Here is your latest news from Ground Zero in the War on Education, aka the Capistrano (Capo) Unified School District:
- Capo Unified Children First candidates
Gary Pritchard, John Alpay.
On Tuesday the 13th, the day before the recall of Trustees Ken Maddox and Mike Winsten was officially announced (it’ll be on the Nov. 2 ballot as expected) the Children First Alliance 2010 endorsed their hand-picked candidates to take their place:
John Alpay, a San Clemente corporate attorney and member of the OC Republican Central Committee, who vows to represent three constituencies only: taxpayers, children, and homeowners; and
Gary Pritchard, an Aliso Viejo music professor and previous Democratic senatorial candidate against Mimi Walters, who believes school board members “should be working more closely with parents, teachers and community leaders, as well as working to shore up school financing in Sacramento and Washington.”
(The CUSD includes all or part of the cities of San Clemente, Dana Point, San Juan Capistrano, Laguna Niguel, Aliso Viejo, Mission Viejo and Rancho Santa Margarita, and the communities of Las Flores, Coto de Caza, Dove Canyon, Ladera Ranch, and Wagon Wheel.)
- The extremist incumbents of the “Reform Slate”
– Mike Winsten and Ken Maddox.
Predictably, partisans of the embattled incumbents are already trying to paint these two challengers as union tools, which in South Orange County is akin to labeling them Communists. Of course it’s a red herring – unions have nothing to do with either of these candidates, and Alpay in particular, although he pledges to “stand behind the teachers, as they teach my children,” has promised not to accept money, endorsements or assistance from the teacher’s union.
No, ignore the mudslinging. The parents have simply had enough of this so-called “reform” slate they ill-advisedly voted in a few years ago, and have now found the perfect candidates to “help restore balance and sanity to the Board and heal the damage caused to the district by the current trustees.”
I’ll be working on a “Capo Recall Primer” over the next few weeks, to explain why I call this “Ground Zero in the War on Education,” and why this struggle is vital and fascinating to Californians and Americans everywhere who care about our public schools and children. For those of you who already know the issues down in the district,
[poll id=”282″]
Ground zero indeed.
Reminds me of the belt of corruption in Southeast Los Angeles, where insurgents fought to oust the old guard of whites who they accused of corruption.
When the insurgents won, it turned out that they weren’t really opposed to patronage and corruption. Instead they just wanted their turn at the trough.
The Education Alliance folks promised a lot, but turned out to be even worse than the people they replaced – nakedly rewarding their cronies with legal settlements, pissing away money on more outside consultants, putting ideology ahead of common sense.
They were stealth candidates funded by the usual familiar cast of family values crowd, including your new BFF Riggy and his Education Alliance family values crowd.
This recall is a union power grab. The teachers’ union has already damaged our schools.
The union is an opponent local control, that seeks only to union seeks to protect pension privileges. The union is responsible for the recent strike in CUSD. The union is behind the recall, having organized striking teachers to collect signatures for the petition.
The union campaign is based on lies. The union-coalition of progressive liberal supporters seek to undo reform that is underway at CUSD.
Finally, the union seeks higher taxes. The platform of their supporters confirms this and Mr. Alpay has embraced the idea in his announcement of candidacy. Now that he’s on the record, let’s talk about where that “funding” will come from and who will be the principal beneficiary of it.
wow.
Where did this information come from?
Here’s the campaign in a nut shell
Children First Coalition
Local district elections. Reduce impact of all outside forces including the unions. Focus on education. Balanced ticket of various political viewpoints, each representing their own local schools and district, with the sum or the candidates representing the entire community.
Education Alliance Insiders
We stole this district fair and square so we can force our “reforms” through and reward our cronies.. Union, Union, Libruls, Gay Aborttionists! Uniion! Union!
These guys are political opportunists, nothing else. They both lost elections for other offices in 2008 and now they want to use CUSD as a stepping stone for their political aspirations. Do they even have kids in CUSD?
Neither candidate has any experience with public education in CUSD, zero!
Looks like CUCF is offering us a re-run of what we already have, not what CUSD needs.
Both of Alpay and Pritchard have young kids attending CUSD schools. Their interest in the school district is a lot deeper and more personal than simply a political stepping stone (in sharp contrast to the current school board members.)
It will be nice to have candidates whose decisions will affect their own children as we navigate through really tough financial times. Despite the ridiculous drumbeat of some…why would these father’s put the needs of any special interest or union above the education of their own children? Yet, they understand and value the important role of teachers and school support personnel who have daily contact with the students, as well. Definitely NOT more of the same!
These seem like 2 solid candidates to me.
Hey socmom
Unlike Ken Maddox aka Ken Lopez Maddox, Gary Prtchard actually lives in the area that he will represent and has a daughter in elementary school in Aliso Viejo.
There are things called “web sites” where you can look up what we call “Facts”. If you need to find a “website”, you can use something called “google” .
The kids have a little saying that might help you from making a fool out of yourself.
J F G I . Just F***ng Google It.
And may I remind you that Maddox aka Lopez-Maddox hasn’t had a real job in around a decade – a failed Sacramento politician who didn’t make the cut for the next office after he was termed out, then turned to lobbying, and now works for a Board of Equalization member who is almost as loopy as he is.
So a state assembly member doesn’t count as a job, unless it’s someone you support I mean. I guess liberal community college teacher qualifies though. At least Maddox has political experience. Pritchard couldn’t even become a failed politician after getting beat by Mimi Walters in 2008. Thanks for the tip on that “Google” thing. It helped me find out that Pritchard was endorsed by the liberal ECCOPAC, and that he’s pro-abortion and anti-Prop 8. It’s kind of hard to say you support children when you advocate terminating their lives in utero, but that’s just me.
Yes it is just you, Newbie, just you and a few others. The majority of California, and the majority of this district, is pro-choice.
And not as stridently anti-gay as you seem to think either.
The last time I checked, a majority of Californians still support Prop. 8. And I know I live in a blue state (but thankfully a red county), but more Americans are still pro-life than not (47%-45% by today’s Gallup poll), so it’s a bit more than a few others.
Newbie? It’s so close on both issues to be a wash either way, but both views are not extreme by a long shot.
Minor detail, anyone who runs as a Dem in the 33rd is doomed to lose, the registration is so far out there Republican to Dem it’s an impossible seat to win. If you google some more, Pritchard said he ran in order to give people a choice on the ballot, rather than leaving it empty. Some people think that even if they might have have a shot, people do deserve a choice. It’s called Democracy. Another thing you can Google.
So Pritchard has a daughter in the district, but Alpay doesn’t. Thank for the info, Quimby.
Why don’t you file a complaint about Maddox if he doesn’t live in his area? Or is it all a vast right wing conspiracy?
Sounds to me like you are saying we went through the strike and all this turmoil for ssdd (another saying kids have -same “stuff” different day)
Not very compelling.
soc mom
Alpay also has a child entering kindergarten in CUSD in the fall. If you actually read these candidates positions, you will see that they are both advocates of strong public schools.
