ENGAGING DISCUSSION AT FRIDAY'S BEACHSIDE CHAT WHERE I SERVED AS GUEST SPEAKER

I appreciate the San Clemente Times for hosting the September 23rd Beachside Chat at Cafe Calypso and inviting me to be their guest speaker. It was a good turnout with a lively discussion about my candidacy for school board and issues related to CUSD, including the billion dollar bond (Measure M) the school board placed on the November ballot. I shared this morning, that I had hoped for my opponent to join me so the discussion can be balanced with the candidates' opposing viewpoints, but she did not respond to multiple requests by the Editor.

I thank everyone for coming out to participate. In the spirit of Democracy, it was healthy to have people attend today who support me and what I stand for, and those who oppose me, especially as it pertained to CUSD's billion dollar bond/tax proposal and my ideas to get CUSD's financial house in order. I stated that government should not borrow from the future to pay for today's needs. Our children and grandchildren will be on the hook for paying this back.
I shared my experience with the over-taxation of Mello-Roos taxpayers and that this is an important example of how CUSD misused and mismanaged taxpayer dollars illegally and unfairly. Someone said but I bought in Mello-Roos so I should deal with it. I said I signed up to pay Mello-Roos, my fair share and not $60 million more which is what our citizens group remedied from being overtaxed by CUSD. Why would this $1.8 billion bond be any different?

I shared how I believe CUSD needs to live within its means, stop wasting taxpayer dollars on a myriad of consultants, look to its surplus land which is unused, evaluate under-enrolled schools and see what can be done to consolidate administrations to be more fiscally prudent and free up money to repair facilities so we are not financing maintenance repairs for 35 years, and better prioritize the $430 million it receives each year in taxpayer dollars so that the students also win (ie. restore programs and reduce class sizes). Only then, if the facilities needs cannot be met should the school board consider a bond, and it should then only be a bond by area, with specified projects addressed so that residents can actually keep watch over how the funds will be spent. I also said CUSD, in its efforts to attain $229 million in state matching funds should the $9 billion statewide school facilities bond pass (Prop. 51) could have started its process with a smaller bond proposal to build trust with the communities (which is lacking) and work to demonstrate fiscal accountability by selecting high schools with the greatest needs, ie. SCHS and DHHS and seek a $229 million bond and still be eligible to apply for the state match, should voters pass this.

Further I said the process should not be rushed over the summertime in just 4 months. It should involve far more time and involve the community and get it right with specificity of projects and concrete cost estimates which do not exist with the current bond proposal, that is opposed by every trusted Mayor in South OC, and opposed by our Senator, Assemblymember, OC Supervisor, and State Board of Equalization member representative.

I said this bond is too big to manage, too big for taxpayers to track, and taxpayers will be disappointed just like they were with Measure A which promised a lot of the same things, that were never done. I added, there are no guarantees the projects will be completed as disclaimers are noted on CUSD literature advocating for the projects in this bond. I also shared the list of construction, architects, and others already donating to the "Yes on M" campaign because of all the millions they have to gain should this billion dollar tax pass. I concluded by reading comments from the LA Times article about how the Governor is opposing the "developers" $9 billion school facilities bond stating he has nothing good to say about it including the construction industry's role as the proposition's main financier. And that the governor says it will promote sprawl and continue an inequitable system based on which school districts get to the application line the fastest, not which ones need it the most.

CUSD SHOULD NOT BE ABOVE THE LAW WHILE ADVOCATING FOR ITS BILLION DOLLAR BAILOUT OF FAILED LEADERSHIP, AKA "MEASURE M" AND TAXPAYERS SHOULD BE TREATED EQUITABLTY....BUT UNFORTUNATELY, THEY ARE NOT.

I attended the Ladera Ranch Civic Council meeting last night. Along with business items relative to Ladera Ranch on the agenda, their community's representative on the CUSD school board, CUSD Board Vice President Jim Reardon was invited by the members to speak on CUSD's bond measure on the November ballot. He was asked to discuss and answer questions about Measure M.
I appreciated Ladera Ranch Civic Council's Todd Stearns comment "It seems the school district added all these project needs to justify the high amount of the bond". He also asked Trustee Reardon "why couldn't CUSD carve out other Mello-Roos districts like they carved out Rancho Mission Viejo." Trustee Reardon said "it was political as the Rancho Mission Viejo would have actively worked to block it."

So those of us Mello-Roos taxpayers (should this billion dollar bond pass) get stuck with triple taxation after years of unknowingly paying millions more than our fair share that we remedied only after a collaborated taxpayer revolt. I appreciate Trustee Reardon voting NO on the billion dollar bailout of leadership of CUSD -- the only sitting board member to vote no, and the only board member not funded by the union (CUEA).

Also, a citizen last night made a comment that I have heard from many others recently, that he was disappointed over how CUSD can place fancy display boards and flyers with propaganda advocating for Measure M placed in the offices at school sites district-wide. Just today, I heard another complaint and received a copy of a flyer advocating for $17 million in improvements at Vista Del Mar schools. The concern of my friend, an attorney, was that it was blatant how CUSD was advocating for its bond measure, yet there was no literature representing the other side which opposes Measure M. If the district feels so compelled as to openly advocate for its billion dollar bond measure, then at the very least, the public should have an equal opportunity to express an opposing view. To do otherwise is a violation of the law and no one should be above the law.

VOTERS MUST QUESTION THE MOTIVES OF INCUMBENT CUSD TRUSTEES

WHO ARE FUNDED BY SPECIAL INTERESTS

 

Last week, the California PTAs adopted a Resolution supporting and advocating for CUSD's Measure M, the $1.8 billion bond measure (once interest and fees are included). 

This week CUSD Trustee Amy Hanacek, who is running for reelection against Wendy Shrove, advertised broadly how happy she was that the PTA at San Clemente High School is behind the bond measure. Remember this is the PTA board, not a vote by all of its  members, or teachers for that matter. Trustee Hanacek is pushing the bond heavily. Trustee Hanacek is funded by the teachers' union. Remember a couple months ago at a school board meeting, the union president pressed the school board to adopt the district-wide bond in lieu of smaller bonds by area because the union president told the school board it would be too difficult to form 7 different political action committees and ensure all the bonds are passed.

Ask yourself this election season, just who are the union-endorsed trustees? Of course, those who voted to put this billion dollar bond on the ballot. Trustee Hanacek received $10,000 initially when the union endorsed her in April and another $5,000 not long after voting to place the bond measure on the November ballot.  In fact, look back at the meetings leading to the bond approval, Trustee Alpay initially called the bond a giant slush fund; Trustee Hanacek called the bond a conceived economic stimulus (think of how many consultants CUSD will hire if the bond passes.  If you want an idea, just look at how many consultants have been hired by CUSD just to prepare this bond); and Trustee McNicholas is right, the bond seeks way too much money.  Notwithstanding the reservations they had, all the trustees except for Jim Reardon voted for the big bond as directed by the teachers union. In addition to the $15,000 given to Hanacek so far; the union has given Pritchard (also running for reelection) $15,000.

Voters need to pay attention and follow the special interest money and question what the district plans to do with all other revenue sources the school district automatically receives every year totally $430 million for its annual budget.  This money keeps rolling in whether voters decide to tax themselves and their grandchildren more for the next 35 years or not.  How about demanding CUSD instill better fiscal prudence of the monies they do get and making better decisions to prioritize the allocation of said taxpayer funds in its annual budget? Did you know San Clemente taxpayers alone send over $50 million in property tax dollars to CUSD every year? What has CUSD done with this money to even begin fixing San Clemente's older schools? For over 15 years, nothing.  The union fought for this mega bond, but ask yourself what has the union done all these years to cry out for the kids to fix their facilities and make for a more quality education experience? Remember, the teachers union is not giving its anointed candidates big bucks to do what’s right; it’s giving the candidates big bucks to do what it (the CUEA union) wants.

