Gibson's revisionist supporters substitute fantasy for fact

Today on the North County Times blogs one of Jim Gibson's supporters re-wrote history. A blogger, who calls himself Vista Watchdog 1, posted wild ravings and fantasies following today's North County Times article indicating VUSD must file a lawsuit as the first step to recovering money from the outside housing developer who owned the land where the Dual Magnet high school is being built.

http://www.nctimes.com/articles/2009/04/30/news/coastal/vista/z7f4e67662eb58ec6882575a50077c5e1.txt


LIES AND MISINFORMATION OF NCTIMES BLOGGER VISTA WATCHDOG

The first sentence of today's first VWdog's post refers to a previous post by Randy asking about performance bonds that are required by law to be obtained before any construction is allowed at any site in the United States of America.

My oldest son is a lawyer with a San Francisco company that specializes in litigation surrounding these bonds. Even with the bonds in place, the bond companies delay paying for years during lengthy court proceeding in which responsibility for which bond company should pay is assigned. The contractor has a bond with one comapany. Subcontractors are bonded with another. Other entities with potential liabilities are brought into the suits. It becomes a huge time consuming and costly mess.

In today's post VWdog says that a performance bond was not obtained for the Melrose/Highway 76 dual magnet site. Any one who know anything about construction knows this is a made up lie on the face of it. No permits would be issued without a bond. That sentence is his first delusion of the day.

Again he is referring to Randy's post which was the first post after this article. Randy asked about performance bonds wondering indirectly why the insurance company which issued the bonds was not paying for the housing developer's failure to bring utilities to the site.

Here is what VWdog wrote:

To Randy: Should have! But, the Union trio (now four person majority) was in such a hurry to get this job done (at any cost, and any way they could) that they failed to require such.


VWdog ranges off into even more madness with the following:

Law "suits were filed by the city and county because the district failed to meet zoning and other building codes, stating they were exempt from these things since they were a school district'

Of course this is a lie on the face of it. No one is allowed to build schools in the state of California without the express approval of the state of California not only for all architectural plans and but of all site locations.

California schools are not only required to meet the Uniform Building Code but the much more rigorous Field Act requirements. The Field Act of 1933 was passed by the California State legislature to try to ensure that the disastrous collapse of two and three story brick school building in the great Long Beach quake would never happen again.

Below is the VWdog's total post. Reading it should provide insights into the nuttiness that the four rational caring and community supported board VUSD members face every day on our behalf. Thank you Herrera, Jaka, Chunka and Lilly for putting up with this kind of nonsense from our ANTI friends.

Vista Watchdog1 April 30, 2009 5:34AM PST
To Randy: Should have! But, the Union trio (now four person majority) was in such a hurry to get this job done (at any cost, and any way they could) that they failed to require such. There are MANY other problems resulting from the same mismanagement and ignorance of those who have been running this project, and district, into the ground. But, the only thing most of the (anti quality education) Union bloggers will focus on will be Strawberry Hill (a parcel of property that VUSD could never have developed for a school - but that isn't what the Union fools will tell you), and false claims concerning board minority members filing suits to block the construction (suits were filed by the city and county because the district failed to meet zoning and other building codes, stating they were exempt from these things since they were a school district - more anti education union arrogance and ignorance!). They were warned this school would not be ready by this fall. In fact their opposition candidates told the public it was a pipe dream. But, the public ignored reality and bought into the union pap. Well, they got exactly what they deserved: MORE FAILURES! VUSD is a real JOKE. Unfortunately the only ones to suffer are the children (and our country's future!).

LAWSUITS ASSOCIATED WITH GIBSON COST MILLIONS MORE

The lawsuits that VW dog is referring to cost VUSD millions more. One was orchestrated by a four member group that Stephen Guffanti, former board member, and Gibson political ally was filed. Another refers to a lawsuit filed by the former owners (outside housing developers from Tustin, CA) of the Melrose/Highway 76 site. During Gibson's 2006 run for school board, Gibson found a way to secretly funnel thousands of dollars of campaign contributions from those outside developers through Guffanti's campaign into his.

http://www.nctimes.com/articles/2007/02/06/news/inland/2_04_282_5_07.txt


Gibson also benefited from a 15 to 20 thousand dollar scandalously inaccurate mailer produced and distributed on his behalf by the Tustin developer and received at our homes just days before the 2006 school board election.