1935 Autocross CT
El Cajon, CA 92019
December 10, 2001
Hi! I hope you’ve been having a good school year.
I wanted you to know that Rick Werlin has recently, at my lawyer’s request, produced a report of allegations against
me by staff members at Castle Park. You are one of six people whose accusations are included in his report. I am
well aware of the reasons for the other five people being
November 21, 2001
To: Pamela Havird
From: Maura Larkins
Re: Michelle Leon-Scharmach’s complaint
Michelle is the librarian. At the beginning of last year, she did not let me know what time my
class could go to the library each week. I assumed she’d let me know on or before the day I
was supposed to come. On Thursday of the second week of classes, Jan Clark, the library
aide, asked me if I had been given my library time. I said no. She seemed somewhat
disgusted with Michelle.
“Lessons haven’t started have they?” I said.
“Yes,” Jan told me. “They started this week. And your time was yesterday.”
I could see why Jan was disgusted. Michelle had apparently used my class’s library time for
her own prep time without ever letting me know.
But I could see an easy solution to the problem. I knew Michelle had no classes scheduled that
afternoon, so she could make up our lesson that very day. And fortunately, there were still a
few minutes of recess left, so I went right over to the library to talk to her. (Since I was only
working a half-day that day, this was my only opportunity to talk to her that day.) I honestly
believed she would want my kids to get their lesson.
I walked into the library. I did not say anything. I stood waiting to catch Michelle’s eye.
Michelle stopped her lesson and said to me, “You’ll have to come back later. I don’t have time
to talk to you now. You should have come to see me sooner to get your library time.”
“I was just wondering--“ I started to say.
She cut me off. “You’ll have to leave now. I can’t talk to you now.”
Talk about hostility, overreaction, and inappropriate behavior in front of students! Even if she
could make a case for refusing (in front of students) to let me speak, it would be hard for her
to justify telling me to leave. Teachers and students come in and out of the library freely all
day, and stay as long as they want. And normally when a teacher comes in to talk to another
teacher, she is given a respectful ear. Even children who come in with a message are given a
respectful ear. Michelle clearly had a personal agenda.
I said, “I was wondering if you could make up our library time this afternoon.”
She said. “No. That is my prep time. I am not going to give up my prep time.”
[Of course, Michelle knew perfectly well that she had used my library time for her prep time.]
Then the kindergarten teacher, a very young and inexperienced teacher named Lynn Del
Galdo, said, “You need to leave! You’re interrupting my students’ time!”
My emotional state was one of puzzlement. I could not figure out why it was such a problem to
give me a minute of time, since I assumed we all wanted all kids to be treated fairly.
I said, “I only need a minute of your time. My students lost all forty-five minutes of their time!”
Lynn said again, “You need to leave.”
I left, shaking my head. I figured we’d discuss making up the lesson when Michelle and Lynn
had settled down. (I’ve been doing a lot of puzzled head-shaking this past year. I am unable
to follow the logic of several of my coworkers.)
Michelle and Lynn reported this incident to Gretchen three months after it happened, right after
I asked Michelle to make up the missed lesson. Gretchen never told me that a complaint had
been made. Werlin used this in April to justify having taken me out of my classroom in
February. He and Gretchen were desperately searching for justification for their actions. The
real reason I was taken out of my class was the police report.
I know Michelle felt bad about this. Michelle and I had always gotten along well. I think she
was influenced by others. She went to Maria Beers after I was taken out of my classroom and
said, “Wasn’t there a step that was skipped here? Shouldn’t we have discussed this instead of
just taking Maura out of her classroom?”
During the week I was back, Michelle came over and hugged me.
Someday I’ll tell her not to feel so guilty. Her complaint was a symptom, not a cause.
But she should feel somewhat guilty.
She contributed to the frenzy of hostility.
And she’s old enough to know better.
There was no litigation,
only a tort claim, but after
October 4, 2001, teachers
were made to believe that
litigation was in progress.
That was when Daniel
Shinoff became involved,
according to his own
statement. Mark Bresee
was still very much
|Fears were encouraged, to the extent that M.S. wrote the following two letters. Most
likely, Werlin suggested to Scharmach that she ask for a restraining order.
|Maura Larkins sued some of her
accusers in March 2002 for
defamation of character.
