Tonight at 5 pm, for the first time in the 15 months, since they were told by District Deeds in Closed Session with a Petition and Public comment that they were WRONG for improperly removing Principal Mitzi Lizarraga from SCPA, the San Diego Board of Education and ESPECIALLY Trustee Marne Foster and Supt. Cindy Marten will begin to publicly admit the error of their ways.

EVERY citizen can go to the CLOSED SESSION and tell the board what they think they should do to remedy the Trustee Marne Foster “Abuse of Power” and Superintendent Cindy Marten willing support that has scandalized the San Diego Unified School District for the past 3 years.

District Deeds STRONGLY URGES our readers to go to the SDUSD BOARD CLOSED SESSION and LET YOUR OPINION BE HEARD!  Here is the information needed to attend tonight’s meeting:

PLEASE NOTE:

• Notice and Call of SpecialClosedSession Meeting and Agenda—Tuesday, September 22, 2015, 5:00 p.m., Room 2249Closed Session Meeting Information: https://www.sandiegounified.org/meeting-information

The SDUSD Board of Education Special Closed Session Agenda indicates that there is only “one case” to address….

11. Conference with Legal Counsel-anticipated litigation – Initiation of litigation pursuant to subdivision (c) of Government Code Section 54956.9 (no cases); Significant exposure to litigation pursuant to subdivision (b) of Government Code Section 54956.9 (one case)

Government Code Section 56956.9 is better known as a part of The Ralph M Brown Act.

“anticipated litigation”...“Significant exposure to litigation”

It looks like the multimillion dollar SDUSD Legal is hearing footsteps from the San Diego District Attorney and others as demanded by the San Diego Union Tribune Editorial Board.

The Pronouncements by Trustee John Lee Evans are just a SMOKESCREEN .

In his statement in Voice of San Diego (VOSD), three comments stand out:

The reports target the board president, but imply that the superintendent has been coerced into taking certain actions.”

“we do not have a superintendent who caves to pressure from board members”

-Trustee John Lee Evans

No One, especially DISTRICT DEEDS, EVER thought that Marten had been “coerced” or had caved in to Foster.

co·erce (kōˈərs/) –   persuade (an unwilling person) to do something by using force or threats.

To be “coerced” Marten would HAVE to be “unwilling”.

Marten was an enthusiastic participant, especially when she was excited to make an example of Principal Lizarraga’s “resistance” to Foster by removing her from the SCPA Principal position to prove her dominance.  Marten has removed NINETY OTHER PRINCIPALS the SAME WAY….apparently for the simple fact that they had BETTER credentials…and ethics… than Marten.

Evans also said:

I am asking for the board to meet in a special closed session as soon as possible with our superintendent and legal counsel to consider our options, including an independent investigation.

-Trustee John Lee Evans

IF this occurs it is a BLATANT attempt at a cover-up and a ridiculous statement. There has ALREADY been an independent investigation.  It is called

San Diego Unified School District Trustee’s Overreach Abuse of Power Report  

It is the report that Supt. Cindy Marten decided to subvert and ignore in her response and that District Deeds dismantled her response for doing so here and here

It makes NO SENSE to DUPLICATE a SIX MONTH INVESTIGATION to come up with the same results..or WORSE..if it is done honestly.

It is just a SMOKESCREEN….and an attempt at a cover-up to make the Media back off for however long it takes for this scandal to die down.

One final note…

If Foster AND Marten are part of the discussion and decision making process on how to proceed, HOW CAN ANY PRESS RELEASE OR CONCLUSION coming from this Special Closed Session be trusted  by the MEDIA or by the SDUSD STAKEHOLDERS?

Do the courts allow accused felons have a “vote” as to how they are INVESTIGATED by the Police?

Do accused Senators get to sit on the panel that investigates them for misdeeds?

Does the President of the United States get to sit on the Impeachment panel and give his (or her) opinion and vote?

ABSOLUTELY NOT!

If Foster AND Marten are not excused from this Closed Session Meeting, the meeting is OBVIOUSLY a ‘CIRCLE THE WAGONS” cover-up to get the legal advice how to avoid responsibility and to get their story straight for all members when they talk to the press.

District Deeds believes there are 3 options for the SDUSD Board to deal with the Foster Abuse of Power Scandal and the “Significant exposure to litigation”:

Option 1:

Try and justify Fosters actions that she was acting as a citizen, not an elected official, when she sent the email to Joe Fulcher, the former chief student services officer and called Cindy Marten to complain about a sealed document she had improperly acquired.

Marten tried to justify Foster’s actions by telling Channel 7/39 :

“That email was written to that staff member by Marne Foster, my understanding is, from her personal email account and it was signed by her as a parent,” Marten said. “She brought that forward as a parent and as a parent she has a right to do that and our board policies are really clear about that.”

