Del Mar School District Delays Salary Information

Source: CalAware Today

By Anne Lowe

The Del Mar Union School District refused to release salary information for all its employees in response to a Public Records Act request for weeks, the Del Mar Times reportsuntil repeatedly threatened with litigation.

NakedGovernment.org co-founder Michael Robertson requested names, titles and salaries for employees of 50 school districts across the nation. The Del Mar district refused to cooperate fully with the request, stating that it would not disclose salary information for employees making less than $100,000 per yearto protect their privacy rights.

Del Mar finally complied with the request this week when threatened with legal action, after three weeks of resistance.

Scott Mann, DMUSDs assistant superintendent for business services, initially provided only the names, titles and salaries of all employees earning more than $100,000 annually, along with the certificated and classified salary schedules.

Parres objected and wrote to Mann, saying, The documents you provided are general in nature. Other school districts I have contacted provided specific listings as requested with no hesitation. He provided the response from the Boulder Valley School District in Colorado as an example.

Mann wrote back, saying, First of all, lets be clear. I am not rejecting your request as I have fully complied with it. Case law from the courts has held that total compensation under $100,000 for employees shall not be released because of privacy rights of the individual employee. I have complied with your request under the PRA.

Mann said in a follow-up email, The Del Mar USD considers your request fulfilled.

Saying the Del Mar Union School District does not have the right to decide what requests to honor and to what extent, Robertson wrote to DMUSD superintendent Jim Peabody, explaining the impasse and promising to escalate the situation if DMUSD does not fully respond to the multiple Public Records Act requests which have been submitted to Mr. Mann.

After investigating the matter, Peabody wrote back to Robertson, saying, I have asked Scott Mann to produce the title and salary of all employees for you.

This time the DMUSD sent the titles and salaries of each employee, but with the names redacted. Robertson criticized Del Mars reluctance to provide the complete data. He said the Los Angeles Unified School District and the San Diego Unified School District were both asked for the same information, and both cooperated fully with the request, as did most of the 50 school districts that were also asked.

Our request to you was straightforward and unquestionably allowed by law, wrote Robertson to Peabody. I am quite puzzled at the delays and nonresponsiveness by your DMUSD staff to this request.

Robertson told Peabody that he will not stand by and let DMUSD ignore the law and will file a lawsuit to force DMUSD to comply with the laws of our state.

The initial request was made to Del Mar on Oct. 8. On Oct. 28, Robertson received an email letter from attorney Susan Gilmor, of the law firm of Stutz Artiano Shinoff & Holtz, writing on behalf of the DMUSD. Gilmor defended the districts decision to withhold the information.

We have reviewed the recent cases regarding public disclosure of public employee salaries, which are specific to employees earning $100,000 a year or more, Gilmor wrote. You have asserted your position that you are entitled to all employee names and salaries. Please tell us what case you are relying upon that specifies that employees earning less than $100,000 a year are not exempt from public disclosure by name.

She said the districts position is not to engage in a fight with you. We have a constitutional duty [to] ensure that we do not invade privacy rights. While we understand that the public has a strong interest in monitoring public expenditures, it [is] our duty to follow the law. It is our position that the courts have not ruled that the names and salaries of public employees earning less than $100,000 a year would be subject to disclosure.

Robertson challenged Gilmors interpretation of the $100,000 threshold. Theres no exclusion for [an] employees salary under $100,000, he wrote to her. Citizens do not have a duty to justify why a request is warranted. Rather DMUSD is obligated to follow the law and provide public records. The party seeking to withhold public records bears the burden of demonstrating that an exception applies.

There is nothing in the law or ruling to suggest government employees with $99,999.99 salaries are entitled to a different or greater right of privacy than someone making $100,000 per year or more, he added.

Robertson again threatened legal action if the request was not honored. If DMUSD[s] intention is to use the same privacy excuse to shirk their legally required duties which the courts at the highest level in our state have rejected then they will lose that case and squander taxpayers money, he wrote. DMUSD does not get to decide what is good for people to know.

Robertson said schools commonly complain about not having enough money, but when a citizen places a request to see where the money is going they are stonewalled.

Terry Francke, First Amendment rights attorney and founder of Californians Aware, said Robertsons legal case was strong.

The California Supreme Court decision concluding that public employees salaries are subject to disclosure under the California Public Records Act stemmed from a request for the salaries of Oakland city employees earning $100,000 or more, he said in an email. But the court neither expressly nor impliedly limited its public disclosure ruling to salaries in that amount, and almost no public agencies are interpreting it that way.

If sued, Im confident this district would lose, and have to pay the requesters attorney fees.

CalAware is a nonprofit organization specializing in helping the public understand Californias open-meeting Ralph M. Brown Act, the Public Records Act, First Amendment rights and open-access government issues.

Robertson had his attorney contact Gilmor directly and asked him to explain to her that I understand the law and Im intent on making this happen and theres just better things for the school district to worry about.

After speaking with Robertsons attorney, Gilmor wrote the following email to Robertson: Thank you for your response and patience. As I mentioned, my concern was to ensure that a release of names would not subject the district to claims of violating personal privacy rights. I appreciate your input and the time you allowed so that I could make certain that the statutes and laws were interpreted correctly.

Gilmor said the district has been instructed to provide the requested information, all of which was sent to Robertson by Mann on Nov. 1 with the following note: By direction of the Governing Board, the attached PDF file was prepared for your use under the CPRA and contains all information you previously requested. Peabody later clarified that only board president Steven McDowell rather than the full Board of Education met to discuss this issue.

Del Mar school district’s delays frustrate businessman

Source: Del Mar Times

By Marsha Sutton
Contributor

An online open government project co-founded by Del Mar Internet entrepreneur Michael Robertson hit a speed bump along the information superhighway, when the Del Mar Union School District delayed releasing data requested by Robertson through a formal California Public Records Act request.

Robertson’s NakedGovernment.org site, to be launched later this month, will allow users free access to a wide range of governmental documents, initially beginning with the names, titles and salaries of school district employees from school districts throughout the country.

Robertson and his partner John Parres submitted PRA requests asking 50 school districts to provide this information. Only Del Mar refused to comply fully based on privacy rights, claiming the district was legally obligated to protect the privacy of individual employees earning less than $100,000 annually.

"I find this outrageous and appalling behavior," Robertson said. "There is no right to privacy which allows DMUSD to not respond to our request with the names, titles and salaries of all employees."

Del Mar finally complied with the request this week when threatened with legal action, after three weeks of resistance.

Scott Mann, DMUSD’s assistant superintendent for business services, initially provided only the names, titles and salaries of all employees earning more than $100,000 annually, along with the certificated and classified salary schedules.

Parres objected and wrote to Mann, saying, "The documents you provided are general in nature. Other school districts I have contacted provided specific listings as requested with no hesitation." He provided the response from the Boulder Valley School District in Colorado as an example.

Mann wrote back, saying, "First of all, let’s be clear. I am not ‘rejecting’ your request as I have fully complied with it. Case law from the courts has held that total compensation under $100,000 for employees shall not be released because of privacy rights of the individual employee. I have complied with your request under the PRA."

Mann said in a follow-up email, "The Del Mar USD considers your request fulfilled."

Saying the Del Mar Union School District does not "have the right to decide what requests to honor and to what extent," Robertson wrote to DMUSD superintendent Jim Peabody, explaining the impasse and promising to "escalate the situation if DMUSD does not fully respond to the multiple Public Records Act requests which have been submitted to Mr. Mann."

After investigating the matter, Peabody wrote back to Robertson, saying, "I have asked Scott Mann to produce the title and salary of all employees for you."

This time the DMUSD sent the titles and salaries of each employee, but with the names redacted. Robertson criticized Del Mar’s reluctance to provide the complete data. He said the Los Angeles Unified School District and the San Diego Unified School District were both asked for the same information, and both cooperated fully with the request, as did most of the 50 school districts that were also asked.

"Our request to you was straightforward and unquestionably allowed by law," wrote Robertson to Peabody. "I am quite puzzled at the delays and nonresponsiveness by your DMUSD staff to this request."

Robertson told Peabody that he will not "stand by and let DMUSD ignore the law" and will "file a lawsuit to force DMUSD to comply with the laws of our state."

The initial request was made to Del Mar on Oct. 8. On Oct. 28, Robertson received an email letter from attorney Susan Gilmor, of the law firm of Stutz Artiano Shinoff & Holtz, writing on behalf of the DMUSD. Gilmor defended the district’s decision to withhold the information.

"We have reviewed the recent cases regarding public disclosure of public employee salaries, which are specific to employees earning $100,000 a year or more," Gilmor wrote. "You have asserted your position that you are entitled to all employee names and salaries. Please tell us what case you are relying upon that specifies that employees earning less than $100,000 a year are not exempt from public disclosure by name."

She said the district’s position is "not to engage in a fight with you. We have a constitutional duty [to] ensure that we do not invade privacy rights. While we understand that the public has a strong interest in monitoring public expenditures, it [is] our duty to follow the law. It is our position that the courts have not ruled that the names and salaries of public employees earning less than $100,000 a year would be subject to disclosure."

