(from YouTube video)
  • (from YouTube video)
  • Story alerts
  • Letter to Editor
  • Pin it

Sweetwater Union High School District superintendent Ed Brand will be bringing another university plan to the board of trustees on May 13.

In January of this year, the district made a controversial agreement with the for-profit, religious Grand Canyon University. On Monday, Brand will ask the board to vote on another agreement with Alliant University.

The surprising thing is that in advance of the board meeting, as if assured of three trustee votes, a YouTube advertisement has already been posted melding the names of Alliant University and Sweetwater.

The approval item on Monday’s agenda states: “Alliant International University, an accredited university with a long history of success in addressing the needs of multicultural students, has joined us in developing a partnership that will offer a four-year university program with guaranteed admission to the SUHSD students while sharing our facilities. Alliant International University has locations around the state, including the San Francisco Law School and satellites campuses in Tokyo, Hong Kong, and Mexico City.”

As the document states, the “university” will be housed on Sweetwater property. Several sources have indicated one of the adult-education campuses will be closed to make way for the campus. According to a director in the district, directors will be offered an opportunity to teach at the university; at a recent meeting, they were also told to recruit at least one student.

Superintendent Ed Brand's LinkedIn profile indicates he attended Alliant University

The internet site LinkedIn shows that Brand attended Alliant from 1971–1983.

Fifty varied student reviews of Alliant University can also be found online. The student who attended the campus in Mexico found the experience “amazing”; the students in San Diego were less positive. One posted: “Alliant was the worst decision I made in my life. It costs so much for nothing and I will be in debt for a very long time.”

  • Story alerts
  • Letter to Editor
  • Pin it

Comments

anniej May 12, 2013 @ 6:48 p.m.

So what we are seeing is PROOF POSITIVE that Brand and "certain" members of the board are in collusion? Well, my, my, my, my ,my

This is exactly what we, the antagonists, have been alleging all along. Now lets see if you all can 'guess' what board members will be voting for Alliant - let me save you the trouble - that would be Jim Cartmill, Arlie Ricasa, and Johnny boy Mccann.

4

erupting May 12, 2013 @ 6:56 p.m.

Mr. Cartmill is this a Brown Act violation? Surely Dr Brand would not do this without board approval or at least there nods from board members. Who in the hell runs this district the board or Fast Eddy? Since the board mtg. is tomorrow how does this happen? Who are the three board members that gave the nod? Oh, what a tangled web we weave when first we practice to deceive. What nerve!!!

3

anniej May 12, 2013 @ 7 p.m.

I would urge ALL reading this to take a look at the WATCHDOG on the UT, there you will find the saga of L street (reportedly previously by Susan Luzzaro). The article outlines how we are out approximately 40 million that is MILLION folks. And what does Brand have to say about this "I can live with my decision". Sure he can live with it, but what about us the ones whose money has been thrown down the commode?, can we live with it? And what do our board members have to say about it well I am surmising it will be something like "many bad land deals were made back then" - true, but Brand, and then board members Jim Cartmill and Arlie Ricasa were in the business of educating our middle and high school students, NOT BAD LAND SPECULATION DEALS!!!!!!!!

It is indicated that a MAJOR law suit is headed Brands way, Jim Cartmills way and Arlie Ricasas way. You see us bumpkin pumpkins in the South Bay do not take kindly to our District purchasing land and then giving it away. Oh, you didn't know, we do NOT hold the paper on L street, but we are paying the freakin mortgage on it.

John Mccann what is it going to take for you to step up and start -acting like the fiscal conservative you CLAIM to be????????????? You think we are going to give you the keys to our fair City of Chula Vista when we have seen all that you have NOT done for our middle and high school students or their tax paying parents.

4

eastlaker May 12, 2013 @ 9:42 p.m.

John McCann is probably quivering in his boots at this moment...because while he apparently isn't smart enough to actually do anything about this highway robbery of Sweetwater's taxpayers and students, he probably recognizes that this mess isn't just going away any time soon.

The great state of denial that this board and Brand have been living in is about to become a state of reality, and it is about time.

I have been saying for a couple of years now that we need forensic accounting, and I will say it again. We need it because Ed Brand and all the schemes have meant that Sweetwater is being consistently and deliberately pilfered and scammed. This crooked majority board is liable.

Walls closing in McCann? Is it starting to get hot in here? Going to try for another TAD somewhere safe?

2

Visduh May 13, 2013 @ 9:03 p.m.

Interesting notion, anniej, that those jerks on the board might not be brought down by these criminal prosecutions, but rather by lawsuits. Lawsuits can be most pesky, and if the district will not or cannot pay the legal fees, those crooks can be in a world of hurt. Beating a criminal rap is one thing, but winning a civil suit, where the lawyers can wear you down with years of depositions and discovery and innuendo is another thing. Maybe justice will be served by those clowns having to deal with legal fees until they are in their 80's and long after they departed the district. I have a friend who believes that "you get what you deserve." Can't say I fully subscribe to that, but if these crooks receive some measure of justice it may not be in any court of law. But it could be in the courtroom of life's events.

2

montana64 May 12, 2013 @ 8:05 p.m.

May I please order a t-shirt? Alliant -Sweetwater U! For-profit/for rent/pay-dirt! I'd sell my soul to Hades, too!

2

anniej May 12, 2013 @ 8:17 p.m.

Montana64 - Brand is selling out the very students he swore to protect. Does it get any lower?

How does a super enter into an agreement without the vote of the board? Well that my friends is how Brand operates. What will the Pres of the board do about this? How will this be explained by law biding board members?

3

eastlaker May 12, 2013 @ 9:49 p.m.

He, that is to say Brand, evidently knows that he has the voting majority in his pocket, so that he hasn't even bothered to wait for the formality of a vote.

