Updates may be found HERE.One of the big ironies of the MiraCosta palm tree scandal in Oceanside, California is that the palm trees were a gift to the college. Still, the college managed to spend millions of taxpayer dollars to investigate the theft of $305 during the sale of some of the palm trees.
This investigation was reprehensible. It was not intended to help the public in any way, only to benefit individuals and their lawyers in their battles for personal power and their quest for financial gain at the expense of taxpayers.
Here are the public expense estimates in chronological order:
May 2007Victoria Munoz Richart
Former president of MiraCosta College
May 2007--Between $120,000 and $1 million
May 16, 2007
San Diego Union Tribune
by Lola Sherman
"MiraCosta College has been charged almost $200,000 by the investigator hired to probe the campus palm-tree scandal that began in February 2006...Last week, the former head of the Horticulture Department, Allene Texeira, pleaded guilty to a single grand-theft count.She admitted paying a former boyfriend, Jack Wackerman, $305 more than the college received in the sale of 30 to 40 palm trees. She paid back the money, plus a $2,500 fine, according to Richart's report...But trustee Gloria Carranza said the accounting presented by Richart doesn't answer her questions. Carranza said she wants to know all of the legal costs, which she previously had estimated at close to $1 million, including staff time and resources. Richart told Carranza yesterday that she will get those figures. But she said invoices from the college's lawyers include legal matters that have nothing to do with the Horticulture Department. The college has paid ESI $119,080 thus far, according to the company. And it notes that as much as $110,000 could be reimbursed by the college's insurance carriers. Jonathan Cole, president of the Academic Senate, told trustees that by his accounting, the college has spent $322,000 in total legal expenditures in the current fiscal year, five times the amount spent in 2003-04 before the palms investigation..."
June 2007 I found the following report dated June 2007 on the website of Bob Dutton, California State Senator:
"I have to tell you when it comes to law and order issues I am a strong believer it’s important to punish criminals for the crimes they commit.
"But sometimes even I believe agencies can get outrageous in their investigation of a crime, especially when it costs $200,000 to find out who stole a $300 tree. This, in my opinion is yet another example of wasteful spending and why I will never raise taxes.
"Recently MiraCosta College started a palm tree “probe”, which has cost the state hundreds of thousands of dollars. I’m convinced the money spent on this debacle could have been better used to provide more students a college education.
"According to the North County Times, “ MiraCosta College has spent nearly $200,000 investigating an on-campus palm tree growing operation during the last 15 months. That amount does not include a sharp increase in legal fees paid by the college during the investigation, and it excludes money the college might have to pay several employees allegedly involved in the scheme who have filed law suits against MiraCosta.”
This incident occurred after “ a private investigator was hired in by the college and its law firm… to investigate allegations by a whistleblower that employees had been growing and selling palm trees on campus for personal profit over an eight-year period.”
“Since then , [the investigator] has spent 1 ,289 hours interviewing witnesses , reviewing employee e-mails and other documents and briefing county prosecutors about his findings. [The investigator] was paid $151 per hour.”
“Despite [the investigator’s] apparently thorough investigation , county prosecutors announced last week that there was only enough evidence to charge one employee , and that she would only be charged with stealing $305.”
“The president’s decision to treat this affair as a significant criminal operation , and the board’s concurrence with that decision , has turned what was merely a problem into a full-blown crisis….It has resulted in multiple lawsuits against the college , hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal expenses and total expense that may exceed $1 million.”
"It is mind boggling to think that MiraCosta College would spend $151 an hour and waste more than 1 ,000 hours to uncover a $305 theft (not to mention the lawyers’ fees and settlements with employees that are yet to come). It must be nice to have access to limitless resources with no accountability for how those resources are used. If private businesses behaved in this manner , they would go bankrupt in short order. There is no excuse for this reckless spending of precious taxpayer resources."
http://republican.sen.ca.gov/opeds/31/oped3935.asp
June 20, 2007 MiraCosta trustees agree to part ways with president
By: North County Times
OCEANSIDE ---- The seven-member MiraCosta College board of directors agreed early Wednesday morning after an all-night closed meeting to end the employment of embattled Mira Costa College President Victoria Munoz Richart effective June 30.
July 2007Gloria Carranza,
MiraCosta College Trustee
Gloria was right!
July 23, 2007 Over $1.2 million
North County Times
July 23, 2007 11:56 PM PDT
By: PHILIP K. IRELAND
"OCEANSIDE -- A few months ago, when MiraCosta College Trustee Gloria Carranza predicted that the palm tree imbroglio could cost $1 million or more, the four-member majority scoffed at the figure and berated her for speculating.
Now, with the release in the last two weeks of a pair of documents that put the personnel, investigative and legal costs at more than $1.2 million as of May 30, Carranza's claim has been vindicated.
