Teacher Complaint Process Dominates LCUSD Meeting
The board will also reconvene on Dec. 21 in closed session to discuss any action against Gabrielle Leko after two closed-session meetings Tuesday night.
No decision has been made on an LCHS math teacher who allegedly used ethnic slurs against her students after two Tuesday night closed-session meetings that sandwiched an epic public board meeting that focused on handling concerns about teachers.
Veiled references to Gabrielle Leko hung over the first public board meeting for rookie members Andrew Blumenfeld and Ellen Multari, as they joined the rest of the board in fielding comments from parents and other residents on ways to best deal with complaints about teachers at Tuesday night's meeting.
Following parents' demands that Leko be removed, the board had emerged from closed session to tell dozens in attendance that there was nothing to report, but would regroup later in the evening for more deliberations. They reconvened for another closed session, emerging at midnight to say that no decision was reached, and that they will meet again in closed session on Dec. 21.
Follwing the public swearing-in of Multari and Blumenfeld as well as the cake-accented honoring of departing members Cindy Wilcox and Jeanne Broberg, all eyes eventually turned to Superintendent Wendy Sinnette's presentation of a multi-layered list of possible procedures on how concerns and issues with teachers could be handled. The district's handling of the Leko situation has drawn the ire of parents, who have decried the "broken" process.
"If the system has fallen down, we need to fix it," Sinnette said Tuesday night.
Assembling A Plan
Sinnette's slide-oriented presentation outlined different plans of action when issues are reported at varying levels: principal, counselor, formal, informal and public complaints. Several slides showed language from the California School Boards Association that could be implemented into a policy for the district, such as what defines inappropriate behavior, or what an employee should do if he or she witnesses or had evidence of inappropriate conduct between another employee and a student.
Several people raised questions ranging from how much evidence a student or parent would need to warrant a full investigation by the principal or counselor, or about the variances in types of child abuse.
There were flashes of comments mentioning the Leko situation, but board president Susan Boyd and Sinnette made it a point to steer the discussion back to the potential complaint methodology, as they asked that no references be made to specific incidents or people.
That didn't stop Debra Archuleta, whose daughter Alyssa Stolmack spoke of Leko's "verbal atrocities" at the previous board meeting, from peppering the board with pointed questions regarding the responsibility of counselors and supervisors faced with teacher complaints.
"At what point does common sense come into this?" she said. "It's not anger, it's concern. This should be part of their job."
A point on one of the slides mentioned that anonymous complaints wouldn't be entertained at either the formal or informal level, which brought Archuleta to speak about students and parents paralyzed from fear of retribution.
"I understand why you can't [handle anonymous complaints], but how are we going to encourage people to put their names in these complaints, instead of living under this culture of fear in La Cañada?" she said. "My daughter ... she has not suffered any retribution by staff or administration, even though she came forward. Hey, if my kid did it, then I'd want others to come forward. This message should be out there, that kids can come forward and be treated with the same respect."
Sinnette called the teachers she works with "pros, and that the pros I know would not engage in retribution."
Better communication
Improving outreach and communication was another aspect discussed between board members and residents. Wilcox said she had learned about "egregious" things that had happened that had never been brought to the board's attention, even while she was on it.
"Perhaps you can decide what triggers the board's being informed of something," she said. "Or when you'd want staff to bring things to your attention."
Wilcox also mentioned that sometimes school principals are "confused" about when a particular issue has been resolved, when in some situations, it's more about a parent giving up.
"They say, 'I can't take any more time off work,'" she said.
Susan Blumenfeld, sitting next to Wilcox, mentioned that it "took me a year-and-a-half to realize a process even existed."
As the discussion on complaint procedure winded down, Archuleta asked the board about what action would be taken, other than putting in a policy and trying to train staff, to prevent what she called a "complete breakdown" and "appalling lack of professionalism" in how the district handled the concerns of her and her daughter. Boyd responded that "it happened, and now we're dealing with it. We're dealing with it now to keep it from happening again."
