rick Denmon, librarian Ms. Scharmach.
Thursday, June 28, 2007
The Supreme Court says race can't be used to decide where kids go to school
Yesterday the Supreme Court overturned the historic Brown v. Board of Education decision. The court now says race can't be used to decide where kids go to school, except in very limited circumstances.
This is shocking, in that it shows so little respect for precedent. Now that Sandra Day O'Conner is gone, moderation seems to have gone out the window. What will happen now? It seems likely that schools will become very segregated very quickly.
But maybe it's not all bad. Just think, students of America: now you don't have to travel as far for a bad education!
This is shocking, in that it shows so little respect for precedent. Now that Sandra Day O'Conner is gone, moderation seems to have gone out the window. What will happen now? It seems likely that schools will become very segregated very quickly.
But maybe it's not all bad. Just think, students of America: now you don't have to travel as far for a bad education!
Tuesday, June 26, 2007
To Sharon Jones, board member, SDCOE
Sharon:
You have responsibility for the way the JPA is administered since the superintendent of SDCOE administers the JPA. Why is Diane Crosier still in charge after wasting so much money meant for children, and channelling it to lawyers in return for covering up wrongdoing?
Maura Larkins
You have responsibility for the way the JPA is administered since the superintendent of SDCOE administers the JPA. Why is Diane Crosier still in charge after wasting so much money meant for children, and channelling it to lawyers in return for covering up wrongdoing?
Maura Larkins
Monday, June 25, 2007
Cheryl Cox had nothing to do with it
You might think that our own Cheryl Cox, former CVESD trustee and now mayor of Chula Vista, would somehow be in charge of what the City of Chula Vista does. Cheryl says it isn't so.
She might have had something to do with the choice of John Witt, former San Diego city attorney, as a special counsel for Chula Vista. But she has nothing to do with the fact that he is suing city council candidate Patty Chavez for $100,000 because she lent herself $11,000 for her campaign and didn't report it to her opponent, Rudy Ramirez.
You might think Rudy Ramirez has something to do with this draconian attack on a housewife who ran for office. After all, he might want to strike some fear into her so she won't dare run against him again. Rudy himself is under investigation, he says. He claims he will be vindicated. Somehow, I think he's right. I don't imagine John Witt feels the same way about Ramirez that he does about Chavez.
Cheryl Cox says she's formed a committee to look at the rules.
How about a committee to look at how the rules are enforced, Cheryl? You've made it clear that you believe attorneys who work for cities should represent the interests of the elected officials. Somehow, I don't think you've changed your mind about that.
She might have had something to do with the choice of John Witt, former San Diego city attorney, as a special counsel for Chula Vista. But she has nothing to do with the fact that he is suing city council candidate Patty Chavez for $100,000 because she lent herself $11,000 for her campaign and didn't report it to her opponent, Rudy Ramirez.
You might think Rudy Ramirez has something to do with this draconian attack on a housewife who ran for office. After all, he might want to strike some fear into her so she won't dare run against him again. Rudy himself is under investigation, he says. He claims he will be vindicated. Somehow, I think he's right. I don't imagine John Witt feels the same way about Ramirez that he does about Chavez.
Cheryl Cox says she's formed a committee to look at the rules.
How about a committee to look at how the rules are enforced, Cheryl? You've made it clear that you believe attorneys who work for cities should represent the interests of the elected officials. Somehow, I don't think you've changed your mind about that.
Thursday, June 21, 2007
Innocent lacrosse players reach settlement with Duke University
(CNN) -- Duke University has reached an undisclosed settlement with three former lacrosse players who were falsely accused of rape, the school announced Monday.
"This past year has been hard for many people who care about Duke -- for students, faculty, staff, alumni, families and friends -- and for the three students and their families most of all," the Duke board of trustees said in a written statement.
The three students posted a statement on Duke's Web site saying, "We hope that today's resolution will begin to bring the Duke family back together again, and we look forward to working with the university to develop and implement initiatives that will prevent similar injustices and ensure that the lessons of last year are never forgotten."
David Evans, Collin Finnerty and Reade Seligmann were accused of sexually assaulting an escort-service dancer at a party in March 2006.
North Carolina Attorney General Roy Cooper reviewed the case and exonerated the three men in April 2007, saying the charges never should have been brought against them.
District attorney disbarred for unethical behavior
The prosecutor who brought those charges, Durham County District Attorney Mike Nifong, was disbarred Saturday by a disciplinary panel that said he violated the majority of at least 19 ethics offenses in prosecuting the case.
"This past year has been hard for many people who care about Duke -- for students, faculty, staff, alumni, families and friends -- and for the three students and their families most of all," the Duke board of trustees said in a written statement.
The three students posted a statement on Duke's Web site saying, "We hope that today's resolution will begin to bring the Duke family back together again, and we look forward to working with the university to develop and implement initiatives that will prevent similar injustices and ensure that the lessons of last year are never forgotten."
David Evans, Collin Finnerty and Reade Seligmann were accused of sexually assaulting an escort-service dancer at a party in March 2006.
North Carolina Attorney General Roy Cooper reviewed the case and exonerated the three men in April 2007, saying the charges never should have been brought against them.
District attorney disbarred for unethical behavior
The prosecutor who brought those charges, Durham County District Attorney Mike Nifong, was disbarred Saturday by a disciplinary panel that said he violated the majority of at least 19 ethics offenses in prosecuting the case.
Tuesday, June 12, 2007
Why did Pat Judd, Pam Smith, Larry Cunningham and Bertha Lopez foment hysteria about violence at Castle Park Elementary?
UPDATE NOVEMBER 4, 2008 ELECTION: JUDD LOSES
ORIGINAL POST:
After she was falsely accused, Maura Larkins, teacher at Castle Park Elementary, voluntarily spent hundreds of dollars to get a fitness for duty examination by a psychiatrist. The doctor faxed his report to CVESD.