Maura Larkins, teacher at Castle Park Elementary, voluntarily spent
hundreds of dollars to get a fitness for duty examination by a
psychiatrist after she was falsely accused of "being the type of person
who commits mass murders." The doctor faxed his report to CVESD.
Why did Cheryl Cox and the CVESD board and their attorneys Daniel
Shinoff and Kelly Angell continue to foment hysteria at Castle Park
Elementary even after receiving this doctor's letter in August 2001?
Answer: They wanted to smear Maura Larkins in order to prevent her
from revealing their violations of law. Was this smart? It would have
been smarter to retract the false accusations and apologize. Instead,
they stopped Maura Larkins pay (in violation of the contract) and
refused to grant her the hearing to which she was entitled (also in
violation of the contract).
Robin Donlan (who became famous in 2004 as one of the San Diego
Union-Tribune's "Castle Park Five," then in 2007 for claiming that she
had no idea how her school teacher husband suddenly came to possess
7 million dollars) also worked hard, along with her personal friend,
Chula Vista Educators' President Gina Boyd, and Beverly Tucker of the
California Teachers Association, to smear Larkins.
But it appears that there was another reason for Cheryl Cox's support
of violations of law and the contract: she wanted to get rid of
Superintendent Libia Gil. In May 2002 Cox was willing to violate yet
one more law against Maura Larkins, Labor Code 1102.5, in order to
get rid of Libia Gil.
Cox and Bertha Lopez went along with the BIG THREE, PATRICK JUDD,
PAMELA SMITH, AND LARRY CUNNINGHAM, and voted to dismiss
Maura Larkins less than two months after Larkins filed suit against
the district. Clearly, these people felt so certain that they were above
the law, that they were not afraid to flagrantly violate it.
It appears that Cox and Lopez got something in return: Libia Gil's
resignation. Gil made her resignation official in March 2002, but said
she wouldn't be leaving until October. She announced that she had
accepted a job at New American Schools in Virginia, but she never left
San Diego, and continued, without success, to seek employment around
the country and around the county as a public school superintendent.
Gil claimed to travel for New American Schools, which came in handy
when she wanted to avoid depositions.
on this list; they put considerable effort into destroying my reputation and career. I am not offering them the
chance to meet with me informally to resolve this problem.
I always thought of you as a nice person. I always thought we got along well. I was shocked to learn that you had
made these secret accusations against me. Rather than sue you for defamation of character, I would prefer to ask
you to help me understand how you came to do this, and how you feel about it now. I believe your actions were
related to other events that were occurring at Castle Park. I have worked long and hard to expose the truth about
what happened last year, and my efforts have finally begun to pay off. I don’t think my other accusers will admit
the truth until they are forced to do so, but I think you have less to hide than they, and therefore have less reason
to be afraid of the truth. I don’t believe you will require a supoena and an oath.
I am very enthusiastic about the legal process, which has slowly but surely worked to bring about truth and justice
in my case. My faith in our system is being restored. I think my father, who was an attorney, would be proud of
me if he were alive. I feel that by refusing to bow to injustice, I am helping to restore Chula Vista School District’s
administration to a level of integrity to which it has not risen for quite some time.
You might want to discuss with a lawyer whether it is in your best interest to remain aligned with Jo Ellen and
Linda and Gretchen as the wheels of justice continue their inexorable turn. I’m not saying you need a lawyer. But
if having one would make you feel more confident and secure, I think hiring a lawyer would be a worthwhile
expenditure. A good lawyer can be an emotional as well as a legal support. If you don’t already have a lawyer, you
can get a referral from CVE or the San Diego County Bar Association.
If you are interested in talking to me informally, with or without a lawyer at your side, please call me at 619 660
6955 before December 17. I am willing to meet with you without my lawyer being present.