Robertson challenged Gilmor’s interpretation of the $100,000 threshold. "There’s no exclusion for [an] employee’s salary under $100,000," he wrote to her. "Citizens do not have a duty to justify why a request is warranted. Rather DMUSD is obligated to follow the law and provide public records. The party seeking to withhold public records bears the burden of demonstrating that an exception applies."

"There is nothing in the law or ruling to suggest government employees with $99,999.99 salaries are entitled to a different or greater right of privacy than someone making $100,000 per year or more," he added.

Robertson again threatened legal action if the request was not honored. "If DMUSD[’s] intention is to use the same privacy excuse to shirk their legally required duties which the courts at the highest level in our state have rejected then they will lose that case and squander taxpayers money," he wrote. "DMUSD does not get to decide what is good for people to know."

Robertson said schools "commonly complain about not having enough money, but when a citizen places a request to see where the money is going they are stonewalled."

Terry Francke, First Amendment rights attorney and founder of Californians Aware, said Robertson’s legal case was strong.

"The California Supreme Court decision concluding that public employees’ salaries are subject to disclosure under the California Public Records Act stemmed from a request for the salaries of Oakland city employees earning $100,000 or more," he said in an email. "But the court neither expressly nor impliedly limited its public disclosure ruling to salaries in that amount, and almost no public agencies are interpreting it that way.

"If sued, I’m confident this district would lose, and have to pay the requester’s attorney fees."

CalAware is a nonprofit organization specializing in helping the public understand California’s open-meeting Ralph M. Brown Act, the Public Records Act, First Amendment rights and open-access government issues.

Robertson had his attorney contact Gilmor directly and asked him to explain to her "that I understand the law and I’m intent on making this happen and there’s just better things for the school district to worry about."

After speaking with Robertson’s attorney, Gilmor wrote the following email to Robertson: "Thank you for your response and patience. As I mentioned, my concern was to ensure that a release of names would not subject the district to claims of violating personal privacy rights. I appreciate your input and the time you allowed so that I could make certain that the statutes and laws were interpreted correctly."

Gilmor said the district has been instructed to provide the requested information, all of which was sent to Robertson by Mann on Nov. 1 with the following note: "By direction of the Governing Board, the attached PDF file was prepared for your use under the CPRA and contains all information you previously requested." Peabody later clarified that only board president Steven McDowell rather than the full Board of Education met to discuss this issue.

Peabody said he referred the matter to the district’s attorneys, who initially told him that the names of employees earning less than $100,000 per year should not be disclosed.

In agreeing to release the information, he said, "If it’s going to get into a legal squabble, it’s just going to eat up some district resources."

Peabody said he was concerned about the reaction of teachers and was informing union leadership that the names of every employee, their titles and salaries was about to be made public. "I worry that they’ll be upset, but I think they will understand," he said.

---

More information:

• John Parre's Public Record Request and DMUSD's Response

Del Mar man helps to launch The Naked Government project

Source: Del Mar Times

By Marsha Sutton
Contributor

NakedGovernment.org is a new project co-founded by Del Mar Internet entrepreneur Michael Robertson that is intended to make government more transparent. In addition to actual documents from governmental agencies, the site will also contain names of individuals and organizations that have made Public Records Act requests for specific documents.

"Every day, there are thousands of public document requests … across the United States," he said. "My belief is all those should be public. For example, who is asking what of the water companies? In a lot of respects, I think that is more interesting than the actual documents. That’s the kind of information that will help citizens better manage, or police if you will, the government that runs their lives."

The concept stems from Robertson’s belief that, once an agency or news organization makes a PRA request and gains access to information, that information should be made available to the public in its raw, unfiltered form.

The site will be Wiki-driven, he said, much like Wikipedia, where users he called "information envoys" will find those document requests and contribute documents and information directly to the site.

"I’m creating a Wiki-powered service where all public records will be searchable by who has made the request [and] what they requested, and you can view the actual documents," he said.

Robertson said he and his partner John Parres didn’t want to launch the site empty, so they requested payroll information of 50 school districts from across the country chosen at random, although the Los Angeles Unified School District and the San Diego Unified School District – as well as Robertson’s hometown Del Mar Union School District – were specifically selected.

"We’re collecting some documents now so there will be some critical mass in the system, so hopefully others will get the vision and help with the task," he said.

Robertson said the DMUSD was not the only district to refuse their request, but was the only district to refuse based on privacy rights.

"I understand where they’re coming from," he said. "They don’t want to get sued by the teachers’ union. That’s the interest they’re trying to balance."

But he believes the law is on his side and governmental organizations "need to understand that it’s the citizens’ money here." Some do, he said, and some don’t.

"We have had a couple people say no," he said. "We’ve had a couple of school districts say, astonishingly, we don’t have that information. It’s preposterous. … Others have said you’ll have to pay to get that information."

Robertson said reasonable costs associated with Public Records requests are fair but that some districts are suggesting that assembling the requested data will require many hours of programming time, adding up to expenses that Robertson called "outrageous."

"So we are putting pressure on them to comply," he said. "When we get pushed back, we’re trying to be polite but firm and encourage the organization to do the right thing."

He said the reason NakedGovernment.org is needed is because not everyone is forthcoming. "There’s some people involved in this process that think the government doesn’t work for its citizens," he said.

Del Mar’s initial noncompliance particularly frustrated Robertson.

"I’m a taxpayer in Del Mar; I’ve got two kids in the Del Mar schools," he said. "That’s why it was so amazing. …The last thing the school district should be spending money on is hiding public information from concerned citizens."

Most districts have been fully cooperative and compliant, he said, including LA Unified which was one of a handful of governmental bodies that was given a more expansive list of information requested for the site.

"We should have hundreds of document requests from LA Unified in the system," he said.

Initially, the site will launch with extensive information from half a dozen institutions including LA Unified, the Port Authority in San Diego and the Dept. of Water in Los Angeles.

"So for a handful of organizations you’re actually going to see what kind of requests they get [and] who is making that request," Robertson said. "And it’s amazingly revealing to see. You see people asking about pension data – these are reporters … Then you’ll see unions coming in and making their own requests. … It’s quite fascinating what is happening, and that’s the kind of information I want to make public."

In addition, there will also be the school district payroll information from almost every state in the union.

Robertson, a Del Mar resident with children attending Del Mar schools, has founded, grown and sold several Internet companies, one of which was MP3.com which was the first company to popularize digital music.

NakedGovernment.org is set to launch later this month.

McClain's attorney orders DMUSD trustees to state the causes for her termination

On June 1, 2010, former DMUSD superintendent Sharon McClain's attorney Elbie J. Hickambottom, Jr. of Gronemeier & Associates sent a letter to the DMUSD Board of Trustees reiterating Sharon McClain's prior request for a statement of cause(s) for her termination.

Hickambottom notes that by exercising her right to air the Board action terminating her employment contract in public session, McClain also waived her right to prevent potentially adverse information regarding her job performance from being publicized.

If McClain's lawsuit goes to trial, Hickambottom says he will file a motion to prevent any information about the reasons for McClain's termination that are not in the public record from being presented in court.

The Board of Trustees has until June 13 to satisfy McClain's request.

The letter from McClain's attorneys follows:

June 1, 2010

Steven McDowell, President
stevenatdmusd@yahoo.com
Dr. Annette Easton, Member
aeaston@san.rr.com
Doug Perkins, Member
doug4dmusd@yahoo.com
Comischell Rodriguez, Member
comischell@aol.com
Katherine White, Member
kwhite@shwx2.com
Board of Trustees
Del Mar Union School District

Re: McClain re Del Mar USD

Dear President McDowell and other Members of the Board of Trustees:

Dr. Sharon McClain has requested that the Board of Trustees provide her with a statement of cause(s) for her termination; to date, the Board of Trustees has failed to provide such a statement of cause(s). This letter reiterates her request.

As a general matter, the rationale for a governmental action such as the Board of Trustees’s termination of Dr. McClain’s employment contract on March 31, 2010, purportedly for cause, is determined based upon the rationale publicly articulated at the time of the governmental action. ⁽¹⁾ For sound policy reasons, California law generally disfavors discovery during litigation of the subjective motivations of members of governing boards for their actions as a board; one of the benefits of that policy is that it spares members of a governing board the burden of having to respond to deposition or trial discovery of their subjective motivations.

Moreover, where employers fail to articulate the rationale for employment terminations at the time employees are discharged, the law allows juries to draw an adverse inference to employers that their subsequently articulated rationales are false rationales invented post-hoc to cover-up an unlawful motivation. ⁽²⁾

Dr. McClain exercised her right to have the Board of Trustees’s action terminating her employment contract aired in a public session rather than in a closed session; she thereby waived any privacy right that entitled her to prevent assertedly adverse information about her performance that would presumably be the purported cause for terminating her employment contract from being publicly presented at the public session. Despite that waiver, the Board majority – and Mr. Shinoff, its representative who spoke at the March 31 meeting – failed to articulate during the meeting any cause for Dr. McClain’s employment termination. No closed session could legally have occurred concerning her termination given Dr. McClain’s exercise of her statutory right to require all proceedings concerning her termination be held publicly. ⁽³⁾ After the Board acted, Dr. McClain sent the Board of Trustees a request for a statement of cause(s), but the Board still has not articulated any cause for Dr. McClain’s employment termination.

