Yes, Trustees Met Sunday ...

But apparently it wasn't illegal.

Trustees indeed met Sunday for a closed session without any public notice. That seems unusual, but there's actually a section of the government code that allows such closed-door meetings for employee negotiations.

The meeting was called to order at 6:15 p.m., with all trustees in attendance -- although Anna Bryson attended by telephone.

Superintendent Bobbi Mahler and the district's lead negotiator were the only other attendees. No action was  taken.

The meeting was called quickly as the deadline nears for the release of the independent mediator/fact finder's report on the district's impasse with the teachers. The 30-day deadline comes at the end of this month.

That is the report that will recommend a settlement. It will be a public document. The fact-finder was mutually agreed on by the district and teachers and travels the state doing the work, so it will be well versed in the current complications of school financing. The district will have 10 days to respond to the report.

Here's the code:

California Government Code Section 3549.1 All the proceedings set forth in subdivisions (a) to (d), inclusive, are exempt from the provisions of Sections 35144 and 35145 of the Education Code, the Bagley-Keene Open Meeting Act \ (Article 9 (commencing with Section 11120) of Chapter 1 of Part 1 of Division 3 of Title 2), and the Ralph M. Brown Act (Chapter 9 (commencing with Section 54950) of Part 1 of Division 2 of Title 5), unless the parties mutually agree otherwise:

 (a) Any meeting and negotiating discussion between a public school employer and a recognized or certified employee organization.

(b) Any meeting of a mediator with either party or both parties to the meeting and negotiating process.

(c) Any hearing, meeting, or investigation conducted by a fact finder or arbitrator.

(d) Any executive session of the public school employer or between the public school employer and its designated representative for the purpose of discussing its position regarding any matter within the scope of representation and instructing its designated representatives.

That's apparently OK, but unusual, Californians Aware attorney Terry Francke told me. He's one of the top public-meeting laws experts in the state. "They can step out from under the Brown Act," Francke told me. "But I have never seen a school district use it."

I emailed six trustees -- everyone but Larry Christensen (I just couldn't put my hands on his email) -- and only heard back from Trustee Ken Maddox. Maddox admitted it was a hastily called meeting, but said trustees are under the gun with the approaching deadline for the release of the independent report.

"None of us are working on Sunday," he added.

A couple of side notes: Trustees set off the alarm when they got to district headquarters, which spurred response from the sheriff's department. Also, as they left, some observer bolted from the bushes and ran through the parking lot. Maddox didn't know his name, but recognized him from the board meetings.

Comments

[socmom]

Remember that state laws set the MINIMUM requirements for open meetings. Nothing prevents a school district from working to achieve transparency and public access to the decision-making process. But if they had held a public meeting (even with the minimum 24 hour notice), they would have had to listen to parents and voters, or at least until the microphones were turned off....

[Phil A. Steen]

Is there a state or federal law preventing trustees from working on Sunday. It seems to me that students, administrators, teachers, and parents are burning the midnight oil getting what needs to get done all week. Are Maddox and his gang of seven running for a higher office?

[Pam Sunderman]

So why did they turn off the lights and refrain from speaking with the police officer investigating the alarm?

[Recall, Remove, Recover]

Total BS from these Trustees.

They promised transparency and accountability and instead they find a way to meet in secret using a loop hole few have ever heard of and even fewer have ever used! They knew when the fact finding results were coming and they have known for months. Their protest that they had to call a hasty meeting is BS.

If they hadn't set off their alarms and concerned citizens hadn't noticed what they were doing there is a good chance none of would have known about this meeting! How many other meetings like this have they had that we don't know about?

If there was anyone on the fence about the need to recall and remove these bumbling fools I hope you now see clearly how dysfunctional these seven are.

[Secret meetings, Secret Agendas, Secret Donations, Secret Decisions]

What about the report that when the officers showed up and knocked on the window that they turned off the lights?

Keystone Cops at their finest. Is there any way to turn off the lights on these guys for real?

Yes, join the recall: www.caporecall2010.org

The web site is updated and one of the reasons for the recall is Winsten and Maddox's failure to fulfill their campaign promises of openness and transparency.

[Can't wait for November]

These seven trustees make me ill! What a crock! How dare they run on a platfom of openess and transperency. Where was the transperency on Sunday you seven theievs?! What a bunch of hypocrites. I hope all recall signature gathers print this up and make sure to share this with all of our consituents. Recall Lo-Mad and Winsten and vote out the other three crooks. The other two trustees, Brick and Palazo, will come soon thereafer! I agree that we need to remove, recall and RECOVER from this mess.

[This isn't "limbo"]

Not "ILLEGAL". I call that a LOW BAR.

[Spin Zone]

"None of us are working on Sunday," he added.

For Once, Lopez Rodriguez Martinez Sandoval Garcia Perez Maddox may have been speaking the truth as it is hard to work on a Sunday when you are instead playing "Hide and go seek" with the local law enforcement

[Fed up with the "new" corruption]

From the CUSD Recall.com website:
"... a campaign dedicated to restoring honesty, integrity and accountability to public education."

“The District Attorney takes note that...the newly elected [reform] trustees immediately upon their election, publicly committed themselves to end the Board’s past practice of violating the Brown Act. Together with the existing “ABC” Trustees this results in a new majority on the Board committed to compliance with the law."

“The reform trustees have done a tremendous public service by exposing the ongoing corruption at CUSD - which is why they were elected and given a mandate for change," said Tom Russell, Spokesperson for the CUSD Recall Committee.

Yeah right... why don't they just meet at the Beall's. Oh wait, they already have!

[Lights out!]

This is just one more why these trustees have failed us.
From Sue Palazzo's campaign statement:
"Every effort must be made to make meetings, records, votes, actions, and deliberations open to the public unless otherwise provided by law. Exceptions are to be strictly interpreted. Public meetings, including meetings conducted by telephone, Internet or other electronic means, are to be held at reasonably convenient times and must be accessible to the public."
and from MIke Winsten's campaign staement:
"Eliminate Closed Session Board meetings except when and if required by law, not just when allowed by law. What happens behind those closed doors with attorneys, consultants and staff is allowed to occur in closed session, but that does not mean it is required to be handled in closed session. This one proposal alone can go a long way towards increasing transparency and restoring the public’s trust in how CUSD in being administered."
Have they forgotten what they promised?