I see CUSD's bond measure as analogous to a billion dollar bailout of failed leadership. Why? Because I've attended school board meetings regularly for years and I've seen the excessive and illegal over-taxation of the people who pay Mello-Roos, which my fellow taxpayers and I fought for an entire year to remedy. I've seen the gross waste of ALL taxpayer's dollars. I've seen greed and conflicts of interests. I've seen an unbelievable number of consultant contracts -- some questionable for services involving school districts far, far away, and even duplicative contracts for the same thing on the same meeting agenda. These and the tens of thousands involved each time the contracts appear on every single school board agenda is very concerning. This money could be spent in the classrooms to reduce class sizes, restore programs and fix facilities, but that is not what is being done. I've seen the board talk about millions as if they were talking about pocket change. They show complete disregard for taxpayers' hard-earned dollars. I've sat in shock and utter disbelief when board members shame parents just for speaking out or proposing educational choice, including charter schools. I've seen parents be shooshed in the audience for clapping and cheering for speakers. I've also seen them be threatened to be removed from the meeting room, while those who support the board have been given special treatment and can clap and cheer all they want without being reprimanded.  I've watched the school board announce they plan to sue two Mayors in south OC for opposing their bond measure and for spearheading a letter signed by all other trusted south OC Mayors in protection of their taxpayers. I've seen CUSD play games with friends seeking public records requests, telling some that their requests will be so voluminous it will cost them hundreds of thousands of dollars if they want the records.

This majority union-controlled school board (6 of the 7 members) has behaved at times as if it is above the law. It will stop at nothing to get more, more, more of our tax dollars. It has hired consultants and lawyers regularly to fight the very people they are supposed to serve, just like they are doing now targeting these two mayors for calling out their billion dollar scheme for what it is: a slush fund with no specificity or guarantee that the projects will ever be built.   

Without trust, transparency and accountability, overpaying for a bond that is haphazardly compiled that is nothing more than a slush fund is not helping children. CUSD needs to sharpen their pencil and come back to the voters with a better plan.
 
I plan to VOTE NO on Measure M.  I hope you will do the same. And, please vote for me for CUSD School Board. I promise to restore trust, transparency and leadership to CUSD. I also promise to bring much needed collaboration and integrity to the school board.

Best,

Laura Ferguson
Candidate for CUSD School Board Trustee Area 3

I am proud and thankful to have a growing number of esteemed endorsements for my candidacy for CUSD School Board, Trustee Area 3, San Clemente - Laura Ferguson 

Mayor Bob Baker, City of San Clemente

Councilmember Lori Donchak, City of San Clemente

Councilmember Tim Brown, City of San Clemente

Mayor Pro Tem Kathy Ward, City of San Clemente and Greg Ward, Retired High School Teacher

Ret. Mayor (2012) Jim Evert, City of San Clemente

Assemblyman Bill Brough, Assembly District 73

Senator Pat Bates, Senate District 36

Board Trustee Linda Lindholm, Orange County Board of Education

Gloria Romero, Ret. Senator and Chair of the Senate Education Committee

The Republican Party of Orange County

The Lincoln Club of Orange County

The Orange County Charter Schools PAC

Vice President Jim Reardon, Capistrano Unified School District Board of Trustees

Mayor Frank Ury, City of Mission Viejo

Mayor Tony Beall, City of Rancho Santa Margarita

Mayor Mike Munzing, City of Aliso Viejo

Councilmember Brad McGirr, City of Rancho Santa Margarita

President Andrea Ewell, Talega Maintenance Corporation HOA Board

Ellen Addonizio, Former Trustee, Capistrano Unified School District

Taxpayers and parents, please read this article (link below). I was one of the three non-educators acknowledged in Dawn's article who attended the CUSD special meeting on Tuesday.

