 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
| Since December 22, 2004 |
An Unruly Advocate Whodunnit? SPECIAL REPORT
The Weak Pleasures of Narrow Minds: ESUHSD Superintendent Bob Nunez Placed on Administrative Leave
"Revenge is always the weak pleasure of a little and narrow mind" - Juvenal
In a year characterized by drastic budget cuts and financial turmoil, the East Side Union High School District suffered a self-inflicted blow this summer when the Santa Clara County Office of Education (SCCOE) released a report raising concerns about inappropriate expenditures by Superintendent Bob Nunez. The greatest financial concern specifically dealt with cash payouts for Nunez's unused vacation time, which the Mercury News notes is allowed as part of Nunez's contract. 
.
Community members in the audience reacted strongly to the revelations made at the special board meeting on Tuesday, July 28th, an understandable reaction given the sizable cuts made to academics and sports, the substantial reduction in employees and the increase in class size impacting all East Side schools. Coupled with the near-daily dire state news concerning cuts to services for ch ildren, the elderly and the poor, it's no wonder the community is up in arms over a reimbursement for a cup of coffee. It's an awful time for any California public official to make questionable expenditures.
But it is also a perfect time to enact political revenge through the appearance of impropriety. Timing is key. With tensions running high over local and state budget cuts, someone need only fan the flames of suspicion to set a scandal ablaze.
The charges against Nunez appear egregious, but according to the contract link published by the San Jose Mercury News, the superintendent acted in a manner allowed by the contract ratified by the ESUHSD board of trustees. The business model mentality employed by school boards throughout the country allows for expenditures like food, travel, and, yes, vacation buyouts. Two former and one current East Side board member have privately admitted that the contract language in question is fairly standard. Additionally, since the July 28 school board, the SCCOE has officially stated that Nunez did not commit an offense worthy of placement on paid administrative leave.
Many of Nunez's East Side detractors have voiced their criticism on the Mercury News forums and at board meetings. But Nunez's job performance, no matter how viable the complaint, is not at issue here. Nor does The Unruly Advocate openly support Nunez - we have been quick to criticize his performance and will continue to raise questions when a specific situation warrants independent investigation. Nunez is not hands on enough as a superintendent, he's made some questionable administrative appointments and he's more of an appeaser than a decider. We broke the story on the parallels between layoff rescinding in Riverside and East Side under Nunez' human resources tenure. These are viable criticisms about his job performance, though even they are not reasons alone for dismissal. The fact is when examining the narrow scope of the appropriateness of expense and vacation reimbursements, Nunez did not violate the public trust.
Then why was the superintendent of one of California's largest high school districts placed on paid administrative leave when no crime was committed?
A number of politically connected current and former administrators, a board member, and an aspiring politico have personal beefs with Nunez, some documented, some alleged, that a private investigating firm will be looking into at the behest of the school board. The Unruly Advocate staff decided to provide the investigators a little help.
At the forefront of the documented is Geraldine Forte, the former administrator in charge of career services. Forte was quietly removed from her position as principal of Oak Grove four years ago after a series of staff and parent complaints about her ineffective leadership, and "promoted" to the career services position (read here: http://unrulyrus.com/200510_news/200510_02.html ). As is often the case, she purportedly did not become more effective in her new position. And, with the state and district budget crisis growing, her position became one of sixteen targeted for elimination. Whether she lost her job due to poor performance or budget reductions will never be known. Forte appears to believe she was wrongly dismissed when she received her pink slip in March. Team Unruly has learned that she was offered a social studies teaching position, which for a district-level administrator can cause a severe bruise to a professional ego. Forte made others feel the sting of that bruise during her remaining months at the district office. She openly accused current interim superintendent Dan Moser of engaging in cronyism by hiring a consultant who happened to be a friend of another district administrator to oversee the district's Program Improvement plan. She cast aspersions about Nunez in public and private conversations, including stoking rumors about Nunez's sexual dalliances with various female employees.
She seems to have forgotten her ironic public gift of a "Mr. Goodbar" to Nunez when he first took the district helm.