Why did Cheryl Cox and the CVESD board and their attorneys Daniel Shinoff and Kelly Angell continue to foment hysteria at Castle Park Elementary even after receiving this doctor's letter in August 2001?
Answer: They wanted to smear Maura Larkins in order to prevent her from revealing their violations of law. Was this smart? It would have been smarter to retract the false accusations and apologize. Instead, they stopped Maura Larkins pay (in violation of the contract) and refused to grant her the hearing to which she was entitled (also in violation of the contract).
Robin Donlan (who became famous in 2004 as one of the San Diego Union-Tribune's "Castle Park Five," then in 2007 for claiming that she had no idea how her school teacher husband suddenly came to possess 7 million dollars) also worked hard, along with her personal friend, Chula Vista Educators' President Gina Boyd, and Beverly Tucker of the California Teachers Association, to smear Larkins.
But it appears that there was another reason for Cheryl Cox's support of violations of law and the contract: she wanted to get rid of Superintendent Libia Gil.
In May 2002 Cox was willing to violate yet one more law against Maura Larkins, Labor Code 1102.5, in order to get rid of Libia Gil. Cox and Bertha Lopez went along with the BIG THREE, PATRICK JUDD, PAMELA SMITH, AND LARRY CUNNINGHAM, and voted to dismiss Maura Larkins less than two months after Larkins filed suit against the district.
Cox and Lopez got something in return: Libia Gil's resignation.
Clearly, these people felt so certain that they were above the law, that they were not afraid to flagrantly violate it.
ORIGINAL POST:
After she was falsely accused, Maura Larkins, teacher at Castle Park Elementary, voluntarily spent hundreds of dollars to get a fitness for duty examination by a psychiatrist. The doctor faxed his report to CVESD.
Why did Cheryl Cox and the CVESD board and their attorneys Daniel Shinoff and Kelly Angell continue to foment hysteria at Castle Park Elementary even after receiving this doctor's letter in August 2001?
Answer: They wanted to smear Maura Larkins in order to prevent her from revealing their violations of law. Was this smart? It would have been smarter to retract the false accusations and apologize. Instead, they stopped Maura Larkins pay (in violation of the contract) and refused to grant her the hearing to which she was entitled (also in violation of the contract).
Robin Donlan (who became famous in 2004 as one of the San Diego Union-Tribune's "Castle Park Five," then in 2007 for claiming that she had no idea how her school teacher husband suddenly came to possess 7 million dollars) also worked hard, along with her personal friend, Chula Vista Educators' President Gina Boyd, and Beverly Tucker of the California Teachers Association, to smear Larkins.
But it appears that there was another reason for Cheryl Cox's support of violations of law and the contract: she wanted to get rid of Superintendent Libia Gil.
In May 2002 Cox was willing to violate yet one more law against Maura Larkins, Labor Code 1102.5, in order to get rid of Libia Gil. Cox and Bertha Lopez went along with the BIG THREE, PATRICK JUDD, PAMELA SMITH, AND LARRY CUNNINGHAM, and voted to dismiss Maura Larkins less than two months after Larkins filed suit against the district.
Cox and Lopez got something in return: Libia Gil's resignation.
Clearly, these people felt so certain that they were above the law, that they were not afraid to flagrantly violate it.
Monday, June 11, 2007
The self-righteous Mr. James L. Camblos
A Virginia woman and her ex-husband will spend 27 months in prison for allowing her son’s16-year-old friends to drink beer at a sleepover. Elisa Kelly’s reason for providing the beer was that she didn’t want the kids to drive to get alcohol. About half of the kids at the sleepover drank no alcohol at all.
Ryan Kenty, Elisa’s son, was so distraught about his mother’s situation, for which he felt guilty, that he dropped out of high school. Ryan’s younger brother, now 16, will not have his mother around for quite a while. It seems unlikely that anyone’s life has been improved by the government’s actions in this case.
Still, Albemarle County Commonwealth's Attorney James L. Camblos III isn’t feeling the family’s pain. It would appear that he didn’t become a public servant in order to make life better for other people, but to make life better for himself. This seems like another case where the justice system is being abused by someone with a pathological need to inflict pain. Camblos knows that a good way to get people to vote is by identifying an evil, and working everyone into a frenzy over it. Certainly underage drinking is a problem, but it’s also a reality, and Mr. Camblos’ actions are not likely to stop 16-year-olds from drinking. Camblos will just make it more likely that they’ll drive somewhere to get their alcohol.
Daniela Deane of the Washington Post writes:
“"No one left the party," said Kelly, 42, who collected car keys that night almost five years ago to prevent anyone from leaving. "No one was hurt. No one drove anywhere. I really don't think I deserve to go to jail for this long."
“Kelly said she's "scared" to go to the Albemarle Charlottesville Regional Jail, where each of her sons will be able to visit her only once a month for 15 minutes at a time, and worried about how her sons will fare without her. "I'm going to miss the end of Brandon's high school," she said of her 16-year-old son, choking back tears.
“After the incident, Ryan dropped out of high school, where he was an athlete and a member of the school's basketball team, saying he couldn't take the constant attention. He shelved plans to attend college and now works full time at UPS. The brothers will live nearby with their father, Marc Kenty, until their mother is released.”
Ryan Kenty, Elisa’s son, was so distraught about his mother’s situation, for which he felt guilty, that he dropped out of high school. Ryan’s younger brother, now 16, will not have his mother around for quite a while. It seems unlikely that anyone’s life has been improved by the government’s actions in this case.
Still, Albemarle County Commonwealth's Attorney James L. Camblos III isn’t feeling the family’s pain. It would appear that he didn’t become a public servant in order to make life better for other people, but to make life better for himself. This seems like another case where the justice system is being abused by someone with a pathological need to inflict pain. Camblos knows that a good way to get people to vote is by identifying an evil, and working everyone into a frenzy over it. Certainly underage drinking is a problem, but it’s also a reality, and Mr. Camblos’ actions are not likely to stop 16-year-olds from drinking. Camblos will just make it more likely that they’ll drive somewhere to get their alcohol.
