Castaniada tenders resignation to Soquel school board

Castaniada tenders resignation to Soquel school board

Henry Castaniada 

By Calvin Men, Santa Cruz Sentinel

POSTED: 06/17/15, 9:21 PM PDT | UPDATED: 2 HRS AGO

4 COMMENTS

CAPITOLA >> Henry Castaniada, Soquel Union Elementary School District’s superintendent who has been the target of teacher and parent discontent, announced he will leave the district after the 2015-16 school year.

“It has been a good journey. It has been exciting,” Castaniada said. “I appreciate the opportunity.”

Castaniada’s resignation at Wednesday’s school board meeting started off a blockbuster night for the district that included an end to teacher salary negotiations, a public acknowledgment of an effort to recall school board members and accusations that the board violated the Brown Act.

Castaniada’s announcement in front of a crowd of more than 50 parents and teachers drew applause from the crowd. Castaniada’s resignation comes after four years on the job, months of tense salary negotiations with teachers and a 96 percent vote of no confidence by teachers in March.

The resignation came after the board publicly applauded Castaniada’s performance while it announced the results of his evaluation.

“Overall, this board is pleased with the current direction of the district,” said Phil Rodriguez, president of the board.

The board also approved a tentative contract agreement with the Soquel Education Association, giving teachers a 3 percent raise across the board as well as granting them a $96 per month increase in their health and welfare cap. The salary increase is retroactive to July 1, giving teachers pay that averages out to $2,107, according to Harley Robert, assistant superintendent for business services.

Also part of the negotiation is that the district and teachers will begin salary negotiations in September instead of January.

Michelle Bell, co-president of the teachers union, said the district still needs a big changes and implored the board to learn from the year’s events.

“I hope you will learn to never not respond again,” she said.

She added that the teachers and parents do not believe there is a need for a strong public presence at the board meetings.

“We will work to find board members and we will work to find people who will change and work with us,” said Michelle Bell, co-president of the teacher union.

The comment comes against the backdrop of efforts to recall one or more members of the school board. A survey asking voters about an interest in a recall election was sent out May 27.

Also part of the session was the acceptance of the expulsion cases regarding five students who face expulsion after they were arrested when they allegedly sent messages to one another about shooting other students and a teacher. It’s unclear what the action meant for the students.

Before the board accepted the cases, Chis Hadland, co-president of Main Street Elementary’s parent club, accused the board of violating the Brown Act by discussing Castaniada’s salary in closed session.

“The Brown Act requires that any discussion about compensation for an employee (such as the superintendent) only take place in open session. The mere discussion about compensation in closed session is a violation of the Brown Act,” Hadland said.

Leila Knox, an attorney with the First Amendment Coalition, said the law is nuanced.

“In general, behind closed doors, everything that a legislative body can decide based on a public employees performance, whether they are entitled to a raise or an additional perk,” said Knox, first amendment attorney for the First Amendment Coalition. “But once they start to tread into the details of what amount that will be, that should be discussed in open session.”

In other business, the board approved the 2015-16 budget for the school district.

http://www.santacruzsentinel.com/social-affairs/20150617/castaniada-tenders-resignation-to-soquel-school-board#comment-2085343524

Preemptive warning to Board about Brown Act violations

June 17^th, 2015

I have prepared my statement in written form tonight so that there is no confusion as to what I intend to say.

The introduction to the Brown Act states in part:

The people of this State do not yield their sovereignty to the agencies which serve them. The people, in delegating authority, do not give their public servants the right to decide what is good for the people to know and what is not good for them to know. The people insist on remaining informed so that they may retain control over the instruments they have created.

I’d like to comment on a few procedural items regarding the closed session for the Board meeting tonight.

Item 2A

First, I have no interest in knowing the details of the expulsion matter. I realize that the whole thing is a very serious matter. My only interest is that the law is followed. If it is the intention of the Board to hold a vote to expel students in closed session, I’d like it made known that it may be a violation of the Education Code and the Brown Act to do so. I do not know what the Board’s intention is, but it is possible that the Board includes the intention to hold a final action in regard to this matter.