I assure you, I never felt hostility toward you. On the day I came into the library to ask if my children’s library
time could be made up during your prep time (which was coming up in a couple of hours), I was not expecting the
level of hostility I encountered. I thought you would be perfectly happy and willing to make up the lesson, and that
you would be pleased that a time slot was still available. I had not yet realized that you had intentionally deprived
my kids of a library lesson the previous day when you used their forty-five-minute library time as prep time for
yourself without sparing a minute to call my room or write me a note to inform me of my library time. You were
petty, but common pettiness does not explain all the events at Castle Park last year. More was involved. Malice
was part of it.
Much investigation remains to be done to expose how and why the frenzy of hostility developed. Perhaps you
intentionally joined those who were instigating this frenzy. If you ate lunch with, and/or spent a significant
amount of time with those who delighted in frequent harsh, contemptuous criticisms of various children, parents,
teachers, and administrators, you certainly had a golden opportunity to become involved. I know you were
dismayed to see the attack on me get so out of hand. But you are old enough to know that those who consider
themselves superior to others and who feel a great deal of contempt for others often end up also considering
themselves above the law. That’s when things get out of hand.
It’s interesting that Lynn Del Galdo isn’t listed by Werlin as one of my accusers. Didn’t she make the same
accusations you did, and at the very same time?
The names that have been omitted from Werlin’s list are in some cases more interesting than the names that are
Did you hear the story that spread like wild fire last spring about me throwing pens at Werlin when he took me out
in front of the school where there were no witnesses? That story was totally, absolutely, completely false. It was
fabricated out of whole cloth. But here’s the really interesting thing: Werlin didn’t include that story in his report!
Werlin appears quite willing to point the finger at you, putting you in a position where you’ll have to answer for
slander, but he doesn’t seem to relish the prospect of having to answer for slander himself.
The whole truth is going to come out, one way or another. You will be involved in the investigation, one way or
another. I hope you will be standing on the side of justice when the gavel is struck for the final time.
|Does the following letter contain an offer
that you would accept if you were not
involved in covering up wrongdoing?
|Merry Christmas, Michelle!
December 11, 2001
I am writing this in regards to the safety issue at Castle Park Elementary
School. Before last year I felt safe at school. After the problems that arose
with Maura Larkins I felt that I needed to be more aware of my
surroundings. For the security of students and staff I have made sure that
the library door that is accessible from the parking lot is always locked. We
all need to be a lot more careful and aware of the things going on around
us. No matter where we are we should never have to feel unsafe.
TO: [This name was removed. Most likely, it was addressed to Lowell Billings, or
Sam Snyder, who served as principals of Castle Park Elementary during the fall
FROM: [Michelle Scharmach]
REGARDING: Restraining order against Maura Larkins
Maura is not reacting to the misunderstanding we had in the library in a rational
manner. She has twisted the circumstances in an unhealthy way, and has stated
that she will never forgive me for the wrongs she feels I committed against her.
Wounds that do not heal fester, and can cause unnatural reactions.
She came to my home and delivered an accusatory and threatening letter. I fear
that as litigation continues on this issue, she may become further angered and
threaten me with physical harm. I fear for my safety at both my school sites as
well. I am hoping that a Restraining Order will be issued against her to
augment my peace of mind now and in the future.
Maura Larkins had to file
her lawsuit very soon, but
she wanted to give one
teacher on Werlin's list,
whom she had always
thought of as a nicer
person than her other
accusers, the opportunity
to avoid being sued. She
delivered the following
letter in person, to give
Michelle Scharmach more
time to decide how to
|Despite Michelle's request,
which apparently was
suggested by Richard
Werlin, no restraining order
was sought by the district.
Why? Because that would
have required the district to
actually make a written
accusation, and Maura
Larkins would have an
opportunity to respond!
|Michelle seemed to be
projecting her own feelings
onto Maura Larkins, who
never said she wouldn't
forgive her. That seems to
be Michelle's own feelings
of guilt talking. Why did the
district take such drastic
action without asking to
hear the other side of the
|Was MIchelle Scharmach afraid of physical
harm, or was she afraid of being exposed as
someone who had aided and abetted a crime?
Clearly, Michelle Scharmach knew something
she didn't want to tell Maura Larkins. She was
helping to cover up crimes and other
|But Werlin never followed through on the restraining order idea. He would have had to
provide some actual, specific accusation against Larkins, and that he could not do, because
Maura Larkins had never threatened anybody.
