ALPINE TEACHERS AND PUBLIC EXPRESS FRUSTRATION AT THE BOARD AND SUPERINTENDENT
By Janis Mork November 30, 2013 (Alpine)- At the Alpine Union School District Board meeting on November 21st, many teachers and the community expressed their frustrations at the school board over fiscal issues, many asking why the Superintendent gets a raise when the district is facing a financial crisis and teachers are being asked to take more furloughs and cuts. Everyone who spoke voiced anger at the school Board or criticized the Superintendent. In all, there were 22 speakers. Superintendent Tom Pellegrino responded, “I believe I’m the only person who makes less money,” noting that cuts have negated his raise, as he explained in detail in a later interview with ECM.” I do not have an overall raise.” Eric Wray, who led the meeting, allowed 11 to speak initially, then the Board moved on to address the other agenda items, and later the remaining speakers had an opportunity to voice their opinions. Gayle Malone, who had addressed the employee association reports on the Alpine Teachers Association (ATA) and California School Employees Association (CSEA) Chapter 607, defended the teachers. “Alpine teachers were the very first in the County to accept voluntary pay cuts to help mitigate the effects of the recent economic downturn,” Malone said. “The district seems intent on diverting attention away from its own culpability by scape goating teachers as greedy and irresponsible, crippling them financially, and by extension, badly damaging Alpine’s ability to provide a quality education for its students.. Alpine teachers care too much about the students, the community, and their own professions.” She then offered her recommendations. “First, carefully read the fact finders’ report. Second, get complete answers. Third, find out what the ATA was willing to do to settle this mess. Lastly, talk to the community.. Listen to the community and take charge. Lead this district down the path to recovery. Lead this district to a fair and reasonable solution.” Aleta Greer, a teacher in the district, was puzzled as to why there was a law enforcement officer at the meeting.. She argued that the board should know the teachers well enough to know that the teachers are professionals and of “high quality.” She specifically addressed board members Joe Perricone and Wray, whose children she has had in her class. Another teacher, Jennifer Broderick, was outraged at the board’s careless spending. “ She stated, “It’s true we face tough economic times.. We got here [by] poor spending decisions.. There’s not been a clear vision for Alpine schools.” She explained how first, teachers were asked to revision schools “with the promise of grand re-openings, which did not happen.” Then the board sought to upgrade the school with technology, she recalled. ““Teachers were laid off.. Money was spent on shiny new Itouches. Money was also spent on the district website that was supposed to promote our schools and bring us into the 21st century. . I personally spent countless unpaid hours creating a video, promoting my schools (including MLVA).” However, there is nothing on the website about the promotions, Broderick said, adding, “The above plans were poorly executed and clearly did not bring new enrollment to our district.. However, the Superintendent was given a raise by the board for a job well done.. We are a family and families are supposed to work together for what’s best for all..” Referring to an earlier presentation on the fiscal oversight report from the San Diego County Office of Education, she said the presentation’s speaker omitted information on historical cuts in benefits taken by the teachers “The Superintendent abruptly picked up his ball and went home. I was devastated.. I implore the board to force the superintendent back to the bargaining table..The students, parents and teachers of Alpine deserve better.” Lisa Hein, a parent of two kids who attend Alpine schools, was disappointed at the board. “I have two children with special needs.. my kids wouldn’t be here today if it wasn’t for the teachers that they’ve had.. Shame on you guys for what you’re trying to do.” ECM spoke with the Superintendent recently to get his comments and the action he and the board plan to take now. “The overall raise I had was 2 ½ percent a few years ago.This year, since July 1 2013, everyone has a 7.73 percent reduction (which negates his 2 ½ percent increase).” Thus he explained, “I’m making less than when I started [in 2010]. I took a 4.73 percent reduction for multiple years.” Asked about the meeting overall, he replied, “It’s not a surprise to me.. When you have serious financial difficulties.. and the burden has to fall on all of us, they’re difficult but doable.” He added, “ Of course people are going to be angry. If we had more money, I would be the first to give the employees more salary etc.. The board started addressing this five years ago. The board made it clear we need to stop spending more than we save, and I’m trying to do that. This year, we’ll have a $1.35 million deficit if we don’t do anything.” He added that a fact finding report due this week will be made public by the Superintendent with an open letter to the public. As far as the action to take, he concluded, “We’ll try to bargain with the ATA for agreement. We’ll meet with the board soon and look at the fact finders’ report and see if we’ll go ahead with it..” To learn more about fiscal facts of Alpine, with letters from both the teachers’ and district’s points of view, visit: http://www.alpinecommunitynetwork.com/2013/11/alpine-teachers-response-to-superintendent-pellegrinos-ausd-fiscal-facts-november-20-2013/. View the Superintendent’s contract here.
LET IT SNOW! FLURRIES FORECAST DOWN TO 3500 FEET BY WEDNESDAY
File photo: Cows in snow at Descanso, by Rebecca Masten December 1, 2013 (San Diego’s East County) – Cold weather is forecast to sweep into our region on Tuesday, bringing rain countywide and snow down to elevations as low as 3500 feet by Wednesday. Areas at or above 3500 feet include Julian, Cuyamaca, Pine Valley, Descanso, Boulevard, Mount Laguna, and Warner Springs. Westerly winds in mountain and desert areas are also forecast. Expect cooler temperatures to continue through at least Friday, the National Weather Service predicts.