The Education Code permits this Board to hold the hearing in closed session, just not a vote to expel a student. The Districts own AR 5144.1 also states a similarly worded statement. I’d like to also mention that section 48918(g) of the Education Code requires the hearing to be recorded.

The Brown Act only protects the action of a board to affect employment of an employee during closed session, not affect the status of a student.

Education code 48918(j) states:

Whether an expulsion hearing is conducted by the governing board of the school district or before a hearing officer or administrative panel, final action to expel a pupil shall be taken only by the governing board of the school district in a public session.

Government Code 54953(a) states:

 All meetings of the legislative body of a local agency shall be open and public, and all persons shall be permitted to attend any meeting of the legislative body of a local agency, except as otherwise provided in this chapter.

Government Code 54957.1(a)(5) states in part:

Action taken to appoint, employ, dismiss, accept the resignation of, or otherwise affect the employment status of a public employee in closed session pursuant to Section 54957 shall be reported at the public meeting during which the closed session is held.

Item2B

The Brown act requires that the name of the Agency Representative be named. Not the title. The name.

Government Code 54954.5(f) states: 

(f) With respect to every item of business to be discussed in closed session pursuant to Section 54957.6:

   CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS

   Agency designated representatives: (Specify names of designated representatives attending the closed session) (If circumstances necessitate the absence of a specified designated representative, an agent or designee may participate in place of the absent representative so long as the name of the agent or designee is announced at an open session held prior to the closed session.)

Item 2C

The Brown Act requires that any discussion about compensation for an employee (such as the superintendent) only take place in open session. The mere discussion about compensation in closed session is a violation of the Brown Act.

(San Diego Union v. City Counsel, 1983)

Government Code 54957(b)(4) states in part:

Closed sessions held pursuant to this subdivision shall not include discussion or action on proposed compensation except for a reduction of compensation that results from the imposition of discipline.

I ask you to please conduct the people’s business in an open manner consistent with the law.

Government Code 54959 states:

Each member of a legislative body who attends a meeting of that legislative body where action is taken in violation of any provision of this chapter, and where the member intends to deprive the public of information to which the member knows or has reason to know the public is entitled under this chapter, is guilty of a misdemeanor.

Chris Hadland

Third FOIA request after two previous FOIA requests not complied with

Christin Hadland

1112 Sutherland lane #3
Capitola, CA 95010

May 22^nd , 2015

Mr. Harley Robertson

Assistant Superintendent, Business Services
Soquel Union Elementary School District
620 Monterey Ave

Capitola, California, 95010

Dear Mr. Harley Robertson:

Under the California Public Records Act § 6250 et seq., I am requesting an opportunity to inspect and obtain copies of public records between the period of July 1^st, 2003 to present that show (1) General Ledger level data (debits, credits and corresponding memos) of all donations given to the SUESD by the nonprofit organization known as the Soquel Elementary Home & School Club, (2) the General Ledger level data (debits, credits and corresponding memos) of accounts those donations were received into, transferred to, or transferred from, and (3) any and all transactions within those accounts during the time frame specified above.

This should include but not be limited to, all donations from Soquel Elementary Home & School Club from July 1^st to present, as well as all offsetting entries on accounts those donations were made to and any other entries made to or from those same accounts from other sources. 

If there are any fees for searching or copying these records, please inform me if the cost will exceed $100.00. However, I would also like to request a waiver of all fees in that the disclosure of the requested information is in the public interest and will contribute significantly to the public’s understanding of the relationship between the non-profit organizations that donate to the Soquel Union Elementary School District’s schools and the Soquel Union Elementary School District itself. This information is not being sought for commercial purposes.

The California Public Records Act requires a response within ten business days.  If access to the records I am requesting will take longer, please contact me in writing in regards to when I might expect to be able to inspect and obtain copies of the requested records. I look forward to full compliance with the intent of the California Public Records Act by receiving access to the documents in a timely manner.

If any of this request is denied, please cite each specific exemption you feel justifies the refusal to release the information and notify me of the appeal procedures available to me under the law.

Thank you for considering my request.