As you presumably know, Dr. McClain’s position is that there is no good cause for the termination of her employment; rather, the three members of the Board majority asserted that there was cause simply for the purpose of trying not to make the contractual payment required for a termination without good cause. We would be pleased to proceed to litigate Dr. McClain’s entitlement based upon the current record of the Board of Trustees’s refusal to articulate any cause – i.e., its refusal at the time of the Board’s action and its refusal subsequently when Dr. McClain directly and now I on her behalf have requested a statement of cause(s). In a superior court action, you can expect that we will, among other things, file an in limine motion to restrict DMUSD to using the rationale in the public record rather than relying on Board Members to post-hoc assert their purported subjective motivations; that of course would leave the Board of Trustees without any cause to defend its position. If you would seek the advice of an independent and competent employment lawyer with trial experience on employment cases, I think you would get the sound advice that your stonewalling on the Board’s purported cause(s) for Dr. McClain’s employment termination is taking you down a dangerous road.

Our office has drafted a government code claim that is ready to be filed with the District in order to exhaust any claims-presentation requirements prior to filing a lawsuit. We will hold off filing it until June 13 to give the Board one last chance to publicly satisfy Dr. McClain’s request that the Board communicate the cause(s) for Dr. McClain’s employment termination. If the Board majority does not articulate the cause(s) for Dr. McClain’s employment termination, it will have to live with the consequences. Please govern yourselves accordingly.

Sincerely,

GRONEMEIER & ASSOCIATES, P.C.
By Elbie J. Hickambottom, Jr.
Attorneys for Dr. Sharon McClain

---

(1) See, e.g., County of Los Angeles v. Superior Court (1975) 13 Cal. 3d 721, 724-725.

(2) See, e.g., Santiago-Ramos v. Centennial P.R. Wireless Corp. (1st Cir. 2000) 217F.3d46, 56 (summary judgment reversed where employer did not give the employee reasons for her terminating when it occurred but rather prepared a memo claiming performance deficiencies several weeks later when it became concerned the employee might file suit).

(3) If the Board of Trustees had discussed its purported cause for termination in closed session, doing so would have violated the Brown Act and thereby voided any action taken. Dr. McClain is not alleging that the Board did illegally determine its rationale; rather, she assumes that the Board did not violate the Brown Act.

More information:

• Gronemeier & Associates letter to DMUSD School Board re Sharon McClain
• Del Mar Times: Attorneys for former Superintendent McClain send letter to school board

That "Property Thing"

A DMUSD parent recently published a letter to the Del Mar Times regarding the DMUSD's tardiness in procuring a site for the district offices.

In her letter, Ms. Takahashi writes:

May of 2010 is when the District Office's rent on the Shores property increases 30,000-fold. Instead of paying $1 a year, DMUSD will be paying $30,000 a year from its general fund (the same general fund that pays teachers' salaries) to use the dilapidated office on 9th Street in Del Mar.

It was no secret that the lease payments would increase from $1 a year to $30,000 a year starting year 3 post-escrow. Members White, Easton, and McDowell were there.

May of 2010 is the date when the lease payments to the City of Del Mar increase from $1 to $30,000 annually, and it is true that members White, Easton, and McDowell were aware of this.

What the letter neglects to point out is that escrow on the Shores property closed on May 15, 2008 and that the original lease with the City of Del Mar was a 3-year lease, to expire in May 2011, 11 months from now.

The original lease specifies rent payments of $1 per year for the first two years, to increase to $30,000 annually in May 2010. There is still a year remaining on the original lease negotiated with the City of Del Mar.

On March 1st, former DMUSD superintendent Sharon McClain wrote a letter to the City of Del Mar requesting an extension on the lease of the Del Mar Shores property from May 15, 2011 to August 30, 2012.

McClain requested that the $30,000 annual payment be converted to a monthly payment at the end of the term of the original lease in May 2011, with a 60-day notice to vacate.

The preschool/childcare program currently housed at the Winston school would be vacated by the end of the original lease, May 2011. Maintenance and operation sheds would be vacated by June 30, 2011, to coincide with the end of the school year.

McClain also stated that the intent of the district was to move during the 2011/2012 school year.

The need to find a new site for DMUSD district offices should be a high priority to DMUSD trustees, but the $30,000 payment to the City of Del Mar for May 2010 to May 2011 is already part of the agreement negotiated back in the summer of 2007.

More information:

• Letter from Sharon McClain to the City of Del Mar to extend the Shores lease
• Minutes of the March 8, 2010 Del Mar City Council Meeting

Guys, how's it coming on that property thing?

Source: Del Mar Times

By Kate Takahashi
DMUSD parent

It's spring - May to be exact - and schools in Del Mar are buzzing with field trips, school plays and end-of-year parties. PTAs are balancing their budgets, organizing thank-you dinners, deciding their slate for next year. Principals have just completed the unfortunate task of deciding how to slice and dice their shrunken ESC programs, among their hundreds of other duties.

May also has a special significance for the DMUSD Board of Trustees. May of 2010 is when the District Office's rent on the Shores property increases 30,000-fold. Instead of paying $1 a year, DMUSD will be paying $30,000 a year from its general fund (the same general fund that pays teachers' salaries) to use the dilapidated office on 9th Street in Del Mar.

There has been plenty of time to find a new office. The Shores property was first considered surplus back in 1988, then again in 2005. Minutes from the Board meeting dated August of 2007 reveal a heads-up from then-Superintendent Tom Bishop that when the Shores escrow closes, the District will have 36 months to vacate the property.

It was no secret that the lease payments would increase from $1 a year to $30,000 a year starting year 3 post-escrow. Members White, Easton, and McDowell were there.

There has been plenty of effort. Next month, Colliers International agents will have spent one year showing DMUSD properties and land. The board members have seen at least 11 properties. If no deal has been made by June, the poor agents will have donated their time free of charge to the decision-masterminds at DMUSD. Trustee Comischell Rodriguez seems to be the lone board member who recognizes the urgency of this issue, as she urged her other colleagues to make a decision at a recent board meeting.

Real estate decisions may perplex this board majority, but other decisions that might prove gut-wrenchingly hard for most humans have been swiftly executed. Trustees White, Easton and McDowell decisively ended Tom Bishop's career at the DMUSD in 2008, sending him on his way with more than $300,000 of our kids' general fund money.

More recently, Trustees White, Easton and Perkins had no trouble deciding to fire Dr. Sharon McClain. (Steve McDowell abstained on the vote; he evidently could have gone either way on halting her career.)

Dr. McClain had barely unpacked her belongings in her new office when DMUSD Attorney Dan Shinoff started his expensive wild goose chase, searching for that great material breach of contract that we'll never hear of.

So the board CAN be decisive about certain things. It's just all the wrong things. In the meantime, the community wants to know: Guys, how's it coming on that property thing?

Peabody gets unanimous vote to lead Del Mar schools

Source: Union Tribune

By Bruce Lieberman, UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER

DEL MAR — James Peabody is the new superintendent of the Del Mar Union School District.

The school board voted unanimously earlier this month to hire Peabody as the district’s permanent superintendent, a little more than a month after he was hired as interim superintendent to replace Sharon McClain. The board fired McClain on March 31 after she and trustees clashed over management issues.

Her ouster has drawn criticism of the board from parents and teachers, who have long said that trustees have micromanaged district business. The trustees have been largely silent on exactly why they decided to fire McClain. Trustees Katherine White, Annette Easton and Doug Perkins voted to terminate her contract, while Trustee Comischell Rodriguez voted against the ouster, and Trustee Steven McDowell abstained. McClain has vowed to sue the school district for wrongful termination, although as of this week she hasn’t done so.

Peabody is working part time as superintendent of the Julian Union High School District. He will work on a per diem basis in Del Mar until July 1, when he will come on board full time.

He will be paid $750 per day, up to 16 days per month, before July 1, according to an employment contract that trustees signed May 5. His annual salary beginning July 1 will be $180,000. He will receive 25 days of vacation annually, 24 days of sick leave annually, a monthly automobile allowance of $400 and $1,200 per month paid toward his state retirement — among other fringe benefits.

The term of his contract is two years.

Peabody was out of town to attend his son’s graduation from medical school and could not be reached. He has a 38-year career in public education. He has been a classroom teacher, track and cross-country coach, curriculum specialist, assistant principal, principal and assistant superintendent.

He has also served as a trustee for the Alpine Union School District, and he worked for the San Diego County Office of Education as the director of its regional system of district and school support.