It is true Foster apparently used her blacked out personal email address to Fulcher as provided by the Voice of San Diego here:

Plausible deniability right?

That implies that Foster is disciplined enough to make personal requests of District Employees with her personal email address and address SDUSD Board business with her official SDUSD Board Member email account.

WRONG!

District Deeds acquired a copy of the original email to Counselor Kim Abagat from Foster requesting that Abagat complete the Common Applications Document here:

You will notice that this personal email to Counselor Abagat WAS SENT FROM HER OFFICIAL BOARD MEMBER EMAIL ADDRESS!

OBVIOUSLY Foster sent both personal and Board messages to SDUSD employees from both email addresses, which made it IMPOSSIBLE for any SDUSD employee to know if it was sent “as a parent” or if it was as a POWERFUL and VINDICTIVE Board Member.

Fulcher’s reaction tells it all.  Here is his response to her email…again from VOSD:

He received the above email from Foster at 7:55 am on 12/6/13 as a FOLLOWUP to a previous conversation about her concerns the day before and replied SLIGHTLY OVER 1 1/2 HOURS LATER with assurances that he had ALREADY spoken to Supt. Marten about it!

The subsequent SUSPENSION of Kim Abagat, that could only be accomplished with the willing cooperation of Cindy Marten, PROVES that Marten was an accomplice from the start and IS JUST AS GUILTY AS FOSTER! In fact, Marten may be even MORE GUILTY since she not only betrayed the students at SCPA for taking away their Counselor for 9 days and attempting to ruin an exemplary employees reputation, but she BETRAYED Board Members Beiser, Evans, Barrera, McQuarry,,,and even FORMER Trustee Scott Barnett...for acting on only one Board Member’s command and then trying to cover it up instead of reporting it. 

These documents ELIMINATE Marten’s LIE to Channel 7/39 as a plausible excuse for Foster’s inappropriate actions and points to a Marten cover up to escape prosecution.

DISTRICT DEEDS ODDS for OPTION 1: 2% CHANCE

Option 2:

Stand with Foster and drag the SDUSD through the mud in an extended costly legal battle with potentially MORE VIOLATIONS being uncovered and exponentially increasing the risk of financial and integrity destruction.

The growing MOUNTAIN of evidence points to Foster as being OBVIOUSLY GUILTY and the Board of Education is RUN by the Legal Department.

There is NO WAY that the SDUSD Legal Team would allow the Board to make this DISASTROUS financial mistake.

DISTRICT DEEDS ODDS for OPTION 2: 3% CHANCE

Option 3:

“Encourage” Foster to Resign

The most practical and cheapest option is just for Foster to resign.  With her clean departure, the SDUSD can promote a “New Era” of accountability and transparency,  It would be considered a “remedy” by Prosecutors and throw the Press off the case.

Knowing Foster, she will not go away easily without continued Financial and Legal protections which will cost the Students and Taxpayers money better used for education.

This approval of this option by the Board will also be an attempt to insulate Cindy Marten from Disciplinary Action (Termination, Suspension, Reprimand) and prosecution legally, by the press and by public opinion.

DISTRICT DEEDS ODDS for OPTION 3: 95% CHANCE

Unfortunately Option 3 does not FULLY address the OTHER SDUSD problem that IS NOT on the Special Closed Session Agenda.

The Involvement and Guilt of Superintendent Cindy Marten.

The facts are:

• Foster could have done NOTHING without Marten’s active OPERATIONAL support and concealment…Marten is EQUALLY AS GUILTY AS FOSTER.

• Marten lied to the Board of Education, to the Press and to ALL SDUSD Stakeholders to cover up her guilt

• Marten illegally and unethically suspended, reassigned and fired District employees at Fosters command.

• Marten is a serial offender.  Ms. Abagat and Ms. Lizarraga Marten are just the most PUBLICIZED examples of the Foster abuse and the Marten willing cooperation.  District Deeds knows MORE of the same improper activities by them that will continue to drag the SDUSD as long as Foster AND Marten remain employed by the SDUSD. 

Getting rid of Marne Foster IS NOT ENOUGH!

Go to the SDUSD SPECIAL CLOSED SESSION today at 5:00 and tell the Board: 

Trustee Marne Foster AND Supt. Cindy Marten Must Go!

The Professional Integrity of the San Diego Unified Teachers, Staff, and Administrators depend on it…don’t let these abuses CONTINUE to happen.

Remember, our Children DEPEND on them.

If you CAN’T make it…

SIGN THE RECALL TRUSTEE MARNE FOSTER NOW! PETITION!!!

To stay up on ALL the NEWS and get ALL the REAL information about the SDUSD…scroll to the bottom of this page and “Follow” the District Deeds Blog right now!