STATE OF CALIFORNIA DECISION OF THE PUBLIC EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS BOARD |
Posts on Weblog of San Diego Union Tribune March 6, 2008 Grossmont-Cuyamaca: State probe still not wrapped up Looks like there won't be any quick resolution of the state's investigation of the shenanigans at Grossmont-Cuyamaca Community College District that were brought to light by a whistleblower. I asked Ralph Black, assistant general counsel at California Community Colleges System Office, if a final report had been issued. No, we have not done so yet. We have had some key staff leave and, due to the state budget problems, haven't been able to fill vacant positions. In addition, one key staff person who's been working on this case has had some health issues and hasn't been able to devote much time to this case. I can't wait to read the report. The draft report -- look at it here--sure raised fundamental questions about Grossmont-Cuyamaca's leadership. Here's key detail not in the report: Just what was the community college district wrongly reimbursed for by the state? Hundreds of thousands of dollars for providing educational classes at facilities for seniors -- and the "classes" amounted to such unfocused frivolousness as the "instructor" playing a piano for the seniors. The GCCCD bosses who approved this scam should be fired, and promptly. Of course that won't happen. In a district where the superintendent can surreptitiously rewrite his own contract without getting in trouble with a see-no-evil board majority, nothing short of armed robbery has any consequences. Posted by Chris Reed at March 6, 2008 Comments ...My simple question is this: Why isn't the Grossmont Cuyamaca College Board of Trustees UNANIMOUSLY VOTING TO FIRE Omero Suarez? What will it take? 1. We have the top highly paid GCCCD CEO, OMERO SUAREZ, WHO alters HIS CONTRACT without board approval (violating the law) , YET THE GCCCD BOARD LOOKS THE OTHER Way and MAKES EXCUSES and rationalizations for his behavior by the same lawyers that are dealing with MiraCosta's mess, 2. We have had the FBI asking questions of the contract changes, the Grand Jury investigation that is ongoing OF GCCCD, and the San Diego District Attorney involved looking into the list of problems within the district, 3. We have had an ongoing NONCREDIT investigation (for nearly three years) by the State Chancellor's office in Sacramento citing GCCCCD for approximately over $340,000 to be paid back due to bogus Rest Home/retirement home (Cuyamaca's) "college courses" funneling millions of dollars into Cuymaca's budget despite Omero's public denial of any such investigation ---and the GCCCD board responding with their heads in the clouds, 4. We have numerous employees that are agressively looking for other jobs at other colleges or in the private sector to flee the hostile working environment (retaliation and firings of employees) 5. We have a history of Omero continuing to give special favors (and bonuses and extended contracts/inlcuding interim back door contracts for select positions) to employees who support him, 5. We have all GCCCD employee groups that would be happy to see this "leadership' end due to the ongoing problems with negotiations and game playing (decieve deny delay tactics) by Ben Lastimado, 6.. Under Omero's reign, GCCCD now has a track record over the years of such poor FISCAL MANAGEMENT, that GCCCD is claiming they cannot afford to pay their emloyees COLA, 7. We have a vote of no confidence against Omero by the Academic Senate due to the years of miscommmunications and conflicts under his reign with the faculty, 8 We have hundreds of thousands of dollars also during Omero's reign as chancellor, that GCCCD is paying to mounting legal fees and settlements from the countless numerous legal cases filed, 9. We also have GCCCD who is paying millions of ollars each year to building consultants for new buildings despite not one shred of evidence from an objective Projected Enrollment Study to validate Prop R monies that were intended for repair, 10. We have District office personnel that are spending hundreds of dollars each month eating out at the Brigantine and the Fish Merchant and other eateries in addition to purchasing Starbuck's cards and for various travel across the states---ALL PAID BY DISTRICT CREDIT CARDS, 11, We have board members that are involved in ECEDC, DEFCOMM, and other business deals overlapping educational monies with East County business raising eyebrows about the conflict of interest issues,(Rest home/retirement facilties under investigation giving campaign dollars to Weeks, Garret and Alexander) 12. We have the Accredittion Report citing major issues that need to be addressed by the District yet the Board not fully comprehending the high stakes of lost accreditation, don't even understand the issues at stake for the colleges sicne their top CEO fails to communicate key issues to the Board, 13. WE have many students at Grossmont who cannot get their classes due to many faculty choosing to work at other campuses due to the poor hourly pay, (classes are being cancelled due to the inabiity to hire faculty to teach) 14. We have a Board majority and district leadership with Omero at the top, that has supported the construction of new buildings with millions of dollars of taxpayer money to build gargantuan buildings at Cuyamaca college (Alexder's backyard), with not enough students who can fill the rooms ...while students at Grossmont College