Forte was at the July 28th board meeting, and was seen applauding the decision to place Nunez on paid administrative leave. It also was at that meeting where concerns about a district mole releasing confidential documents to SCCOE and the press were raised. The trustees openly discussed hiring a private investigator to look into who was leaking the information. Soon after, the Mercury News wrote an article about the "growing criticism" surrounding Nunez' job performance. One cited reason for this growing criticism? The Merc had received a copy of a complaint filed with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission by a former "African-American" administrator claiming race was the deciding factor in this administrator's dismissal.
The only African-American administrator working at the district office who received a pink slip in March? Geraldine Forte.
While Forte obviously forwarded information to the Mercury News, was she also the culprit that forwarded confidential employee information to the SCCOE in violation of the law? We can't prove that conclusively, but circumstantial evidence raises the possibility. Though no longer a district employee, she has been spotted at every special board meeting about Nunez' investigation since July 28th. She was also purportedly spotted speaking to Dana Hull from the Mercury News at one of those meetings, though we cannot verify that claim. Forte, however, did not work on the human resources side of the building. Would a mid-level administrator from an unrelated department be able to access confidential employee records, email records, and detailed expenditure reports? That kind of multi-level access never happens with middle-management; either a low-level technician with lots of building keys and an alarm code or an upper-level manager with full access to all records can retrieve those types of documents.
Evidence suggests some documents were taken straight out of Nunez' office.
\We cannot directly connect a dot between the three assistant superintendents, Forte, and a singular revenge plot. In fact, what evidence we have seen suggests multiple people with various motives stumbled onto the same path. CFO Jerry Kurr has no beef with Nunez - Nunez brought him into the district. Assistant Superintendent of Curriculum and Instruction, now Interim Superintendent, Dan Moser was taken to task publicly for the development of his controversial, remedial Program Improvement plan. Nunez and a couple of trustees began asking questions over teacher concerns about the program. At a district-wide meeting with math and English teachers about the PI plan, Moser openly stretched the truth in part to deflect blame for his involvement in the plan's development. Those in attendance witnessed a shaken and nervous Moser attempt to protect himself from the scrutiny of his immediate supervisor and two board members. The seemingly affable Moser is capable of lying to serve his own means, though he is more than a tad nervous about public humiliation, a nervousness that suggests a lack of courage. Simply put, Moser doesn't have the balls to pull off a coup.
Board President Patricia Martinez-Roach, however, did publicly acknowledge that Moser was qualified to be the interim superintendent of the largest high school district in Northern California because he rode his bicycle to work.
Where Kurr lacks purpose and Moser skill, Alan Garofalo, the Assistant Superintendent of Student Services and Facilities, more than makes up for his colleagues' underhanded deficiencies. The report released by the SCCOE raised a specific concern about th e appearance of no-bid contract awarding due to the district awarding contracts to the same vendors. While the Mercury News and the general public focused on a charge of conflict of interest alleging Nunez's son received a quid pro quo job from a construction vendor, the torch and pitchfork crowd forgot some important job duty facts and past scandals that would have turned their collective ire toward a different target.
The board ultimately makes the final decision on vendors - they obviously saw no problem with the same group of people chosen for construction projects. Was that an oversight on the board's part or a deliberate choice? East Side's board has a long history of dubious connections to builders and land developers. Current board member Eddie Garcia was a lobbyist for Comcast before he became the chief of staff for his friend, Santa Clara County Board of Supervisors member George Shirakawa, jr., who ran a prominent local lobbying firm supporting land developers and builders prior to his Board of Supervisors run.
In a high school district that stretches over half of the 8th largest city in the United States (and the only part of the city with sizable areas of undeveloped open space) Garofalo holds a position rife for quid pro quo arrangements. By virtue of his position he is the East Side contact person for aspiring politicians, corporate lobbyists, and prospective vendors. Garofalo appears to prefer the prestige of power than avoiding appearance of conflict. He has been spotted having dinner with members of the board of trustees, including former trustee and controversial local politician Craig Mann. In the presence of a San Jose Mercury News reporter he openly threatened to block construction projects at an East Side school because he didn't like the school's union leadership.