The strike has nothing to do with these candidates. The strike was caused by the current dictatorial school board which has demonstrated poor judgment, an unwillingness to take formal traditional school board training and weak leadership skills ( to put it mildly.)
This blog article makes no effort to establish facts.
For example, labeling Winsten and Maddox as “extreme” is simply ridiculous. In fact, those behind the recall cite the apparent lack of action on the part of Winsten and Maddox as an element of their cause. The recallers also complain about “charter schools”, but the only charter schools in CUSD today were created during the tenure of the old board that was swept-away when the reformers became the majority 18 months ago. Winsten and Maddox had done nothing to bring charter schools to CUSD, much to the disappointment of this supporter.
But the fiscal reality of California education funding has been the overriding priority for the current Board. It is not a local matter. But the CUEA (local teacher union) has been receiving support from CTA and NEA to make our conservative community the test case in their effort to wrest away local control of our schools. Make no mistake, this recall is about control.
The current school Board has placed the issue of by-district elections on the ballot for the voters to decide in November. This is an issue that most of them campaigned on when they ran for office. However, now faced with a union-organized effort to take control of the Board, it is not surprising that they now regret their original support for the concept.
Some may call this change of position a flip-flop, or betrayal. In light of CUEA’s actions, it is a matter of political survival.
Make no mistake: If CUEA manages to gain control of a Board majority, we will have replaced the present conservative board with a group of union lackeys. Pritchard is a Democrat, actively opposed Proposition 8, who is a union member and public employee. John Alpay is so reliable that he has announced his candidacy for the San Clemente City Council and CUSD Board and filed candidacy papers for neither!
So what gives? Who is to be believed here? Shall we take the word of the union, the SOC Democratic Club and a group of disgruntled and displaced Board members, or shall we look at the actual record of Winsten and Maddox? I think they can be successful on their records.
Thanks for verifying my assertion, Parent.
Alpay has no educational experience in CUSD.
Everyone knows the strike was engineered to support the recall. It is just that I was hoping the union would has developed stronger candidates.
Give it up, socmom. It’s the Children First slate that has skin in the game, kids in the district. You think Alpay, with his three little kids about to enter the system, hasn’t been paying close attention to the chaos this “Reform Board” has sown?
Winsten is the ONLY member of the “Reform Board” who has kids in the district, from his multiple marriages; Maddox on the other hand (thrice-married) took his kid OUT of public school the moment he was elected to the board. Real devotion there. For these incumbents it’s all just a political game.
Never said they don’t have skin in the game. But since CUCF’s last slate received about $100K from CUEA, I am a little concerned about issues that are more than skin deep.
Publicly CUCF says this isn’t a union deal, but during the strike, their people kept saying “the teachers are the union and the union is the teachers” and “no board has ever survived a strike”. They talk a lot more about teachers than they do about students. It just makes me wonder.
Never said I like Lo-Mad and Winsten, I just don’t want the same kind of trustee with the added detraction of being in the union’s pocket.
SOC mom….with another lie
CUCF didn’t exist in the last election and no one received 100K in that election. CUEA spent money for some candidates but that wasn’t money donated to any group but spent to support some that were running. This is a typical dishonest tactic from Beall and his puppets since it was THEIR candidates that took all that money from outside interests and LIED about it until it was discovered.
CUEA, for all the bashing they get ,is a local interest and funded by teachers that teach our kids and live in our communities. Boucher and Ahmanson from the Education Alliance don’t live here and don’t give a crap about our schools. Neither do the Bealls, Russells and other thieves that convinced Bryson, Maddox and Winsten to vote in favor of $655,000 in out of court settlements that went right into their pockets and their attorneys.
What does the current board offer – lies, lawyers, out of court settlements, privitization of CUSD, cronyism, nepotism and out of district hidden support…oh don’t forget the Bealls and similar puppeteers.
What do the new candidates and Children First offer – no more lies, no more wasteful and out of control spending, a new way to elect trustees that saves the district $1,000,000 a decade in election costs, honest people that have kids in our schools and support public education.
I will take CUCF’s candidates over the current fools any day
Yes they did, childrens first changed the name but has the same ID# to file 460’s
The union did spend over 100k , pic in the OCR of the group giving a check to Kutnick
“But the fiscal reality of California education funding has been the overriding priority for the current Board.”
And they’ve thrown kids under the proverbial bus in the name of cutting to the bone and then blamed teachers for the fiscal woes of the district when it has nothing to do with teacher pay, but with the State’s massive budget cuts to education.
This is the problem, is the conquer and divide attitude of this board pitting parents against teachers, etc. while slashing class sizes, and everything else you can imagine and blaming the Union, by calling teacher thugs and greedy.
This board is blaming outside influence when they ARE the outside influence (Exactly ONE board member has a child in CUSD schools), in that they could care less about keeping CUSD the great district that it is but just cut cut cut like it was a business. It is not! It is driving parents to put their kids in public schools, screaming for more charter schools, they are accomplishing just what they set out to do. I just bet they didn’t think it would get them recalled.
They keep screaming UNION, UNION and it has nothing to do with the reality we live in, less money. People get that, but what they don’t understand is how this can be all the union’s fault. It is NOT.
CUSD deserves more than cuts, it needs some answers that goes beyond finger pointing and name calling from it’s BOT’s, school yard bullies that would get detention if they behaved that way during recess, but it’s okay if they are behind a dais or on their recall website.
As a parent, I expect more from people who are elected to protect the interests of my kids. I’m more worried about their education right now than my pocketbook. This lack of funds is not GOING TO GO AWAY, but each kid who is in larger classes, each child who gets shoved into a combo class because the parent feels pressured, that is also permanent and it can leave kids at a learning disadvantage for a long time to come. This is what should be the priority, not the BOTTOM LINE.
That’s what putting kids first is about. Not about calling teachers names.
Who mentioned teachers? Who is calling teachers names?
This is about the union.
And I should point out that it was Winsten, Maddox and the remainder of the Board who opposed the union’s proposal to increase class sizes (by putting pay and benefits ahead of teacher retention). How does more pay translate to better education when the alternative of more teachers is available? Especially, when the more teachers are already credentialed and working in the school district!
Unions are the teachers, CUEA are the teachers. And not one cent has been taken from the Union. This recall was not backed by the union. You can yell about that all you want, but this is parent driven.
Cut, cut, cut.
http://www.ocregister.com/articles/school-255653-million-high.html
The 2010-11 spending plan, which includes $34 million in budget cuts, incorporates savings from a 10.1 percent pay cut from district teachers totaling $19.7 million through June 2011.
…
Meanwhile, the district will eliminate the last vestiges of its class-size reduction program. The 25-to-1 student-teacher ratio in the first grade will jump to 31.5, mirroring class sizes at other grade levels.