Sincerely,

Christin Hadland

831 840-0194

chris_hadland@hotmail.com

Disrespect of Teachers

Soquel school board president shows no respect

I am ashamed at how Phil Rodriguez, president of the Soquel Union Elementary School District, completely ignored the teacher who spoke near the end of the meeting on Wednesday night, regarding the white-washing of the board minutes. As soon as he starting speaking, Rodriguez picked up his cell phone and played with it the whole time he was talking. I would expect that from a seventh- or eighth-grader, not from a grown man. That teacher should have walked over and taken your cell phone away and locked it in a desk drawer until after class. Rodriguez demands speakers address the president of the board, but he shows absolutely no respect to those speaking.

— Chris Hadland, Capitola

http://www.santacruzsentinel.com/opinion/20150522/letters-may-23-2015-countys-anti-cultivation-law-being-misapplied

Vote "NO CONFIDENCE"

Soquel Union teachers vote no confidence in superintendent

By Calvin Men, Santa Cruz Sentinel

POSTED: 04/07/15, 5:13 PM PDT |

CAPITOLA >>

Teachers in the Soquel Union Elementary School District voted “no confidence” in the district’s superintendent, citing a lack of communication and respect for teachers.

Roughly 96 percent of the Soquel Education Association voted no confidence in Superintendent Henry Castaniada’s leadership on March 25.

“This vote of no confidence is a drastic measure,” said Ashley Edgar, president of the association, which represents the teachers. “It’s not a measure that we take any gratification from. It’s not a happy time. This is primarily due to the level of frustration.”

Castaniada said the no confidence vote was news to him. The district and the association are in negotiations for teacher salary.

“We had one session, it went well. We had three other sessions that are potential negotiation dates,” Castaniada said.

Phil Rodriguez, president of the board of trustees, said he was also caught off guard by the news but added that the association would bring it up eventually.

“I would guess that at some point in time, the SEA will advise us about this. Without knowing the context, I have no opinion,” Rodriguez said.

At the heart of the association’s frustration with Castaniada is the perception that he doesn’t represent the best interests of the teachers and the students. Teachers hadn’t seen a salary increase since 2008, Edgar said. In 2014, when the teachers negotiated for a 3.5 percent salary increase, they were asked to work additional hours. The caveat to the deal was seen as unjust given that teachers went without a salary increase to keep class sizes manageable.

“We repeatedly ask Mr. Castaniada to advocate for us with the board,” Edgar said. “Teachers felt like they haven’t been made a budgetary priority.”

The no confidence vote also comes during amid months of angry parents taking umbrage over what they deem is a lack of communication over district policy.

Adding fuel to the frustration, Castaniada’s contract was recently renewed through 2018 by the board with a 15 percent increase in his base salary among other changes.

“I think what they were trying to say is they wished the board looked at all the priorities in the district and looked at those priorities closest to the classroom,” said Susan Midori Jones, a labor representative from the California Teachers Association. “Hiring more teachers to reduce class size before deciding to reward people who were further from the classroom.”

With the vote, the association aims to create dialogue with Castaniada and the board.

“We’d like to see the board and the superintendent react in a way that would be constructive as to what we want. How did things go wrong and how can we not have a year like this again?” Edgar said.