LOCAL GOVERNMENT REPORT: FEES PROPOSED TO COVER FULL COSTS OF COUNTY FIRE AUTHORITY
Hot items also on the agendas in Boulevard, Lakeside and Lemon Grove this week By Miriam Raftery December 1, 2013 (San Diego’s East County)–San Diego Supervisors meet on Tuesday and Wednesday, December 3 and 4 at 9 a.m. The hottest item is a public hearing Tuesday on a county proposal to levy fees to recover the actual cost of services provided by the San Diego County Fire Authority including fire plan reviews, inspections and other technical work. In the past, such services have been provided to individuals and businesses without full cost recovery. The Agenda does not state how much the proposed fees would be or how much revenue the county expects to raise. But coming on the heels of a statewide fire fee that is going up at year’s end, the proposal is likely to fuel controversy among taxpayers. The item is first on Tuesday’s agenda. View December 3 agenda. View December 4 agenda. Lakeside’s Community Planning Group meetings on Wednesday,, December 4 at 6:30 p.m. A public hearing will be held on a proposed 35-foot-tall cell phone tower at the Lakeside Fire Station #3 on the Highway 8 Business Loop. Also on the agenda is a proposed r subdivision with 18 residential lots on Lake Jennings Park Road. In addition, the Department of Parks and Recreation seeks public input on its updated five-year park project priority list. View full Lakeside agenda. The Boulevard Planning Group has several major items to consider at its meeting on Thursday, December 5 at 7 p.m. Planners will hold a question and answer session on a new Boulevard Fire Station – and consider whether a moratorium should be requested for new large-scale commercial projects until Boulevard Fire Stations are verifiably staffed daily around the clock. The agenda also includes major energy issues such as Soitec Solar Projects, for which a comment period starts December 12th. Other energy projects to be discussed include Infigen’s proposed Fox Acres Solar, Champan Ranch Solar, and Iberdrola’s Tule Wind planned in McCain Valley. There will be updates on lawsuits filed challenging the Iberdrola project, a CEQA suit filed over the county’s new wind ordinance, and another lawsuit over Sempra’s cross-border transmission line from Mexico. Water will be another hot topic. The Board will discuss a California Public Utilities Commission that modified a court appointment of a receiver for the troubled Live Oak Springs Water. In addition, there will be discussion about controversial groundwater sales by the Campo tribe and Live Oak Springs to SDG&E for construction of two substations and powerlines. Rough Acres Ranch’s planned campground and conference center will also be on the Boulevard Planning Group’s agenda. View full Boulevard Planning Group agenda. Lemon Grove’s City Council meets on Tuesday, December 3rd at 6 p.m. Council members in the cash-strapped community will hear a report on possible naming rights of City-owned property. View Lemon Grove full agenda. Looking ahead to next week, El Cajon’s City Council will meet on December 10th at 3 p.m. The full agenda has not yet been published, but will include a review of applicants for the City Council vacancy and possible appointment of a new Councilmember.
CPUC TO HOLD HEARING IN ALPINE FEB. 5 ON NEW “STEALTH” SDG&E POWER LINE PROJECT PROPOSED IN BACKCOUNTRY
NOTE: CORRECTED DATE View map of all energy projects in our region to see cumulative impacts and disparate impact on rural areas Judge to Decide Whether to Have Hearings on Nearly Half Billion Dollar SDG&E Power Line Project That Opponents Say Threatens Back Country Communities January 31, 2014 (Alpine)–The California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) will hold a prehearing conference at 1:30 p.m. February 5 in the Oak Room of the Alpine Community Center, 1830 Alpine Blvd. in Alpine regarding proposed SDG&E’s Master Special Use Permit project that wouldl impact communities throughout the San Diego backcountry from Pauma Valley to Potrero (north to south) and from Ramona to Boulevard (west to east). The project is so large that SDG&E estimates construction will take about five years. Administrative Law Judge Jean Vieth will determine if there will be full evidentiary hearings for this project or if this prehearing conference will be the only time the issues are heard. “In its application, SDG&E asked the CPUC for permission to construct this $418.5 million project without any hearings at all—their usual method of operation,”Backcountry Against Dumps, a nonprofit community organization, states in a press release. Donna Tisdale, President of Backcountry against Dumps and Chair of the Boulevard Planning Group, voiced these concerns. “SDG&E’s project is being sold solely as fire-hardening but it appears to be an undisclosed stealth increase in carrying capacity that may directly or indirectly support numerous commercial solar projects that are already proposed along or near the route in Boulevard, Pine Valley, Descanso, Potrero, Julian, Ramona, and perhaps elsewhere that we are not yet aware of. Solar generation projects represent potential new fire ignition sources that cannot be de-energized during red flag wind events or other emergencies.” During construction of the Sunrise Powerlink, SDG&E was granted numerous waivers to work during certain fire hazard days within the Cleveland National Forest, Tisdale recalled. Many of these communities are groundwater dependent, and some of the route passes through the federally designated Campo-Cottonwood Creek sole source aquifer, which raises questions such as how much water will be needed, where will it be sourced, and what impacts that will have to adjacent well owners and rural resources. Noisy and disruptive helicopter flight paths were not identified, either, said Tisdale. SDG&E’s 85-acre ECO Substation is currently under construction near Jacumba. The post-EIR Water Wupply Report estimated 30 million gallons would be needed for construction. The CPUC had to increase that vastly inadequate estimate to up to 100 million gallons once reality set in—triple the amount estimated–all after public comment on the project was closed. There will also be a supplemental scoping meeting for this project on February 19, 2014 in the same location from 5:00 to 7:00 pm. Alpine Community Center, 1830 Alpine Boulevard, Alpine, CA. Supplemental scoping comments are due March 7, 2014 at cnfmsup@dudek.com. The project route map is posted here: http://www.cpuc.ca.gov/environment/info/dudek/CNF/ProjectLocationMap.pdf. The MSUP is posted here: http://www.cpuc.ca.gov/environment/info/dudek/CNF/CNF.htm , and the County-wide energy project map is attached for comparison of project locations with the MSUP project route.