Daniela Deane of the Washington Post writes:
“"No one left the party," said Kelly, 42, who collected car keys that night almost five years ago to prevent anyone from leaving. "No one was hurt. No one drove anywhere. I really don't think I deserve to go to jail for this long."
“Kelly said she's "scared" to go to the Albemarle Charlottesville Regional Jail, where each of her sons will be able to visit her only once a month for 15 minutes at a time, and worried about how her sons will fare without her. "I'm going to miss the end of Brandon's high school," she said of her 16-year-old son, choking back tears.
“After the incident, Ryan dropped out of high school, where he was an athlete and a member of the school's basketball team, saying he couldn't take the constant attention. He shelved plans to attend college and now works full time at UPS. The brothers will live nearby with their father, Marc Kenty, until their mother is released.”
Sunday, June 10, 2007
Truth v. Money in CVESD
In recent years, failure and incompetence have been trounced by money at the ballot box. But reality may be making a comeback.
(Paraphrasing Jonathan Alter, "The Political Power of Truth," Newsweek Feb. 6, 2006
(Paraphrasing Jonathan Alter, "The Political Power of Truth," Newsweek Feb. 6, 2006
Sunday, June 03, 2007
An Open Letter to Steve Padilla
Dear Mr. Padilla:
Since you have a very young daughter, it seems to me that you might be interested in the California educational system. Republicans use school board positions to make sure that education is limited, in most classrooms, to rote skills and memorization. In other words, our kids are getting a nineteenth century education. In 2004, Chula Vista Elementary School District trustee Patrick Judd stated in the Chula Vista Star-News that education hasn't changed much in a hundred years. He said his interest was in building new schools. I think his real interest is in making friends with developers so they'll keep his campaign coffers filled.
The best and brightest teachers are systematically eliminated in many schools. Castle Park Elementary is a shameful example of this.
People who have achieved power in the educational system tend to focus on their personal goals, not the goal of teaching children. This includes those who control the California Teachers Association and Chula Vista Educators. Yes, Democrats work with Republicans in education to protect their own careers. The education of children is a secondary concern to most of these people.
Do you have the courage to challenge corrupt Democrats in the educational system? I believe you would have prevailed over Cheryl Cox in the last election for mayor of Chula Vista if you had dared to expose her wrongdoing as a school board member.
By the way, I must apologize, as a citizen of San Diego County, for the shocking actions of D.A. Bonnie Dumanis against your aide, Jason Moore. I am ashamed to say I voted for her. I thought that Judge Brannigan was an extreme right winger. It turns out that Bonnie Dumanis is an extreme right winger. I believe that Peter O'Toole is calling the shots in the District Attorney's office, because Bonnie Dumanis is afraid he'll run against her if she doesn't kowtow to him.
I believe that Dumanis was forced to beat up Jason Moore as part of her initiation into the inner circle of extreme right-wing politicians, much like teenagers are forced to beat up a complete stranger when they join one of the gangs that Bonnie is supposed to be fighting. Obviously, the target was chosen by the Cheryl Cox campaign. Dumanis has wasted enormous resources on prosecuting Jason Moore, a city employee who took two hours off work. Dumanis' actions have caused Chula Vista to spend over $400,000 on lawyers to represent city employees. This is tax money that has been shamefully misspent.
I also believe your administration was targeted by Dumanis so she could prove she's not soft on gays. She pleases right-wingers by being their token gay official, beating up on gays for them--while no one would think to accuse her of being anti-gay. I sure hope someone who respects the law will run against Dumanis in the next election.
You'll lose a lot of campaign money if you challenge the corrupt California Teachers Association, but you'll be doing the kids of California a big favor.
Since you have a very young daughter, it seems to me that you might be interested in the California educational system. Republicans use school board positions to make sure that education is limited, in most classrooms, to rote skills and memorization. In other words, our kids are getting a nineteenth century education. In 2004, Chula Vista Elementary School District trustee Patrick Judd stated in the Chula Vista Star-News that education hasn't changed much in a hundred years. He said his interest was in building new schools. I think his real interest is in making friends with developers so they'll keep his campaign coffers filled.
The best and brightest teachers are systematically eliminated in many schools. Castle Park Elementary is a shameful example of this.
People who have achieved power in the educational system tend to focus on their personal goals, not the goal of teaching children. This includes those who control the California Teachers Association and Chula Vista Educators. Yes, Democrats work with Republicans in education to protect their own careers. The education of children is a secondary concern to most of these people.
Do you have the courage to challenge corrupt Democrats in the educational system? I believe you would have prevailed over Cheryl Cox in the last election for mayor of Chula Vista if you had dared to expose her wrongdoing as a school board member.
By the way, I must apologize, as a citizen of San Diego County, for the shocking actions of D.A. Bonnie Dumanis against your aide, Jason Moore. I am ashamed to say I voted for her. I thought that Judge Brannigan was an extreme right winger. It turns out that Bonnie Dumanis is an extreme right winger. I believe that Peter O'Toole is calling the shots in the District Attorney's office, because Bonnie Dumanis is afraid he'll run against her if she doesn't kowtow to him.
I believe that Dumanis was forced to beat up Jason Moore as part of her initiation into the inner circle of extreme right-wing politicians, much like teenagers are forced to beat up a complete stranger when they join one of the gangs that Bonnie is supposed to be fighting. Obviously, the target was chosen by the Cheryl Cox campaign. Dumanis has wasted enormous resources on prosecuting Jason Moore, a city employee who took two hours off work. Dumanis' actions have caused Chula Vista to spend over $400,000 on lawyers to represent city employees. This is tax money that has been shamefully misspent.
I also believe your administration was targeted by Dumanis so she could prove she's not soft on gays. She pleases right-wingers by being their token gay official, beating up on gays for them--while no one would think to accuse her of being anti-gay. I sure hope someone who respects the law will run against Dumanis in the next election.