Bruce Lieberman: (760) 476-8205; bruce.lieberman@uniontrib.com

An interview with former Superintendent Sharon McClain

Source: Del Mar Times

Thursday, May 13, 2010
By Karen Billing

Dr. Sharon McClain was hired by the Del Mar Union School District after a nationwide search and became the new superintendent in 2008 after Tom Bishop was released. McClain, the former superintendent of Hermosa Beach City School District moved to San Diego from Long Beach, living apart from her husband Joe Condon, also a former superintendent.

In coming to Del Mar, McClain said she knew there were some problems but thought she could help move the district forward. A year and a half later, on March 31, McClain was fired. Here she shares some thoughts about the board's decision and her plans to file a lawsuit against the district.

Have you decided to sue the district?

I am moving forward. My lawyers and I talked about how to move forward and what to do and we'll file papers. I'm letting him just take care of that. We talked about why and my basic reasoning is that the hardest thing for me is that when you worked in a profession almost 30 years and somebody accuses you of doing something bad so they can fire you and they're not clear with you what that is - it's my reputation.

And I know other superintendents have lost their jobs in California over the years, many of them have. But that's why we have a contract so there are some protections for you.

And the board didn't follow my contract either. They were supposed to have evaluated me by May 15 of last year; they didn't give me an evaluation until August so they breached my contract.

There are things like that in other districts but the board has at least honored the contract and this board refused to honor my contract. We had negotiated, agreed to a buyout of 12 instead of 18 months, which education codes gives me. We were negotiating to make it even less than that and I was willing to work with them but they just stopped negotiating.

I think they think this is the easy way out. But they haven't treated me fairly. I don't feel that I've been fairly treated.

Do you feel that the suit will take away from the children?

It's definitely going to cost the district. There's no way around it. But I didn't make this choice the board made this choice. They chose for me. I wouldn't have left. I would've worked on and did the best that I could and I was doing the best that I could do under the circumstances. And so I didn't make the choice. I feel like if the board hadn't done what they did I would still be in my office today instead of here talking to you.

What were some of the things you enjoyed about being superintendent here?

First of all Del Mar is really a wonderful district. The first thing it's got that's the best thing of all, it's got great kids.

Then you've got parents who are really involved and willing to step up and do all kinds of jobs in the schools. You can't go on a school campus that you don't have a parent working somewhere, doing something.

Then you've got really good staff, you've got wonderful teachers. Then you've got the principals and I know I'm sounding like Pollyanna but you truly have eight really good principals, you don't have a weak principal. Then you have the district office, which has a very strong staff.

How would you describe your working relationship with the board?

Our working relationship was difficult at times. One of the things that was very difficult for me was having so many board meetings. Our board was scheduled really to have only 12 meetings a year and in the first year we had 44 meetings. I counted them up and that was a meeting every five and a half days on average. And by the time I left at a year and a half we had 63 board meetings.

It was very difficult to keep up with the board meetings because there are a lot of legal requirements for school board meetings and published minutes and so forth, so it was difficult for staff with the amount of reports they were asked to do and I had a lot of people doing a lot of different things.

But I was lucky in that when I came to the district I had heard that the staff was really good but they really were good and they tried to step up and do the best job they could. That was the most difficult thing, the number of meetings and the number of things the board kept asking for over and over again.

When did you begin to see that it might not be working?

I think there was a disconnect between what I saw as the superintendent's job and the board's job and what they saw as the superintendent's job and the board's job.

The disconnect was that my philosophy is that the board sets the direction for the district, they have the 30,000 foot view of the district and then they leave the day-to-day operation of district to superintendent. And that wasn't the philosophy of the board. The board really became involved in the day-to-day operations of the district, which made it really difficult to those who were in administration of the district.

In December, the board held a meeting to discipline or dismiss you over a parent's complaint in a student discipline issue and they took no action. Were you thinking you and the board would be able to continue or did you have a feeling it wasn't over yet?

I think I knew at that time they were going to find something else. I felt like it wasn't over.

And that parent's complaint was the only one you know of?

Right. In August they wrote an evaluation document and said some things in the document that they wanted me to do and work on and some criticisms of some things that I had done. I responded. Their document was eight pages long and my response was 55 pages because I had a lot of evidence. They said 'You didn't do this,' 'You didn't do that' and I had done them to the best of my ability and the best job I could under the circumstances.

When did you find out about the dismissal? How were you told and what did they say?

I was in a meeting on Monday with the district office group. We met every Monday from noon to about 4 or 5 p.m. We were in that meeting and Comischell (Rodriguez) came in and she said she wanted to talk to Darlene (Nadlonek, district personnel technician).

I thought it was odd so I came out of the meeting and I asked, 'What's going on?' and I could tell by Comischell's face that something was wrong. We went back in my office and she (Comischell Rodriguez) said, 'Well it's the dreaded letter. We didn't make it.'

So you go into that special meeting knowing you would be fired or did you think public comment might be able to sway them?

Oh, I knew they were going to fire me. After I talked to Comischell, that was on late Monday afternoon and they had scheduled the meeting for Wednesday morning at 8 a.m. and of course nobody could've come to that. So Comischell insisted it would be at 12:30 p.m. and parents complained they couldn't be there at 12:30 p.m. because of picking up children, so it was switched it to 12:45 p.m.

The board was definitely trying to have meeting at a time when there would be least amount of resistance from the community so they had at time when a larger portion of community couldn't be there. I was surprised that so many people did show up and even some teachers tried to get away from lunch and left and actually spoke.

But I knew and I had cleaned out my whole office the day before. I was certain. There was no question in my mind that they were ready to terminate my contract.

What was that like, the decision to fire you made in open session, what were you feeling?

It was an awful experience. I devoted my life to education and since I was a little girl I wanted to be a schoolteacher. I achieved my goal and I got into administration because I wanted to make a difference and I felt that I could make an impact.

Now looking back on it I can see the biggest impact happens in the classroom, it really does. The rest of us are just facilitators to make whatever happens in the classroom work.

That was really a very difficult meeting for me. I prepared a statement ahead of time because I didn't want to sound bitter and angry and it was very very difficult.

I'm angry with Mr. (Daniel) Shinoff, the board's attorney, because he said I asked not to have a public meeting, which is absolutely not true.

I showed up at the meeting about 15 minutes before and learned at that time that I was supposed to speak for 20 minutes and I had no idea, he had never told me that so I protested to him and said I didn't think that was fair. He said 'Well, how much time do you need to speak?' and I said, 'About three, maybe five minutes,' and he said, 'Okay, I'll limit my comments to same amount of time.' He never said anything that that constituted as me asking not to have public hearing.

Another thing he said in that article (in an interview published in this newspaper), so I feel compelled to talk about it since he talked about my releasing his bills. Well his bills are public documents and I tried to protect those bills by having them redacted. I asked a different law firm, I didn't ask Mr. Shinoff's law firm to redact their own bills.

He asked me about that weeks before and I had told them who the lawyer was that redacted them and I told Comischell. I called the lawyer, Melanie Peterson, and told her Mr. Shinoff was really upset about how bills got redacted and she said to tell him to call her. So he knew that so for him to say in the paper that I had just sent them out and wasn't a lawyer didn't have the right to do that, that's just completely false.

And you were never given a reason for your dismissal besides "serious performance violations"?

No. The only document I have is the document from August, my evaluation, which I responded to. Then they wrote a letter to me about the parent complaint, a disciplinary letter saying you should've done this and I responded to that as well. So I haven't heard anything since.

When I talked to Comischell she said I'd get a document so I was expecting a document or I was expecting him (Shinoff) to read something at the hearing. I still don't have anything. So to me, I should still be working and I don't know what cause that they have.

The things in the August document, they weren't serious?

Well they were things like I should've hired somebody sooner for HR because we knew that Rodger (Smith) was leaving. But you know you don't hire someone six months before they start the job you generally hire three months or so before they start the job. You generally wait so I didn't agree with that. So I asked another person on staff to move into that position and the board said that was not legal.

I felt the things they were criticizing for were things within my purview as superintendent to do. And they felt they had to make all the decisions.

Another one was that Holly McClurg's (the staff person who filled the HR position until a permanent replacement was hired) name was in the board agenda and I shouldn't have done that and I went back and counted all the names of people hired in the agenda and there were 200 something. So those are the kinds of things that were in there.

To me they were picky and they were easily remedied so I didn't feel there was any substantial cause in that document and I don't feel there was substantial cause in the issue over the parent either so I don't know what the substantial cause is.

If there were substantial cause, why wouldn't they have told me? It doesn't make any sense to me at all. If I did something egregious to hurt the district, why haven't they come forward and told me what I've done?

I really believe it's more of a personality issue, what I said before - what my vision of what the superintendent's job is and what the board's job is and their idea of what it was.

What are your plans now and are you going to stay in San Diego?

Well, no. I will probably move back to Long Beach. My husband and I are making plans deciding what we're going to do. I am doing some consulting already and I'm enjoying that. I know that Tom Bishop, after he left, he coaches a lot of small district superintendents around the county so he's quite busy and I hope to be busy too.