July 31, 2007 Over $1.2 million plus $1.5 million = Over $2.7 million
July 31, 2007
North County Times
MiraCosta adjusts estimate of Richart buyout to $1.5 million
by PHILIP K. IRELAND -
OCEANSIDE -- Former MiraCosta College President Victoria Munoz Richart will get roughly $1.5 million in salary, benefits and unspecified damages under a controversial buyout reached with trustees last month, according to updated numbers released by the college Tuesday...The deal with Richart has been challenged by Oceanside resident and attorney Leon Page, who says it must be set aside because, he alleges, the closed session violated the Ralph M. Brown Act -- legislation that defines how public agencies must conduct public business.
Page alleges that the college erred in announcing the closed session meeting and that the participation of a retired judge as mediator was improper.
In rejecting Page's claim, college attorney Jack Sleeth said the meeting did not violate the Brown Act.
Sleeth said retired Superior Court Judge David Moon was not in the closed session, but instead waited outside so that lawyers and trustees could shuttle in and out to him "to discuss the claims, demands and negotiations."
Because Moon was not physically in the room, no violation occurred, Sleeth said. However, he added, no legal opinion exists regarding the presence of a mediator in a closed session.
Sleeth said mediators must be a part of closed board meetings to help minimize chances of the issue going to court, which would escalate the cost to the taxpayer.
Page brushed aside the argument that Moon was outside the meeting, saying his location was irrelevant.
"The notion that Moon was not in the room -- I'm not sure that matters," Page said. "The fundamental problem is that at that moment in time, Judge Moon was speaking to board members and enjoying the opportunity to speak when no other member of the public was (allowed the same opportunity)."
If Moon was considered "a member of the public" -- and Page said he believes a judge would agree -- then at the moment he spoke with board members, the meeting should have become a public forum open to all.
If the closed meeting continued -- as it did on June 19 -- any decision made after that moment was illegal and must be set aside, Page said.
Diane Crosier, former associate of Daniel Shinoff and current director of SDCOE-JPANorth County Times
November 1, 2007
by Philip K. Ireland
"The visiting team from the regional Accreditation Commission called upon the parties at issue at MiraCosta College to cooperate mutually, for the good of the college, in finding a resolution to the rift opened by the precipitous and unwise actions of the Board Majority," the news release states..."
TRANSLATION:
EVERYONE HUSH NOW, SO THE PEOPLE WHO BROUGHT YOU THIS MESS (DIANE CROSIER, SDCOE-JPA, KEENAN AND ASSOCIATES, JACK SLEETH AND DANIEL SHINOFF OF STUTZ, ARTIANO SHINOFF & HOLTZ) CAN GET BACK UNDER THE RADAR AND GO BACK TO BUSINESS AS USUAL, SIPHONING OFF LARGE AMOUNTS OF PUBLIC FUNDS AND ENCOURAGING CONFLICT IN LOCAL INSTITUTIONS OF LEARNING.
THE PALM TREE SCANDAL WAS BUSINESS AS USUAL. IT WAS JUST THE SCALE THAT GOT OUT OF CONTROL.
November 20, 2007
MCC paid $46K to provide documents in county probe
By: PHILIP K. IRELAND - Staff Writer
DA's office investigating buyout deal with former president
OCEANSIDE -- MiraCosta College has paid about $46,000 so far to a law firm with expertise in defending companies against allegations of white-collar crime.
The firm, McKenna, Long & Aldridge, was hired in August to review and select documents requested by San Diego District Attorney's office, said Jim Austin, the college's assistant superintendent of business services.
County investigators are probing the circumstances surrounding former President Victoria Munoz Richart's $1.5 million buyout deal with trustees, inked in a controversial all-night board meeting on June 20.
In July, trustees refused a request by deputy district attorney Mike Still to provide closed session details and documents about the Richart settlement. However, the board instructed college administrators to cooperate with investigation. The decision was made in closed session.
"We feel strongly that our board has done nothing wrong," Austin said.
[Blogger's note: Well, then, why didn't you just turn over documents, instead of keeping them secret, and paying a lawyer to look for reasons not to turn them over?]
In discussions among trustees Tuesday regarding the McKenna contract, trustee Simon said she wanted to know why the board had not been notified sooner about the contract and the spending.
Carranza questioned why the college should pay attorneys $380 an hour to $500 per hour to review documents. She also wanted assurances that the contract would be available to the public.
Austin said all contracts are public documents.
In the end, all but one trustee voted to ratify the contract, with Strattan opposed, saying the fees were exorbitant. The college has already spent more than half of the allotted $75,000, she noted, adding that had the board agreed to give county investigators the documents in July, the college would not have incurred the costs in the first place.
No comments:
Post a Comment