Escondido Union School District
Case Title: ESCONDIDO
UNION SCHOOL DISTRICT VS
FRAGOZO
Case Number:
37-2015-00040103-CU-PT-NC
Case Location: North County
Case Type: Civil
Date Filed: 12/02/2015
Category: CU-PTO
Petitions - Other
UNION SCHOOL DISTRICT VS
FRAGOZO
Case Number:
37-2015-00040103-CU-PT-NC
Case Location: North County
Case Type: Civil
Date Filed: 12/02/2015
Category: CU-PTO
Petitions - Other
Blog posts Escondido Union
School District
School District
| San Diego Education Report |
| SDER |
San Diego
Education Report
Education Report
| SDER |
| SDER |
| SDER |
Blog posts: Escondido Union High
School District
School District
December 27, 2015
Escondido Union School District is trying to silence a whistle-blower by destroying his
political career.
Here's a pathetic accusation: "violating personal space." How is this an offense that
deserves a restraining order?
Then we have "pointing a finger"! Seriously--pointing a finger.
And my personal favorite, "demeaning staff." Demeaning staff is normally considered
de rigour behavior in school districts.
Other school officials have committed actual crimes and yet managed to maintain the
full support of their districts, and immunity from prosecution.
I assume this entire case is based on political conflicts.
School district, Fragozo face off in court
by Steve Puterski
Coast News
December 23, 2015
VISTA — The battle between the Escondido Union School District and trustee Jose
Fragozo went before a judge on Dec. 18 at the San Diego County Superior Court.
Fragozo is subject to a temporary restraining order filed by Superintendent Luis
Rankins-Ibarra with supplementing statements from three other EUSD administrators
on Dec. 2 after the four alleged threatening and harassing behavior from Fragozo.
The district is attempting to make the order permanent.
During last week’s hearing, EUSD Board of Trustee Zesty Harper testified Fragozo’s
behavior grew increasingly volatile over the last year.
The hearing lasted several hours and was continued until Dec. 23.
Trustee Zesty Harper testified as a witness for the district and Rankins-Ibarra saying
Fragozo’s demeanor behind closed doors increasingly grew more aggressive,
intimidating and threatening over the past year.
Harper, who was elected last year, said she saw several incidents of Fragozo
violating others’ personal space, pointing a finger in faces and demeaning staff
during meetings.
The district’s attorney, Daniel Shinoff, told the court his clients suffered through
tirades and threats of physical violence from Fragozo. In addition, Shinoff said
Deputy Superintendent Leila Sackfield felt, at one point, she had been falsely
imprisoned, while Assisatant Superintendents Kelly Prins and Kevin Rubow were
targets of bouts of yelling “as close as possible” with Fragozo pointing his finger in
their faces.
[Maura Larkins' comment: Sackfield "felt" she was falsely imprisoned? Why didn't she
call the police? Why didn't she file a criminal complaint? I suspect the accusation was
dreamed up long after the event in question. Has anyone questioned Sackfield's
propensity for paranoia?]
Shinoff also cited 158 school shootings since 2013 including three local shootings
have given the four added reasons for concern, but Fragozo’s attorney, Laura
Farris, blasted Shinoff for attempting to link her client and mass shootings.
During Farris’ opening statement, she said her client has not threatened any district
official and his passion for the district stems from wanting the best for its students.
She added Rankins-Ibarra is overly sensitive to others in disagreement with how to
approach the district’s issues.
In addition, Farris claims the district has prevented Fragozo from performing his
duties and “obliterated” his constitutional rights.
“He demanded accountability for test scores,” Farris said. “They are using the
shootings to get Mr. Fragozo out of the picture.”
From the Superior Court files: 12/23/2015 Court request to continue the
Hearing on Restraining Order and reissue the temporary orders was granted. The
Hearing on Restraining Order was continued to 01/08/2016 at 09:00 AM in
Department N-21.
Escondido Union School District is trying to silence a whistle-blower by destroying his
political career.
Here's a pathetic accusation: "violating personal space." How is this an offense that
deserves a restraining order?
Then we have "pointing a finger"! Seriously--pointing a finger.
And my personal favorite, "demeaning staff." Demeaning staff is normally considered
de rigour behavior in school districts.
Other school officials have committed actual crimes and yet managed to maintain the
full support of their districts, and immunity from prosecution.
I assume this entire case is based on political conflicts.
School district, Fragozo face off in court
by Steve Puterski
Coast News
December 23, 2015
VISTA — The battle between the Escondido Union School District and trustee Jose
Fragozo went before a judge on Dec. 18 at the San Diego County Superior Court.
Fragozo is subject to a temporary restraining order filed by Superintendent Luis
Rankins-Ibarra with supplementing statements from three other EUSD administrators
on Dec. 2 after the four alleged threatening and harassing behavior from Fragozo.
The district is attempting to make the order permanent.
During last week’s hearing, EUSD Board of Trustee Zesty Harper testified Fragozo’s
behavior grew increasingly volatile over the last year.
The hearing lasted several hours and was continued until Dec. 23.
Trustee Zesty Harper testified as a witness for the district and Rankins-Ibarra saying
Fragozo’s demeanor behind closed doors increasingly grew more aggressive,
intimidating and threatening over the past year.
Harper, who was elected last year, said she saw several incidents of Fragozo
violating others’ personal space, pointing a finger in faces and demeaning staff
during meetings.
The district’s attorney, Daniel Shinoff, told the court his clients suffered through
tirades and threats of physical violence from Fragozo. In addition, Shinoff said
Deputy Superintendent Leila Sackfield felt, at one point, she had been falsely
imprisoned, while Assisatant Superintendents Kelly Prins and Kevin Rubow were
targets of bouts of yelling “as close as possible” with Fragozo pointing his finger in
their faces.
[Maura Larkins' comment: Sackfield "felt" she was falsely imprisoned? Why didn't she
call the police? Why didn't she file a criminal complaint? I suspect the accusation was
dreamed up long after the event in question. Has anyone questioned Sackfield's
propensity for paranoia?]
Shinoff also cited 158 school shootings since 2013 including three local shootings
have given the four added reasons for concern, but Fragozo’s attorney, Laura
Farris, blasted Shinoff for attempting to link her client and mass shootings.
During Farris’ opening statement, she said her client has not threatened any district
official and his passion for the district stems from wanting the best for its students.
She added Rankins-Ibarra is overly sensitive to others in disagreement with how to
approach the district’s issues.
In addition, Farris claims the district has prevented Fragozo from performing his
duties and “obliterated” his constitutional rights.
“He demanded accountability for test scores,” Farris said. “They are using the
shootings to get Mr. Fragozo out of the picture.”
From the Superior Court files: 12/23/2015 Court request to continue the
Hearing on Restraining Order and reissue the temporary orders was granted. The
Hearing on Restraining Order was continued to 01/08/2016 at 09:00 AM in
Department N-21.