Freedom Of Information Act ---- *** DENIED ****

SOQUEL UNION ELEMENTARY SCHOOL DISTRICT

February 10,2015

Mr. Christin Hadland


Re: Public Records Act Request

Dear Mr. Hadland:
We are in receipt of your two requests, both dated and received on February 2, 2015,
for specified records of the Soquel Union Elementary School District ("District").
We take our responsibilities as guardians of the public's information seriously, and
we will make our best efforts to respond to your request within the limits of the
Public Records Act (Gov. Code, §§ 6250, et seq.). Accordingly, please be advised of
the following with respect to your requests for District records.
In one of your February 2, 2015 letters ("Request Number I"), you request "the
document referred to by Superintendent Benry Castaniada, during the December
[District] meeting," from the District's legal counsel "in relation to school connected
organizations." The District is unable to comply with your request because the
requested documents are exempt from disclosure under Government Code section
6254, subdivision (k) and Evidence Code sections 950 et seq. because they fall within
the attorney-client privilege.
With respect to your second letter of February 2, 2015 ("Request Number 2"), you
have requested records "between Friends of Main Street and the [District], that
pertain to the School Connected Organization form, known as Exhibit 1230 as found
on the [District's] website in the Board Policies series 1000, Community Relations,
section." In order to ensure that we have provided you the requested information, it
would be helpful if you would provide more specificity to a period of time regarding
your Public Records Act request. The requested document(s) will be made available
to you once we have had a reasonable time to locate and duplicate those document(s),
provided such document(s) exist and are subject to disclosure. Document related to
your Request Number 2 may not be subject to disclosure to the extent exempted
under the Public Records Act, including, but not limited to, (i) personnel, medical or
similar files, the disclosure of which would constitute an invasion of personal privacy
(Gov. Code, § 6254(c)), (ii) preliminary drafts and notes not ordinarily retained in the
course of business (Gov. Code, §6254(a)), as well as student records not subject to
disclosure under California and Federal law.
www.soqueldo.santacruz.k12.ca.us
Public Record Acts Request: C. Hadland
February 10,2015
Page 2
We will make all reasonable efforts to provide the requested document(s) to you in a manner
consistent with the Public Records Act by no later than February 25, 2015, provided that we will
timely notify you if this is not possible. As a condition to receiving the document(s), you will be
responsible for reimbursing the District for its direct costs incurred in duplicating the
document(s). Pursuant to Government Code section 6253(d), please be advised that I,
Superintendent Henry Castaniada, am the person responsible for the partial denial of your
request.
Sincerely,

Henry Castaniada
Superintendent
--
www.soqueldo.santacruz.k12.ca.us

Freedom of Information Act request

Christin Hadland

1112 Sutherland lane #3
Capitola, CA 95010

February 2^nd, 2015

Henry Castaniada
Superintendent
Soquel Union Elementary School District
620 Monterey Ave

Capitola, California, 95010

Dear Henry Castaniada:

Under the California Public Records Act § 6250 et seq., I am requesting an opportunity to obtain copies of the document that was referred to by Superintendent  Henry Castaniada, during the December Soquel Union Elementary School District meeting. The reference was about a document that had just arrived from the school attorneys, that day at 4:00pm, and was in relation to school connected organizations.

If there are any fees for searching or copying these records, please inform me of the cost.  However, I would also like to request a waiver of all fees in that the disclosure of the requested information is in the public interest and will contribute significantly to the public’s understanding of the relationship between the non-profit organization Friends of Main Street and the Soquel Union Elementary School District. This information is not being sought for commercial purposes.

The California Public Records Act requires a response within ten business days.  If access to the records I am requesting will take longer, please contact me with information about when I might expect copies or the ability to inspect the requested records.

If you deny any or all of this request, please cite each specific exemption you feel justifies the refusal to release the information and notify me of the appeal procedures available to me under the law.

Thank you for considering my request.

Sincerely,

Christin Hadland

831 840-0194

chris_hadland@hotmail.com

A VERY IMPORTANT READ  regarding the authority of a superintendent and a school connected charity comprised of parents.

How much control does your local school board, superintendent, or principal attempt to exercise over the PTO? Recently, I attended the first PTO meeting at my children’s new school. I was surprised to learn that the local board of education has issued rules attempting to regulate the operation of school parent and booster organizations. Some of the regulations make sense, but others may go beyond the legal authority of the school board and hamper the ability of the PTO to operate effectively.

If a PTO is a program of the school—it is set up and managed by the school—then the school may supervise and control the activities of the PTO. In such a case, however, the school also is liable in a legal sense for the activities of its PTO program. For independent PTOs, those that are separately incorporated or that operate as independent, unincorporated associations of parents, the school has more limited authority. The school may supervise and control an independent PTO regarding the use of school facilities and the activities students engage in during school hours or as part of a school program. Beyond that, however, the PTO’s own rules—constitution or articles of incorporation and bylaws—should control.

One crucial note before we get into specifics. Principals and parent groups each hold considerable power to make the other’s work easy—and miserable. Know your group’s rights and stand up for them, but do it through discussion and negotiation. Divisiveness and animosity hurt the school and the children. You don’t want to create a situation like that whenever it can be avoided, and your principal shouldn’t, either.

At my children’s new school the school board has set forth regulations, including these three:

• The group must receive approval from the principal when planning functions in which students will participate.
• The use of school facilities must be requested through the principal.
• All items donated by parent or booster groups become the property of the school, and the school may use or later modify or sell those items.