"I hoped my concerns would be handled in the local confines of the school," Archuleta responded. "I'm sorry that it's become such an issue ... had this been handled last year, maybe we wouldn't be sitting here."
Following the discussion, the board moved to introduce a proposed policy for LCUSD to be discussed at the Jan. 10 board meeting.
Other Notes
At the conclusion of the public meeting, the board nominated and elected new officers. Scott Tracy took over as the board's president for the fourth time, stepping in for Susan Boyd. Multari assumed the position of vice president, and Blumenfeld took up the mantle of clerk.
James Stoker
7:38 am on Wednesday, December 7, 2011
Unfortunately, I could not be there at this board meeting. Like many local residents I am still making up for time lost during the power outage.
This complaint process is a suitable subject for a workshop or series of workshops. The failure to deal with this issue will only serve to bring outside legal pressure to bear on the school district. The assumption that the details of this complaint process is governed entirely by the Teacher's Association MOU needs to be carefully explored and mapped out. It is clear to me no MOU can govern the actions of the board.
If the board is considering dismissal of a teacher, then the Education Code requires that consideration to be taken up in an open meeting. Nothing in the Government Code has removed that particular requirement. Nothing in any MOU can suspend that requirement.
Scott Tracy
11:58 am on Wednesday, December 7, 2011
Mr. Stoker,
Regarding your claim that Education Code requires that consideration of teacher dismissal must be taken up in an open meeting, this is not accurate.
The Brown Act and Ed Code delineate the circumstances under which a legislative body of a local agency - including our school district - may meet in closed session. The Brown Act authorizes closed sessions for eight reasons including "personnel exception".
Specifically, "a board may meet in closed session to consider (including taking action on) the appointment, employment, evaluation of performance, discipline or dismissal of a public employee".
Scott Tracy
President, LCUSD Governing Board
James Stoker
12:44 pm on Wednesday, December 7, 2011
GC 54957(b)(1) allows the board to consider dismissal in closed session only subject to GC 54957 (b)(2), namely that the employee in question has been given adequate notice of the option to be heard in open session. Lacking that notice the action of the board in closed session is null and void.
Any action taken in closed session must be announced in open session at the same public meeting according to GC 54957.1 (5) unless other administrative remedies have not been exhausted. I don't know that there would be any administrative remedies left open in the case of board action.
So in one sense Scott Tracy accurately states the provisions of the Brown Act. In practice my original assertion may be closer to the truth.
As I understand the press reports, the administrative remedies of GC 3543.2(b) have been exhausted, so that the next step would be the provisions of EC 44944 -- a much more public process involving the courts. This is exactly what the board should be trying to avoid -- courts getting involved in setting school district policy as related to discrimination. Once the courts begin looking at discrimination in district programs Pandora's Box may be opened, and the boards hands may be tied.
Wayne Lahr
9:11 am on Wednesday, December 7, 2011
As a teacher from Pennsylvania, I am thoroughly out of the loop in regards to this specific situation with Ms. Leko, however, I will ask one simple question.
Since when does a teacher give up their fundamental rights when they walk through the doors of the school building. If I do something wrong at work and a student/parent decides that it is worthy of complaint, I have a right to address both the student AND the parent before ANY action is taken against me. Since when are students and parents, ALONE, the arbiters of what is right and wrong? Maybe the student doesn't particularly care for that teacher and what happened was "reported" to the parent without any context at all. This system of "anonymous" complaints is a complete and utter joke. If the teacher has done something worthy of reprimand (or worse), they should be permitted to face their accusers, just like out "in the real world."
Patrick Lee
9:47 am on Wednesday, December 7, 2011
Hi Wayne: You may want to fill in the gaps on this long-standing story by reading our coverage here. As you can see, this is far from a one time deal. http://lacanadaflintridge.patch.com/topics/Gabrielle+Leko