If after reading you doubt what really happens at these meetings, take the time to listen to the CUSD audio recordings where every word is on the record. Once you do, there's no disputing the urgent need for new leadership at CUSD that will put the students first in making sure they have a great public school experience while ensuring taxpayers are treated equitably and respectfully. Parents and taxpayers should never be shamed by elected public officials just for speaking up.

 Our chance to hit the reset button on this school board is November 8th.  The student-centered, taxpayer friendly candidates are at a disadvantage when running against union-backed/funded candidates.  When you vote in this coming election think about what candidates have earned your vote versus those who will try to buy your vote.

 

Thank you,

Laura Ferguson

 
http://patch.com/california/sanjuancapistrano/listen-words-trustee-who-doesnt-understand-she-was-elected-represent

This is a message to the union members (CUEA) of our school district written by a passionate parent and student advocate Julie Collier.  She provides some clarification to the union about the upcoming election in CUSD that is based on their latest newsletter to their members (see newsletter excerpt at bottom of page). Since the local union is taking direct aim at those of us parents who have become outspoken about transparency issues and ensuring students are the priority in CUSD over the years, including Laura Ferguson for CUSD, this must be addressed.  Here is her letter posted on Facebook today:

Dear CUEA,

1. I am proud to stand with parents like Laura and others who have fought for children in CUSD at great risk to our own children. We have become accidental advocates for parents, students and the great teachers who work beyond the limitations of their union contract.

2. It was not the board who brought on the teachers' strike of 09-10, it was CUEA and the teachers who made the choice to vote for and walk the picket lines instead of being in the classroom with their students. This was done in the name of more money for teachers at the cost of increased class sizes, reduction in programs, and the loss of beloved newer teachers who were not tenured.

3. The "local politicians" are not back...we have never left. We continue to not only be outspoken, but question what is happening in CUSD with our tax dollars and the quality of education. We are not ashamed to stand up for improved education for ALL students in CUSD, including public school choice options that charters bring and true open enrollment within CUSD.

4. We do not, in any way, oppose public education, as you wrongfully state. We wholeheartedly support public education and expect the leaders and district admin to do all they can and uphold the value of high-quality public education for ALL students in CUSD, regardless of ability and socioeconomic status. Further, we believe if there is going to be a bond in CUSD, then it must be very transparent and clear to all taxpayers what will be done, how and when. Do you really think that is asking too much? Really? Yes. We supported Rebecca Friedrichs in her historic case against CTA because all she wanted was for teachers to have a choice in joining their union instead of being forced to pay dues. Clearly, the unions seem to support forced dues. Also, I'm sure you know I spoke on the steps of the Supreme Court in support of Rebecca. It was a very proud moment for me, which I will never forget. I can forward you the link to my speech, if you'd like.

5. We are election-weary too. We continue our fight against special interest groups that focus only teachers and maintaining business as usual education, like CUEA, H.O.P.E. and Children First. We run for office knowing we will never have the same funding as you, we will have to battle the ridiculous whisper campaigns wrongfully stating we will turn most schools into charters (so NOT true), teachers who stand by their union and call us evil to parents while passing out flyers in front of the school, people in PTA meetings "forgetting" to mention candidates who are not supported by CUEA, signs are not only stolen from public street corners but from front lawns, and some of our own children become the easiest mode of retaliation. Yet, we still speak up, we still run for office, and our children continue to bravely encourage us to do so because "their friends need help and a quality education."

And while I have your attention, CUEA, parents of CUSD would like the following:

1. Return our kids' tests back to our children so we can review it or have a tutor review it. We know there is no board policy on this, and teachers do not have a right to withhold this vital information in the name of recycled tests.

 2. Adjust your union contract to allow teachers to be available before and after school to help their students as needed. This will greatly benefit the working parents and truly is in the best interest of students, especially those in high school.