We have been paying for empty husks to sit on that dais and systematically disembowel Sweetwater and enrich themselves.

As for law abiding board members, they are in a distinct minority.

2

anniej May 12, 2013 @ 10:08 p.m.

don't ya just love 'sources'? anniej sure does. look what was just sent to me -

http://alliantedu.blogspot.com/

any of you know what happened to the millions referred to in this blog?????? surely if it was a great success, and surely if we did great things with this grant - then surely this info would not be a surprise.

bruce husson, hmmmmmm, where have we heard that name before? oh, that is right, he is part of the L street fiasco. oh, and this is not brand's first go around with alliant either. more to come

3

eastlaker May 12, 2013 @ 10:12 p.m.

Gosh, it's starting to look like the crooks could be stacked like cord wood.

2

anniej May 12, 2013 @ 10:16 p.m.

take a look at the first line of pictures - well, i will be darned that sure looks like ed brand of 2005, remember when he left under the cloud of a Grand Jury investigation.

now take a look at the second line, first picture.

http://www.picsearch.com/Alliant%20International%20University-pictures.html

now here is the funny thing when you click on ALL of the pictures up comes the story, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THESE TWO. hmmmmmmmmmmmmm

don't you just love how transparent brand and the leadership of the board is? corruption vs transparency - they are as far apart as they can be, even in websters.

does anyone know if Bertha Lopez reads these blogs, hopefully she will have some questions for brand on the alliant deal, that has been signed, sealed and delivered, that he will answer tomorrow night. that is unless arlie ricasa steps us and gives us another lecture on how we should respect brand.

2

eastlaker May 12, 2013 @ 10:44 p.m.

So Brand had a deal going with Alliant about 10 years ago, but that withered on the vine when he skedaddled north...and he I guess is breathing new life into old deals.

So--maybe because he had the agreement of the board low those many years ago, he feels that it is unnecessary to put things to a public vote? That's confidence for you...

Maybe that could be a new name for the one, the only "Fast Eddy" Brand, the Confidence Man of Sweetwater.

It's a three ring circus here in Sweetwater, with the Confidence Man as ringleader and ringmaster. Scandals galore! Fraud of every variety! Fast Eddy and the Liars, now appearing in many news reports.

You can see them IN PERSON at the board meeting Monday night. Step right up, the show is about to begin.

3

anniej May 12, 2013 @ 11:21 p.m.

eastlaker: what should NOT escape the reader (no pun intended) is the fact that the deal has been brokered by brand WITH NO BOARD VOTE. WHY? HOW?

they closed the adult school at montgomery high and word has it alliant will be housed where the adult school use to be housed.

brand and the leadership of the board has traded the much needed adult ed for high priced alliant university. i guess brand prefers to USE our community vs SERVE it.

again i ask where is the leadership of Jim Cartmill and Arlie Ricasa, the Pres and VP of the board? why has this deal been brokered without public input or board vote?

todays articles here and in the Union Tribune Watchdog section have clearly defined ALL THAT IS WRONG WITH OUR BOARD. it appears obvious that the leadership of the board are NOT governing, they are instead MIA, no doubt worried about their upcoming trials and those soon to be infamous Grand Jury testimonies.

in all seriousness, as a citizen of The Greatest Nation In the World isn't is abominable that we are held captives by board members who are and who have failed us. the ONLY board member to serve the students or ask about the financials of our tax dollars is Bertha Lopez. WHY??????????????????

4

cvres May 13, 2013 @ 7:19 a.m.

Student debt is a huge issue in the whole country. Positioning students to assume student debt before they are even out of high school is reprehensible.

Fortunately for students there is a lot of internet information. Student reviews like the ones referred to in this article are one way of navigating the maze of private colleges that have flooded South County.

The board members seem to be M.I.A. in Sweetwater. Is this the Brand show?

3

eastlaker May 13, 2013 @ 7:26 a.m.

Why, anniej? Because Bertha Lopez continues to be in the game for the benefit of the students.

Not herself.

The other board members must have motivations other than what should be the case...political aspirations (McCann must have said he would go along with all of Brand's schemes in order to obtain promises of future support), monetary gain/security (didn't Brand give Cartmill $50,000 a few years back...that's a pretty large gift, and it probably came with strings attached)...solidarity in exchange for protection (Ricasa...aren't there some large attorney fees) and sometimes Quninones, who still apparently can be touched by the needs of the ROP/CTE students, but where is she for the real fights?

At one time I would have thought that these individuals would be embarrassed by their own lack of integrity. But they have become very brazen, as if to say that the opinions we hold of them do not matter.

Do they still think that this swirling mess of Sweetwater is going to bring them to some beautiful, tropical lagoon where they can enjoy the fruits of Ed Brand's scams and schemes? If so, we have news for the voting block and Brand: there will be a cleansing stream, and they will be washed away.

3

SDJill May 13, 2013 @ 8:53 a.m.

I've given up on the board, so this is for any SUHSD students who might come across this. Be careful, you are much better off completing the A-G requirements for the California State University System-they will cover the admission requirements for almost any university in the country. Then, if you are able to, take classes at one of community colleges in San Diego while still in HS (summers, night classes during the school year). City College is easily accessible by trolley and Southwestern is on the bus line. These classes will transfer to the State Universities and many private colleges. These community college credits are inexpensive. Alliant is unranked, doesn't even give out a 4 yr graduation rate and is far from economical. Study, hard, do well in HS and apply for scholarships and financial aid at much better schools. UC schools (depending on family income) may cost less and include some top ranked universities. Well known private schools also have many academic scholarships available. Just because someone tells you something is a good deal-doesn't mean it is.

4

anniej May 13, 2013 @ 8:55 a.m.

Eastlaker: Truth be told, they do not believe ANY of this is any big deal. When we say "community" they hear "antagonists". They do not believe the community cares even a little bit.