These regulations are within the legal authority of the school. Any activity involving students, including distributing fundraising materials or PTO newsletters through the classrooms or organizing assemblies or other enrichment activities in which the students will participate, may be controlled by the school. In addition, any activity involving school facilities, such as an annual fall fair or other fundraisers, may require the approval of the school for use of the facilities owned and controlled by the school.

Also, items donated to the school become the property of the school to do with as desired. For example, it may upset PTO members to learn that computers they donated have been sold or used in the library rather than the classrooms designated by the parent group, but once the items have been donated, the PTO has no legal authority over them.

Overstepping

Other rules of my local school board go beyond its legal authority.

• Parent and booster organizations must submit their annual fundraising plans to the school principal, and the plans then must be approved by the school board prior to the start of the school year.
• The principal must approve and supervise all fundraising activities.
• The mutual agreement of the principal is required prior to purchasing equipment, supplies, or materials for the school.
• All funds of parent groups must be deposited in either FDIC or FSLIC institutions.
• An outside audit of financial records must be conducted each year, and a copy of the report must be submitted to the principal and the school system’s finance officer.
• Funds of any parent or booster group must revert to the school if the group dissolves.

Annual fundraising plans are submitted to the school board to ensure that multiple schools are not attempting to sell candy or wrapping paper at the same time. However, the rule also may hinder the local PTO if it comes up with a new fundraising idea during the year and is unable to move forward with it.

Legally, an independent parent group may raise funds for a school without anyone’s approval. The PTO can even state, without the school’s approval, that the funds are being raised to purchase new computers or a playground. The school may refuse the funds or items purchased with them, but it cannot legally control the fundraising. So while cooperation is important to make sure the school wants the money raised or items purchased, sometimes schools attempt to exercise control beyond their legal authority.

Know Your Rights

Similarly, while depositing funds in secure banking institutions and conducting an annual audit are good financial practices, the school and school board have no legal authority to impose these regulations on the PTO. The school board may make suggestions regarding financial controls. However, the PTO has the authority to determine and implement its own financial practices.

In addition, the PTO may determine how its funds are distributed upon dissolution. Under IRS rules, organizations tax-exempt under section 501(c)(3) must distribute funds to other (c)(3) groups upon dissolution. The school may be the logical recipient, or it may make sense to distribute the funds to a new or different parent or booster group.

Cooperation between any parent group and the school it supports is essential to carry out the mission of the PTO. However, as a PTO leader you should understand the extent of a school’s legal authority over your organization’s activities. This may allow you to make better and more informed decisions about the operation of your group.

Sandra Pfau Englund is an attorney specializing in legal issues for PTOs and other nonprofit organizations.

http://www.ptotoday.com/pto-today-articles/article/167-whose-rules-school-or-pto

Missing Detail of December 17th, 2014 Board Meeting Minutes

On Tue, Jan 13, 2015, Marcella Moran wrote:

Dear Soquel Union Board Members,

I feel like the board meetings from the 12/17 meeting are incomplete. I do not think they should be approved as is. In particular I feel like Section 6 regarding Board Policy 1230 is incomplete.  This section lacks many important details regarding the discussion between the community and the board members.  These details need to be documented in the minutes so they can be referenced in the future should any questions regarding the details and the intent of the board policy arise.  Furthermore, I feel like the minutes do not adequately describe the confusion and conflicting statements and consequent clarifications that arose between the board members, the public and the Superintendent. Again, I feel it is important that these are documented so that the community can look back upon them when needed, especially with such a contested policy.

Lastly, I find the minutes to be inadequate in regards to the details of the discussion that took place regarding the practice of having only one reading for board policies. The minutes do not reflect the discussion that took place amongst the board members regarding the need for two readings except in trivial situations.  The minutes do not note that the board has been acting against current board policy by approving policy changes that are not trivial with only one reading.

I now again feel a level of distrust with this system.  It is very important that the minutes function as an adequate reflection of the community input and conversation that takes place at the board members. I will take the time to review the audio from the December 17th and take notes on all items I feel were erroneously left out of the minutes.