You'll lose a lot of campaign money if you challenge the corrupt California Teachers Association, but you'll be doing the kids of California a big favor.
Tuesday, May 29, 2007
Gina Boyd Tried Hard to Cover up the Truth
Why did Chula Vista Educators President Gina Boyd refuse to come forward and testify in the Maura Larkins case when Maura Larkins was a member of Chula Vista Educators?
Some hints can be found in Ms. Boyd's deposition.
Why did Gina Boyd's lawyer Michael Hersh write a letter on Gina Boyd's behalf that Boyd would not testify about any actions taken by herself or Chula Vista Educators regarding Maura Larkins?
Why did Gina Boyd refuse to allow Marilyn Sanderson of CTA to represent Maura Larkins when Gina Boyd was representing Linda Watson, Jo Ellen Hamilton, Robin Donlan and other teachers who made allegations against Maura Larkins?
Why did Gina Boyd try for two years to avoid being deposed?
Answer: Gina Boyd, Michael Hersh and CTA's chief counsel Beverly Tucker were trying to cover up crimes committed by Gina Boyd, SCTU executive director Tim O'Neill, and Beverly Tucker
in 2000, 2001, and 2002.
On March 22, 2004 I finally got the chance to ask Gina Boyd some questions.
Through an examination of Gina Boyd's actions as she "represented" me, I had become convinced of Gina Boyd's guilt. A rational analysis of the evidence seemed to admit no other explanation than that Gina Boyd acted as she did, violating law after law, as a result of her illegal receipt of arrest records that did not lead to any charges.
But I wanted to know if there was anything I was missing. Was there something that I didn't know that would point to Gina Boyd's innocence? Was there some exculpatory evidence that I hadn't come across? Did Gina Boyd have some defense other than refusing to discuss her actions as my representative.
Absolutely not. After an hour and a half, Boyd's lawyer Michael Hersh instructed her not to answer questions about her representation of me, or any actions of CTA or CVE. I explained that my entire case rested on what I knew of Boyd's violations of law, and CTA and CVE's violations of law, when they were my representatives. Still, Hersh insisted that his client would not answer any questions about those actions. In fact, Kelly Angell (Minnehan) of Stutz Artiano Shinoff & Holtz, who was representing Richard Werlin, also demanded that Maura Larkins not ask questions about what happened at CVESD.
Gina Boyd and SCTU executive director Tim O'Neill refused to allow Maura Larkins, even though the CVE Bylaws required them to do so, to address the Representative Council and/or Board of Directors of CVE to present a complaint against President Gina Boyd. The corruption of Boyd, O'Neill, and Jim Groth was thus covered up.
However, Maura Larkins informed the members of the Board of Directors individually about Boyd's wrongdoing, and those board members then assisted in covering up the wrongdoing of Boyd, O'Neill, Groth, Beverly Tucker, and Richard Werlin of the CVESD school district.
Tuesday, May 22, 2007
CVESD teacher Robin Donlan has changed completely--or has she?
David Washburn of the San Diego Union Tribune wrote on May 18, 2007, regarding the recent lawsuit against Vencent Donlan and his wife Robin Donlan, "...Robin Donlan, who teaches fourth grade at Hilltop Drive Elementary in Chula Vista, is cooperating with federal investigators to an “unprecedented degree.”
Any cooperation at all from Robin Donlan in the investigation of crime is unprecedented, in my experience.
Robin's lawyer David Hiden said "she has waived attorney-client and spousal privileges and agreed to informal interviews."
In a civil lawsuit filed about four years ago against Robin Donlan for misdemeanors committed against Maura Larkins at Castle Park Elementary School District, Robin's entire defense was based on attorney-client privilege. Her argument was that any subject she had ever discussed with her attorney was something she should not have to answer questions about. Robin answered only ONE written interrogatory in San Diego Superior Court case no. 781970, and she answered it EIGHT MONTHS after it was served on her, when she knew that the plaintiff had already found out the answer to the question. (The answer was found by a private investigator at a cost of several hundred dollars.) Robin Donlan's brother, Michael Carlson, who is a sheriff's deputy in Santa Barbara, never answered a single interrogatory, nor showed up for a deposition. But perhaps he could be helpful in the current case. He could tell his sister that he puts people in jail all the time for being in possession of stolen property.
While Robin Colls Donlan's cooperation in answering questions is clearly a brand new behavior, some of her other behavior hasn't changed at all.
Robin ensnared a lot of her friends in her crimes, but they all stood loyally by her, claiming the same attorney-client privilege, and committing felonies to cover up her misdemeanors. Robin, on the other hand, seems to have turned against her husband. That's probably wise, since the FBI might be a bit tougher than Robin's victim in the previous case.
Donlan turned against Chula Vista Elementary School District after it had paid many $100,000's of taxpayer dollars to defend her. The San Diego Union Tribune wrote frequently about her attacks on the school district in 2004 when she was transferred to a new school. The district had to spend EVEN MORE MONEY TO DEFEND ITSELF FROM Robin Donlan, after it had spent so much TO DEFEND HER.
Here's what I'm wondering. If Robin really believed that she had HONESTLY AND GENUINELY come into millions of dollars in wealth, why didn't she pay back the taxpayers for all the money they spent on her? Robin's former lawyer Daniel Shinoff is still living high off taxpayer dollars, but the students of Chula Vista Elementary schools could sure use the money.
Interestingly, today's paper says 30 former officials at Mira Costa College are outraged by the college president, Victoria Richart. It seems she funnelled around a million dollars to Daniel Shinoff and a private investigator and school staff to investigate "the errant, but well-intentioned, actions of a teacher struggling to make her program the best in the state." This quote is from a letter from the 30 former officials.