…
Like many school districts, Capistrano has been hit hard by years of painful budget-cutting. Last June, the district trimmed $25.5 million, drastically scaling back class-size reduction in the primary grades and stripping funding from counseling, sports and arts and music programs, among other cuts. The district also imposed a 10 to 11 percent pay cut on all of its administrators that year.
The board keeps saying they spared class sizes, etc. But they did not. They’ve laid off teachers, supervisors and you still say it’s the unions fault. IT IS NOT, it is the economy,
BUT you still want to point fingers at the teachers. Thanks for proving my point.
Look who is talking about teachers!
Gosh, I was referring to CUEA and its CTA / NEA overlords.
Your comments are intended to mislead by omission. They are in the same form that CUEA has been using for months.
Specifically, CUSD’s Class Size Reduction program has been threatened since state funding of the district began to decline. The 25-to-1 ratio you cite was itself a compromise worked out the year before. Prior to that, the ratio was 20-to-1 in K-3 grades. Mike Winsten, in particular, fought for the preservation of this program until it was obvious that there would be no state funding for it. You seem to omit this fact.
And sure, the budget has been cut by $34 million, an amount that is typical (as a percentage of budget) for all districts. The 10.1 percent pay cut imposed on teachers is also typical. In fact, it is less than the 10.3 percent pay cut that the union proposed to the state fact-finder. So to say that Winsten and Maddox need to be recalled because “they” cut the teacher’s pay is misleading. The pay-cut was simply necessary.
A more important issue would be how to impose the pay cut. The Board (including Winsten and Maddox) unanimously supported structuring the cut so that it would minimize the number of teacher layoffs. Keep in mind that layoffs result in class size increases, assuming enrollment is constant. But the union wanted to layoff more teachers (=bigger classes) so they could preserve the pay rates of their more senior members.
And then, when the Board imposed the plan the reduced layoffs (=smaller classes), the union raised the scurrilous claim that the Board had no respect for the teachers and called a strike.
To prove the point, when a settlement was reached between CUSD and the union to end the strike, the teachers got an empty bag for their trouble and loss. But CUEA had made the CTA and NEA political point — loud and clear.
And during those strike days, teachers were given credit for signatures on the recall petitions in lieu of time on the picket lines. Support is not always about money.
Mislead? No. I’ve just been paying attention. The teacher’s didn’t put forth any contact, just the fact finder. But no matter what I write, you will come back with something untruthful and call it fact.
This is why the debate is useless. As a parent it’s not winnable because I’m aligned with the union. My voice has been taken away by this board, not just figuratively but if they don’t like what you have to say at board meetings, they will cut of the mike.
Just read the Register and people can see the difference between how CUSD and Saddleback handled the negotiations with their teachers. HUGE difference, and they chose the word, respect to describe that difference.
http://www.ocregister.com/articles/district-248166-board-school.html
Our board did not post strike sub positions or strike Q&As on the district website way back in negotiations either. When an impasse was declared many people started to worry we were going down the same route as Capo, but I did not think that was the case. There is still trust in our district between our leaders and our teachers.
Our union leaders are equally as professional and trustworthy. I know it is popular to insult unions and point out all the weaknesses in the system, but when you get down to the person-to-person contact, I have always found our teacher union leaders to be helpful to me. I feel heard in my district, like I am a part of what is happening, and that makes a big difference when it comes time to take pay cuts, raise class sizes and face layoffs.
The teachers in Capo were fighting to be heard by their school board and remain a part of the decision-making process. Those who took that stand were standing up for what they believed was right.
Contact the writer at http://www.goasktheteacher.com.
By the way, it was the fact finders that put forth the compromised union contract that the teachers accepted and the board rejected. Minor detail. That was not the union’s proposal.
Capo “Parent” wrote:
“The teacher’s didn’t put forth any contact, just the fact finder.”
You’re right! Not once did the union make an offer before the strike.
Capo “Parent” further wrote:
“By the way, it was the fact finders that put forth the compromised union contract that the teachers accepted and the board rejected. Minor detail. That was not the union’s proposal.”
Right again! The Trustees were under no obligation whatsoever to accept the Fact Finder’s (singular) proposal. That is not the purpose of “fact finding”, and you mislead everyone by stating that the union even had a “proposal”. There was no such thing.
What a crock.
This whole thing is about progressives being pissed off that the conservatives have gained control of the board.
Start researching the ‘alternative’ candidates and you will see major uber liberal relationships to indian gaming, to the gay rights push, to the destruction of conservative values and to fiscal responsibility.
The union has created this whole thing and the union’s candidates are 100% going to bring us right back to the Flemming days, except this time with NO money to spend.
Nice headline too. Makes one wonder who the extremists are.
All this blame-it-all-on-the-unions stuff is pure dog-et-my-homework. It’s the “Reform” Board’s own damn fault that they’re facing recall – their fault for being incompetent, corrupt career politicians who really don’t care about education.
And now I see, from a couple of comments, that you’re also somehow connecting it with teh GAYS. Hey! Maybe you guys can figure out a way to blame it on Mexicans too! Unions, gays, Mexicans – the Full Retard Trifecta.
Go for it! People will REALLY take you seriously then.
Vern
I am part of the handful of people who actually initiated, organized and promoted this recall.
There was NEVER a union member involved in any step of this recall effort. We qualified this recall in less then 60 days which is a record in Orange County. People lined up to sign these petitions because of out of control and wasteful spending, lies from the trustees, broken campaign promised, votes to approve out of court settlements that paid off their campaign donors and just the general arrogance and ignorance on the part of these trustees.
When SOC Mom ( jennifer beall) and others deliberately LIE to make their points they reveal themselves for exactly what they are…false and willing to do anything to keep their cronies and puppets in office. We are mostly Republican and are parents, homeowners and community leaders that have had enough! We once supported the old recall and voted for many of these current trustees. We were lied to and deceived and we are now PISSED OFF! Let there be no mistake. these people will be removed on November 2. Recall, Remove, Recover!!
We could sure use you to start a recall on smuck of the year award winner and Orange County Public Administrator John Williams, who just got re-elected. There are so many issues with him (even in your neighborhood as South Orange County Community College Trustee) that he needs to go. Wish I lived in your community.
As Clint Eastwood said to the drunken, wounded general in that great Civil War battle scene of The Good The Bad and the Ugly, “keep your ears open.” If big JW hasn’t gone the way of that blown-up bridge within a year’s time, then your humble OJ correspondent is lacking in mojo.
PLC. your own spokesman is a union member
wake up and embrace who you are ……the union!
Some of them are union, some of them are not, some are pro-union, some are anti-union. What is this, some new McCarthyism?
You keep thwacking away at your red herring, within a week you’ll sound like such a broken record that nobody will even hear you any more. And good.
This recall is about the screwups in charge right now.
PLC-
you have no proof that socmom is anyone and when you lie like that you have no Creditability. The fact remains that 6 of the signers of the recall are either union members or related to one. The only group splitting hairs is PLC and intentionally trying to deceive the public by claiming they’re republicans. Why no be true to who you are or are married too,union members.