Back when this story broke, it appeared that bond monies targeted for construction at the high schools on Garofalo's "naughty list" were shifted to sites Garofalo preferred. Garofalo has denied any wrongdoing. Since then, Team Unruly has confirmed through anonymous sources working for one of the construction firms that a district official connected to the bond oversight committee convinced the committee members to shuffle the funds.
Alan Garofalo is the district administrator directly involved with the bond oversight committee.
The Mercury News hyped up the story of Nunez' vacation reimbursements because the numbers were easy to cite for their brand of yellow journalism. Of all the findings cited in the SCCOE report, the vendor question is the most damnable. The Mercury News failed to accurately investigate the depth of this question. If concrete documentary evidence can prove wrongdoing in this area, Garofalo, not Nunez, could lose his position. All Team Unruly knows is Nunez started asking uncomfortable questions related to vendors. Nunez openly criticized Garofalo's job performance at one district management meeting. As a district official told us on condition of anonymity, Garofalo has been "on thin ice with Bob for a long time."
Was Nunez looking for a valid reason to convince the Board in closed session to buyout Garofalo's contract? Could Garofalo have been seeking a way to get Bob before Bob got him? Is it merely coincidence that Alan Garofalo was Geraldine Forte's direct supervisor?
To address concerns about bond expenditures and construction priorities, Nunez, under the direction of the school board, ordered that construction decisions be made locally by school site councils rather than at the district-level through the bond oversight committee. That edict shifted the power out of Garofalo's hands. The loss of political influence, the potential of a developing scandal and the threat of a buyout provides more than enough motive for Garofalo's involvement in Nunez' ouster.
But that's only half the story.
J.T. Moore, the chair of the former Measure E and the current Measure G bond oversight committees, was not happy with Nunez' decision to shift construction decision-making power to the school sites. Moore has a reputation for stirring up controversy within the district. Moore became a known figure towards the end of former superintendent Joe Coto's tenure for leading a charge against stadium lights being installed at Santa Teresa High School's football stadium: he argued the lights would bother the neighbors. When district and school officials proposed building a wall to minimize disruption to the adjacent neighborhood, Moore complained that the wall would obstruct homeowners' view of the park-like landscape of Santa Teresa's athletic fields. When Santa Theresa's principal proposed leasing their athletic fields to community sports organizations - a move that could have resulted in millions of additional revenue to the school district currently famous across the state for its proposal to cut athletics - Moore complained about the noise and traffic disturbing the neighborhoods behind the school. In an attempt to appease Moore (and some would argue to try to expand his narrow view of school district operations), Moore was invited to sit on a number of committees, including the now-defunct budget task force. He eventually chaired the bond oversight committees.
Taking the decision-making power for school construction projects out of the oversight committee's hands and giving it to the various school site councils across the district also appears to have infuriated Moore. He made no mention of his frustration, however, until after the meeting where Nunez was placed on administrative leave, where he essentially accused Nunez of undermining the committee's (read: his) authority. He resigned as the committee chair so he could make his accusations as a public citizen, although he does not appear to have resigned from the committee. At an August board meeting, he railed against Nunez as an administrator, a manager, and a human being. Why the sudden jump to the anti-Nunez camp?
Moore has let it be known that he will be running for the school board. Some believe his connections to Garofalo and the land developers will help him in his bid.
At the August meeting, Moore announced that he raised these concerns to Board President Patricia Martinez-Roach. At that point, Roach publicly announced that she20and Moore had been working together "behind the scenes" for six months. An admission like that should have prompted a Mercury News investigation, but the comment almost went unnoticed. Did Martinez-Roach play a role in Nunez's ouster?