Also, I love to teach. I've taught at graduate programs at so many different universities and I really miss it. I had always taught while being a superintendent. I'd been teaching at Pepperdine and Cal State Northridge and I had been doing that on and off while I was superintendent at Hermosa Beach.

When I came here I just did not have the time, I was just so overwhelmed with the number of board meetings and all the stuff that was going on, so I'm looking forward to doing that again.

And also spending time with your grandchildren?

I've got nine grandchildren and I'm really enjoying - the youngest one is only six months old so she's really a joy. The oldest one is 13 so he's in junior high school and that's really an interesting thing.

Do you have any advice for James Peabody?

I think that the community is going to make some important decisions in November. I think you need a board that has the whole community's interests at heart and I think that will happen in November and I think then it will be a good place for him to be working because everything else is in place.

You know the kids, the parents, the staff it's a good district. They consistently score higher and higher and I mean it's just amazing. And that's a team effort. The reason for that is that you've got good kids and really talented people working to help those kids. I think that he's in a good position to be for next two years and I wish him luck. I want the district to settle down and be happy.

New DMUSD board president elected

Source: Del Mar Times

Thursday, May 13, 2010
By Karen Billing

Steven McDowell became the new president of the Del Mar Union School District board of trustees, replacing Comischell Rodriguez who resigned on April 26. Trustee Doug Perkins was also nominated to be president but declined, citing concerns about his availability.

Co-location of district office option eliminated

The trustees voted unanimously to take the idea of co-locating the district office at a school site off the table on May 5. Trustee Katherine White made the motion. She said the board heard a lot of valid safety concerns as well as concerns about zoning and the legality of co-locating.

Trustee Annette Easton said the option of co-locating is not feasible because of the amount of time and money needed for zoning changes and conditional use permits.

Comischell Rodriguez was hesitant to take co-location off the table without having identified a suitable office building alternative, given the fact that the district needs to be out of the Shores property, which the district sold to the city of Del Mar in 2008, by May 2011.

"I don't want to back ourselves into a corner," Rodriguez said.

She said even though co-location wasn't the best option, it did allow them an emergency plan in case they could not find a new location or if the city of Del Mar did not extend the lease.

"I think it's a good gesture on the board's part to take co-location off the table as long as we are actively pursuing property," Rodriguez said. "I'd like to see us actually begin to make offers soon."

Financial Task Force presents report

The district's financial task force presented their final report to the school board with the hope of holding public workshops to share their findings with a larger audience.

The Financial Task Force, made up of representatives from each school site, met nine times between January and April to study district finances and suggest strategies for the short and long term. Chair Jonathan Flam said the group came up with recommendations regarding the district's reserve policy and a basic aid contingency plan.

Del Mar is a basic aid district, which differs from revenue limit districts in that revenue limit districts get funding from the state based on enrollment and average daily attendance. Basic aid districts get to keep their property taxes in excess of their revenue limit, allowing the district an extra $10 million a year.

If for any reason basic aid status is greatly decreased or eliminated, the task force recommends the reserve should be spent incrementally to preserve programs.

Currently, the district's reserve sits at $11 million.

The task force recommended that the district keep their reserve balance between 22 and 30 percent of expenditures. Only if that reserve level falls below 22 percent should the district consider material cuts for the following year, Flam said.

"Don't do budget cuts and then end up with a surplus," said task force member Beth Westberg. "We don't want to make cuts in anticipation of something that may or may not happen."

The task force also recommended that the district look into the feasibility of an "opt-out" option for the DMUSD health insurance and a district pre-school to boost revenue. The task force recommended that if the pre-school option is explored, the district should perform a comprehensive business plan and market analysis.

ESC Staffing distribution for 2010-2011

As of May 11, 2010, the ESC FTE distribution among the schools was determined based on projected pupil enrollment (table below).

School	Music	Art	P.E.	Science	Tech.	Drama	Other	Total
Ashley Falls	0.50	0.50	1.00	1.00	0.60	0.00	0.00	3.60
Carmel Del Mar	0.50	0.40	0.50	1.00	1.00	0.00	0.00	3.40
Del Mar Heights	0.00	1.00	1.00	0.40	1.00	0.00	0.00	3.40
Del Mar Hills	0.40	0.60	1.00	1.00	0.40	0.00	0.00	2.50
Ocean Air	1.00	1.00	1.00	1.00	1.00	0.50	0.00	5.50
Sage Canyon	1.00	1.50	1.00	1.00	1.00	0.00	0.30	5.80
Sycamore Ridge	0.60	0.50	0.60	0.50	1.00	0.00	0.00	5.00
Torrey Hills	0.80	1.00	0.60	1.00	1.00	0.60	0.00	5.00
Totals	4.80	6.50	5.80	6.90	7.00	1.10	0.30	32.40

The permanent pink slips slated for 12 classroom teachers were rescinded. Three ESC teachers and one district office staff member listed below received permanent pink slips.

Name	Position	School
Arah Allard	ESC Music Teacher	Del Mar Hills
Michelle Beeson	ESC Music Teacher	Del Mar Heights
Kathleen Shanahan	Coordinator of State and Federal Projects	District Office
Shayne Singleton	ESC Art Teacher	Sage Canyon

Interim superintendent is permanently hired

Source: Del Mar Times

Thursday, May 13, 2010
By Karen Billing

Peabody officially part of DMUSD

The "interim" is no longer a part of James Peabody's title at the Del Mar Union School District. The school board voted on May 6 that Peabody would officially become Sharon McClain's replacement, approving a two-year contract for the Julian Union High School District superintendent.

The quick decision is a contrast to the hiring process for McClain, who was selected after a summer-long, nationwide search in 2008 in which a search firm and parents were heavily involved.

Peabody has been splitting his time between the Del Mar and Julian districts since April 1 but his position at Julian will end June 30 when the second part of his contract begins in Del Mar.

"I think it's going to be a great opportunity," said Peabody, who said he is very impressed with the district in his month serving as the interim superintendent.

He said the staff and teachers are "incredible" and he has loved being in the classroom at different campuses, seeing the "magic" the teachers create. The level of parent involvement also strikes him.

"The community support of the schools is almost breathtaking," Peabody said.

Peabody, whom the trustees all call "Jim," has more than 40 years of experience working in education. He got his start in 1970, teaching biology in the Grossmont Union High School District. He would later to go on to be that district's superintendent for 34 years.

For the last three years he has been superintendent at Julian and he has also served on the Alpine Union School District board and the San Diego County Office of Education as the regional director of school support services.

"In getting to know Jim these last few weeks the intent is that we want him to act in the full capacity as superintendent," McDowell said.

The first part of Peabody's contact runs until June 30, paid per diem and not entitled to benefits. His two-year contract begins July 1 and will run through June 30, 2012. According to Jeanne Blumenfeld, an attorney with Stutz Artiano Shinoff & Holtz, the contract is for an annual salary of $180,00 including fringe benefits, an auto allowance, 24 sick days, 25 vacation days and a $1,200 a month retirement allowance.

Trustee Comsichell Rodriguez said she was thankful that Peabody was willing to stay on and said he will be a very valuable resource for the district.

Pink slips rescinded for classroom teachers

Source:

Thursday, May 13, 2010
By Karen Billing

The remaining preliminary pink slips given out to 22 classroom teachers on March were all rescinded at the Del Mar Union School District's May 5 special meeting.

Of the 22 classroom teachers given preliminary layoff notices, 12 were still in danger of losing their jobs. The Board of Trustees' unanimous vote to rescind all pink slips for classroom teachers was met with cheers.

Thirteen Extended Studies Curriculum teachers were also spared due to the fundraising efforts of the Del Mar Education Foundation.

Trustee Katherine White made the motion to save the 12 teachers despite the fact that the district does not yet know final enrollment and staffing needs. There was a proposal to increase class sizes, which threatened 12 teaching positions. Instead, in 2010-11 class sizes will be reduced to 20-to-1 in lower grades and 27-to-1 in upper grades. White said based on her quick, "back of the sheet" calculations, "it seems to me we're going to need these people."

During the public comment period David Skinner, a Carmel Del Mar teacher and Del Mar California Teachers Association president who was attending his first meeting since beating throat and neck cancer, asked the board to rescind the pink slips.

Skinner said even though they didn't know all the numbers yet, the teachers should be kept on. He said the board took risks earlier in the evening by removing the cost-saving measure of co-locating the district office at a school site and by hiring James Peabody as their new superintendent after just a month as the interim superintendent.

"Ideally we'd have all the information and there would be no risks involved," Skinner said. "I think these people are worth the risk."

"David had some good points," Trustee Annette Easton said. "The people are the heart of this district and it's always been what has distinguished us from the rest."

Trustee Doug Perkins said while he was concerned about not knowing the final numbers, his gut said that bringing back all the teachers was doable.

"We have been through so many ups and downs, well so many downs ... David's comments really struck home," Trustee Comischell Rodriguez said. "We're a family and when you go through hard times, you gotta huddle back. ... There will be challenges but I'd like to cut in other areas."

During public comment, the board also heard the voices of some of the teachers they would lose if the pink slips went through.