Vern, it is disappointing to see you throw words out like corruption when you site no proof of it. You might support change but to outright deceive like that is a shame and lowers the standard of this site. If you want to read all of the budgets, every vote and agenda item and point out what you might have done different so be it, but corruption makes you sound like a PLC puppet. Before you hitch your wagon to this group make sure you want to associate with people that will target children, expose children’s grades, defame and lie to get what they want.
Vern, it is disappointing to see you throw words out like corruption when you site no proof of it.
Crazy liars, I am engaging in fighting words because this post is an “opening salvo” or “shot across the bow.” I’ll have many, many detailed chapters to follow.
By the way the words you want are “cite” and “credibility.” You’re welcome.
Vern,
Charming of you to point out my mistake, my bad should have proofed and did not, it is a blog.
The union as well as the old Fleming supporters has acted horrible over the last year causing all sorts of unrest. PLC have lied and lied and told half truths to cause the needed acrimony needed for a recall. Make no mistake these people that support change supported the old board and Fleming, Fran being one of them.
Yes many chapters will be rolled out in this saga over the next month and it will be ugly. PLC is a mean group of evil people that attacks anyone who disagrees or gets in the way. Many children, parents and innocent bystanders in CUSD have been victims of the crazy rants and rage displayed on blogs by PLC supporters. My surprise is you want to a mouth piece for PLC and support them.
The losers in all this …………..the students
It is so disappointing to read “reporting” like this on Orange Juice. As a previous poster mentioned, try using google.
If you do try this you will find some reveailng information, you will find that the majority of petition initiators are union members or they sleep with someone who is.
Call the Secretary of State’s office and ask for a copy of PLC’s documents. They show that PLC’s officers are
Peter Espinosa (CTA member)
http://www1.socccd.cc.ca.us/eservices/Profile.asp?siteid=A&id=pespinosa),
Gale Benda (CUEA member and retired teacher)
Stephanie Seach (CUEA Grievance rep)
http://www.cuea.org/Contract/grievance/contGrievComm.htm
These people were initiators of the recall petition, along with John Alpay.
Three guesses (first 2 don’t count) about whether Gary Pritchard is a CTA member
hahahaha
Sounds like the dog ate Vern’s homework.
Dare we hope in the “many, many detailed chapters to follow” he learns how to research his subject?
Sock, see comment “the lies continue” below. Sorry about the dog.
Vern,
Have you been been to find out if the information posted above is accurate?
AV Parent, let me answer this at the bottom of the thread, so it will be easier to see. I kind of don’t like how these comments are “nested,” I”m going to see if I can change it back to a simple numbered system – this is hard for readers to see what comments have been added since last time they were here.
Short answer – the above comment from “Lie Detector” is selective and deceptive. I’ll get into detail below.
I will be voting NO on the recall and like the current board!
What is Ethnomusicology?
from Wikipedia (you may have heard of it?)
Ethnomusicology is a branch of musicology defined as “the study of social and cultural aspects of music and dance in local and global contexts.” …
Jeff Todd Titon has called it the study of “people making music.” Although it is often thought of as a study of non-Western musics, ethnomusicology also includes the study of Western music from an anthropological or sociological perspective. Bruno Nettl (1983) believes it is a product of Western thinking, proclaiming “ethnomusicology as western culture knows it is actually a western phenomenon.” …
While musicology’s traditional subject has been the history and literature of Western art music, ethnomusicologists study all music as a human social and cultural phenomenon. …Early ethnomusicology tended to focus on non-Western music that was transmitted through oral traditions. But, in more recent years, the field has expanded to embrace all musical styles from all parts of the world.
I suppose you are now going to ridicule ethnomusicology (Mr. Pritchard’s field) because it takes other cultures seriously? Or because it takes music seriously? Let’s see your next step. Careful – don’t show your racism!
Vern Vern Vern,
I’ll show you mine if you’ll show me yours!
Ooops too late – you already have.
You reported that Prichtard was a music professor, not an ethnomusicology professor as he identifies himself on his website. Why? Did you perhaps think that ethnomusicology lacks sufficient gravitas?
And really – Wikipedia – that is your credible citation? tsk tsk tsk …
This is lame, bro.
1. Ethnomusicology is a branch of music. No inaccuracy or spin or secret scheming results in simply calling Gary a “music professor.” It’s what he is. Ever heard of trying to make your prose sail along?
2. Yes, for something as non-controversial as the definition of “ethnomusicology,” wikipedia is the most obvious source.
Ya got nothing, La Raza, nothing!
Come on Vern!
We’re talking about Cerritos freekin’ Junior College here! It’s a public two-year college located in Norwalk.
Pritchard has a position teaching the equivalent of Ethnic Studies in the Music Department.
Bruno Netti was correct. Ethnomusicaology is a product of Western thinking. In fact, it is a product of Western decadence and liberal cultural guilt. What other culture in the world deprecates its own art in order to assuage its collective guilt for vaguely outlined sins?
The practical purpose of a Junior College is to provide vocational or college prep. It has no place being involved in cultural indoctrination.
Pritchard is a liberal parasite, sucking resources from a system that is rapidly failing. If he were teaching such a subject in a private institution — at the graduate level — I’d have no complaint.
How about, instead, we move those resources over to CUSD and actually teach kids something useful?
Let’s see, now we’re very clear about your opinion of studying other cultures.
Gary is running against Ken “Lopez” Maddox (very funny story how he got that Lopez by the way, I’ll share that in the future.) Care to share with us how “Lopez” Maddox is more qualified than a (junior) college professor with children in the actual district?
This might be interesting to hear. Sell us on Ken “Lopez” Maddox’ excellent qualifications, Supe!
And this sort of thing:
Ethnomusicology … is a product of Western decadence and liberal cultural guilt. What other culture in the world deprecates its own art in order to assuage its collective guilt for vaguely outlined sins?
The practical purpose of a Junior College is to provide vocational or college prep. It has no place being involved in cultural indoctrination.
…is why I’m correct to use the term “extremist.”
Union, union, union….
If I say it often enough I don’t have to address that the current board lied repeatedly to get elected, lied once they were in office and are lying to keep their offices. CUSD is the largest employer in South Orange County. 55,000 students, 4,000 employees and lots of parents.
Not one teacher was an original signer of the initiating recall petition. Parents, many of them Republican, initiated this recall. The Bealls and their trustee puppets can’t handle the fact that because of wasteful and out of control spending, millions spent on attorneys that were their friends and associates and hundreds of thousands of dollars that awarded to people who personally wrote checks to the campaigns of these trustees.
Vern, I think “corruption” is a great word for this. When they hired that disgraced attorney, Phillip Greer, to fight the parent led initiative to change the way we elect trustees ( which the trustees supported when they ran for office and then conveniently changed their positions on when they got elected ) they spent over $30,000 on him. He has been disciplined twice by the State Bar and also defended Chriss Street. You know Chriss? He is Anna Bryson’s boss and also lost in court and was ordered to pay back millions to his former clients. This is who the liars from the current board supporters surround themselves with.