4

anniej May 13, 2013 @ 9:08 a.m.

SDJill: I can only hope that the educators who stand before our students will share the truth about Alliant. At this point they are the students and parents only line of defense.

Our board members Jim Cartmill (Pres,), Arlie Ricas (V.P.) both of who have the authority to STOP THE MADNESS, are in fact complicit by their silence.

Since when were our tax dollars meant to be given away for free rent for Alliant, or any other questionable college course source. Has Cartmill and Ricasa forgotten about Southwestern, our hard earned monies paid to build and RENOVATE those buildings where credits ARE transferable!!!!!!!

5

angrybirds May 13, 2013 @ 9:42 a.m.

Aint no way they are going to stop the madness, SUHSD is poised to receive kick backs for each student. You watch people Eddie boy when he is done stuffing money down his pockets and bankrupting Sweetwater he will have something to do with Alliant. Oh Eddie when will you learn your lesson. When will the board wake up and take over the wheel and start driving the bus. Otherwise we are on a collision course straight into a brick wall

4

angrybirds May 13, 2013 @ 9:43 a.m.

Oh yeah can some teacher or counselor let us know how many kids they have to recruit cause you know there is a number

4

Susan Luzzaro May 13, 2013 @ 11:27 a.m.

SDJill, I think your comments will be helpful for parents and students. Thank you,

3

oskidoll May 13, 2013 @ 11:50 a.m.

"SCAMWATER....the latest show in town" It's a shame we taxpayers are on the hook for it all.

4

dbdriver May 13, 2013 @ 12:28 p.m.

I honestly don't mind another avenue of education for our students. But for this to have already been pushed through before the board has voted on it is the wrong way to do this. (Gee, this appears to the district specialty.)

However, looking at the agenda item, it shows that the financial impact to the district is "No direct impact." Yet, it talks about labor involved by district staff and legal fees during the initial set-up. Also stated are longer term impact in terms of utilities, custodial services, etc. and to "offset" this, Alliant will send over student scholarships?

I'm sorry, that's comparing apples and oranges. As a taxpayer I want more details than that. What is the value of this space we are granting them the use of? How many and how much in scholarships are they giving in return? And if our students are smarter than the average bear, and they decide not to partake from this picnic basket, what is the district compensation from Alliant?

Of course, we still have our agreements with Southwestern, and I know some students have gotten courses at City College as well. Why are we not stepping up and allowing them to use our facilities as a satellite location?

But knowing our board, they'll vote on this with no information.

3

eastlaker May 13, 2013 @ 3:04 p.m.

Yes, one side of the mouth says "No direct impact", yet the other side cancels ROP/CTE and other programs, giving over those sites. Of course there is a direct impact! Of course this costs money!

How stupid do they think we are?

4

oskidoll May 13, 2013 @ 1:06 p.m.

It is usual for students in public high school to be able to 'co-enroll' at the public community college with the permission of their high school counselor and parent. Most community colleges do not charge ANY tuition for students who are co-enrolled. These students earn credits that may be applied to high school grad requirements OR are a head start on their college transcripts. SUHSD students are welcomed at Southwestern College and can earn credits there even while they are still in high school! My own son earned 6 units while a senior in high school and they transferred when he entered college. No mess, no or very little MONEY, and no fuss!

5

dbdriver May 13, 2013 @ 1:19 p.m.

Same for my son. He and a friend took a 4-unit course over at Grossmont College, and they paid $15 for the course. (At the time, it would have cost me about $104)

5

joepublic May 13, 2013 @ 1:46 p.m.

I agree with all of the points made here. This is a bad idea, and once again, the public's voice is being ignored. Let's not forget that they're reducing the adult-ed program in order to pull off this "proposed"/done-deal. I find it incredible that this whole plan will have no fiscal impact. By the way, whose money was used for the promo video?

3

oskidoll May 13, 2013 @ 1:56 p.m.

This information appears on the Southwestern College website: "High School Special Admit High school students who are enrolled in grades 9–12 with a minimum grade point average of 2.5 may be admitted for concurrent enrollment at SWC. A High School Special Form, signed by the high school principal is required. All necessary forms and instructions are available on the Admissions and Records website printable forms area, and in the Admissions and Records office. Enrollment is limited to no more than two classes or six units per semester or summer session. See the SWC College Catalog for more information."

I do hope Ed and site counselors are doing everything in their power to inform students and partnets about this excellent opportunity to get a head start on college credits while still in high school, without any need for financial aid or scholarship assistance .... a much better deal than anything offered in the high-priced 'offers' from either Grand Canyon University or Alliant.

6

Visduh May 13, 2013 @ 3:50 p.m.

Not to take anything away from all the previous comments, I think the public ought to know more about Alliant International University, and its precursors. Simply put, this operation is the former United States International University renamed about a decade ago. That old name had become, for good reason, a liability in recruiting students. USIU for many years was very slow to pay its bills, earning the sobriquet of "USIOU." But it had its share of scandals and finally claimed to have cleaned house and made a clean break with the past, while it got the new name. Actually, USIU was the result of renaming the old California Western University that had its campus on Point Loma. That campus now houses a totally unrelated institution, the Point Loma Nazarene University.

The important thing to note is that during the late 60's and early 70's many of the masters degrees in education, and almost all of the doctorates in education held by local school teachers and administrators had come from Cal Western/USIU. It will sound harsh, but too many of the recipients were not looking for an educational experience when they enrolled in a USIU degree program. They wanted the degree, which as a "ticket punch" got them a larger salary every year. I'd be willing to bet some money that the fat man got his "ed doc" from USIU, and it is also probable that, if he attended USIU after 1971, also received his BA from there, too. And he would know very well just how academically rigorous the operation was (or still is.) USIU was also the source of the doctorates that the founders of National University held. Chigos came straight out of the USIU doctorate to found NU, which in its own right was also a questionable operation, and which later suffered its own scandals.