Thank you for your time,
Marcella Moran

Here is a follow up letter from Marcella


Good Afternoon,

Here are the important details I feel like were omitted from the minutes. 

Board members expressed a need for clarification regarding Board Policy 1230. 

Board members stated that there was a large amount of misinformation and miscommunication about board policy 1230.

Board members apologized for the large amount of miscommunication and misinformation regarding board policy 1230. 

Board members expressed that from this point forward board policies like 1230, that affect the students and parents,  will have two readings. 

Board members clarified that under Board Policy 1230 the language regarding board authorization was in regards to the legality of the organization of the home and school club itself.

The board members clarified that the  board is not involved in the approval of the specific fundraisers and does not need a fundraiser list.  

The Board members clarified that it is the principal and the home and school clubs that will work together on the fundraiser specifics. 

The board members clarified that the AR once written can be reviewed if it is not consistent with the intent of the board policy

Thank you,

Soquel school district feels heat from parents, teachers

By Kara Guzman, Santa Cruz Sentinel

POSTED: 01/14/15, 9:49 PM PST |

0 COMMENTS

CAPITOLA >> An angry family at risk of losing its spot at Santa Cruz Gardens Elementary School is the latest in a series of parents, teachers and community members demanding better communication from Soquel Union Elementary School District.

More than 60 people filled Wednesday’s board meeting, several to support Marilu Radilla, who was notified Monday by voicemail from the Santa Cruz Gardens principal that her son must find a new school in five days.

Radilla, a longtime parent at the school, moved out of district boundaries in December, but failed to notify administration. When the principal, Kerry LeRoux, heard of the new address from Radilla on Monday, she left two messages, first saying that the family must submit transfer paperwork, then saying that the school no longer had room for her son, Radilla said.

Radilla said her son has special needs and would have a difficult time at a new school. Further, according to policy, the district is required to give written notice, 10 days plus a chance at appeal, before a family loses its spot, she said.

“The way that they have been interacting with me, it’s unprofessional,” she said. “It’s unacceptable.”

The family has since submitted paperwork, met with LeRoux, talked with Superintendent Henry Castaniada and scheduled a meeting, but has received mixed messages, Radilla said. She was originally told by district staff via voicemail that her transfer paperwork would be denied, she said.

Castaniada told the Sentinel that the family would be allowed to stay, as long as Radilla submits paperwork and Radilla’s home district, Santa Cruz City Schools, agrees.

“The message has changed every couple of minutes. Every new voicemail, it’s something different. It’s never consistent, never correct policy and procedures, so you really don’t know,” Radilla said.

Others expressed discontent at Wednesday’s meeting.

Supervisor John Leopold, who reported on county plans, said his office tried to collaborate with the district on improving a Main Street Elementary pick-up area, about which neighbors have expressed concerns. The district has been unresponsive, Leopold said.

Several residents have complained to him about the district, he said.

“I’ve encouraged them to reach out to you but they continue to come, which to me is a sign that they’re not being heard in some way,” Leopold said.

Michelle Bell, New Brighton Middle School teacher and co-president of the teacher’s union, said she has asked Castaniada for months to address teacher healthcare, but has not received a satisfactory response.

Poor communication is a common theme, she said.

“I think it’s important that for you, the board, to keep a pulse of the parents, the students, the teachers, your community and not just step out of the way of the person you are employing,” Bell said.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Reach the author at kguzman@santacruzsentinel.com or follow Kara on Twitter: @karambutan.

http://www.santacruzsentinel.com/social-affairs/20150114/soquel-school-district-feels-heat-from-parents-teachers

Please see an email string between the Superintendent and I from back in September. I tried to work toward a solution and the Superintendent flat out refused to even take the time to listen.

********************************************************************************************

Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2014 

Subject: Request for Meeting

Hello Chris,

Janet, my executive assistant, informed me that you would like to schedule a meeting for Monday to discuss "closing the divide between Main Street and the District".  Since I do not believe that there is a divide between Main Street and the District, I called Annette and she had no idea why you would want to schedule a meeting with me regarding the subject of your request.  Chris, my common message for the past three years is to have the parent talk with the principal first regarding their perception about their school and the District.  If after meeting with Annette you would still like to have a meeting with me, I am more than willing to sit down with you.