None of us behind this recall are “Fleming supporters” and these fools know this. So they deliberately lie, they lie, they lie. I signed their recall petition and voted for most of their trustees and I strongly fought against Fleming. I was a leader in this recall effort and I am not a union member or married to a union member.
They lie, they lie, they lie…
Whoops! Sounds like my homework has run over socmom’s dog!
Thanks for the pointer, Vern. I read the post above.
Lots of opinions, I don’t find too many facts beyond the mention of Greer and that Bryson works for Chris Street. Believe it or not, I already knew that. I have been following things and I signed the recall petitions. I am a little concerned about some of things I have learned since I signed. But I was hoping PLC would find good candidates.
As a resident of Talega, I am quite familiar with John Alpay, not impressed. As a conservative voter, Gary Pritchard is completely unacceptable to me. I’d rather have Lo-Mad. Looks like even though I signed the petitions I will be voting against the recall. That frustrates me.
I am just disappointed in the caliber of PLC’s people.
socmom
PLC isn’t the one putting forth the candidates Children First is. Perhaps you should meet and talk with the THREE candidates just announced? Get the facts straight too please
A glass of water would do a better job then Maddox or Winsten.
Winsten and Maddox will definitly be removed on November 2nd. There isn’t a shred of doubt about that.
socmom –
Another candiate in Area 5 has emerged. His name is Paul Hebbard. He is known a lot in AV but nowhere else. His wife teaches at Wood Canyon, but they are both conservatives. Check out his material soon. Probably be up mid August
Much of this discussion is just a diversion. We are talking about public education here. Education requires teachers. Per state law, teachers are part of collective bargaining. IE: an association or “union”. If that is a problem then the problem lies at the state level. The problem in CUSD is not our teachers.
Our problem is a complete and total lack of leadership. We have 7 trustees who were either coerced into running or promised some bigger “elected” position but really did not and do not care about public education and our children in CUSD.
So a group of parents who have worked diligently for years to improve the quality of education in south county got together to find a way to elect better trustees. And the election is coming in November. This isn’t a conspiracy. We aren’t looking for some big takeover.
So stop with the spin. Get with the program. This is about kids. Vote for local control and elect trustees who care.
You’re right! The problem in CUSD is not the teachers. The problem is their union and a handful of political opportunists who have decided that they want to fight old political grudges, Proposition 8, and Indian gambling issues in the context of the CUSD Trustee election.
These people view CUSD as the crucible in which statewide, national and even moral issues will be decided. This whole thing has nothing to do with our schools.
Anyone willing to do an hour of homework would understand that this recall is a very dangerous thing for our community.
Wow. “Huh?” is right. You write very nice sentences, but you slip right off the side of reality. John Alpay and Gary Pritchard, as well as the thousands backing this recall, are merely using it to “fight Proposition 8 and Indian gambling issues?” Sir, you flirt with madness.
Vern,
Hyperbole is not your strong suit. You should make a point to avoid it in the future.
I made no mention of “thousands” in my post. I’m talking about those people who are behind this recall. You know who they are, obviously, and to deny their orientations makes you dishonest.
Gary Pritchard was a vocal opponent of Proposition 8. He makes no secret of it. Why do you wish to conceal it? He’s the PLC candidate. The voters will decide if that is acceptable and they should be informed.
At least two people who organized this recall are directly involved with Indian tribal recognition and “gaming”, i.e., gambling. Why would they become involved in a local school district recall? Answer: It is a platform for building a sympathetic base of support for their other views.
Are these views “extreme”? It was your headline, after all!
It’s no secret that the two largest sources of political finance in California are the tribes and the teacher’s union. For good, or for worse?
Gary, myself, and very close to half of California was against Proposition 8. To get from that innocent fact to saying that’s his secret motivation for running for School Board is a very unsafe leap between distant rooftops. You could kill yourself, sir.
And I don’t know anything about this “gaming” connection, but it sounds like an equally absurd non-sequitur. Are you suggesting the Children First slate is contemplating bringing gambling and Injuns into south county grade schools?
Nah, you’re just sitting around thinking “What’s the best way to slime these guys?” Logic is not YOUR strong suit, elegantly though you may write.
Vern, come on! Don’t phone it in…
If you consider OC, which is all that really matters, Proposition 8 was approved by 57.6 percent of those who voted (72.6 percent of those who were registered). Considering the passionate interest in that election and the high local turnout, this should be considered representative of the feelings of our community on the matter. It was not, as you say, “very close”.
The accusation made is that this recall will serve as a platform by which those with beliefs that significantly differ from the mainstream view of the community will attempt to gain credibility. For example, if a pro-Gay Rights Democrat can win a school board election in south OC, what does that say about us?
Can he win? Informed voters will decide.
Meanwhile, down here in San Clemente, John Alpay could not be elected to be Dog Catcher. On his last outing, he got 5 percent of the vote for City Council. Just a few weeks ago, he announced he was running for City Council again. This was greeted locally with a big yawn.
But without missing a beat, he has now announced, but not filed, to run for the school board. Some might ask, which is it?
But worse, during the June election, Alpay won election to the OC Republican Central Committee (some might say, by accident). He won’t be seated in that position until after the election in November. How do you think he’ll be welcomed after running on a slate with a pro-Gay Rights Democrat in a recall election that has been formally condemned by the Central Committee?
Just as an aside, you should look into some of this stuff yourself. Chris Korpi is hardly a reliable source of information.
The accusation made is that this recall will serve as a platform by which those with beliefs that significantly differ from the mainstream view of the community will attempt to gain credibility. For example, if a pro-Gay Rights Democrat can win a school board election in south OC, what does that say about us?
That’s just WAY too convoluted and conspiratorial. And essentially you’re trying to disqualify anyone from running for office whose views on any issue are so FRINGE that only 45% or so of his fellow citizens agree? Laughable.
Meantime your obsession with homosexuality does not pass unnoticed, and we remember fondly the spectacular falls from grace of so many prominent gay bashers. You can feel safe to come out here, Mr. Huh. This is a gay-friendly blog, you know.
Indian Gaming issues?? What planet are you on? This is obviously a post made by Jim Reardon who was a recipient of tons of money awarded to him by his puppet trustees. When it gets rough tor Jim he brings up unrelated issues to confuse the issue. The issue here are the lies of the current trustees and their out of control and wasteful spending and the $655,000 that was awared to Reardon, Beall, Russell and others by the votes of people they donated money to to get elected.
So let’s talk about gay rights, abortion, “indian gaming” and anything else that deflects attention away from money stolen from the classroom and paid directly into the pockets of people that donated money to the election coffers of these trustees.
Huh?
Funny Jill Case also sued and never a word, why hmmm she is a dem.
Response to a comment from above from someone called *cough* “Lie Detector” which read:
“…the majority of petition initiators are union members or they sleep with someone who is.