Also, if he put the accusations in writing, they would no longer be secret from Maura Larkins,
and she would be able to respond to them.
|After Maura Larkins sued, Michelle Scharmach wrote a letter which the district
used as a major justification for firing Mrs. Larkins.
Obviously, a letter written after you've been sued is not reliable. So the
district erased the date on the letter, and pretended it had been written over a
That summer, Werlin removed the date from the letter, and changed his Nov.
21, 2001 report to appear that the letter had arrived BEFORE Nov. 21, 2001.
This is a felony. Mark Bresee presented Michelle Scharmach's letter to the
Office of Administrative Hearings as if it had been received before Nov. 21,
2001, even though he himself had not included it in his Feb. 22, 2002 PERB
filing. He had, however, included the two letters below, which were written
by Scharmach in 2001.
|Larkins first heard the
allegations against her NINE
MONTHS after she was taken
out of her classroom.
Why the long delay?
|Scharmach had the opportunity to avoid
being sued for her false allegations against
Maura Larkins, so it would appear that she
acted against her own best interests when
she obeyed instructions of CVESD lawyers.
Was Scharmach blind in her trust in Richard Werlin? Did she believe that Maura Larkins was a
dangerous person? It appears that Michelle Scharmach was duped by Richard Werlin, Robin Donlan,
Linda Watson, and other teachers, who created false allegations to cover up the crime they committed
when they conspired to use Kathleen Elton's allegations to remove Maura Larkins from her classroom.
Of course, it's also possible Michelle just wanted to be on the winning team, and was convinced that
Werlin would prevail.
wanted to give
the opportunity to
avoid being sued for
character. She didn't
feel that Michelle
belonged on the list
Maura Larkins was
mistaken on this
undergone a 180
since April of
|Since May 2001, Maura Larkins'
lawyer had been asking Rick Werlin
for information about the
allegations against Larkins. The
only information so far was
Alan Smith's report.
|Scharmach was convinced by the District to
keep her allegations against Maura Larkins
secret from Maura Larkins. Werlin did not
reveal that the allegation that Larkins had a
gun was made by a mentally ill woman,
about whom he received evidence on April
3, 2001, the day before he asked Maura
Larkins to return to work in April 2001,
mentally ill. He also failed to reassure
teachers with the letter f from the
psychiatrist who examined Maura Larkins.
|Larkins' responded to the
duo's hostility with
Scharmach had never before
been hostile to Larkins.
Larkins had no idea why the
librarian had used Larkins'
class library period the
previous day as her personal
time, while keeping Larkins in
the dark about when her class
was supposed to come to the
|Larkins thought that this was odd
behavior, but believed it would take
only a moment to fix the problem.
Larkins was wrong. Apparently, the
librarian had been affected by
Robin Donlan's false allegations,
and had suddenly developed a
strong hostility not only to Larkins,
but to Larkins' students. The
librarian refused to make up the
missed lesson, and told Larkins to
leave the library!
teacher Lynne Del
to Maura Larkins in
the library in
September 2000, but
Larkins was not the
type of teacher who
ran to report to the
she had a problem.
|When she learned that Michelle Scharmach was one of her
accusers, Larkins wrote the following letter to her lawyer.
|[There was never any investigation of these
allegations by the district. The district never
asked Maura Larkins for her side of the story.
This was the district's final report on why Maura
Larkins was taken out of her classroom in the
middle of the year. Here is the section regarding
|Larkins was puzzled when she saw
Michelle Scharmach's name on the list.
|When attorney Daniel Shinoff got
involved in this case on October 4,
2001, he wanted written evidence to
use against Larkins. He never
appears to have advised the board to
obey the law and set things right.
Until this time, Rick Werlin had told
employees that he didn't want
anything in writing. Now Werlin
wanted written reports. For six
months Maura Larkins' lawyer had
been asking Rick Werlin for
information about the allegations
against Larkins. The only information
so far was Alan Smith's report.
|On November 21, 2001, Richard Werlin
gave Maura Larkins a list of six names
of her accusers, but he didn't say what
the specific accusations were.
|Richard Werlin changed this document in
2002, and district lawyer Mark Bresee
submitted the falsified document to the Office
of Administrative Hearings. The original
document had already been submitted to PERB.
|In December 2001, the
statute of limitations
was fast approaching.