My own personal opinion is, if a public entity is doing business with Daniel Shinoff or Stutz, Artiano, Shinoff & Holtz, that public entity is probably involved in dirty business. Chula Vista Elementary trustees Cheryl Cox, Bertha Lopez, Pamela Smith, Larry Cunningham and Pat Judd wanted lawyers who would be willing to commit crimes to cover up crimes, so they chose Daniel Shinoff of Stutz and Mark Bresee of Parham & Rajcic.
This is certainly true of Grossmont Cuyamaca Community College, where chancellor Omero Suarez changed his own contract without permission, but the lawless board kept him on. He and Dan Shinoff are apparently doing exactly what the board wants. The board clearly does not value honesty. If it did, how could it get away with violating the law so often?
Any cooperation at all from Robin Donlan in the investigation of crime is unprecedented, in my experience.
Robin's lawyer David Hiden said "she has waived attorney-client and spousal privileges and agreed to informal interviews."
In a civil lawsuit filed about four years ago against Robin Donlan for misdemeanors committed against Maura Larkins at Castle Park Elementary School District, Robin's entire defense was based on attorney-client privilege. Her argument was that any subject she had ever discussed with her attorney was something she should not have to answer questions about. Robin answered only ONE written interrogatory in San Diego Superior Court case no. 781970, and she answered it EIGHT MONTHS after it was served on her, when she knew that the plaintiff had already found out the answer to the question. (The answer was found by a private investigator at a cost of several hundred dollars.) Robin Donlan's brother, Michael Carlson, who is a sheriff's deputy in Santa Barbara, never answered a single interrogatory, nor showed up for a deposition. But perhaps he could be helpful in the current case. He could tell his sister that he puts people in jail all the time for being in possession of stolen property.
While Robin Colls Donlan's cooperation in answering questions is clearly a brand new behavior, some of her other behavior hasn't changed at all.
Robin ensnared a lot of her friends in her crimes, but they all stood loyally by her, claiming the same attorney-client privilege, and committing felonies to cover up her misdemeanors. Robin, on the other hand, seems to have turned against her husband. That's probably wise, since the FBI might be a bit tougher than Robin's victim in the previous case.
Donlan turned against Chula Vista Elementary School District after it had paid many $100,000's of taxpayer dollars to defend her. The San Diego Union Tribune wrote frequently about her attacks on the school district in 2004 when she was transferred to a new school. The district had to spend EVEN MORE MONEY TO DEFEND ITSELF FROM Robin Donlan, after it had spent so much TO DEFEND HER.
Here's what I'm wondering. If Robin really believed that she had HONESTLY AND GENUINELY come into millions of dollars in wealth, why didn't she pay back the taxpayers for all the money they spent on her? Robin's former lawyer Daniel Shinoff is still living high off taxpayer dollars, but the students of Chula Vista Elementary schools could sure use the money.
Interestingly, today's paper says 30 former officials at Mira Costa College are outraged by the college president, Victoria Richart. It seems she funnelled around a million dollars to Daniel Shinoff and a private investigator and school staff to investigate "the errant, but well-intentioned, actions of a teacher struggling to make her program the best in the state." This quote is from a letter from the 30 former officials.
My own personal opinion is, if a public entity is doing business with Daniel Shinoff or Stutz, Artiano, Shinoff & Holtz, that public entity is probably involved in dirty business. Chula Vista Elementary trustees Cheryl Cox, Bertha Lopez, Pamela Smith, Larry Cunningham and Pat Judd wanted lawyers who would be willing to commit crimes to cover up crimes, so they chose Daniel Shinoff of Stutz and Mark Bresee of Parham & Rajcic.
This is certainly true of Grossmont Cuyamaca Community College, where chancellor Omero Suarez changed his own contract without permission, but the lawless board kept him on. He and Dan Shinoff are apparently doing exactly what the board wants. The board clearly does not value honesty. If it did, how could it get away with violating the law so often?
Friday, May 18, 2007
Bonnie Dumanis, why don't you investigate me?
May 18, 2007
Richard Monroy
Jesus Rodriguez
Bonnie Dumanis
San Diego County District Attorney Office
Dear Sirs and Madam:
Yesterday I received a letter from Richard Monroy, dated May 10, 2007. I am deeply concerned by a sentence in the last paragraph: “Our office cannot be used in civil disputes to leverage one side against another.”
Mr. Monroy seems to imply that my complaint constituted an attempt at extortion. If you believe that, Mr. Monroy, you have an obligation to investigate ME.
Of course, after Bonnie Dumanis so pointedly ignored my complaint about Richard Werlin in February 2005, Mr. Monroy’s ugly implication seems pretty silly. My report of a very serious crime resulted in absolutely no action from the San Diego District Attorney. I couldn’t extort a corroded cent out of Cheryl Cox and her powerful associates even if I wanted to. They, not I, are able to dictate who gets investigated. They, not I, are capable of committing extortion.
In fact, Cheryl Cox and her associates committed extortion when they had me threatened by law enforcement when I filed a PERB charge, and again when I filed a San Diego Superior Court lawsuit. Every time I tried to exercise my rights under the law, Cheryl Cox and her associates intimidated me in every way they could.
Finally, Cheryl Cox and every member of the Chula Vista Elementary School District Board violated Labor Code 1102.5 by firing me for reporting wrongdoing. Their dismissal decision clearly states that I was fired for filing a lawsuit and grievances. They wanted my silence and my livelihood. All they got was my livelihood.
Mr. Monroy’s discussion of extortion is particularly bogus because it would be impossible for a person like me who is not politically-connected to cause the prosecution of defendants are very politically connected. Cheryl Cox’s campaign can get a prosecution started against a low-level employee like Jason Moore for taking two hours off work, but I can’t get a prosecution started against Cheryl Cox. I knew long before I made my first complaint about Richard Werlin that the San Diego District Attorney would never investigate, much less prosecute, Cheryl Cox and her criminal co-conspirators.
