Buy The BookRecent Happenings, Judge Knopf, OAH
On April 26, 2005, I subpoenaed Judge Knopf, who wrote the DECISION for
the Office of Administrative Hearings (OAH), the Commission on Professional
Competence (CPC), to provide me with copies of two documents which were
referenced in her DECISION against me. (I believe that no such documents
exist.) Judge Knopf forwarded the subpoena to Attorney Farrow at the
Sacramento office
of the OAH. Attorney Farrow phoned me, asking that I drop the subpoena.
I did not agree to drop it. On May 19, 2005, Attorney Farrow wrote:
"This office will not be complying with the subpoena. If you
pursue enforcement of the subpoena, the Attorney General's Office
will represent this office in moving to quash it."
On May 23, 2005, I wrote Attorney Farrow:
"If you have any such papers as I requested, why not just send them
instead of refusing to comply with the subpoena? Why are you so anxious
to quash the subpoena."
The OAH and CCT would like to cover up their dirty work.
================================
Recent Happenings, California Commission on Teacher Credentialing (CCTC)
On April 26, 2005, I subpoenaed Attorney Kim Hunter, California Commission
on Teacher Credentialing (CCTC) to provide me with information concerning
a statement in their INVESTIGATIVE REPORT, that I had "significantly
harmed a child." Thesubpoena requested that they provide the name of
the child and all documents, papers and records to support that accusation.
On May 9, Attorney Hunter sent me my entire file of more than 1,043 pages.
I wrote back, stating that none of those pages contained the name of the
child that supposedly "significantly harmed", nor any documentation
to substantiate their accusation. I requested that they address the
issue in writing.
On May 23, 2005, they wrote that they have given me all the information
contained in my file.
On June 11, 2005, I wrote: "Are you now advising me that you have no
supporting evidence for the statement which you made? How was this
determination made?"
The CCTC would like to cover up their dirty work.
RECENT HAPPENINGS Regarding Leslie Fausset,
On Monday, May 2, 2005, I received an e-mail containing a communication
sent by Leslie Fausset, then Deputy Superintendent of San Diego City Schools:
Office of the Superintendent
Deputy Superintendent
April 5, 2005
Dear SDCS Community Member:
We understand that you may be receiving a book titled "The Black Hole in the
Blueprint: Teacher Abuse in San Diego City Schools" by Janice Howes.
This book appears to be self-published by a former teach of the San Diego City
Schools who was dismissed by the Board of Education for several reasons including
unprofessional conduct. The Board's decision was reviewed by the Commission on
Professional Competence and upheld. The teacher appealed that decision to the
Superior Court and the court upheld the termination.
District personnel who have reviewed the book have indicated that it contains
inaccuracies about the situation. However, neither the district nor any district
employees are in a position to discuss the specifics about any personnel-related
matter, including the one involving Ms. Howes. It is also unclear whether or not
the other employees mentioned in the book provided any form of permission to
publish confidential information about their situations.
While San Diego City Schools respects the rights of employees to write and
publish materials, we did believe it was important to share with you the district's
position about the veracity of the book.
Thank you for your continued commitment to San Diego City Schools and our students.
Sincerely,
Leslie Fausset
Deputy Superintendent
Note by Janice Howes: The bold print above is my emphasis.
RECENT HAPPENINGS Regarding Leslie Fausset,
In response to Leslie Fausset's letter, I wrote the following letter and took it to
the board meeting on Tuesday, May 3, 2005.
Dear Dr. Fausset:
I am enclosing herewith a copy of an e-mail which I received recently.
My dismissal was unfair, as was my hearing with the CPC, and also the appeal. Had
you taken time to read the book you would have known that what I am saying is true.
You state that my book contains inaccuracies. Will you please give me the page
numbers, the paragraphs, and the quotes of any statements which you feel are
inaccurate?
If you were really interested in whether or not the employees mentioned in my book
provided any form of permission to publish confidential information about their
situations you could have contacted me and asked. Why was this not done?
You state: "…it was important to share with you the district's position about the
veracity of the book." Upon what do you base this statement?
If I do not hear from you by May 9, 2005, I will assume that you are unable to
substantiate your claims against me and "The Black Hole in the Blueprint". This,
of course, would indicate that you are continuing in the pattern of dispensing
misinformation modeled by former Supt. Alan Bersin, who was voted out of his
position in San Diego City Schools.
Sincerely,
Janice Howes
Note: The bold print above is my emphasis.
On May 3, 2005, I also gave a copy of my letter to Leslie Fausset to each
SDCS Board Member, along with the following cover letter:
Dear [Board Member]
Enclosed is a copy of my letter to Dr. Leslie Fausset, and also a copy of a
recent e-mail which I received.
Will you please ensure that I receive an answer to my letter to Dr. Fausset
by May 9, 2005?
Thank you for the work you are trying to do to once again make San Diego
City Schools an honorable institution.
Sincerely,
Janice Howes
My letter was not answered or acknowledged by Leslie Fausset or any
Board Member.
A hearing for my Workers Comp claim has been scheduled for August, 2005.
On May 17, 2005, I subpoenaed the following documents from Leslie Fausset:
Specific references of any and all misstatements, errors, inaccuracies,
or lies made in book, "The Black Hole in the Blueprint", giving page
number, paragraph number, and quote.
This subpoena was sent by certified mail, and delivered on May 20, 2005.
Compliance is to be made within ten days of the date of service. The
subpoena has not been answered.