“Call the Secretary of State’s office and ask for a copy of PLC’s documents. They show that PLC’s officers are
Peter Espinosa (CTA member)
http://www1.socccd.cc.ca.us/eservices/Profile.asp?siteid=A&id=pespinosa),
Gale Benda (CUEA member and retired teacher)
Stephanie Seach (CUEA Grievance rep)
http://www.cuea.org/Contract/grievance/contGrievComm.htm
“These people were initiators of the recall petition, along with John Alpay.”
First, let’s get one thing out of the way before we examine Lie Detector’s deceptions:
It’s lame to demonize the union as much as you board apologists do: All teachers ARE REQUIRED BY STATE LAW to have an “association” which is called a “union” by people that want to demonize this collective bargaining group. Over 50% of CUEA membership are Republican, by the way. (And if being a member of the teacher’s association (union) is so evil then why are these same people trusting their kids in the classroom for 5-6 hours a day with “union thugs”? You guys are desperate.)
That aside, let’s see if it is accurate to suggest that the recall is solely or mainly a project of the union, as that would be interesting to know. Surprise, surprise, of course it’s not. “Lie Detector’s” comment is selective and deceptive. As organizer Chris Korpi tells me:
Stephanie didn’t have anything to do with Parents for Local Control until several weeks after we started collecting signatures. Gail is a retired teacher and Pete is a college professor. Using these commenters’ logic, any teacher, spouse of a teacher, relative of a teacher, former teacher, college or CUSD employee etc has no right to want to work to remove these two trustees? That doesn’t leave many people does it?
I was there when we decided to initiate the recall. There were four of us. We found ten people to sign the first petition and then Maddox and Winsten threatened to sue because they didn’t like the way the “notice of recall” was served.
So we redid the “notice of recall” and new people were added to or replaced names for the ten original signers. Most of those people never did anything for the recall but sign the original petition to qualify it for circulation. The old recall group can’t get their hands around that because everyone that were original signers of their petition were actual “leaders” and supporters and gave money.
The current recall was started by parents or just pissed-off voters. No union member was consulted or involved and none of their money was used or even offered. Not one of those commenters has ever tried to verify their assumptions or talk to one of us. They prefer to make it up and lie.
I hope that clears up some readers’ concerns. This recall is a project of pissed-off parents and voters, not of the union. And it’s not about the recallers anyway, it’s about the manifold failings of the lame-ass BOARD.
No deception here. You offer a long explanation that confirms, rather than refutes, everything I said Vern.
Peter Espinosa is a CTA (California Teachers Association) member.
Gail Benda is a retired CUSD teacher.
Stephanie Seach is a CUEA grievance rep.
These people and every union member have the right to work to remove Winsten and Maddox, certainly. What they don’t have the right to do is mislead and lie.
Mr. Korpi tells an interesting tale, but it isn’t quite accurate. He has had a problem that way. Signature gathering began in March. PLC filed documents with the Secretary of State confirming Seach’s involvement as of February 23, 2010. If you are curious, do a PDR with Bowen’s office, you have the documentation by fax in about 5 minutes.
Or you just keep relying on Korpi as your source.
He did tell you his “partner” is a CUEA member, didn’t he?
So detector, how low can you scrape to try to be relevant? Did you ask Korpi before posting your false information? Perhaps you don’t realize that all CUSD teachers aren’t members of CUEA and anyone can ask to be removed from membership? Do you know who has removed themselves from CUEA membership? Of course you don’t. You assume, you lie, you desperately try to make it all about some conspiracy of “union thugs” to do anything you can to avoid owning up to the fact that you and your friends financed and got elected trustees that ended up voting to take money out of the classroom and send it to your bank accounts.
Word.
You know what I heard? Lopez-Maddox’s best friend’s uncle was once in the SEIU, and even worse, Winsten’s mailman is a TOTALLY well-known union member. Remove, replace, recall, recover!
If Corpi’s partner removed himself from association rolls and is still working, that would be evidence of union collusion in my eyes. Most non-association members are gone. They go to the gallows first.
Maybe CUEA made a special deal for Corpi’s SO.
Here are some facts
1) The current board sucks.
2) They are going to get voted out in November
3) Keep public education public
There are other union connections to consider:
1) CUEA endorsed the first recall and Addonizio and Christensen in 2006. It was ok then to take union support?
2) All this talk about gay rights. Does the hiring of the current CUSD Superintendent indicate that these current trustees don’t care about someone’s sexual orientation? Why is it ok to hire an out Superintendent but not ok to be for marriage equality and be on a school board?
3) Bryson’s daughter is a teacher and so is Brick’s. Brick’s daughter in a CUSD teacher and a “union member”. I guess with the “logic” displayed on this blog both Bryson and Brick should resign.
4) Bryson and Maddox are public employees and couldn’t find work unless someone gave them a patronage job. They are on the public pension system. Now that means that Bryson and Maddox should resign too since they have a vested interest in some crazy way.
Korpi joined this effort for the same reason a lot of us did. The current trustees lied and took money out of the classrooms to pay off their politcal donors. Home values are hurt because these trustees are wasting money. I know Chris and Indian Gaming has nothing to do with this school board. The OC GOP shouldn’t be involved in this election either but they will be and the “indians” won’t be. That is the campaign tactic….avoid dealing with the payoffs and wasteful spending and confuse the issue with non-relevant side conversations.
Just because someone is a teacher or a “union member” doesn’t mean they are “union thugs” or teamsters. The teachers weren’t opposed to a 10% pay cut. They were opposed to the imposition of that contract and they way they were and are bullied by incompetent trustees. All of this could have played out differently if the current trustees would have played the game with respect and partnerhip. Instead they took over, paid off their friends and did the bidding of the OC GOP and Beall and company. now they will pay for their arrogance. No attempts are gay bashing, abortion talk, indian gaming fantasies or false union connections will save their hides. They are gone, finished, out of here
I’m learning new things every hour. Apparently we’re going to really have to keep our eyes on “Lopez-Maddox”‘s connection with the Teamsters Union, he has done them many favors over the course of his checkered career, including recently while on the school board.
Are they going to be helping him in his hour of need, as fully expected? If so, let’s all stand up as one against this egregious union influence! Just say NO to Union Thug “Lopez-Maddox!”
“1) CUEA endorsed the first recall and Addonizio and Christensen in 2006. It was ok then to take union support?”
This statement is false. CUEA stood aside during the recall because they made a fool’s deal with Superintendent Fleming. Of course, Fleming acted true to his form and left CUEA with an empty bag and broken promise.
Alinsky would be proud. Keep up the spin!
Wrong. CUEA members campaigned for ABC “Reform” candidates. They were walking precincts and working phone banks. That’s not standing aside. And CUEA never trusted Fleming. Teachers don’t bargain with superintendents, neither party has authority to make an deal with the other.
It is not about connections, it is not about the union or even advocacy of gay rights. I am not going address Korpi’s sexuality. I believe it is irrelevant.
This is about disclosure and integrity-the missing ingredient in this recall.
Anyone who has been active in the community will have connections. Those connections should be disclosed, as the current board members have done, not denied as PLC/CUCF continues to do.
For months we have heard that PLC’s only motivations are those of concerned parents, that there is no union connection to this recall. In my opinion, these claims are patently false. The fact seem to support that-despite the chant of lie, lies, lies.
Let’s start here. Among Parents for Local COntrol’s identified leadership, Peter Espinosa, Gail Benda, Stephanie Seach or Chris Korpi, who is the parent of a child in CUSD?
I am not going address Korpi’s sexuality. I believe it is irrelevant.
Niiiice. Classic! Oh, you’re telling everyone Korpi’s gay? Not that there’s anything wrong with that though, right?
You seem to have some pretty thin skin about all of this.
How can you write such a story that is so stinking biased and not expect to be held accountable for it?
Further, I find it quite disturbing that the Union and the Liberals all go after the existing board because of their conservative values, and that is fine and dandy, yet, if someone brings up the prop 8, the homosexual agenda, the san juan indian gaming issues, the raging pro-abort positions taken by too many of the leadership in the recall effort.
You seem to blow a bit of a gasket.
You sure seem like one heck of a hypocrite to me. Not that there’s anything wrong with that though, right?
LOL, I sure feel pretty calm and amused; if this is blowing my gasket then fears of gasket-blowing are vastly overstated.
“The Union and the LIberals all go after the existing board because of their conservative values,” you say – in order to show our hypocrisy. Can you show one example of that? I can’t think of one. I hope you are not calling wastefulness, self-dealing and incompetence “conservative values.” If so, it’s not surprising that real conservatives are ditching your cause by the boatload.
But you guys sure like to throw a kitchen sink of irrelevant red herrings, see what sticks. Gays! “Raging” abortions! Gambling Indians! What a hoot. Keep it up, see you in November.
The current trustees wasted money, over spent, imposed a contract, lied repeatedly about who supported them, reversed their positions on the by trustee voting method and paid off their donors. Their supporters avoid talking about any of those issues and instead focus on personalities. Not one email or phone call has been made by them to anyone associated with PLC or Children First since they would rather just make it up.
Oh, Alpay isn’t running for SC City Council and PLC doesn’t exist anymore. PLC was created to coordinate the collection of petition signatures to qualify the recall. Their job is done. Other parents will take over from where they left off.
In the meantime, the Russells, Bealls, Reardons and friends continue to enjoy all the money they had their trustee friends appropriate for them and that should have been used in the classroom.
“PLC was created to coordinate the collection of petition signatures to qualify the recall. Their job is done.”
Why was the recall effort arranged this way?
The better question is; what is the difference between PLC and CUCF?
Answer; Nothing.
avoiding says above that PLCs job is done. But when Vern has questions, Corpi is his to go guy. Corpi has made the rounds in the district talking about how great “their slate” is going to be. Is he part of PLC or CUCF? What about Peter Espinoza? He is CUCF’s spokeman right? But isn’t he invovled in PLC too? Failed candidate, Fleming defender and union groupie Kutnik claims to be a founder of CUCF but she show up at the Registrar of Voters office to turn in the petitions. This is the real tangled web.
These two groups are one group attempting not very cleverly to hide the union’s involvement from the voter of south Orange County. I think the voters are smarter than that.
Vern – don’t get bogged down in prurient minutia.
I read your blog but don’t feel every nuance is meaningful.
Any luck with the Secretary of State?
Or who the actual parents in “Parents for Local Control” are?
Lynn Hatton, the social ecology candidate ……
Social Ecology:
Social ecology is a philosophy developed by Murray Bookchin in the 1960s.
It holds that present ecological problems are rooted in deep-seated social problems, particularly in dominatory hierarchical political and social systems. These have resulted in an uncritical acceptance of an overly competitive grow-or-die philosophy. It suggests that this cannot be resisted by individual action such as ethical consumerism but must be addressed by more nuanced ethical thinking and collective activity grounded in radical democratic ideals.
Murray Bookchin:
Murray Bookchin (January 14, 1921 – July 30, 2006) was an American libertarian socialist, social philosopher, environmentalist/conservationist, speaker, and writer. For much of his life he called himself an anarchist. Bookchin was the founder of the social ecology movement within libertarian socialist and ecological thought.
Bookchin was an anti-capitalist and vocal advocate of the de-centralization, as well as partial de-industrialization and de-urbanization of society. His writings on libertarian municipalism, a theory of face-to-face, grassroots democracy, had an influence on the Green movement and anti-capitalist direct action groups such as Reclaim the Streets.
Sounds like a fine compliment to the Enthomusicologist!
This is looking pretty bad.
Here at the Orange Juice we respect our anonymous commenters’ anonymity. But still it’s amusing to note how MANY aliases so FEW board defenders have used on this thread. Really, you can count the defenders on HALF of one of your hands. As borne out in the poll.
What a bunch of BS.
It starts with a poorly written, poorly fact checked, poorly headlined article and LOTS of defense afterwards.
Now, work to minimize those that disagree.
By the way, the reason the voting is so skewed is the reason I came to read this trash.
It is on the Capistrano Unified Childrens First FB page and people are asked to visit this story and vote.
You guys just love trading your own spit.
Mmm, spit…
Let’s see, now you’re “What a crock.”
Are you all the same person, or just all in the same room?
Grow up Vern.
This entire thread is shameful,I like the board and will be voting for all of them if they run again. As for the recall I vote no, not because I think ken and mike are so great but because of the personal attacks the recall group have waged against children and the families of anyone who had the nerve to disagree with the kutnick crowd. Evil is the best word to describe them!
Why would I want the kutnick, korpi crowd in charge of my children?
Okay, grown up again.
I’d like to hear a single example of that:
“Personal attacks the recall group have waged against the children and families of anyone” who disagreed with them.
And also as I mentioned above, an example of us “going after the existing board because of their conservative values,” As I wrote there, I hope you’re not calling wastefulness, self-dealing and incompetence “conservative values.” If so, it’s not surprising that real conservatives are ditching your cause by the boatload.
Any substance there? Or just more sound and fury? We are all ears.
ALL OF YOU SETTLE DOWN…
Now, what do you all think I should ask John Alpay in my interview with him next week?
If if’s not unreasonable and insulting, I’ll ask it.
That should be fun.
Ask him when he will start a photo contest for CUSD!
Why don’t you ask him whether he will adhere to the $2400 limit on campaign expenditure that he sought to impose on City Council candidates in San Clemente.
Why don’t you ask him how he reconciles this position with American principles of free speech and freedom of association?
If elected, would he seek to limit campaign expenditures in future school board elections?
Does his answer to any of these questions change depending the outcome of the election itself, including the ballot proposition pertaining to election of Trustees by district?
