Pro public education, VUSD school board trustee, Elizabeth Jaka reponded in print in a North County Times Forum piece today to the lies that Jill Parvin was allowed to publish in the North County Times recently.
Read what Jill Parvin wrote here:
http://www.nctimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/article_63509623-7cf4-5259-9fb7-2817cc3670d8.html?mode=story
Read the Jaka's response here:
http://nctimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/article_6164f23a-ab93-5977-af1c-23b5bfc4db9b.html?mode=story
Unlike Jill Parvin's Forum, Elizabeth Jaka's Forum was fact checked and is correct. No information is made up. Below is the full text of Jaka's response.
FORUM: Vista Unified is seeking legal opinion on VTA pact
R. ELIZABETH JAKA -- VUSD trustee Posted: Friday, October 2, 2009 12:00 am
A recently published Community Forum questioned a long-standing contractual agreement between the Vista Unified School District and the Vista Teachers' Association. In the article, Ms. Jill Parvin misstates the action requested, the board's response and the financial implications of the issue. As a result, she creates a very distorted picture of the board's conduct and leadership.
At issue is a contractual agreement that calls for Vista Unified to pay for the VTA president's release time to the district. According to a staff report, the intent is to pay for the VTA president's time spent conducting district business, freeing him or her from teaching duties. District responsibilities may include working to prevent litigation, processing grievances, participating in negotiations, as well as other business related to the VTA.
In her forum, Ms. Parvin claims that Jim Gibson asked the board to "demand that the union return the money" the district has paid under this agreement. That is not true. In fact, Mr. Gibson asked the board to "Approve staff lawyers to investigate the legality of the union contract and report back to the board at the next board meeting concerning the Vista Teacher Associations' president's salary."
After some discussion on this item, board members voted, 5-0, to have staff send the issue to the state attorney general for an opinion. Contrary to Ms. Parvin's claims, it was not sent "to staff for consideration."
It's important to know that the VTA president's release time was negotiated and approved through attorneys as far back as 25 years ago. Since then, the legality of this practice has been investigated by the district's attorneys multiple times. Most recently, a review of the issue was presented at the Sept. 8, 2005, board meeting, and before that it went to the attorneys in March 2003.
It makes no sense to spend limited district funds to have this agreement investigated by the attorneys again. By sending our request to the state attorney general this time, we will receive a "truly independent legal opinion" at a fraction of the cost of paying district attorneys for yet another review. In the process, perhaps we will be able to settle this issue once and for all.
Finally, Ms. Parvin gives some impressive figures to further support her claims. However, she fails to factor in the money that Vista Unified is obligated to pay for work done for the district, and that greatly reduces any potential refund.
While every dollar is critical, it's important to keep things in perspective.
Any money that might be refunded would be greatly appreciated, but it won't be enough to bring back buses, or even save one part-time job.
In the end, it comes to this: The Vista Unified board was asked to seek an independent legal opinion on a contractual issue. We unanimously agreed to take that action. To claim that anything other than this occurred does a disservice to the district and the community we serve.
R. ELIZABETH JAKA lives in Oceanside and is a member of the Vista Unified School District board.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment