What kind of administrators control ACSA?
The Region 18 Chair is
Ed Brand
Term expires July 2009  
Should superintendents like Ed Brand  direct our SDCOE

He is on the San Diego County School Legal Services
Council until 2008!
Ed Brand, Mary Anne Weegar
and Sweetwater UHSD
As demonstrated by the Mary Anne Weegar case, and
many other cases handled by the SDCOE JPA and legal
Ed Brand contributes to, and helps enforce,
SDCOE's culture of dishonesty and secrecy.

Should superintendents like Ed Brand be in a position
over SDCOE lawyers, when they are the very individuals
for whose wrongdoing SDCOE must pay?

Isn't that putting the fox in charge of the hen house?  
The taxpayers have to keep paying and paying, while Ed
Brand violates the law.

Ed Brand directs SDCOE lawyers to assist him and other
school district leaders in illegal actions!
Association of California
School Administrators
NSBA--National School Boards Association

Council of School Attorneys
Attorneys who have helped cover up
crimes in schools are in charge of
training both new board members and
new school attorneys.
California Council of School Attorneys
November 29, 2007
San Diego Marriott Hotel & Marina
Who Can’t Remember: The Basics of

Mark Bresee, Counsel, Orange CDE
1) Mark Bresee
formerly of Parham/Rajcic--now
works for Orange County Dept.
Education; as of July 2008
works for San Diego Unified
School District
Who trains new
school attorneys?
2) Dan Shinoff trains board
members and employees
as well as attorneys
Special Education
One of Daniel Shinoff's specialties is destroying
the lives of parents who complain that their kids
aren't getting the right education.  He clearly
doesn't teach the teachers to work with parents.

Date: 3/14/2005 8:00AM  

Daniel Shinoff and Jack Sleeth
will present vital information
to keep
you up-to-date with the latest changes and
best practices in the implementation of
IDEA as reauthorized...
agenda topics include
legislative updates; evaluations, eligibility
determinations & IEPs; related services &
assistive technology; discipline; behavioral
intervention procedures; confidentiality of
student records and most common mistakes.  
$205; Four Points Hotel by Sheraton, San Diego;
sponsored by MEDS-PDN
Shinoff and Sleeth Present "The Forensics of
Special Education Litigation"

Daniel R. Shinoff and Jack M. Sleeth
presented at the 2008 Association of
California School Administrators Symposium
on January 17, 2008 in Monterey, California.
The presentation addressed pre-litigation
strategies that educational institutions
should consider implementing in order to
prevent a variety of civil rights claims, such
as violations of the Hughes Act or
discrimination based on disability. Strategies
include proper documentation of all events
that may trigger a civil rights claim, and
methods to ensure that negotiations which
occur in the context of private converstation
(sic) are not damaging. The seminar also
covered issues of privileged communications,
and the interplay of the litigation process in
special education beyond due process

For more information or to request a
workshop, please contact us at
from Stutz website
Training new attorneys
Training board members
Collaborating for whose benefit?
Fagen Friedman & Fulfrost
San Marcos office

Melanie A. Petersen... served
fifteen years as
in-house counsel
for San Diego Unified School
Ms. Petersen is the chair of the firm’s
Charter School Practice Group...[She]
is a frequent
presenter at ACSA,
and several other
professional organizations.  
is the 2008-09
President of the
California Council of
School Attorneys.

downloaded 09/01/08 from FFF website
From the Lozano Smith

"... Our attorneys are routinely asked to
speak at all of the major Association of
California School Administrators (ACSA)
labor and employment conferences,
School Employees Association (SEA),
California Council of School Attorneys
(CCSA), the National School Boards
Association (NSBA), and the California
School Boards Association (CSBA) as
labor and employment experts..."

downloaded 09/01/08

(This law firm was ordered to give ethics training to
all its lawyers by
Federal Judge Oliver Wanger in
the Moser decision. )
From the Stutz Artiano
Shinoff & Holtz

"...Our attorneys are frequent
speakers at local and national
education conferences and seminars
on advisory, special education and
litigation topics. We develop and
conduct workshops on legal issues of
importance to our clients in an effort
to keep them current on important
changes in the laws that affect them.
We are also active members and
participants in many school related
professional organizations including
Association of California
School Administrators (ACSA),
California School Boards
Association (CSBA), the California
Association of School Business
Officials (CASBO), the
California Council of
School Attorneys for
which one of our
attorneys was a
founding member,
National School Boards
Association (NSBA)

downloaded 09/01/08
NSBA and Chula Vista Elementary
School District
Education Reform Report
SD Education Report
Education and the
Culture Wars Blog
San Diego
Education Report
Education Reform
Site Map
Stutz Defamation
Typical abuse by teachers
Bullies in Schools
Peters case in Vista
Fred Kamper case
Kids bullying kids:
Jeremiah Lasater case
Bullies are popular
Stutz Artiano Shinoff &
Holtz v. Maura Larkins
Stutz' First Amended
Summary Judgment
Daniel Shinoff and
violence in
Case Timeline
Larkins case summary
SDER Site Map
National School Boards Association and Council of
School Attorneys: collaborating for whose benefit?

If you look at the website of
NSBA, you'll see
"SCHOOL ATTORNEYS" right up there in the little
orange menu bar that stretches across the page.
Why are the attorneys so prominent?  Because
they're in control.  Or perhaps it would be more
correct to say that the insurance companies who
pay the attorneys are in control.

School board members come and go, and while
they're in office they do what the attorneys tell them

These attorneys aren't interested in kids getting
educations.  They're interested in insurance
companies getting profits, and themselves getting
financially rewarded.  

Interestingly enough, it's the same in the National
Education Association (NEA), the teachers' union.  
The elected officers are basically talking heads.  
They're just for show.  The decisions are made by
the permanent employees such as the executive
directors and--you guessed it--the lawyers.
Will school employees
intimidate witnesses
and lie under oath if a
lawyer tells them to do

Yes--more often than you'd think.  
Here's why:

The Millgram Experiments

The Millgram experiments
proved that 65% of ordinary
Americans will follow the
directions of a man in a white
coat who tells them to continue
giving shocks to someone who
gave the wrong answer on a
memory test!

Most people will not stop
even when the victims pound on
the wall and complain about a
heart condition--if the authority
figure directs them to continue.

In the experiments, as wrong
answers were given, the voltage
went up and up--to the highest
voltage available.
Jason Bellows says, "One might
hope that we've evolved to the
point that we can question
authority–where we can look
our leaders in the face and ask

In San Diego, the SDCOE JPA
contributes to a culture where
teachers follow orders without
asking why.

What happens to the 45% of
people who refuse to continue
the experiment?  What happens
to whistle-blowers?  
Usually, they get fired, as
happened to Coach Carter in
Escondido, Maura Larkins in
Chula Vista, Mary Anne Weegar
in Sweetwater, etc.

Do What You're Told
Written by Jason Bellows on
December 1st, 2005
From DamnInteresting.com

In the early 1960's the people of the
world were still pondering how the
otherwise good people of Germany
followed Hitler into World War II. After
all, the same atrocities that shocked
and befuddled the world committed
at Nazi hands also shocked many
Germans–even some of them who
were involved. Stanley Milgram
wondered at what it was that caused
ordinary people with contemporary
values to engage in acts of torture
and genocide. How could people go
against their conscience in the name
of "just following orders".

So he conducted a test.

Simply described, a test subject was
recruited by newspaper and ad mail
which sought people to aid in a
"memory study". The subjects
thought they were assisting rather
than that being tested.

Most of his contemporaries felt that
the Milgram experiments were a
waste of time, after all the results
were easily predictable: only a scant
few sadists would follow Dr Millgram's
protocol–most people would leave.