Martinez-Roach, known in San Jose politics as the perennial candidate for all local offices, has only managed to win a seat on East Side's school board. In 2006, the East Side board censured Roach for wagging a finger at Lan Nguyen during a board meeting. The mountain-out-of-a-molehill scandal contributed to Roach losing the election that year to Frank Biehl. While the ridiculous circumstances surrounding that event made Roach seem a victim of political thuggery, Roach is hardly scandal free. She was involved in the infamous credit card scandal of 2004. She was also one of the trustees who supported bringing controversial superintendent Esperanza Zendejas into the district. Her relationship with Zendejas was fairly solid at the start: Roach accompanied Zendejas to Mexico and Texas to recruit teachers on the district's dime. Roach also appears to have engaged in a little nepotism by using her influence to get her sister a district-level administrative job. When Roach lost her seat in 2006, her sister took a comparable administrative job in the Alum Rock Union School District.
Roach returned to East Side's board last year, strategically hanging vinyl campaign posters around district schools with a slogan in Spanish that roughly translates into "Vote or Don't Bitch." In a move to apparently draw fire away from themselves due to the escalating budget crisis and the reality of a massive layoff on the horizon, the trustees chose the returning Martinez-Roach to be the board president for 2009. Upon her return, Roach allegedly approached Nunez about rehiring her sister for a district position.
Like all school districts in California, Nunez and the trustees knew the budget outlook was bleak. Even if they did not know at the time how severe the crisis would be, it was pretty obvious to anyone paying attention to the news that school districts would not be hiring administrators any time soon. Within a couple of months, Nunez would recommend that the board lay off upwards of eighteen district-level administrators. For whatever reason, Roach allegedly felt justified in pushing her nepotistic desire in spite of the budget crisis, the layoffs, and the lack of available positions.
What Team Unruly does know is fairly damning. Not only did Roach admit to working "behind the scenes" with Moore for at least six months, by May Roach began asking leaders in the employee unions who they felt would make a "good superintendent." And at the July board meeting, she let slip that she had been looking to hire a private investigator on the district's dime BEFORE the SCCOE report was publicly released.
She found Nunez guilty before any evidence was shown to the public.
One would hope this sordid tale is long enough, but sadly, there's more. For over a decade district administrators have lamented about the cost of employee benefits, citing rising insurance rates as a principal source of East Side's budgetary problems. The employee unions counter that wasteful spending on consultants, private investigators, and the lack of fiscal accountability are at the heart of the district's insolvency. This issue divides straight across management and labor lines. A number of districts throughout Santa Clara County require employees to partially pay for their benefits, but a few don't. Almost all of the districts that fully cover the cost of employee benefits are in "basic aid" districts, or districts serving privileged children in the wealthiest neighborhoods in the county. East Side is one of the only districts in the county serving predominately underprivileged youth that covers employee benefits. It's a story about equity that the Mercury News should cover when the benefits issue=2 0arises. A teacher by profession, Martinez-Roach works in one of East Side's feeder districts and routinely points out to leaders in both East Side employee unions that teachers in her district pay for their benefits.
She fails to point out that, as an East Side trustee, she receives free benefits.
Team Unruly has confirmed that after the August board meeting, another trustee told leaders in the employee unions that if Nunez would force teachers and classified staff to pay for benefits, the board would reinstate him.
Why was Nunez placed on paid administrative leave? Did Nunez violate the public trust by double dipping on his vacation pay? Did he fall victim to an act of political revenge? Or did he lose his position because he wouldn't make an issue out of employee benefits? If Nunez committed a crime, he should be removed from office. That's a no-brainer. But, as always, looking to the Mercury News for answers is akin to studying history on Wikipedia. The Murk cast many stones without turning over a few in their investigation. It's easy to get angry about a coffee reimbursement during tough economic times. But who really is to blame: the person who purchased the coffee or the board that agreed to the contract that authorize d that type of reimbursement?
The Unruly Advocate stands ready to hold Nunez accountable for his actions - when he actually does something wrong. In this case, there are other stones to look under. The story above gives some good places for an investigative reporter or a private investigator to start.
RECENT ISSUES |
October 2009 |
An Unruly Advocate Whodunnit? SPECIAL REPORT
|
Note to Dana Hull, Murky News |
KIKO AWARD
|
The Sleeping Giant Awakes: The Return of the Unruly Advocate |
Did You Know? |