The CVESD board continued to foment
hysteria about violence at Castle Park
Elementary even after receiving an expensive,
reassuring psychiatrist's report about the
person falsely accused of being potentially
The CVESD board used an unsigned, undated
letter from Michelle Scharmach as Exhibit A in its
case to dismiss Larkins. Where did this document
come from? Was it yet another entry in a long
string of hoaxes perpetrated by Richard Werlin
and Chula Vista Educators?
|Letter from Dr. Otis to Richard Werlin
regarding Maura Larkins
Even after they were warned that Assistant Superintendent
Richard Werlin was committing misdemeanors and felonies
and encouraging false accusations to cover up those
crimes, the CVESD board (Cheryl Cox, Patrick Judd, Pamela
Smith, Bertha Lopez and Larry Cunningham) pretended to
be unaware of the overwhelming evidence against Richard
Werlin. The board allowed Werlin to take serious actions
again and again without creating a paper trail.
|Hoax documents were produced
through the collaboration of Michelle
Leon-Scharmach, Richard Werlin and
Mark Bresee after Maura Larkins sued
Michelle Scharmach for defamation.
|A fraudulent, altered document was presented by the district as Exhibit 44 and
represented as being the "November 21, 2001" letter that Richard Werlin had
hand-delivered to Maura Larkins.
Exhibit 44 contained an unsigned, undated letter which was not contained in the true
document (because in November 2001, it had not yet been written). This new
mystery letter was also offered by the district as Exhibit 7, the first exhibit offered by
CVESD to justify the dismissal of Maura Larkins.
Changes were made to the second page.
NO changes were made to the first page of
the Nov. 21, 2001 letter.
Did mental illness afflict the
accusers or the accused at
Assistant Superintendent Richard Werlin kept secret the evidence
that Maura Larkins was a non-violent person, and also kept secret the
evidence that accuser Kathleen Elton was mentally ill. The District
had used Kathleen Elton's false allegations as a justification for
removing Maura Larkins from her classroom on February 12, 2001.
Three months after receiving the above letter that Maura Larkins was
fit and healthy, Richard Werlin asked teachers to write letters
requesting a restraining order against Maura Larkins.
The alternative would have been to apologize to Larkins. Apparently
not one single individual was willing to consider that option. Larkins'
accusers felt safe because they had the school board, with its
unlimited taxpayer-funded legal resources, on their side.
|Here are principal
Donndelinger's notes of
visit to her THREE
MONTHS AFTER THE
OCCURRED. Why the
long delay, Ms.
|In an effort to
being sued, and to
find out the truth,
wrote the letter
below to Michelle
Larkins had no
|Dr. Otis Letter
(Psychiatrist said the accused was mentally healthy, but the evidence
indicates that the accusers were not.)
|Michelle Scharmach Hoax
(Letter feloniously added at a later date
to Werlin's November 21, 2001 report)
What was Michelle's motivation for
writing the letter? To try to cover up
her own and Lynn Del Galdo Sallans'
aggressive and hostile behavior in front
of children. Maura Larkins was not
hostile, merely surprised at the
unprovoked and unprofessional attack in
front of children. But Maura Larkins did
not have the habit of complaining about
other teachers. Apparently feeling
guilty, Scharmach stated in paragraph
four: "[We]...wanted to voice our side of
the story in case she made a complaint
Many documents clearly answer
"Michelle Leon-Scharmach: Please find
attached a written statement from this
employee indicating that she felt Ms. Larkins
was hostile toward her, over reacted, and
demonstrated hostile behavior in front of
|Michelle Leon-Scharmach: Employee
has indicated that she felt that Ms.
Larkins was hostile toward her, over
reacted, and demonstrated hostile
behavior in front of students. Ms.
Leon-Scharmach stated that one
incident took place in front of Ms.
Del Galdo's Kindergarten students
in the beginning of the 2000-01
|Richard Werlin's Nov. 21, 2001 "INTERIM
SUMMARY OF CONCERNS/ALLEGATIONS"
Michelle Leon-Scharmach: Please
find attached a written statement
from this employee indicating that
she felt Ms. Larkins was hostile
toward her, over reacted, and
demonstrated hostile behavior in
front of students.
Employee has indicated that she
felt that Ms. Larkins was hostile
toward her, over reacted, and
demonstrated hostile behavior
in front of students. Ms.
Leon-Scharmach stated that one
incident took place in front of
Ms. Del Galdo's Kindergarten
students in the beginning of the
2000-01 school year.
Original November 21, 2001
Below is a section of the "Nov. 21, 2001"
report created by Richard Werlin clearly after
February 22, 2002, and almost certainly after
March 13, 2002. This document was
feloniously submitted in place of the true
"November 21, 2001 Report "to the Office of
Administrative Hearings by CVESD, through
its attorney Mark Bresee of Parham & Rajcic.
|Why did the CVESD board, administration and lawyers feel the
need to commit multiple felonies?
What was so bad about the truth?
The district was covering up crimes committed by itself and
the employees who attacked Maura Larkins.
|Exhibit 7 was written after Michelle Scharmach was sued by Maura
Larkins, but presented as if it were written almost two years before.
Here are two versions of Assistant Superintendent
Richard Werlin's November 21, 2001 report. Werlin
collected allegations, but never allowed the accused to
respond. He kept secret the fact that Michelle
Scharmach had made a general allegation, and never
asked Michelle Scharmach to give a detailed account
of her allegation.
This false allegation was bad enough. In fact,
Michelle Scharmach and Lynn Del Galdo were
hostile to Maura Larkins in the library, causing
Larkins to be puzzled and surprised, but not
But then Scharmach, Werlin, and Mark Bresee
decided that they could come up with a bigger
false accusation, and so they created a
replacement document and submitted it to the
Office of Administrative Hearings.
This constituted felony obstruction of justice.
Fraudulent "November 21, 2001"
|The first six exhibits were legal
documents, not attempts to prove the
allegations against Maura Larkins were
true. Michelle's hoax letter, therefore,
was exhibit #7.
Exhibit 44 of the Maura Larkins dismissal hearing.
The district used a correct copy of the first page of a
three-page document that was hand-delivered to Maura
Larkins on November 21, 2001 by Richard Werlin, along
with two pages that had been changed. Then the
district added a page that was written by Michelle
Scharmach after she was sued by Maura Larkins.
Michelle had written it to the district in an attempt to
justify her false and paranoid allegations. This
unsigned, undated hoax letter was used as the district's
first exhibit after the six legal documents it placed at the
front of its exhibit folder.
|But Werlin never followed through on the restraining order idea. He would have had to provide
some actual, specific accusation against Larkins, and that he could not do, because Maura
Larkins had never threatened anybody.
Also, if he put the accusations in writing, they would no longer be secret from Maura Larkins, and
she would be able to respond to them.
This is one of the reasons that schools are
Because those in control are unable, or unwilling,
to put kids first. Below are all-too-typical
examples of the type of behavior to which many
board members, administrators and teachers
devote enormous amounts of time, energy and
taxpayer money. Then they devote more
taxpayer money to covering up their wrongdoing.
Are these people crazy? Are they ignorant or
dim-witted? Or are they corrupt? The public has a
right to know the answer to these questions.
Why did Michelle Scharmach
walk out in the middle of her
Because her lawyer, Kelly Angell Minnehan,
ordered her to do so.
Scharmach was served
with a lawsuit for
defamation of character
on March 13, 2002.
Michelle addressed the
letter to Gretchnen
certainly at Rick
Werlin's request, even
had already gone to
another school. It was
addressed to Rick
Libia Gil resigned
a few days after
the suit was filed
Maura Larkins was
dismissed by the
These changes were made to the third page:
Michelle Leon-Scharmach: Employee has
indicated that she felt that Ms. Larkins was
hostile toward her, over reacted, and
demonstrated hostile behavior in front of
students. Ms. Leon-Scharmach stated that
one incident took place in front of Ms. Del
Galdo's Kindergarten students in the
beginning of the 2000-01 school year.
This hoax document was also attached
to the altered, back-dated document
presented as Exhibit 44.
Sallans, Lynne Cardiff School Teacher 107 eMail
Bjorstad, Nancy Cardiff School Teacher 109 eMail
CARDIFF SCHOOLS EDUCATION ASSOCIATION
Thursday, September 17, 2009
Cardiff School MultiPurpose Room
Cardiff SEA Officers:
Co president Mark Whitehouse
Co-President Greta Ott
VP AH Kristen McCartney
VP CS Carrie Elwin
Co-Treasurer Becky Smith
Co-Treasurer Stacy Davis
Co- Secretary Dede Watson
Co- Secretary Meghan Laurs
Superintendent Tom Pellegrino
AH Principal Jill Heichel
CS Principal Julie Parker
CS Teacher Reps Lynne Sallans / Nancy Bjornstad
MINUTES, REGULAR MEETING OF AUGUST 14, 2008 Page 2
Superintendent Pellegrino reported the new website will go live on August 25th.
Key staff will
be trained on Friday and all teachers will be receiving training next Friday. Mr.
informed Trustees of the new staff that has been assigned to the different sites:
Steel, SDC; Kathy Williams, RSP; Amy Shireman, GATE-Science; Amy Price,
Specialist, and Tammy White, Tech Specialist will be working at Ada Harris.
Cardiff staff will
include: Lynne Sallans, K/1; Casey Payte 1/2; and Jill Thompson, SDC. Kathleen
will be joining the District as a Psych Intern.
Julie Parker reported Cardiff School is off to a great start. Combination class
Lynn Sallans and Casey Payte have a great attitude and spirit. Back to School
a success. All staff is looking forward to a great school year.
• Jill Heichel reported Ada Harris had a great start as well. There are many new
faces but a
lot of good energy. The digital stations are installed and staff is being trained.
Superintendent Randy Ward visited last week and toured classrooms along with
• The Superintendent and the Director, Fiscal Services, attended the Schools for
Finance workshop in Solana Beach.
The consent calendar was approved as presented.
Cardiff elementary district hires new superintendent
Jun 29, 2007 ... ENCINITAS -- Tom Pellegrino, curriculum instruction and
assessment coordinator for Bonsall schools and principal of Bonsall Elementary
|Some people who have no
coping skills imagine that
everyone thinks in the same
distorted way that they think.
|San Diego Education Report
The Michelle Scharmach hoax was a story created after Assistant Superintendent Richard
Werlin produced his one and only report about Maura Larkins (the Nov. 21, 2001
"Report of Allegations").
Instead of simply apologizing to Maura Larkins for having committed misdemeanors
against her, CVESD decided to quietly insert this false story into the "interim report" and
present the spoliated version to the Office of Administrative Hearings. The purpose of the
spoliation was to aid in the cover-up of events at Castle Park Elementary. The cover-up
was, as is so often the case, worse than the original crime: spoliation of evidence is a
CVESD never completed its "investigation" into the allegations against Maura Larkins.
Instead, documentary evidence has disappeared.
Attorney Daniel Shinoff did a partial investigation, collecting documents at Castle Park
Elementary School. But no one ever interviewed Maura Larkins, the target of the
allegations. Mr. Shinoff has failed to produce for the Superior Court approximately forty
of the Bate-stamped documents he collected.
One suspects that those documents
implicated teachers and administrators
in wrongdoing and proved that the
allegations against Maura Larkins
were false. Is it possible that those
documents ended up shredded and
burned in a school maintenance yard
as did documents of another Dan
Shinoff client, San Ysidro School District?
Why did Superintendent Libia Gil and her top administrators Richard Werlin, Lowell
Billilngs, Maria Guasp and Dennis Doyle, as well as the school board, refuse to investigate
these serious allegations that teachers feared that Maura Larkins might kill them?
Because the district was covering up illegal actions committed by the school board and
top administrators, including Superintendent Libia Gil.
These shredded SYSD documents escaped burning.
Many others did not. Photo: Aaron Bergin, SDUT
CVESD board members Pam Smith and Larry Cunningham, who
spent tax dollars to cover up crimes, are still on the CVESD
board, but the careers of several administrators have ended.
EXHIBITS for grievances
GRIEVANCES filed by