Sage Canyon fourth-grade teacher Sarah Raskin said she could not believe that she would be going from this year's Sage teacher of the year to unemployed.

"I didn't enter this profession for money or fame but to make a difference in the life of children," said Raskin, a teacher with 10 years of experience, three in Del Mar. "I have poured my heart and soul into teaching my students."

Lauren Markarian, second-grade teacher at Ashley Falls, gave the board a look inside the last few days - her thinking about her students as she walked her dog in the morning, spending her own money to buy art supplies, getting to school a half an hour early to prep for STAR testing and holding back tears in front of her classroom after receiving a pink slip that Monday night.

"I don't want to leave here, I just love it," Markarian said.

Both teachers hugged and cheered after the board made the vote to save them.

While all classroom teachers saw their pink slips rescinded, some extended studies curriculum will be cut as all principals have completed their ESC allocation needs.

The Del Mar Education Foundation raised enough money to save 13 extended studies curriculum teachers and when paired with the 19 teachers the district will fund, that brings the total to 32.4 full time equivalents for ESC.

The final ESC cuts include 1.8 FTE of music, 0.5 art, 0.4 from science, 0.2 from physical education and 0.5 Spanish. These cuts are significantly scaled back due to fundraising efforts, considering initial cuts included 6.6 FTE from music, 7.0 from art and 6.0 from PE.

---

More information:

• ESC Staffing distribution for 2010-2011

Regular Board Meeting • May 12, 2010

DEL MAR UNION SCHOOL DISTRICT
BOARD OF TRUSTEES
REVISED

May 12, 2010 Closed Session: 4:30 p.m. Open Session: 5:45 p.m.

Del Mar Hills Academy 14085 Mango Drive Del Mar, CA 92014

ORGANIZATIONAL BUSINESS:

Call to Order

Public Input Concerning Items on the Special Closed Session Agenda

Adjournment into Closed Session:

Closed Session: 4:30 PM

1. Conference with Real Property Negotiator: (Government Code 54956.8)
   11189 and 11199 Sorrento Valley Road, San Diego, CA 92121;
   4106, 4110, 4116 & 4122 Sorrento Valley Blvd., San Diego, CA 92122;
   Jimmy Durante Blvd. & San Dieguito Rd., Del Mar, CA 92014;
   Under Discussion: Purchase of Property; 225 9th Street, Del Mar, CA, 92014
   Under Discussion: Sale/Lease Terms Between the City of Del Mar and the DMUSD;
   Agency Negotiator: James Peabody, Superintendent

Adjournment of Closed Session

RECONVENE OPEN SESSION - 5:45 p.m.

REPORT OF ACTION TAKEN IN CLOSED SESSION

1. FLAG SALUTE

2. STUDENT RECOGNITION – To be presented at the May 26, 2010 Board meeting.

3. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA
   

   1. ORGANIZATIONAL
      Election of Clerk of the Board of Trustees

4. CORRESPONDENCE/COMMUNICATIONS
   

   1. Correspondence:

   2. Public Input:

5. REPORTS, RECOGNITIONS AND HEARINGS
   

   1. Student Recognition
      Erica Guo, 6th grade, Torrey Hills School
   2. Report
      PTA Report: Kathy Nahum, Del Mar Heights PTA President
   3. Report
      Board Report/Comments
   4. Report
      Superintendent’s Report

---

BOARD PRESIDENT CALLS FOR BLUE SPEAKER SLIPS

---

6. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES
   Minutes of Regular Board Meeting of April 28, 2010
   Minutes of Special Board Meeting of May 5, 2010

   1. CONSENT ITEMS
      Approval of Consent Items
      Agenda items preceded by an asterisk (*) compose the Consent Agenda, and unless removed at the request of a board member, will be approved by the Board as a group

      *10.1 Board Approval of Site Performance Agreements
      *10.2 Board Action to Declare District Property Obsolete and Surplus and to Dispose of or Donate per Education Code 17546(a)(b)(c)

7. CURRICULUM AND INSTRUCTION

   1. Second Reading and Board Approval, School Accountability Report Cards 2008-2009

8. ADMINISTRATION AND POLICY

   1. Discussion, Board Members Attendance at 6th Grade Promotions

   2. Reminder of Upcoming Events

9. OPERATIONS AND FACILITIES

   1. 2010/2011 Enrollment and Staffing Projections

10. BUSINESS AND FINANCE

11. PERSONNEL

    1. Board Approval of Resolution 2010-10, Resolution and Decision Not to Reemploy Certain Certificated Employees for the 2010-11 School Year

12. ARTICLES OF INTEREST

13. PRELIMINARY ITEMS FOR MAY 26, 2010 BOARD MEETING

    • Recognitions
    • School Enrollment Caps, 2010/2011
    • Demographics, 2010/2011
    • Staffing Allocations, 2010/2011
    • Third Reading and Approval, Revised Administrative Regulation 3580: District Records
    • Recommendation for Strategic Planning
    • 1st Reading, Board of Trustees School Site Visitation Schedule, 2010/2011
    • Declaration of Need

ADJOURNMENT OF MEETING

---

More information:

• Board Packet/Agenda

Can Anaheim chief bring peace to Capo?

By SCOTT MARTINDALE
2010-05-10 18:49:17

SAN JUAN CAPISTRANO – Joseph Farley, the superintendent of Anaheim's 33,700-student high school district for the past five years, has been named the sole finalist to become the next schools chief of the high-performing but politically fractured Capistrano Unified School District.

Farley will be responsible for managing 56 schools and an annual budget of about $372 million. He is expected to be officially hired at a school board meeting Tuesday and would assume the post July 1.

Farley declined to comment Monday, emphasizing he was a finalist for the position and has not been hired.

Farley, who lives in Newport Beach, would be paid a base salary of $275,000 annually, plus would receive retirement benefits, a portion of his health insurance costs and $600 a month for car expenses, according to his four-year contract, which was posted on Capistrano Unified's website Monday.

"The parties recognize that the demands of the superintendent, the key management position of the district, will require him to average more than eight hours a day and/or more than 40 hours per week," the 12-page contract says. "In that respect, the board hereby certifies that the duties, need for the flexibility of hours, salary, benefit structure and authority of the position are of such a nature that the position should be set apart from those other positions which are subject to the overtime provisions."

Capistrano Unified's next superintendent will have the dubious distinction of being the seventh person in the past four years to fill the district's top administrative post.

The school board fired its last permanent schools chief, Superintendent A. Woodrow Carter, in March 2009 after a tumultuous, 18-month tenure. Roberta Mahler, a retired schools administrator from the Buena Park-based Centralia School District, was hired a few months later, in June, to replace Carter on a one-year basis.

Mahler is being paid $975 a day, or $245,250 a year, assuming 14 unpaid vacation days and holidays and including a $450 monthly car allowance.

Carter received a base salary of $273,000 annually, and a total compensation package of $324,950 a year.

FIVE YEARS IN ANAHEIM

Farley is being paid a base salary of $237,400 annually as superintendent of the 21-campus Anaheim Union High School District. He has been in that role since 2005, and in 2008, received a four-year contract extension until 2012.

The district serves junior high and high school students across much of Anaheim, as well as Cypress, Buena Park, La Palma and Stanton.

Anaheim Union Trustee Thomas "Hoagy" Holguin declined to immediately comment Monday, saying he had just returned from a vacation and was unaware Farley might be leaving.

During his five-year tenure in Anaheim Union, Farley has taken the district successfully through years of painful budget cutting and gained tremendous respect in the process.

Among his many accomplishments, Farley is largely credited with turning around a school construction bond project that was facing heavy scrutiny.

An independent audit that was released just a month after Farley's hiring showed that because of earlier mismanagement, the district would be able to complete less than half of the projects planned under a $132 million bond program.

Like Capistrano, Anaheim Union has been forced to cut tens of millions of dollars from its budget in recent years. Most recently, under Farley's leadership, Anaheim Union was able to get teachers to agree to a 3.24 percent pay cut next year in the form of six furlough days.

"His integrity and dedication to doing what is right for the students and for the district – not what is expedient or political – is unparalleled," Anaheim Union Trustee Katherine Smith said in a 2008 interview.

Holguin echoed those sentiments, saying at the time that Farley had more than met the board's expectations.

"He has affirmed, time and again, that our confidence was not misplaced when we selected him," Holguin said.

NEW CHALLENGES

Capistrano will come with a special set of challenges for Farley. The South County school district – Orange County's second-largest, after Santa Ana Unified – remains embroiled in bitter, parent-driven politicking.

Last week, a group of district activists announced they have gathered enough petition signatures to force a recall election this November that could oust two district trustees. It would be the district's second recall election in as many years.

And the school district is still reeling from three days of teacher picketing last month that forced the 52,000-student district to cancel or postpone scores of programs and activities and pushed attendance rates as low as 30 percent.

The bitter standoff – over the language of a 10.1 percent pay cut imposed on teachers – laid bare Capistrano's deep community divisions and ongoing political rancor.