Have a pleasant day,

Henry J.Castaniada

Superintendent

Soquel Union Elementary School District

620 Monterey Ave.

Capitola, CA  95010

(831) 464-5639

Hjcastaniada@suesd.org 

**************************************************************************************************************

Date: Tuesday, September 23, 2014 9:4AM

Subject: RE: Request for Meeting

Mr. Castaniada--

Thank you for the reply, but the concerns I raise are not an issue between the school and the district as you mention in your response. The issues are real or perceived acts of injustice and discrimination between the District Office and Main Street parents, and some of these issues go back to before Annette was the principal and before I was an active parent at Main Street. There is an ever growing number of parents that feel that you push political agendas that are not in the best interest of the community at Main Street. I intend to try to bring healing to the rift. I could easily jump on the band wagon, but I desire to take a higher road and resolve the conflict. Since you don't acknowledge the divide, it's really hard to move forward in solving the problem.

I talk to Annette all the time and her door is always open. She is aware of some of the disharmony, but it is not in her best interest to divert her attention onto issues that do not involve her. Annette has been a wonderful administrator and she has been more than competent at handling issues at the school. Where I welcome her input into the dialogue, this isn't about the school or the principle. This is about parents and the District Office.

As before, you deflect my attempt to find common ground over issues. When I asked for help concerning the traffic issues in front of Main Street, I got no response from you for months and until pressed, and even then it was menial. Supervisor John Leopold on the other hand immediately responded and a working dialogue followed in addressing the traffic issue in front of Main Street Elementary. The District really should be the one championing the safe passage of children, especially when it's based in California law. An issue like providing a safe way for children to get to or from school should have had the support of the District. I might mention that the Safe Routes to School survey that costs taxpayers a lot of money, has resulted in zero progress so far.

I have asked for a meeting with you, on behalf of concerned parents. If you desire to continue to be indifferent to the parents concerns, than so be it.

With respect,

-- Chris Hadland

**************************************************************************************************************

9/23/14

Hello Chris,

After reading your e-mail I think that it is important that I provide you with a brief background of my leadership style.  As Superintendent I involve various staff members to participate, especially our school principals, when addressing various challenges.  Your comment regarding "a divide between Main Street and the District" is very odd to me.  I do not see and I will not support that our District is divided and each school is a separate entity.  During the past three years the leadership team is united as a team of one and our goal is to improve the educational level for all students at each of our schools. The District consists of five schools and the District Office.  There is no separation under my charge.  If you wish to meet with me to discuss your point of view Annette will be invited.  I do not accept your interest to separate my leadership team regarding your point of view.  

In addition, since you refer to a letter in 2013 regarding  a traffic concern, as I explained last year, I worked with Annette and Harley regarding your request.  I personally met with John Leopold and had a number of conversations regarding the meeting that occurred at Main Street.  As John stated at this meeting, we have a long history of working together and finding win-win solutions.  Chris, every Superintendent has their own leadership style and mine will continue to be a style that will utilize staff as various levels when needed.  In addition, I have been consistent for the past three years to have parent concerns addressed first at the immediate administrative level.  

If you wish to meet with me please contact Janet,my executive assistant, and she will arrange at meeting late next week.  She can be reached at (831) 464-5639.

Have a pleasant day 

Henry J.Castaniada

Superintendent

Soquel Union Elementary School District

620 Monterey Ave.

Capitola, CA  95010

(831) 464-5639

Hjcastaniada@suesd.org

**************************************************************************************************************

9/23/14

Hello Henry,

It is very clear that you have no intention of hearing what I am saying. You repeatedly state that you have no idea of what I'm talking about and have made it clear you have no intention of even listening. Agreeing to a meeting is not listening.

I have offered an olive branch of trying to find common ground, but you refuse to even acknowledge that the parents of Main Street have a valid concern. Your emails consistently deflect the issue to appear that I have a concern about division between the school and the District. This is not the case. There is no division between the school and the District. The division is between parents and the District. The school is not the issue. 

I am truly trying to find common ground, but I see that you have no interest in working together.

Sincerely,

Chris Hadland

 *************************************************************************************************************

And so it stands... Look where we are today.