The subjects came from all
educational backgrounds and walks
of life. The subject and an actor were
ushered into a room and asked to
draw names from a hat to see if he
would be the "learner" or the
"teacher" in the faux-can-memory-be-
improved-via-punishment study. In
reality, the names in the hat both
said "teacher", but the actor knew
this, and would always report that
he'd drawn "learner". The three
participants were then put into place,
the actor in a booth, and the subject
was seated at a console. After
getting a taste of the 45-volt electric
shock that would serve as the
punishment, the teacher would read
a list of word-pairs to the learner.
After finishing the list, he then read
the first word of the pair, and a list of
four possible matches. If the learner
did not give the correct match to the
word as a response, he was
punished by the teacher. Each wrong
response meant that the voltage was
increased 15 volts. The teacher's
control panel that delivered the
shocks was thoroughly marked,
including a red, "dangerous" level. Of
course, the actor failed most of his
questions, and the teacher was told
to continue giving shocks despite the
man in the booth pounding on the
wall and complaining about a heart
condition. As wrong answers were
given the voltage went up; if the
teacher expressed any concern
about the situation, he was told
things like "You won't be held

If a teacher expressed the desire to
leave, there was hard and fast
protocol for dealing with it. He was

1. Please continue.
2. The experiment requires you to
continue, please go on.
3. It is essential that you continue.
4. You have no choice, you must

Only if the subject persisted after all
the refutes was the test terminated.

65% of the subjects followed through
up to and including the 450-volt
shock. 65% of common US citizens
listened to a man cry in pain and
exclaim that his bad ticker might bust,
and followed the directions of a man
in a white coat.

One might hope that we've evolved
to the point that we can question
authority–where we can look our
leaders in the face and ask why. But I
wager we haven't yet. Take for
example airline security. We can't
take nail clippers onto the cabin, and
why? Because we're told that they
can be used as a weapon? A 6'6",
300 pound boxing champ is allowed
on board; if he wanted to cause a
fuss, would nail clippers matter?

Why aren't we all asking why?
High court maintains
$1 million verdict
against Portland
Pamela Settlegood

Teachers must sue for their
right to due process [since
school attorneys don't obey the
Peter Wright of Wrightslaw  
November 9, 2004

Pamella Settlegoode's contract was
not renewed in 2000 after she
repeatedly complained about
services available to students. She
filed suit, contending that the district
violated the Disabilities Act of 1978,
her First Amendment rights to free
speech and the Oregon
Whistleblower Act.

A jury deliberated nine hours
before awarding her $1 million
in 2001. A federal magistrate
set aside the verdict, but the
9th U.S. Circuit Court of
Appeals restored the judgment
earlier this year.

Settlegoode started teaching in the
district in the 1998-1999 school year
after earning a doctorate in
education from the University of
Oregon. She was hired to work with
disabled high school students in
physical education. Settlegoode
developed her own curriculum and
had students taking part in track,
tennis, hiking and self-defense

She complained that some of the
equipment was missing or unsafe,
and it was tough to find locations to
teach her students.
ACSA's enemies list
Why are school
districts trying to
combat parent
School District
Used Power to
Retaliate Against

Federal Judge Approves Record
$6.7 Million
Settlement  in Porter v. Manhattan
Beach Unified
School District, et. al.

State Allowed District to Flout

In his
December 2004 decision,
Judge Feess stated, “it seems that
District has endeavored to use the
power it has over [the student’s]
education as a means of retaliating
against the Porters for their
of, and challenges to, the District.”

Judge Feess also took the
California Department of
Education to task for its failure to
exercise appropriate
oversight over the District: “...
although it is true that the District
repeatedly flouted the State’s
authority by failing to comply with
two state
agency orders, it was only
successful in doing so because of
the CDE ’s

As interim relief, in a separate
order entered on November 23,
Judge Feess transferred control
over the student’s education from
Manhattan Beach USD and the
CDE to a Special Master, Ivor
Weiner, Ph.D.
Under the settlement agreement,
Manhattan Beach USD (in Los
County) and the CDE have been
ordered to set aside approximately
million to pay for the education of
the student at the direction of the
Special Master.