Even so, Capistrano has consistently affirmed its academic prowess. Last year, the district's growth Academic Performance Index score, an overall gauge of a school district's scholastic standing, shot up 21 points, to 857. The statewide benchmark is 800.

"He is very oriented to student achievements," Capistrano school board President Anna Bryson said in an interview last week, "and he is looking forward to taking a very high-achieving district to the next level."

Contact the writer: 949-454-7394 or smartindale@ocregister.com

---

More information:

• Database of total superintendent pay for 2008-09 for all O.C. districts
• New Capistrano Unified superintendent will be Anaheim's Farley *Updated

More turbulence in little Del Mar

By Marsha Sutton
Source: Carmel Valley News

Just when people were starting to feel like the Del Mar Union School District could begin to move forward after months of turmoil leading up to the recent firing of former superintendent Sharon McClain, board president Comischell Rodriguez dropped a bomb.

“Today I have informed the superintendent and board that I am resigning from the office of president of the Board of Trustees of the Del Mar Union School District,” her press release dated April 26 begins.

That simple sentence could have been enough, but Rodriguez didn’t stop there. She continued, in her statement, to level some very serious allegations against her colleagues, some that implied a violation of the Brown Act, among other transgressions.

“I’m not alleging Brown Act violations,” Rodriguez made clear this week. “I’m not alleging secret backroom meetings at all.”

But there are other charges that clearly perturbed her and made her feel marginalized by fellow board members. “I stand by my statement that says I felt isolated,” she said.

Rodriguez first complained in her press release that support for her as president of the board has been withdrawn, with the implication – as indicated by her use of the phrase “for the past few weeks” – that this has happened since the vote was taken on March 31 to fire McClain, an action that passed over her lone objection.

“For the past few weeks,” the full sentence reads, “I have been isolated by the majority of the board to the extent that certain members have taken it upon themselves to sign official documents without authorization.”

Furthermore, she said that “these same board member(s) meet with legal counsel without authorization.”

She goes on to say that “attempts have been made to exclude me from closed session conversations,” and she references “behind-the-scenes email conversations and demands.”

Responding to these statements by email, trustee Annette Easton said, “I have not signed any official documents. I am not aware of documents that have been signed.” And she said this, regarding meeting with legal counsel: “I do not know what she is talking about.”

“I didn't know what she meant by unauthorized signing of ‘official documents’ nor ‘exclusion from closed session’ and am unclear about what ‘behind the scenes demands’ she references,” said a surprised trustee Doug Perkins in an email.

Trustee Steven McDowell wrote to say, “Until I have spoken to Comischell, I don't feel it would be appropriate” to comment on the press release.

A dispute over timing

Trustee Katherine White, who responded to questions in a telephone interview, was able to give some hint about the possible cause of Rodriguez’s decision to resign as board president.

“I’m sure she’s talking about me when she says taking over the role of the board presidency,” White said. “It’s because I tried to get another member to fill her spot when she couldn’t do it.”

The issue concerns the contract for interim superintendent Jim Peabody. White and Rodriguez had agreed to work together on the contract for Peabody, whose first day at the district was to be April 1, a Thursday. The following week was spring break, when Rodriguez was away on vacation.

“I thought we were going to be doing it together,” White said. “I didn’t know she was going [away]. We hired him on the first. Then everybody went out of town.”

White claims that Rodriguez told White to find someone else to replace her because she was away on vacation and then needed to be gone after that for a personal family matter.

“She was supposed to work on that with me, and she’s the one who said she couldn’t do it,” White said.

White said Rodriguez wanted Perkins to replace her. “But Doug wouldn’t do it, so Steven came in because Doug couldn’t meet on any of the days,” White said.

White said she did sign a letter of intent for Peabody to begin work, but did it legitimately in Rodriguez’s absence. “That was one page that went through the terms that we all agreed on and that allowed him to start working,” White said.

White said she and McDowell met with attorney Jeanne Blumenfeld during this time but that the meeting was about Peabody’s contract. “It was not without authorization,” White said. “We were definitely authorized to do that by the board.”

Rodriguez disagreed with White’s recollection of the timing, saying White was “dancing around some facts.”

“We met very quickly at the end right before spring break,” Rodriguez said. “And it was decided that we would have a committee of two – it would be Katherine and me. It was determined that … I was going to be a part of it as president because that was supposed to be important.”

She said it was agreed that they would begin after spring break.

“I got home after spring break and found out that there had been work already started – not even started but basically done,” Rodriguez said. “I did not know that it was going to happen when I was gone.”

Rodriguez emphasized that she did not want to portray the issue as a dispute between two people, saying there was more going on than this one example. But it’s clear that this was specifically referenced in her resignation letter.

She said while she was away, she checked in with the district regularly, “because there were some items that I was still being asked to do while I was gone. Not at any time at all during that time was I informed that there was work being done in my absence.”

Rodriguez said she did eventually send an email to White telling her she was unable to participate in the contract work any longer, but that it was not sent until two weeks later, after she had discovered that work had already been done on the contract without her knowledge.

“It was almost like I was a formality to be on that committee,” she said. “It was spring break and then the following week went by and it was the third week [when] I said [to] meet without me.”

The subcommittee proceeded without her and the letter of intent was signed before she told them she was off the subcommittee, she said, disagreeing with White’s recollection of the timeline.

An investigation

At the last school board meeting, White asked Peabody to investigate Rodriguez’s claims and to release redacted emails “where Comischell resigns from the contract subcommittee and where she requests we find another member to take her place as she will probably be out of town due to an illness in her family.”

Peabody said he is in the process of investigating the matter and will release details as soon as he has completed his work.

“I can’t conjecture on what will be included in the report when it’s done because I haven’t even started it yet,” Peabody said last Friday. “I will report it to the board – they’re the ones that asked me to do it. So it will probably become a matter of public record. As soon as I can get a handle on it, I’ll be forthright.”

Rodriguez said she fully supports Peabody’s investigation, which will include this and other concerns raised by Rodriguez, including her alleged exclusion from closed session conversations and behind-the-scenes emails.

White disagreed that Rodriguez had been excluded from closed session conversations, expressing bewilderment.

“Go look through all of our minutes,” White said. “You can see when our meetings started, when our meetings ended, and who was at them. She was at every single second of closed session. I don’t know what she’s talking about.”

Easton seemed equally confused, saying, “Ms. Rodriguez has participated in all closed session conversations. I am not aware of any attempts to exclude her.”

All board members, except McDowell who did not respond to requests for a comment, expressed disappointment over Rodriguez’s decision to step down.

“I’m sorry she did it,” White said. “I nominated her and I stand by my nomination. I believe that she can do the job. But I’ll support her if she decides she can’t do this any more, and I’ll support her if she decides to continue.”

“I was perplexed and disappointed,” said Easton in an email statement. “From my perspective, while not always agreeing on decisions, the entire board was working well together.” She said the resignation announcement “only serves to further polarize and politicize a community in need of reconciliation.”

“My reaction to her resignation is I'm saddened, as I still believe, as I did in December, that Comischell has some unique leadership capabilities to help DMUSD navigate through these difficult times,” said Perkins. “I wish she'd reconsider and complete her office until it's up in December.”

Despite differences, all trustees agreed that the focus needs to return to the students and district business. Time to move on, was the common refrain. But will this community let them?

Marsha Sutton can be reached at SuttComm@san.rr.com

DMUSD board names Peabody new superintendent, saves 22 classroom teacher jobs

By Karen Billing

Source: Carmel Valley News

Del Mar Union School District trustees today voted unanimously to give Interim Superintendent James Peabody a two-year contract as the district’s new superintendent and to rescind pink slips given to 22 classroom teachers.

At a special board meeting — where trustees also agreed to drop the idea of co-locating the district office at any school site and named Steven McDowell the new board president — trustees accomplished a lot but Peabody’s contract was perhaps the biggest surprise.

“In getting to know Jim these last few weeks the intent is that we want him to act in the full capacity as superintendent,” McDowell said.

His two-year contract as superintendent will begin on July 1. It follows an interim contract, where he was also serving superintendent for the Julian school district.

The news that all classroom teacher’ jobs would be preserved was happy news as only 12 teachers remained uncertain of their futures with the district — other teachers had already heard news that their pink slips were rescinded.

Trustee Katherine White made the motion to save the 12 teachers despite the fact that the district does not yet know final enrollment and staffing needs. Since classroom sizes will not be increased and instead reduced to 20:1 in lower grades and 27:1 in upper grades, White said in her quick calculations, she was pretty sure “we’re going to need all those people.”

While all classroom teachers saw their pink slips rescinded — a vote that was followed by big cheers and hugs from teachers in attendance — some Extended Studies Curriculum positions will trimmed now that the principals have completed their ESC allocations.

The Del Mar Education Foundation raised enough money to save 13 extended studies curriculum teachers and when paired with the 19 teachers the district will fund, that brings the total to the equivalent of 32.4 full time spots for ESC.