So, while Alliant is not a for-profit operation, still has a spotty record, history of re-namings and relocation, and catering to people with Department of Defense educational allowances. This is not to say that everything Alliant and precursors did was poor. For a time in the 70's it dispensed with letter grades altogether and went to a narrative system of reporting progress and attainment. It did some innovative things while it just hung onto its accreditation, and I'd say some of its grads came out very well educated. But on the whole it has not been any great credit to San Diego or the higher education system.

5

eastlaker May 13, 2013 @ 4:55 p.m.

link should be:

http://learningboosters.blogspot.com/2011/06/you-gotta-be-kidding-me-ed-brand-is.html

The only biographical info I could find for Ed was on linkedin and it listed Alliant International University in San Diego from 1971 - 1983.

Not a very strong academic background, to say the least.

1

teachersrock May 13, 2013 @ 4:35 p.m.

We want to find good honest people to replace the 3 seats coming up for election. We want to get as many community members as possible involved with this process. The district is firing tons of Adult Ed/ROP teachers and support staff because Dr. Brand says there's no money to run these programs. If you are interested in getting involved please email us with your contact info to saveadultschools@gmail.com Thanks!

3

montana64 May 13, 2013 @ 8:29 p.m.

Compliant. About Alliant! 3 ducks in a row./ Three votes in his pocket/ Respectfully submitted/ School board puppet show.

3

Reader2 May 13, 2013 @ 11:04 p.m.

Just back from the Sweetwater School Board Meeting. What a sad state of affairs. But I'm not discouraged! There's more work to be done. Isn't it interesting that the video was pulled down just after Mr. Vasquez played the audio for everyone? I had just watched it on the district website a few minutes earlier and I couldn't believe that they had actually put it on the district website before the board had a chance to discuss (and vote) on the "contract" that wasn't. I guess they do have some shame. Hmmm, community pressure is having an effect.

3

eastlaker May 14, 2013 @ 12:22 a.m.

With this board there is an odd combination of arrogance and ineptitude which leads to disaster after fiasco after mess-up after mistake--Brand and his loyal voting block lack any sort of insight into what they have been entrusted to do and to take care of.

The posting of the video--just another way for Brand to showboat, then 'cleverly' have it removed? More hubris.

We really only have his word that that contract with Alliant was not signed.

Why should we believe anything he says? He has never been honest yet, so I doubt he will start now.

I can only wish that the board will start feeling community pressure. The groundswell is growing--.

At least during this meeting I did not see eye-rolling from McCann. So perhaps his behavior has progressed beyond that of a 15 year old. Too bad his judgment hasn't improved along with it.

Cartmill actually showed a semi-involved personality. Ricasa showed a quasi-reasonable side, but then she undermined it all by falling into step like the obedient under parlor maid.

Brand showed himself for the time-share salesman that he is--that signing bonus must really be good for him!

Bertha, again applied herself to the task at hand, and make public the fact that the contract had been shared with the board, but had not been available on the website for the public. Thank goodness we have one trustee who tells us what is going on.

Pearl Quinones, made her point about saving ROP/CTE--but needs to widen her scope a bit. She needs to work much harder, prepare herself much better in order to really do the job like it should be done.

The disgraceful four still seem so pleased with themselves...they must think they are untouchable, even though half of them have been indicted. And if people keep looking, the other half might be in a similar situation.

3

bbq May 14, 2013 @ 6:19 a.m.

After another frustrating Board meeting where the "elite" omniprescient, omnipotent, four (McCann, Ricassa, Cartmill and Brand, said with complete derision), steamrolled the public with another underplanned, misguided, gotta happen now scheme with Allient University (a bit of an oxymoron), I'm resorting to one of the only opportunities to speak my mind.

After speaking to the fact at the Board Meeting that the College Route (which the chosen ones are advocating, hell stuffing down our students throats) is only as good as the foundation we are giving our kids and that this route is not for everyone, HE-double-Hockey-sticks, 80 % of our students will not attend University right out of High School.

We continue to cut the very basic industrial and job skill programs that were the core of our nations greatness, between vocational training, ROP and Adult schools we have taken the tools right out of our students hands.

Board of Trustees do you think Engineers, Doctors, Surgeons, became that way because they read about holding tools and following directions, no they did not, they at some point learned to manipulate tools, hopefully under the guidence of a craftsman in wood or metal shop or a gifted teacher in cooking or sewing classes, where kids can explore what it feels like to create something, get an idea what a career might feel like or even decide that those thing are not what they want to do. We have given up on these essential skills and experiences in our Education system, by only advocating the University route, which all of you have taken.

The soon to be enacted Allience (Pun intended) with Allient University is first a costly alternative to existing programs which we should be fostering and second the dumbing down of the whole college/university experience by reducing the GPA required to start classes/attend/pay for to 2.0, again the Higher GPA students will recieve a "Discount" or Scholarship. (can you say Used Car/Time Share Salesman). If this is such a great deal to our community why do I feel like the timeline of Four months is inadequate to enact a curriculum.

Oh by the way Allient University sold their campus in Scripps Ranch to Kaiser or one of the other Hospital Groups about four years ago, are they getting evicted? Maybe that's the reason for the "Quick-Contract" and the free classrooms.

To my community this disregard by the Four Amigos to the real needs of our students, Community, Region, State and Nation is appalling. "Beware of the Snake Oil salesman, at a minimum what he is selling won't hurt you but remember it most likely won't make things better either". BBQ

5

eastlaker May 14, 2013 @ 8:20 a.m.

Your point about Alliant needing a campus after selling their north county property is very intriguing. That would give them incentive to work something out here in south county, where acreage is cheaper, especially if you can have someone give it to you the way Ed Brand has...

Ed Brand's course of action in cutting ROP/CTE and Adult Education is an example of gutting public schools so that private enterprise can enter in--we know that. What we do not know as yet, is the cost to Sweetwater, although we know it will be great.

And again Ed Brand lies and says there will be no cost.

Again I say, he must think we are very stupid to believe him. It was interesting that Jim Cartmill brought up Ruth Chapman's name, that he had known her as his second grade teacher as well as a fellow board member up until her 92nd year--but to me that only brings to mind the phrase that bears repeating:

"If Ed Brand's lips are moving, he is lying".

She must have been one very smart lady. We should all remember what she had to say. It is a great pity that Jim Cartmill seems to be able to put that right out of mind. Let us hope her words have wings.

3

bbq May 14, 2013 @ 8:53 a.m.

Eastlaker thanks for the comment, one other item last night in all of the confused question/comments etc. Dr.Ed not to be confused with Mr.Ed (insert both have Horses a---es) inserted how important STEM or STEAM programs were, for those not into accronyms, Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathmatics, Ed, Dr not Mr, stated that Alliant would set-up a STEM curriculum for SUHSD. I find this Ridiculous as they have little STEM in their current curriculum.
If you want to know what employers or Universities that teach or use, Engineering and Technology, you should ask them what they are looking for and have them assist you in creating your programs and curriculum. College grad educators should understand education, but it does not mean they know STEM or proper business. SUHSD, use your staff to set the (7-12) Education programs and hire professional managers to manage the business, deficit spending has to end. Taxpayers demand the proper checks and balances of a well run district, and let's get out of the program de jour. BBQ

4

anniej May 14, 2013 @ 9:24 a.m.

Folks, lets face it, they are steamrolling over this community because we are ALLOWING THEM TO!

While it is important to note that attendance is growing, we need MORE, MORE VOTERS!!!!

While I have no doubt that the DA's earnest efforts will drive out Arlie Ricasa, Pearl Quinines and Jim Cartmill we can NOT forget that rumor has it that John Mccann is planning to run for mayor of Chula Vista. He has done NOTHING to clean up this district, what he did do was align himself with Arlie Ricasa and Jim Cartmill, what he did do is roll over and give ALL POWER to Ed Brand when the three of them voted to allow Brand to do what he wants, with our money WITHOUT THEIR VOTE or our input. Is this what we want in a mayor, a wishy washy, weak, soft leader -NO!!!!!!

Last night with a straight face Brand sits up there in his chair and tells us that they put the Alliant video on UTUBE because classes are going to start THIS September. Then Jim Cartmill, with another straight face advises us that the Alliant U agenda item is simply the first step in 'considering' signing a contract. I would advise Mr. Cartmill to listen to both he and Brands defenses of the agenda item and hear how ridiculous they sound. He wonders why people are using collusion and corruption, the proof is in the audio folks!!!!!!!! So now we the public are going to have to send out our numerous emails, using our massive compilation of emails addresses to advise parents and students to NOT BE DUPED!!!!!

And NOW we have the new credit card scandal, with thanks to Arlie Ricasa, Ed Brand. Since when is an employee of the district allowed to spend that kind of money on a lunch? What does the IRS allow for a business lunch????? Jim Cartmill did you know that the "cut up" credit card had been rescued from the trash? You all remember when Johnny boy Mccann told the press THERE ARE NO MORE CREDIT CARDS per John Mccanns decree. So how was a new one issued WHO AUTHORIZED IT? Was it Cartmill, or did Ed Brand take it upon himself? Are we, once again, paying for his 7 Eleven $16.00 coffees in north county, followed by his south county breakfasts, south county lunches and even south county dinners? Are we paying for Ed Brands monthly oil changes? Are we paying for tires for numerous cars and an RV? Are we paying for computers to be fixed in the No County? How much more money can this greedy man TAKE from our students?

Jim Cartmill, you are the board president how did you allow this to happen????????????

3

eastlaker May 14, 2013 @ 10:14 a.m.

Is there a link to any news reports about this credit card issue? Because I haven't been able to find one.

More deception and lies! More arrogance and disregard. More's the shame that these are the people who represent this school district.

2

bbq May 14, 2013 @ 10:31 a.m.

Not sure what story to believe but a later article shows Kaiser planning to build in Kearney Mesa not Scripps Ranch, however they did have an intent to purchase a few years ago. Just in the interest of fair reporting/blogging. BBQ

0

anniej May 14, 2013 @ 9:36 a.m.

Visduh: Civil lawsuit - collusion, corruption, L STREET - Cartmill, Ricasa, Brand. Who knows what the next knock on the door will bring???????????????????

3

anniej May 14, 2013 @ 10:28 a.m.

Eastlaker - it was on channel 7 39 evening news I am told. There sits Brand, twirling around in his chair, I am sure 'he can live with this decision' also.

Problem is it makes John Mccann and Jim Cartmill out to look like pawns on BRANDS checker board. Ricasa, well, if she can charge it to the students, why not - I mean heck we all read the search warrant info - that showed what her board position means/meant to her - lots of paid for freebies!!!!!!!!!!!

respectfully submitted

3

eastlaker May 14, 2013 @ 2:01 p.m.

Ok, finally found that link: http://www.nbcsandiego.com/investigations/SweetwaterMealCostLimit_San-Diego.html

Reminder--if the link appears "broken", then try typing the rest in.

1

joepublic May 14, 2013 @ 1 p.m.

bbq: Where did you get the information about Alliant selling their campus? That's very interesting, and I think you might be on to something. Thanks.

1

oskidoll May 14, 2013 @ 1:06 p.m.

The Governor's "May Revise" proposed budget is out. Looks like Fast Eddy may have shot himself and the District's adult students in the foot (again) with regard to Adult Education. Here's the latest plan: NOTE THE FOURTH BULLET that requires maintenance of 12-13 'effort' to qualify for ANY future funding!

"Adult Ed – • Initial proposal withdrawn • $30M, to be spent over 2 years, is proposed for planning of regional adult ed programs (consortium that could include CCDs, K12, CBOs, jails, etc.) • Plan is for $500M to be appropriated in 2015-16 • Entities participating in consortia must maintain 12-13 effort to be eligible for any new funds • All programs funded at CDCP rate • Instructor qualifications subject to consortium plans"

2

eastlaker May 14, 2013 @ 1:31 p.m.

Do you suppose there is some scrambling at the District Office right about now?

Fast Eddy is probably salivating over 'his' share.

So now what--the district will try to cobble together what they have been disassembling for the past 3 months?

2

bbq May 14, 2013 @ 1:18 p.m.

UT- Kaiser eyes Scripps Ranch land for hospital Friday, August 26, 2011 ... Diego has tentatively agreed to buy Alliant International University’s 60-acre c ... agreed to buy Alliant International University’s 60-acre campus in Scripps Ranch wi ... nd of the year, representatives from Alliant and Kaiser said Friday. Alliant, w ... om Alliant and Kaiser said Friday. Alliant, which served 1,500 students with a ...

UT- Kaiser picks Kearny Mesa site for new hospital Thursday, December 1, 2011 ... udy and picked the county operations property in Kearny Mesa as the site for its n ... ital, rejecting an option to buy the Alliant University campus in Scripps Ranch. ... jecting an option to buy the Alliant University campus in Scripps Ranch. The decisi ... n was met with disappointment by the university and relief by Scripps Ranch resident ...

This is what I saw and heard, unfortunately it looks like Kaiser is not buying the Alliant Campus, but if they were willing to sell 18 months ago, who knows what they are planning to do today.

BBQ

2

eastlaker May 14, 2013 @ 1:28 p.m.

So maybe Alliant isn't doing all that well, wants fresh capital, so will sell the property and move south where rent is free and the living is easy!!

And with Brand's "guarantee" of students, they must be thinking they are set!

Hmm. Maybe Brand's "interest" has to do with a percentage of the real estate sales...?

2

dbdriver May 14, 2013 @ 4:23 p.m.

So, the "agreement" that the Board was to be approving was a combination "Non-Disclosure Agreement (NDA) and a Letter of Intent"? Is that what Cartmill said?

If that is the case, then why wasn't this assigned to the Closed Meeting?

I don't know. All that talk regarding indemnification and the need for facilities, whether new or refurbished, and such seems much to detailed, being several pages long, to be a letter of intent/ non-disclosure agreement. Seems too convenient that they can't disclose the details, yet they can discuss details right out there in public view.

And that "we're at the beginning of the dance" speech; yeah. When you are talking about this much detail in your "letter of intent", and have already discussed district teachers as part of the staff, and a location already picked out, and scholarships (discounts) to be offered, you are NOT at the beginning of the dance.

And the talk of "soft costs" vs "hard costs"...I don't care. I want to know ALL of the cost up front.

3

eastlaker May 15, 2013 @ 10:20 a.m.

More obfuscations and lies, from the Behemoth of Bloat, Ed Brand.

1

Reader2 May 14, 2013 @ 4:29 p.m.

Regarding the credit card charges, I know I'm knit picking here, but Brand says "there are procedures in place" to prevent abuse including an $18 limit for lunch, however, a lunch in Sacramento was billed at $45. Hmmm. He goes on to say that spending "should be monitored" (notice he didn't say that it is being monitored) I'm glad the public is monitoring this! Also, submitting purchase orders is "too complicated????" That's how schools run. Everyone fills out purchase orders and everyone has to wait to be reimbursed.

4

oskidoll May 14, 2013 @ 5:08 p.m.

Well, so in addition to his monthly 'expense' money, he also has access to a credit card to pay for meals (even if there are upper limits?). What is his 'expense money' for? Seems like double dipping to me.

When I worked for a public agency and planned to attend a conference, I received prior approval to spend an estimated amount of money. Then, I paid for lodging and meals myself, and upon return, submitted an expense report, with a requisition. Then, I was reimbursed for expenses which I was required to document with receipts. (Expenses may not include tips or alcoholic beverages.) My agency usually turned my expense report around in time for me to meet current charges for the travel and meals, which I placed on MY OWN personal credit card.

received reimbursement only when my expenses were reviewed and approved. That is the bureaucratic way, which is in place inpart to avoid abuse.

It may seem 'too complicated' to Fast Eddy, but what the hey, it's OTHER PEOPLE'S MONEY.

5

anniej May 14, 2013 @ 7:23 p.m.

oskidoll - Will Jim Cartmill and John Mccann begin to see Brand for what he is NOT-a qualified superintendent.

One of the speakers last evening spoke of observing an elementary board meeting - I believe it was Chula Vista - their scores are up substantially, their middle school charters are producing great scores, ALL members of the board are respected, and the superintendent is of the highest integrity. Perhaps we could ask for a field trip for our board, we could transport them to the next elementary school board meeting where they might observe good government in action.

Oh, and here is the icing on the cake - THEY ARE IN THE BLACK!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! What a novel idea, a school board that respects the taxpayers monies and spends it wisely. But then all of THAT districts board members are fiscally responsible. Currently, we have 1 and 1/4. NO, the 1/4 is NOT John Mccann, his lack of action on the L street property has proven he has joined forces with Ed Brand, Jim Cartmill and Arlie Ricasa - let us remember Brands statement regarding the decisions he, Cartmill and Ricasa made when they GAVE the land away "I can live with my decision". Well, he may be able to, but it is giving us nightmares!!!!! Now Johnny Boy will tell all, 'but when I was with the City of Chula Vista we cautioned against the purchase". Yes the honorable Mayor Cox did, but Mr. Mccann, you have been on the school board since 2010, I believe it was about that same time that Dianne Russo, then CFO, advised the community the bank was looking to call in the loan. Lets see, 2010 - 2011, 2011 - 2012, 2012 - 2013, and we are now into month 5 of 2013. So what are you waiting for????????????????

Folks I am going to on record here, if this lack of fiscal responsibility is the best John Mccann can do, we certainly do NOT need him at City Hall. Failing to investigate taxpayers monies being given away borders on ----------.

As indicated in the UT article a lawsuit appears to be on the horizon........ Just one? How about a civil action? I believe that would make two.

respectfully submitted

5

montana64 May 14, 2013 @ 9:48 p.m.

Capitol Credit card lunches,/ No pulling paunches, Oops punches,/ Cheerleaders promised paychecks/ L street underwater interest / We all gotta eat--you know/ And get into college with a 2.0/ There' s a college for you.../ And a meal plan too./ But We sit on the wrong side of the Dais/ To plunder 'longside the play-uhs/ Looking towards twenty-fourteen... Or it's gonna be rice and beans./ FOR ALL

4

bbq May 15, 2013 @ 10:54 a.m.

timtim my how the shoe changes when you get to call people names and step out on your soapbox.

First off the Review process within the district is flawed as witnessed by the fact that our two Cheer Coaches were allowed unfettered access to students and facilities without passing the background requirements of the District, not to mention being given at least a verbal contract from a district employee. Does this sound like due diligence?
Doesn't the district have the responsibility to Vet their employees? Doesn't the district have the responsibility to protect our students?
How about the bad steering box on the School Box not fixed for over a year or unqualified Bus dirvers sent into the Mountain Areas for field trips?
Should I really have to go on?

Second you are comparing rotten apples to rotten Bananas, of course I am outraged at the situation, but I also have not heard word one from the district/Brand/Board of Trustees acknowleging the issue, an issue the district, yes, and the SEA should be addressing.

So again timtim are you listening to "all" the parents in the district or only condeming the ones who are holding you to a reasonable standard for the position we assume you hold? BBQ

6

bbq May 15, 2013 @ 2:01 p.m.

Hey you know some names, can you remember mine? Not an old face, realitively new to the fight.

Most likely not, since you never interact with anyone, that contradicts the status quo. People that might give you a different point of view than the myoptic "Amigos".

Do you really believe all the stuff Dr. Brand is doing?
If so, you should be standing up and defending it not putting down the opposition just because they oppose.

If you have something to add to the debate that defends the Board I'd be happy to hear it, if you just want to sit and follow along without adding any worthwhile input you should not be part of the debate or discussion or bitch session whatever you want to call it.

Again as I have said it before Steamrollering ideas through does not make for good relations or Politics, understanding and debate do, hence talking, blogging etc should be part of the process and encouraged not dismissed.

Again I give credit to those who come at their own time, risk and reputation to stand up for their ideas, and speak, usually ignored as witnessed by card shuffling, blog writing etc by the Super and the board.

I do not agree with everything they do but I will defend their right to do it. As for the Board and our employee Dr. Brand, if they are intimidated by their required role, they should resign.

How about some intelligent discussion of the direction the District is going, before it becomes bankrupt?

Again up for debate good thoughts, BBQ

3

dbdriver May 15, 2013 @ 3:07 p.m.

Good Afternoon, timtim.

Welcome back, though I thought you vowed never to return.

I believe you are mistaken. Lopez, while she does have those 19 counts, does not have extortion. (That's just Quinones and Ricasa.)

4

bbq May 15, 2013 @ 10:31 a.m.

Having listened to the Recordings of the Alliant University discussions from Mr Cartmill and reread the agenda item,. I feel completely lied to. The agenda item lists that if approved the students would be eligible to start classes at Alliant Sweetwater in September.
Mr. Cartmill flat lied, did not understand what he was voting for or just played follow the leader, any of the above being contemptable. Where is the leader he supposedly once was?

Ms. Ricasa just wants her perks, McCann is hopeless, believing his own babble, Pearl looked lost or intoxicated, maybe because she sees the hopelessness of her situation, while Ms. Lopez is "trying", hate that word, not succeeding in being a moral conscience, to let's take our time to understand this "Agreement".

Where is the overall academic plan for the district? What input is being used to determine this academic plan? Who is out in the public trying to understand what the customers want?

I believe the answer is obvious there is none, these people especially Dr.Brand live in a sound proof glass house each telling the other they know more than everyone-else.

Where is "Of the People, By the People, For the People"? This group thinks they are the "ONLY PEOPLE" BBQ

5

eastlaker May 15, 2013 @ 11:46 a.m.

Well put.

They are beneath contempt.

And to think that I heard McCann still thinks he should run for mayor of Chula Vista?! How completely deluded and out of touch he must be! I always knew he had a 'tin ear' for politics--which isn't good, considering he keeps putting himself out there--but this would take us into other realms entirely. Wooden ear? Blocked ear? Ear for Ed Brand only?

2

bbq May 15, 2013 @ 11:02 a.m.

timtim a running dialog this could be fun as it is my lunch time... I am not a "Friend' to Ms. Lopez, she has the same rights as the rest of the indictees, at least she hasn't sold out and that I have to give her credit for. She at least "trys" to get reasonable answers, something McCann does not even understand, by the way timtim I am not afraid to introduce myself at a Board meeting as BBQ, How about you, timtim? BBQ

5

eastlaker May 15, 2013 @ 11:47 a.m.

Lower case timtim, so close to timid, don't you think?