cannot find parking or enough classes that they need during prime time. All Grossmotnt college employees beginning in 2008/09 will be asked to park off campus.... These are only some of the issues.............. Why would any Board of Trustees continue to let this happen? WHY? Posted by: concerned taxpayer at March 10, 2008 04:09 PM As a former student at Grossmont College, I have had my own personal experience with Chancellor Omero Suarez and the board of Trustees. I once had some respect for what Omero Suarez was trying to accomplish with getting equalization dollars, when equalization dollars finally came and they ran the money through a funding formula that even their own CFO (Austin) admitted was based on flawed assumption, the college that should have received more funding (Grossmont) saw money come into their budget, and then get reduced and the money given to (Cuyamaca) not to create a class that a student from Grossmont could go to but to pay for (Cuyamaca) ridiculously costly Administrative staff. Why? Why does Cuyamaca have to be like Grossmont, it is smaller, even the districts own experts figures show that the college isn't growing not like they predicted and certainly not because they are building all these new buildings over their. The "Build it and they will come" philosoply has failed and only cost the tax payers money, while the college that does serve most of the students in the district suffers. They billed Prop R as "For Repair" yet they ignore the currently old and in much need of repair and renovation buildings while they build buildings that are bigger, but won't have the students to fill those buildings. Sure the Grand Mistress of Spin at the District will claim things like, tax payer association awards, clean audits and the CBOC all who are some what beholden to the district, the CBOC especially has members that are all appointed by the Board, I know I was a member of the CBOC. Then there is the ruthless political activities, the nasty little secrets that the district doesn't like getting out, like the States Investigation, or the Grand Jury Probe. All this is happening yet the district is in Deny, Delay, Deceive mode constantly. They do it because they think they have the citizenary fooled. I was even personally attacked by Chancellor Suarez, when I ran out of things to defend him for, and finally saw that the faculty was right for passing all the votes of no confidence, Omero finally showed his true colors. I recall once, Omero mentioning to me when I came under attack by Crystal Sudano, that I must know what it feels like to be under-fire. My response to Omero was, that the only difference was that I was innoncent and he was guilty. An he has remained Guilty ever since, if there is a scandal in this District you can bet your bottom dollar that Omero Suarez, Rick Alexander, Bill Garrett and the rest have behind the scenes orchestrated everything, everything they do is based on some political motive, everything they say has some political agenda, they don't care one bit, that students can't find a class or that they are running a great district into the ground. Then their is Bill Garrett......what can be said....well since he is worthless as board member it just isn't worth talking about, you show this guy the truth and you would think hey would have a lick of sense to look at the facts and do something. He says, "But I am only one board member" well look at his voting record he usually votes for what ever scam or backdoor deal is on the table. In Wikipedia next to the word Corruption, they should have a picture of everyone of these Board members. Posted by: Student Trustee (Yeah that one) at March 11, 2008 06:37 AM So Omero has decided to retire effective late next year. When the trustees were asked if there was a buy out or a settlement, one said yes while the other said no. One trustee even voted not to accept the retirement. I wonder what kind of shady backroom deal was done this time. The latest on Ben "let's break the union" Lastimado is that he secretly recorded CSEA negotiations after being told that our negotiators did not want to be taped. That is a violation of penal code 632. I hope our union decides to press charges, the district is even refusing to negotiate without the proceedings being taped which is not legal. I pray that the governing board does the right thing and fires Lastimado for breaking the law!!!!!! WHEN WILL IT END Posted by: concerned csea worker March 25, 2008 08:15 PM |
2007 GOVERNING BOARD MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING Tuesday, March 20, 2007 The regular meeting of the Governing Board of the Grossmont-Cuyamaca Community College District was held on Tuesday, March 20, 2007, at 4:00 p.m., in the Heritage of the Americas Museum at Cuyamaca College, 900 RanchoSan Diego Drive, El Cajon, California.Members Present: Trustees Alexander, Barr, Caruthers, Garrett, and Weeks; and Student Trustees Ardilla and Keyes Members Absent:None Others Present:Chancellor Suarez, President Perri and Interim President Colli, Vice Chancellor Lastimadoand Interim Vice Chancellor Business Services Sue Rearic, district and college administrators, members of the staff, students, press, and interested citizens. Call to order Board President Alexander called the meeting to order at 4:03 p.m. Public Presentations Public comment was heard from Dee Murdock, California School Employees AssociationSecond Vice President, who presented resolutions of no confidence