The final ESC cuts include 1.8 FTE of music, 0.5 art, 0.4 from science, 0.2 from physical education and 0.5 Spanish. These cuts are significantly scaled back due to fundraising efforts, considering initial cuts included 6.6 FTE from music, 7.0 from art and 6.0 from PE.

The board’s decision not to consider co-locating the district office at any school site was a unanimous decision, but some trustees had reservations about it.

Trustee Comischell Rodriguez, in her first meeting since resigning as board president, said it was good to have the concept as an emergency option in case they weren’t able to find a building to house their district office or extend the lease on the Shores property by their May 2011 deadline.

“I think it’s a good gesture on the board’s part to take co-location off the table as long as we are actively pursuing property (for the new district office),” Rodriguez said. “I’d like to see us actually begin to make offers soon.”

Permanent pink slips to be announced at DMUSD board meeting

Agenda items 12-14 for the May 5, 2010 Board Meeting deal with teacher layoffs.

At DMUSD in previous years when preliminary pink slips were issued on March 15, they were rescinded by the May 15 deadline, but at tonight's meeting, permanent layoff notices will be issued for 12 classroom teachers and 3 ESC teachers.

The number of positions being eliminated has been reduced from what was determined originally in February prior to the March 15 notices going out. The table below shows the original reductions and the amended reductions.

Services to be reduced	Original Reduction	Amended Reduction
Music Teaching	6.6 FTE	1.8 FTE
Art Teaching	7.0 FTE	0.5 FTE
Science Teaching	2.2 FTE	0.4 FTE
Physical Education Teaching	6.0 FTE	0.2 FTE
Technology Teaching	3.2 FTE	0 FTE
Spanish Teaching	0.5 FTE	0.5 FTE
Classroom Teachers K-6	22.0 FTE	12.0 FTE
Coordinator of State and Federal Projects	1.0 FTE	1.0 FTE

The hope is that additional pink slips can be rescinded before classes resume again in August. Per correspondence received from an Ashley Falls teacher, DMUSD has recently contacted DMCTA requesting to re-open negotiations on class size increases for the 2010-2011 school year. An increase in class size would result in fewer pink slips being rescinded.

The teachers/district staff listed below are scheduled to receive permanent pink slips tonight.

Name	Position	School
Arah Allard	ESC Music Teacher	Del Mar Hills
Michelle Beeson	ESC Music Teacher	Del Mar Heights
Marisa Camarillo	Third Grade Teacher	Torrey Hills
Julie Choi	Second Grade Teacher	Sage Canyon
Abby Farricker	Fifth Grade Teacher	Del Mar Hills
Sarah Grosso	First Grade Teacher	Torrey Hills
Mandy Jackson	Fifth Grade Teacher	Torrey Hills
Jodi Lack	First Grade Teacher	Sage Canyon
Lauren Markarian	Second Grade Teacher	Ashley Falls
Shannon McAfee	Fourth Grade Teacher	Torrey Hills
Shawna Murphy	First Grade Teacher	Torrey Hills
Sarah Raskin	Fourth Grade Teacher	Sage Canyon
Kathleen Shanahan	Coordinator of State and Federal Projects	District Office
Adrienne Sheffield	Sixth Grade Teacher	Ashley Falls
Shayne Singleton	ESC Art Teacher	Sage Canyon
Melissa Weinbaum-Davis	Sixth Grade Teacher	Ashley Falls

Please show your support for these DMUSD teachers by attending tonight's board meeting.

---

More information:

• Special Board Meeting Agenda - May 5, 2010
• Agenda Item 7: Election of President of the Board of Trustees
• Agenda Item 8: Board Approval, Remove from Consideration the Co-location of the District Office on an Existing School Site
• Agenda Item 10: Board Approval of Financial Task Force Final Report
• Agenda Item 11: Salary Schedule
• Agenda Item 12: Reducing and Eliminating CertainCertificated Services for the 2010-11 School Year
• Agenda Item 13: Adoption of the Proposed Decision of the Administrative Law Judge
• Agenda Item 14: Resolution and Decision Not to Reemploy Certain Certificated Employees for the 2010-11 School Year

Special Board Meeting • May 5, 2010

DEL MAR UNION SCHOOL DISTRICT
SPECIAL BOARD MEETING
BY THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES

May 5, 2010 Closed Session: 5:15 p.m. Open Session: 5:45 p.m.

Del Mar Hills Academy 14085 Mango Drive Del Mar, CA 92014

BUSINESS TO BE TRANSACTED WILL BE LIMITED TO THE FOLLOWING:

1. Call to Order

2. Approval of the Agenda

3. Public Input Concerning Items on the Special Closed Session Agenda

4. CLOSED SESSION AGENDA:

   1. Conference with Labor Negotiator: (Government Code 54957.6)
      Agency Designated Representative: Daniel R. Shinoff, Stutz Artiano Shinoff & Holtz;
      Unrepresented Employee: Superintendent

   Reconvene to Open Session @ 5:45 p.m.

5. Report of Action Taken in Closed Session

6. Flag Salute

7. Election of President of the Board of Trustees

8. Board Approval, Remove from Consideration the Co-location of the District Office on an Existing School Site

9. Board Approval, Contract between James D. Peabody and the Del Mar Union School District

10. Time Certain: 6:30 p.m.
    Board Acceptance of the Strategic Planning Financial Task Force Final 3-31 Report

11. Board Approval, Revised Certificated Management Salary Schedule

12. Board Approval of Resolution 2010-09, Reducing and Eliminating Certain Certificated Services for the 2010-11 School Year

13. Adoption of the Proposed Decision of the Administrative Law Judge

14. Board Approval of Resolution 2010-10, Resolution and Decision Not to Reemploy Certain Certificated Employees for the 2010-11 School Year

15. Adjournment of meeting

More information:

• Board Packet/Agenda
• Appendices

Capistrano district picks schools chief finalist

Source: OC Register

By SCOTT MARTINDALE
2010-05-04 13:15:42

SAN JUAN CAPISTRANO – Capistrano Unified's school board has tentatively selected a successor to outgoing Interim Superintendent Bobbi Mahler, but has not released the finalist's name pending a reference check and visit to his school district, school board President Anna Bryson said.

The individual, who is male and a superintendent at another school district, would be responsible for managing 56 schools and an annual budget of about $372 million. He is expected to be officially hired at a school board meeting May 11 and would assume the post by July 1, Bryson said.

"We're very proud of our choice," Bryson said of Monday night's closed-door decision. "He was notified right after our board meeting, and he was very excited and very energetic and looking forward to it. He is very oriented to student achievements, and he is looking forward to taking a very high-achieving district to the next level."

Capistrano Unified's next superintendent will have the dubious distinction of being the seventh person in the past four years to fill the district's top administrative post.

The school board fired its last permanent schools chief, Superintendent A. Woodrow Carter, in March 2009 after a tumultuous, 18-month tenure. Mahler, a retired schools administrator from the Buena Park-based Centralia School District, was hired a few months later, in June, to replace Carter on a one-year basis.

(Click here to view a timeline of the political instability surrounding Capistrano's last seven superintendents.)

NATIONWIDE SEARCH

Capistrano's superintendent finalist was chosen after an exhaustive, nationwide search that netted 46 qualified applicants.

Bryson said the school board was looking to offer him a three-year contract, although she said its length and his salary were still being hammered out.

Three district trustees will visit the finalist's school district, likely this week, and also will contact its school board to do a reference check, Bryson said.

It is unknown when his name will be released; it could be as late as May 11, Bryson said.

Bryson also declined to disclose if he works in Orange County.

Steven Fish, the superintendent of neighboring Saddleback Valley Unified, on Monday announced he will be leaving effective July 1, but Fish is retiring and is not Capistrano's finalist.

POLITICAL UNREST

Capistrano Unified – Orange County's second-largest school district, after Santa Ana Unified – remains embroiled in bitter, parent-driven politicking.

A group of district activists on Monday announced they have gathered enough petition signatures to force a recall election this November that could oust two district trustees. It would be the district's second recall election in as many years.

And the school district is still reeling from three days of teacher picketing a week ago that forced the 52,000-student district to cancel or postpone scores of programs and activities and pushed student attendance rates as low as 30 percent.

The bitter standoff – which was over the language of a 10.1 percent pay cut imposed on teachers – laid bare Capistrano's deep community divisions and ongoing political rancor.

Bryson said the superintendent finalist had "done his research" and was aware of the political challenges.

"He is very aware," Bryson said. "This is a superintendent who enjoys a challenge, and he certainly has proven it with his track record."

Bryson also said he would be in it for the long haul.

Three years ago, following a similar nationwide search, Capistrano's school board selected Placentia-Yorba Linda Unified schools chief Dennis Smith to become its next superintendent. But he walked off the job after less than a month, citing "uncertainty and instability" in the district.

"The finalist is not an interim," Bryson said. "This is not a man who thinks like an interim. He likes to see the long-term results of his work. This superintendent will create news of a different type going forward. He will bring the attention back to where it belongs – the education of 52,000 children."

Contact the writer: 949-454-7394 or smartindale@ocregister.com