Ask him if he has a clue about education and the issues in CUSD. If he responds with his favorite “sound bite”, terminate the interview and report back.
Those do sound like reasonable questions. My first thought, hearing the first one though, is what kind of idiot would pre-emptively limit his own campaign spending when there’s no limit on anyone else? That’s the same kind of thing people tried to throw at Loni Hancock when she wrote Prop 15, they suddenly acted like she couldn’t raise funds herself or she’d be a hypocrite. Very twisted thinking.
John is into campaign finance reform? Good for him. I will find out more about that.
Meanwhile, I’m still waiting for examples of:
1. Recall advocates attacking the children and families of people who disagree with them;
2. Recall advocates criticizing the Board because of their “conservative values.”
If there’s nothing by tomorrow afternoon, you people are conclusively full of hot air.
Vern;
You have alledged that “wastefulness, self-dealing and incompetence” are problems that warrant a recall in CUSD.
Can you please document examples of these issues?
You know, Anonymous, I could answer you right now; I have a list I’m keeping of just those examples, over in my word documents, but 1) you’re asking for sneak peaks into my upcoming stories, and 2) I’m still waiting for you guys to come up with examples of YOUR wild accusations.
When I hear an example of a recall advocate attacking you guys’ kids, I’ll give you an example of the board’s wastefulness and self-dealing. When I hear what these “conservative values” the board has that one of us criticized, I’ll give you an example of the board’s incompetence. Otherwise, you’ll have to wait for my next story.
Vern;
This is your story. You made the statements of wastefulness, self-dealing and incompetence. It isn’t incumbent on anyone else to document your claims.
Vern,
Have you talked to the Secretary of State
or found any real “Parents for Local Control” yet?
Hasn’t been at the top of my priorities list, Lie Detector, but I’ll get around to it by and by.
No wiki?
umm… as far as I can tell, MOST of the “Parents for Local Control” were parents, of kids who either were or are in the district. (I say “were” because the group is now “Children First Alliance 2010.”)
You want names? Susan Goggins, Judy Heidel, Pete Espinosa, I could go on… is this supposed to be some kind of trick question?
Very well children – just to keep you happy till the next chapter – here’s a short quick dirty answer:
Your beloved “reform board” reneged on their promise to change your election rules to “by-trustee-voting-area” method – a reform that would have saved the district $200,000 each election cycle while ensuring local control. If they’d kept their promise this could have been accomplished with a simple request to Sacramento, but instead they wasted $100,000 of district money FIGHTING this reform with lawsuits – a reform that’s going to pass in any case this November in a landslide. (And they were fighting government agencies who were trying to serve us, thus wasting more taxpayer money.) Meanwhile, awarded $650 grand from that “enemies list” lawsuit ($100 grand of which came from the district) they also reneged on their promise to donate the proceeds to the district and instead doled it out to their political supporters. (Insert picture of Tony Beall’s cool new swimming pool.) Forgive me if I have a detail or two a little off here, it’s as convoluted as it is outrageous, but I’m a quick study. Add to that the completely unnecessary STRIKE of last May which they quite consciously forced to happen with their heavy-handed arrogance, spending hundreds of thousands on security and scabs, only to end up with an outcome pretty close to what the teachers were asking for from the beginning. Yes, wasteful, corrupt, incompetent, arrogant, stupid and lame.
Meanwhile, early this afternoon 24 hours will have gone by without any of you providing examples of Children First people attacking your kids, or any “conservative values” your board allegedly has that we don’t like. It’s not coming, is it? You lot have nothing.
(Insert picture of Tony Beall’s cool new swimming pool.)Scratch that detail, per Jennifer. Beall pool predated award.
check… Vern –
This recall is based on self-interest, bigotry and lies.
So far, you are their tool.
Expand on this “bigotry?” I realize that’s a sort of FOX News word, I can never figure out exactly what you guys mean by it, except maybe “you guys disagree with me”
Vern, you wrote:
“It’s lame to demonize the union as much as you board apologists do: All teachers ARE REQUIRED BY STATE LAW to have an “association” which is called a “union” by people that want to demonize this collective bargaining group…”
Later, you wrote:
“Add to that the completely unnecessary STRIKE of last May which they quite consciously forced to happen with their heavy-handed arrogance, spending hundreds of thousands on security and scabs, only to end up with an outcome pretty close to what the teachers were asking for from the beginning.”
In the first part, you seem to be saying that that CUEA is some kind of benevolent association. But in the second quote, you talk about strikes and “scabs” — the language of organized labor unions. Which is it? I think you know the answer.
But the worst part is how you reverse reality. Did you know that it is not possible for the CUSD Board to call a strike? Obviously, the strike was called by the union. Are you certain it was “unnecessary?”
And as for the outcome, what the union got is what the Board imposed before the strike. The union has tried to dress it up in a disguise, but nothing was gained by the strike. The average teacher lost close about $1000 in wages for nothing.
To put it in a different way, all teachers gave up $1000 in wages so that a few of their radical union comrades could spend three days collecting signatures — on the recall petition!
Vern, get your facts straight.
Supercilious:
1. Yeah I say scab. I’m a left-wing writer who is USUALLY sympathetic to unions. But I’m sure not an organizer of this recall, I’m just observing and describing it for the rest of the county as I learn about it. And I can see clearly that unions are not behind it or driving it.
2. The Board forced the teachers to strike by imposing a contract and refusing to negotiate. They knew what would happen if they did that, they wanted a strike; probably in their arrogance they assumed it would turn out to their benefit and the public would back them. (Knowing how these sorts of people only surround themselves with their own kind.) For them to say they didn’t force a strike is like a rapist saying “I didn’t force her to slap me!”
3. I’m pretty sure you’re not telling the truth about what the teachers ended up with vs. what the board wanted to impose – the board wanted a permanent pay cut while the teachers wanted it to only last two years with a trigger to return to their previous wages if and when funding materialized. That’s what I seem to recall, I’ll find out for sure today (as I’m writing about it) and anyone who knows and is honest is welcome to join in.
4. I KNOW the strike wasn’t part of a plot to get petitions or spur on the recall – the drive for the recall was in full swing long before the strike – the strike was more a GIFT that the Board gave the recall organizers. Sorry, that’s how it happened. Silver lining, lemons to lemonade. Get your facts staight.
You’re gonna LOVE my Capo Recall Primer. It’s coming out first thing Monday morning – at that point I’ll close comments here and we can argue there.
Isn’t it time you add some information about the third candidate Lynn Hatton? She is running in Larry Christiansen’s trustee territory but there is rumor that he will not be running again…MV Dispatch and Beyond the Blackboard have done some information on her…so far no dirt- worse thing they could find is she is a democrat….can you add her and do some investigating to the rumor on Larry also? Thank you for posting and giving opportunity to read both sides.
my hands are full right now, but I will check her out soon… I’m excited about the candidate who will be getting announced this Tuesday… that will be my exclusive scoop!
where they being announced at, haven’t heard a peep…pretty good scoop!