3

bbq May 15, 2013 @ 11:50 a.m.

timtim, it's different when you get called out isn't it, I'll bet you loved to play with the big kids but was the first to run home to Mommy when things got tough... My lunch is almost over so to reiterate (sp), be careful who you call out, when you accept a responsibility be able to stand tall and do what's right,not the easiest or best for yourself.... You, the Board of Trustees, former Super Gandara and Dr. Brand called me out to this process, I'll continue to stand tall and call your bluffs .... Start looking out for the community or be left behind... Best to you and the rest of the Amigos... BBQ

4

anniej May 15, 2013 @ 4:47 p.m.

I find it amazing that Ed Brand is taking away ANY ROP or ADULT ED classes choosing to make some of these struggling persons pay Alliant University a substantial increase for their classes.

While Ed Brand is attempting to present himself the hero with some local and state politicians stating he supports ROP and Adult ED, I am hearing he is seen for what he is an opportunist. Persons who use to believe in John Mccann now questioning his validity after learning he has sat by and done nothing to expose the truth about what was done before he arrived on the L street issue. His alignment with Jim Cartmill, Arlie Ricas and Ed Brand,who did sanction the deal and evidently 'can live with their decision' of purchasing property with tax payers dollars and then simply giving it away reflects the real John Mccann - fiscal responsible PRETENDER!

Our email list of VOTERS is growing substantially each week. Keep forwarding all stories to friends, family, neighbors, children's friends parents - talk about it at Von's, Macy's, Bento Noodles etc - anywhere you go. It is working!!!!!

I was just contacted regarding a flier being sent out AFTER this election. Sweetwater issues listed as well as voting records. WOW what a great idea. One similar to what was received this week which was NOT endorsed by the opposing candidate. L STRRET and our alleged new colleges will for sure be highlighted - just to mention 2. Loans for financial troubles. Past election problems NOT having to do with our school board. Hmmmmm, a real blockbuster!!!!

We, the VOTERS have the power to change ALL OF THIS!!!!!!!!

4

bbq May 15, 2013 @ 6:44 p.m.

timtim, if you really are John McCann, there was no mean intent ment by my saying stand tall, your stature is not defined by your height, it's defined by your actions, so if two and two are four figure it out. This comment is mean spirited as mean as your acting impotent (misspelling deliberate) as a Trustee.

A fine fighting man cow-toeing to a bully like Dr. Brand, and thinking the world won't notice, do you think things will be different if you wish it so. Please become a fully functional Trustee ( a self-defined term meaning in the publics trust) before you and you alone let the district become even more of a laughing stock.

My advice for you, remember, many people "Trusted" you to effect change in the district and so far you have a failing grade.
BBQ

3

anniej May 15, 2013 @ 7:19 p.m.

Contrary to the comments made above, the board room was filled yet again.

The 300 VOTERS names presented to the board Monday, a drop in the bucket. Think about it - how many persons does each attendee know? Each of those persons too has many contacts. And so on, and so on, and so on.

3

Reader2 May 15, 2013 @ 9:45 p.m.

Did I miss something? What 300 names are you talking about?

0

anniej May 15, 2013 @ 10:09 p.m.

A gentleman at the board meeting handed the board an envelope which included signatures.

2

Susan Luzzaro May 16, 2013 @ 7:43 a.m.

annie j and reader2, I believe those were petitions with over 300 signatures to maintain ROP/CTE.

3

anniej May 16, 2013 @ 8:47 a.m.

Ms. Luzzaro: Those 300 ROP students are also voters. I believe he also mentioned that fact when he spoke, or maybe it was during his conversation with the audience. Either way, they are organizing and meeting, and something tells me they have very long memories.

3

anniej May 16, 2013 @ 1:48 p.m.

I find it very interesting that Brand chose to take the video down. According to the board president Jim Cartmill the district did nothing wrong in posting the video prior to board approval, the fact that the video CLEARLY indicated an agreement had been made - I mean why else would Sweetwater be posting it for parents and students to see.

4

gobigal May 16, 2013 @ 6:39 p.m.

Don't worry. This will wither on the vine. The FAFSA rules have changed and students cannot apply for FAFSA any more unless they have a diploma or GED. That means high school students can't go into debt for this because they can't get a student loan until they graduate. I am guessing Dr. Brand is unaware of this. So the only students who can utilize this are students who have the four grand laying around- and hopefully those parents will see through this scheme. I teach in Sweetwater district and I am all for college options- I enroll lots of kids at SWC every year while they are still in high school and with the BOG waiver they pay no tuition. Every student should take advantage of that.

4

dbdriver May 16, 2013 @ 7:27 p.m.

I would assume that a student still in high school wouldn't be enrolled for a full semester of classes (12-16 units). I think they would only sign up for 1-2 classes. Hmmmm...lets see, according to their website, undergraduate classes are $620. PER UNIT. Yeah, I think those classes at SWC are looking so much better.

Tell me again, why would students take the Alliant route? We are raising smarter students, aren't we?

3

eastlaker May 16, 2013 @ 8:32 p.m.

Students would take the Alliant route if they were swayed by the school counselors who have been strong-armed by Ed Brand.

Or if they were really desperate...but who would be that desperate.

If, for example, a student really needed to raise their GPA, I have heard that sometimes it is recommended they take any class with a guaranteed A. So if they do that on top of the classes they are taking in high school, the A grades they get from outside classes can boost them enough to get into some schools...

That kind of scenario.

What kind of makes me wonder is the Sweetwater U/Alliant coordination with CIF section 11. That just seems to convoluted for words. Can anyone figure that one out?

2

anniej May 16, 2013 @ 10:16 p.m.

Gobigal - Thank You for this information.

Let us ALL REMEMBER Jim Cartmill's words. Surely he is an honorable man, surely he would not deceive the tax paying voters.

3

Sign in to comment

Join our
newsletter list

Enter to win $25 at Broken Yolk Cafe

Each newsletter subscription
means another chance to win!

Close