Mr. Monroy’s letter says, “Experience has shown that there are always two sides to each story.” And the Cheryl Cox side is the only one you are interested in, isn’t it? My side gets short shrift from the D.A.’s office. It’s obvious that the investigation of crimes committed by Cheryl Cox and her associates was completely ruled out by your office before you ever received any communication from me.
Please don’t hesitate to call me in the unlikely event that you have any questions about this matter.
Yours truly,
Maura Larkins
Richard Monroy
Jesus Rodriguez
Bonnie Dumanis
San Diego County District Attorney Office
Dear Sirs and Madam:
Yesterday I received a letter from Richard Monroy, dated May 10, 2007. I am deeply concerned by a sentence in the last paragraph: “Our office cannot be used in civil disputes to leverage one side against another.”
Mr. Monroy seems to imply that my complaint constituted an attempt at extortion. If you believe that, Mr. Monroy, you have an obligation to investigate ME.
Of course, after Bonnie Dumanis so pointedly ignored my complaint about Richard Werlin in February 2005, Mr. Monroy’s ugly implication seems pretty silly. My report of a very serious crime resulted in absolutely no action from the San Diego District Attorney. I couldn’t extort a corroded cent out of Cheryl Cox and her powerful associates even if I wanted to. They, not I, are able to dictate who gets investigated. They, not I, are capable of committing extortion.
In fact, Cheryl Cox and her associates committed extortion when they had me threatened by law enforcement when I filed a PERB charge, and again when I filed a San Diego Superior Court lawsuit. Every time I tried to exercise my rights under the law, Cheryl Cox and her associates intimidated me in every way they could.
Finally, Cheryl Cox and every member of the Chula Vista Elementary School District Board violated Labor Code 1102.5 by firing me for reporting wrongdoing. Their dismissal decision clearly states that I was fired for filing a lawsuit and grievances. They wanted my silence and my livelihood. All they got was my livelihood.
Mr. Monroy’s discussion of extortion is particularly bogus because it would be impossible for a person like me who is not politically-connected to cause the prosecution of defendants are very politically connected. Cheryl Cox’s campaign can get a prosecution started against a low-level employee like Jason Moore for taking two hours off work, but I can’t get a prosecution started against Cheryl Cox. I knew long before I made my first complaint about Richard Werlin that the San Diego District Attorney would never investigate, much less prosecute, Cheryl Cox and her criminal co-conspirators.
Mr. Monroy’s letter says, “Experience has shown that there are always two sides to each story.” And the Cheryl Cox side is the only one you are interested in, isn’t it? My side gets short shrift from the D.A.’s office. It’s obvious that the investigation of crimes committed by Cheryl Cox and her associates was completely ruled out by your office before you ever received any communication from me.
Please don’t hesitate to call me in the unlikely event that you have any questions about this matter.
Yours truly,
Maura Larkins
Wednesday, May 16, 2007
Bless you, Linda Lozito and Cathy Travalos
For years I've intended to put Richard Werlin's deposition on the Internet, along with the contradictory testimony of others, but I never got around to it.
Now that Linda Lozito and Cathy Travalos are trying to make Werlin's false allegations stick to me, I am motivated to get my scanner out and do the job.
This morning I hobbled out to my storage room on my broken ankle, and got Werlin's deposition. I fell on Cowles Mountain in San Diego on April 7, and got lifted off in a helicopter. It was almost worth having 17 screws and three plates in my ankle to experience such a terrific ride. It was just like on TV, except that I hadn't expected to whirl around and around as I was winched up to the helicopter. But that was great, too.
Now I'm installing the scanner software on my little PC laptop. It's going to be a slow precedure, since I'm enlarging the condensed version of the transcript. I'll skip the first 39 pages where Werlin talks about his many different places of employment around the country, and a lot of background information. I'll try to pick out the most interesting pages. Then I'll put the sworn testimony of teachers who contradicted Werlin under oath.
Of course, the biggest contradictions are within Werlin's own words.
Like when he describes me as a maniac practically foaming at the mouth, then has trouble explaining why he asked me to return to work eight days later without a fitness for duty evaluation! Werlin's description of me is actually a pretty good fit for what Werlin looks like when he's going off--he must have looked like that the day he was screaming at principal Bill Hall, who fell to the floor of his office with a heart attack. Werlin told him to quit being dramatic. But then, Werlin got himself out of testifying in my court case by claiming heart problems.
Jenny Mo, if you sue Werlin, be sure to file a Motion to Compel his testimony. I didn't, but a judge in another case compelled Werlin to testify, saying his heart problems weren't that serious.
Maura
Now that Linda Lozito and Cathy Travalos are trying to make Werlin's false allegations stick to me, I am motivated to get my scanner out and do the job.
This morning I hobbled out to my storage room on my broken ankle, and got Werlin's deposition. I fell on Cowles Mountain in San Diego on April 7, and got lifted off in a helicopter. It was almost worth having 17 screws and three plates in my ankle to experience such a terrific ride. It was just like on TV, except that I hadn't expected to whirl around and around as I was winched up to the helicopter. But that was great, too.
Now I'm installing the scanner software on my little PC laptop. It's going to be a slow precedure, since I'm enlarging the condensed version of the transcript. I'll skip the first 39 pages where Werlin talks about his many different places of employment around the country, and a lot of background information. I'll try to pick out the most interesting pages. Then I'll put the sworn testimony of teachers who contradicted Werlin under oath.
Of course, the biggest contradictions are within Werlin's own words.
Like when he describes me as a maniac practically foaming at the mouth, then has trouble explaining why he asked me to return to work eight days later without a fitness for duty evaluation! Werlin's description of me is actually a pretty good fit for what Werlin looks like when he's going off--he must have looked like that the day he was screaming at principal Bill Hall, who fell to the floor of his office with a heart attack. Werlin told him to quit being dramatic. But then, Werlin got himself out of testifying in my court case by claiming heart problems.
Jenny Mo, if you sue Werlin, be sure to file a Motion to Compel his testimony. I didn't, but a judge in another case compelled Werlin to testify, saying his heart problems weren't that serious.