in Chancellor Omero Suarez and Vice Chancellor Human Resources & Labor Relations Ben Lastimado; BradTiffany, President Administrators’ Association, and Zoe Close, President United Faculty, presented declarations opposing Vice Chancellor Ben Lastimado; and Nancy Asbury, concerned citizen, and Crystal Sudano, Grossmont College student, spoke in support ofChancellor Suarez and Vice Chancellor Lastimado. Adjourn to Closed Session Board President Alexander adjourned the open session at 4:16 p.m. and the Board met in closed session until 6:30 p.m. in the Museum Library, pursuant to Government Code Section 54957.6. The Board reconvened closed session at 8: 57 p.m. Reconvene in Open Session/Announcement of Closed Session Action(s) Open session Board President Alexander reconvened the open session at 6:30 p.m. and announced that no action was taken and that closed session would be reconvened following open session. Board President Alexander reconvened the open session at 11:04 p.m. and announced the following action on March 20, 2007:Closed sessionannouncementsOn motion of Members Caruthers/Barr, with a vote of 1- 4 (Alexander, Barr, Garrett, andWeeks opposed), the board voted not to discipline the Chancellor. Public Presentations Public Comment Public presentations were heard from Rick Walker, concerned citizen, regarding BP 2010-Board Membership. Mary Herman, Grossmont College Multi-Media Tech, Senior, Crystal Sudano, Grossmont College student, Martin DuBord, Cuyamaca College GroundsMaintenance Worker, Senior, Sandy Beasley, Cuyamaca College Learning ResourcesSpecialist, Dave McDade, Grossmont College Financial Aid Assistant, Senior, and Amber Green, Director Employment Services, spoke in support of Chancellor Suarez and Vice Chancellor Lastimado |
May 2008 San Diego County Grand Jury Report SAN DIEGO COUNTY GRAND JURY 2007— 2008 (filed May 27, 2008) The 2007/2008 San Diego County Grand Jury recommends that the Governing Boards of the Grossmont-Cuyumaca Community College District, the Mira Costa Community College District, the Palomar Community College District, the San Diego Community College District and the Southwestern Community College District: 08-91: Endorse and support the County Educational Ethics Committee for community college districts, as proposed above in this report. 08-92: Formulate a ballot proposal, for approval by voters of the district, to limit terms of Trustees. 08-93: Adopt a Governing Board policy that would limit campaign contributions to a candidate for Trustee, whether to a candidate or to a Political Action Committees (PAC) on behalf of that candidate. 08-94: Adopt a Governing Board Policy that would limit the total amount of campaign contributions a candidate for Trustee could receive to a reasonable amount to be determined by the governing board. 08-95: Adopt a Governing Board Policy that would set standards for staff members from soliciting campaign contributions. The Policy should include a provision prohibiting staff members from soliciting campaign contributions for Governing Board candidates from contractors and other firms doing business with the District. 08-96: Adopt a Governing Board policy that provides disclosure standards for Trustees. The Policy should include a requirement that a Trustee disclose the fact that a bidder on a contract donated to his or her campaign. 08-97: Adopt a Governing Board Policy that would set standards for buy-outs of administrator contracts. The Policy should include a provision limiting administrator contract buyouts to amounts specified in their contracts. No salary or benefits should exceed the 18-month period specified in the State Education Code. No damages or special payments should be granted. 08-98: Endorse a policy to expand the public Governing Board meeting agendas according to the spirit of the Brown Act. For items concerning awards of contracts, approving bids and hiring consultants, the agenda should include amounts of bid and award, scope of work, time period, name and address of contract, and college contact. 08-99: Adopt a district policy that the campus police chief reports directly to the Chancellor or President/Superintendent or an appropriate Vice Chancellor or Vice President. 08-100: Review the qualifications of all sworn campus police officers for compliance with requirements of the California Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training. (POST) 08-101: Adopt a Governing Board policy for all real property purchases that specifies the data to be listed on the public agenda when the purchase is voted on. This data should include the current assessed valuation and information on amounts of all sales in the last two years for comparison with the amount of the current purchase price. 08-102: Undertake a cost/benefit analysis on the feasibility of employing a Counsel for the District as opposed to contracting for all legal services. 08-103: Direct District Human Resources officers to adopt procedures to avoid the appearance of nepotism and inappropriate supervisory relationships in the hiring process. These procedures should include the identification and screening of applicants who are close friends and relatives of elected Governing Board members and staff. 08-104: Adopt Governing Board Policies regarding the disposition of surplus property. Said Policies should include a requirement that any college surplus property donated to non-profit organizations or sold by means of public auctions and prohibit purchase by college staff/employees or relatives. |