 3. Do not support the district policy that CUSD students can graduate with a D average. We can and should do better for our kids, with your help on this.

 4. Please support an open door policy for parents so they can meet with their teachers past school hours. This will help allow parents to truly partner with their child's teacher.

 5. Did I mention that parents would like their kids' chapter tests and quizzes back? Seriously. We want them back.

 6. Please allow tenured teachers to be evaluated more than every five years. I know the trustees you support past and present all voted for this ridiculous policy. There is no other profession that I know of that evaluates employees every five years.

I hope this has provided you some clarity on your stance against those of us parents or "local politicians" as you worded it. We will not stop or apologize for caring about the quality of education for students and the need for true transparency in CUSD.

Sincerely,

Julie Collier

PS. I know we all make spelling errors sometimes, but make sure you are spelling "public" correctly. I'm sure you didn't mean that Freudian slip in the third paragraph.

 

FROM CUEA NEWSLETTER DATED AUGUST 26, 2016 CUEA ENDORSES HANACEK, PRITCHARD AND HOLLOWAY CUEA, by unanimous vote of Representative Council, has endorsed candidate, Patricia Holloway, for Trustee Area 3 in San Clemente. Patricia is a well-respected, long-term resident, city planner, community volunteer, who will represent ALL of San Clemente. The former PTA President of Las Palmas Elementary, she is pro-public education and the proud parent of a graduate of Las Palmas Dual Immersion, BAMS and SCHS. She has been recently honored by the San Clemente City Council for her community service and also received a commendation by State Senator Pat Bates.  Last spring, the Rep Council endorsed both Board President, Amy Hanacek (Area 1), and Trustee, Gary Pritchard (Area 5), who have brought stability to the School Board, and have demonstrated a willingness to make decisions based on convictions and what is best for all students in CUSD, rather than being swayed by political expedience. Check out and “like” the Capistrano Unified Education Association Facebook page or our website at www.cuea.org for more information.

WHAT’S AT STAKE IN THIS TRUSTEE ELECTION? Most of us remember the School Board that brought us the days of the strike of 2009-10 and the recall! Names like Winston and Lopez-Maddox remind us of a board beholden to local politicians rather than concerned about the state of our schools and the education of our students.  Well, those same local politicians are BACK and endorsing their slate of opposition candidates. They are united in their desire to shut down Measure M, which will bring the urgently-needed improvements and repairs to our aging facilities [more on this in the next issue - anyone having trouble with air conditioning?]. These are the same local politicians who want to bring more charter schools to CUSD and who supported Rebecca Friedrichs in her fight to bring down teachers’ unions.   If you are election-weary, we understand it! We have been fighting off the onslaught of opposition to public education for years. However, now is not the time for apathy!  The opposition is united and prepared for battle. When your Building Rep asks you to phone bank or walk precincts, say, “YES!” The pubic trusts their teachers. They need to hear from you! We have shown our strength when united in the last several elections. We need this win! Let’s do it together!

 

As a concerned parent and taxpayer, I have attended school board meetings regularly once and more often than not, twice a month for nearly three years. Over this duration I have addressed the board and held them to account numerous times on a range of issues concerning the over-taxation of Mello-Roos taxpayers, high school attendance at schools funded with Mello-Roos, misuse of special taxes on maintenance, lack of public outreach on issues of importance, overcrowded classrooms, mismanagement, wasteful spending on consultants and lawyers to protect the district and battle constituents, and most recently speaking out against CUSD billion dollar bailout of failed leadership, aka the mega bond on the November ballot.   

We have an excellent chance this election to turn around the dysfunction we see regularly at the school board meetings. With four (4) seats (of the 7) up for election, a student-centered, taxpayer-friendly majority board is very likely if you and your friends get out the vote in Trustee Area 3 (Ferguson), Area 2 (Reardon); Area 1 (Shrove); and, Area 5 (Vollebregt).

http://www.ocregister.com/articles/elementary-726275-school-area.html