Maura
Saturday, May 12, 2007
Steve Castaneda is right about Cheryl Cox
Chula Vista Councilman Steve Castañeda agrees that Bonnie Dumanis has a suspicious habit of going after Chula Vista Mayor Cheryl Cox's political opponents. I would go further. Dumanis also lets Cheryl Cox get away with felonies. Castaneda's story is in today's San Diego Union Tribune. I have previously written about Dumanis' shocking prosecution of Jason Moore for taking two hours off work, and her shameful non-prosecution of Richard Werlin, Cheryl Cox's agent when she was a board member at CVESD.
Thursday, May 10, 2007
Response from "disgruntled" teacher
Recently I discovered that Linda Lozito, a parent in West Contra Costa County School District in Richmond, California had written about me on the Internet. Her school district is also known as WCCCUSD, and was called Richmond Schools before it was reorganized in the 1990's after trying to declare bankrupcy. Here is my response.
I am the San Diego teacher whose sanity parent Linda Lozito of wccusdtalk questioned in order to defend Richard Werlin. Werlin was Assistant Superintendent of WCCCUSD in Richmond, California, until he had a teacher arrested in front of her second-graders because she complained about bullying. Werlin then proceeded to fall off the map, as he had done three years earlier in my school district, Chula Vista Elementary School District in the San Diego area.
Werlin held the same position when he was down here at CVESD. When he was subpoenaed in December 2003 to testify in my lawsuit against him, he suddenly claimed to have heart problems. He was seen looking hale and hearty soon afterward, but he stayed out of work and collected a lot of sick pay. Werlin's health problems seemed to have recurred the day after second-grade teacher Jenny Mo was arrested. A judge in San Diego decided that Werlin's heart problems were too mild to justify his request not to testify in court. Maybe the judge should have taken that into consideration that scientists have found that lying is stressful.
Ms. Lozito did not understand the PERB document she quoted in her comments. She seemed to think that a court decision had been reached in the PERB case. In fact, she was looking at a charge I filed against Richard Werlin. PERB did not do any fact-finding. It simply decided not to act on my charge. Since Richard Werlin was working with CTA, PERB's decision is not surprising. PERB's general counsel Robert Thompson has a decidedly odd relationship with CTA. He is very close to CTA's head counsel Beverly Tucker, and has never accepted a CTA member's complaint against CTA.
Linda Lozito looked among the shockingly false allegations of Richard Werlin that were quoted in the PERB refusal, and selected some quotes about me to put on the Internet. She suggested that wccusdtalk members look at my website (mauralarkins.com) and decide for themselves who was telling the truth. She reminded people that some teachers really are crazy.
Of course Linda is right that some teachers are crazy. The same is true of cab drivers, engineers,housewives, and school district administrators. But people in power have a bad habit of destroying anyone who questions their actions with the time-honored trick of calling their opponents crazy. (Remember how the Soviet Union put all those protesters in mental hospitals?)
I believe that Richard Werlin's behavior in the Jenny Mo case was over-the-top in its aggressiveness and vindictiveness. It was the result of poor leadership skills. I have personally seen Richard Werlin behave like someone with a severe anger management problem.
Jenny Mo's fellow employees wanted her to shut up about bullying at the school. They really shouldn't have been so afraid to openly discuss the subject. In fact, why not have a public discussion of the problem?
In my case, my fellow employees had secretly committed crimes against me, and I was asking questions that were likely to lead to the exposure of those crimes. Werlin and the teachers union wanted me to shut up, and worked together to cover up their wrongdoing. (Robin Donlan, the teacher who committed crimes against me, was a personal friend of the teachers union president.)
Linda Lozito apparently believed, without evidence, that Werlin and Robin Donlan and others were telling the truth, and tried to defend Werlin. This blind belief, obviously shared by teacher and wcccusd talk moderator Cathy Travalos, stands in opposition to the school district's decision to transfer Robin Donlan and her friends out of my school in 2004. But neither Lozito nor Travalos bothered to do the basic Googling that would have exposed serious problems in CVESD that were described by the San Diego Union Tribune, La Prensa, and San Diego Education Report. They didn't want to look at Werlin's legacy in Chula Vista. The transfer of five teachers was an unprecedented action to clean up a very serious problem. The school board had spent several $100,000's to cover up Robin Donlan's crimes, but Donlan was still causing trouble. The school board ended up spending even more money to defend itself from Robin. It should never have spent a dime on Castle Park Elementary. It should have transferred Robin Donlan and her co-conspirators in 2001.
Linda Lozito's apparent supposition that my opponents were honest and decent people received another blow this past weekend. Robin Donlan was sued for $7.7 million for stock options fraud. She is being investigated by the FBI, SEC, IRS and the Justice Department.
In my case, the California Teachers Association destroyed documents and committed perjury again and again. I plan to file a lawsuit soon regarding these crimes.
Parents of WCCCUSD, you will have better teachers for your kids if you demand that the law be followed when the union and the district work together to get rid of teachers. The targets are usually neither incompetent nor crazy. In my experience, the targets are usually the best teachers. The reason for the attack is almost always that the teacher has somehow gotten in the way of the union and/or district bosses' personal power.
CTA should be paying for a lawyer for Jennie Mo--and they shouldn't demand that they choose the lawyer! CTA refused to pay a cent for my representation--after I'd paid dues for twenty-five years!-- because I asked them to pay for a lawyer of my choice when I realized that the lawyer CTA chose for me was sabotaging me.)
You might also ask how much money your district has spent on defense lawyers in order to cover up wrongdoing.
Maura Larkins
San Diego
The above post is a response to
Linda Lozito's post about me.
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/wccusdtalk/message/8860
If you go to the wccusdtalk site, and do a search for "werlin," you'll find other thoughts about the individual who has wreaked havoc in districts across the country.
Cathy Travalos, teacher at Kensington School and moderator of the group, was reluctant to publish my response on the wcccusd site, so I'm publishing it here.