College district deserves further probe San Diego Union Tribune June 7, 2008 Letters to Editor This is in response to the Union-Tribune article (“Grand jury expected to urge community college ethics panel,” May 26) and the actual San Diego County grand jury report. The report, which recommended that the San Diego County Board of Education create an ethics committee, is an indictment of a system that is broken. While the report did not name specific individuals, I feel specifics are necessary for citizens in the community college district, which was the focus of the investigation. I am familiar with the Grossmont- Cuyamaca Community College District so I will limit my remarks to that district only. I encourage individuals in the other districts to come forth with more specifics so that the public can understand why the grand jury was involved. Quite apparent was the failure of the agencies already tasked with oversight such as the board of education, California Board of Governors and the state Chancellor's Office. The Chancellor's Office was notified of the allegations in the Grossmont-Cuyamaca Community College District more than two years ago. While I agree with all of the recommendations made by the grand jury, I am going to make this prediction. The Grossmont-Cuyamaca Community College District Board of Trustees – Bill Garrett, Deanna Weeks, Rick Alexander, Gregg Barr and Tim Caruthers – will continue to deny, delay and deceive the citizens of East County regardless of what this report states. They won't move to bring forth term limits. The grand jury report needs to be a wake- up call for the residents of East County, and they should start holding this community college board accountable for the outrageous legal costs it has approved and for a chief executive who has been dishonest and whom the board failed to properly discipline. I have no confidence that the Grossmont- Cuyamaca trustees will do anything to become more transparent. In order for reform to occur, every member of the current board needs to be removed from office and a new board elected. RICK WALKER Grossmont Student Trustee 2005 Associated Student Body President 2004- 2005 Citizens Bond Oversight Committee Member |
Mary Kay Rosinski San Diego Union Tribune Oct 9, 2--8 Leonel Sanchez Rosinski said her experience as a labor leader in the National School District, where she teaches, would be an asset. “I have lots of experience with negotiations,” she said. She's also concerned the district spends too much money on legal fees, including defending the firing of a science teacher at Grossmont College. A Superior Court judge recently reversed the firing. |
Violation of EERA |
Legal cases |
Commentary on the Firing of Ted Martinez La Prensa January 6, 2006 By Beth Smith ... Martinez is a strong advocate for Grossmont College – always has been and probably always will be. He continued to choose championing for the students, programs and community that is Grossmont College, and unfortunately, this stance led to a conflict between him and Suarez. He did exactly what every college president is expected to do – bring to the attention of the district administration and board the problems and inequities facing Grossmont College with the intent to resolve the issues as soon as possible. However, it appears that Suarez did not want him to do the job he was hired to do... This relationship became especially strained in early 2004. The first, a seemingly minor accounting error, identified district expenses that were being charged to the college... The dollar amount varied between $200,000 to $300,000 per year, a sizeable amount that could have been redirected to hiring much needed faculty and staff. Suarez made no attempt to absorb the charges back into the district budget, offered no explanation for why the charges were there, and disgustingly, offered no apology to the college for years of “stealing” funds away from educational programs... The second issue is much more problematic... It is the allocation and spending of the capital construction bond revenue, locally known as Prop R, approximately $207 million dollars. East County voters passed the bond that was advertised as “R for repair,” citing the aging Grossmont campus and the need for some new construction within the district. When the district announced the split of the funds...Not only did the split emphasize new construction at the other campus in the district, but it nearly eliminated all repair funds from the budget for the college. Martinez again went to bat for the college requesting more of the split and a greater portion to repair the 40+ year old campus. All his requests were denied and the college has been suffering the results of the split since... The Grossmont Faculty challenged the processes used by the district to determine the Prop R split. The chancellor ... violated the faculty’s legal right to participate in the development of budget and planning processes...The Academic Senate voted no confidence in Suarez in March 2005... The board response to the vote of no confidence in Suarez was predictable, but the vitriol was not. With comments like “Bring it on” and a patronizing “You’ re not happy?” litany, the board supported Suarez, mocked the faculty concerns, and left Martinez in the middle... Martinez stressed problem solving while Suarez sought to gain power. Martinez was left in a pickle. |
San Diego Education Report |
SDER |
SDER |
SDER |
SDER |