Should I be surprised that a group that proclaims itself to be "open and honest" publishes misguided defenses of people it doesn't know, and refuses to allow rebuttals by individuals maligned in the process.
No. Anybody can proclaim themselves to be "open and honest" or "fair and balanced." If you want the truth told, you usually have to tell it yourself. So I've started a Yahoo group of my own. I've posted my correspondence with Cathy Travalos here.
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/schoolskeepingsecrets/
I am the San Diego teacher whose sanity parent Linda Lozito of wccusdtalk questioned in order to defend Richard Werlin. Werlin was Assistant Superintendent of WCCCUSD in Richmond, California, until he had a teacher arrested in front of her second-graders because she complained about bullying. Werlin then proceeded to fall off the map, as he had done three years earlier in my school district, Chula Vista Elementary School District in the San Diego area.
Werlin held the same position when he was down here at CVESD. When he was subpoenaed in December 2003 to testify in my lawsuit against him, he suddenly claimed to have heart problems. He was seen looking hale and hearty soon afterward, but he stayed out of work and collected a lot of sick pay. Werlin's health problems seemed to have recurred the day after second-grade teacher Jenny Mo was arrested. A judge in San Diego decided that Werlin's heart problems were too mild to justify his request not to testify in court. Maybe the judge should have taken that into consideration that scientists have found that lying is stressful.
Ms. Lozito did not understand the PERB document she quoted in her comments. She seemed to think that a court decision had been reached in the PERB case. In fact, she was looking at a charge I filed against Richard Werlin. PERB did not do any fact-finding. It simply decided not to act on my charge. Since Richard Werlin was working with CTA, PERB's decision is not surprising. PERB's general counsel Robert Thompson has a decidedly odd relationship with CTA. He is very close to CTA's head counsel Beverly Tucker, and has never accepted a CTA member's complaint against CTA.
Linda Lozito looked among the shockingly false allegations of Richard Werlin that were quoted in the PERB refusal, and selected some quotes about me to put on the Internet. She suggested that wccusdtalk members look at my website (mauralarkins.com) and decide for themselves who was telling the truth. She reminded people that some teachers really are crazy.
Of course Linda is right that some teachers are crazy. The same is true of cab drivers, engineers,housewives, and school district administrators. But people in power have a bad habit of destroying anyone who questions their actions with the time-honored trick of calling their opponents crazy. (Remember how the Soviet Union put all those protesters in mental hospitals?)
I believe that Richard Werlin's behavior in the Jenny Mo case was over-the-top in its aggressiveness and vindictiveness. It was the result of poor leadership skills. I have personally seen Richard Werlin behave like someone with a severe anger management problem.
Jenny Mo's fellow employees wanted her to shut up about bullying at the school. They really shouldn't have been so afraid to openly discuss the subject. In fact, why not have a public discussion of the problem?
In my case, my fellow employees had secretly committed crimes against me, and I was asking questions that were likely to lead to the exposure of those crimes. Werlin and the teachers union wanted me to shut up, and worked together to cover up their wrongdoing. (Robin Donlan, the teacher who committed crimes against me, was a personal friend of the teachers union president.)
Linda Lozito apparently believed, without evidence, that Werlin and Robin Donlan and others were telling the truth, and tried to defend Werlin. This blind belief, obviously shared by teacher and wcccusd talk moderator Cathy Travalos, stands in opposition to the school district's decision to transfer Robin Donlan and her friends out of my school in 2004. But neither Lozito nor Travalos bothered to do the basic Googling that would have exposed serious problems in CVESD that were described by the San Diego Union Tribune, La Prensa, and San Diego Education Report. They didn't want to look at Werlin's legacy in Chula Vista. The transfer of five teachers was an unprecedented action to clean up a very serious problem. The school board had spent several $100,000's to cover up Robin Donlan's crimes, but Donlan was still causing trouble. The school board ended up spending even more money to defend itself from Robin. It should never have spent a dime on Castle Park Elementary. It should have transferred Robin Donlan and her co-conspirators in 2001.
Linda Lozito's apparent supposition that my opponents were honest and decent people received another blow this past weekend. Robin Donlan was sued for $7.7 million for stock options fraud. She is being investigated by the FBI, SEC, IRS and the Justice Department.
In my case, the California Teachers Association destroyed documents and committed perjury again and again. I plan to file a lawsuit soon regarding these crimes.
Parents of WCCCUSD, you will have better teachers for your kids if you demand that the law be followed when the union and the district work together to get rid of teachers. The targets are usually neither incompetent nor crazy. In my experience, the targets are usually the best teachers. The reason for the attack is almost always that the teacher has somehow gotten in the way of the union and/or district bosses' personal power.
CTA should be paying for a lawyer for Jennie Mo--and they shouldn't demand that they choose the lawyer! CTA refused to pay a cent for my representation--after I'd paid dues for twenty-five years!-- because I asked them to pay for a lawyer of my choice when I realized that the lawyer CTA chose for me was sabotaging me.)
You might also ask how much money your district has spent on defense lawyers in order to cover up wrongdoing.
Maura Larkins
San Diego
The above post is a response to
Linda Lozito's post about me.
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/wccusdtalk/message/8860
If you go to the wccusdtalk site, and do a search for "werlin," you'll find other thoughts about the individual who has wreaked havoc in districts across the country.
Cathy Travalos, teacher at Kensington School and moderator of the group, was reluctant to publish my response on the wcccusd site, so I'm publishing it here.
Should I be surprised that a group that proclaims itself to be "open and honest" publishes misguided defenses of people it doesn't know, and refuses to allow rebuttals by individuals maligned in the process.
No. Anybody can proclaim themselves to be "open and honest" or "fair and balanced." If you want the truth told, you usually have to tell it yourself. So I've started a Yahoo group of my own. I've posted my correspondence with Cathy Travalos here.
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/schoolskeepingsecrets/
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)