Commentary: DJUSD Cut of Climate Position Threatens To Set Back Efforts by Two Decades

Within the course of cutting $4 to $4.5 million from the school district's budget, you know that the cuts are going to - for the most part -be deep and painful. In fact, that is one reason I have mostly avoided hitting this topic head-on. I have a full understanding that there are going to be painful cuts for all.

That being said, with proposals now on the table, I think we also have to think about the bigger picture and along those lines I have some concerns about some of the cuts.

However, I will start with perhaps some good news, without being too flippant or speaking too far out of school. On the other hand, this is the Vanguard and people have perhaps come to expect a bit of irreverence and even honesty that you will not find elsewhere.

Personnel matters are tricky, in fact, as I would suggest, I think state law goes too far to protect the privacy of top level employees. It is one thing to protect the private records of assistants and custodians and other classified employees. It is another thing not to disclose that a top level public official such as a Superintendent or City Manager has been fired and not explain why that occurred. When you have huge amount of responsibility and large salary, I do not think you have the same privacy rights as those making $30,000 per year.

Yesterday's Davis Enterprise reveals that Ginni Davis, the associate superintendent for educational services is leaving the school district.

In a somewhat contradictory release at first it says

"she decided last month not to renew her contract when it expires in June. Her decision is becoming public now, as part of the district's plans to reduce staffing in many areas to correct a growing budget deficit."

She's quoted as saying:

"I'm part of that proposed $200,000 in reductions among district office administrators."

As is often the case there is something happening between those lines.

While I cannot say for certain what happened, I do know some board members have had deep concerns about her for a good deal of time. At the end of the day however the Superintendent was going to be allowed to make his own personnel decisions. I have no direct knowledge of what happened here, but I suspect that this was not merely a budget move.

I first became aware of Ms. Davis during the case of the junior high school student who was bullied on the Harper Junior High campus largely, because he has two gay fathers. It was Ms. Davis, who became so intransigent during talks with the family that it turned from simply a complaint to a lawsuit. This was in late 2006 and early 2007.

More recently word has it that the truancy issue became a far bigger problem with the school district last fall due to decisions made from her office not to fully disclose to the school board what was occurring. Indeed, Pam Mari who was newly appointed as Director of Student Services, was hung out to dry in that meeting, believing that the board knew of this policy and she was merely providing an update for them. The board had no idea what was going on and Ms. Mari was left in a very bad position.

Finally, it was Ginni Davis who authored the resolution that opposed the Valley Oak Charter School. This resolution in December was very antagonistic and set the stage for what would happen in January. At that time, the Superintendent had to step in and put forth a large amount of work to reconcile the district's position with those of the Charter Petitioners. Prior to that point the district was very reluctant to meet or help out with the charter petition and it seems that Ms. Davis played a large role in that as well.

At the end of the day, Board President Sheila Allen issued a statement:

"We want to thank Ginni for her leadership during these difficult times, and we wish her luck in [her] next endeavors. I think she knows a lot about the educational process; that's a strength she brought to the position."

I am hopeful that when this budget emergency passes, the school district will find a new associate superintendent of educational services that will work well with the new superintendent to serve all of Davis' students.

I am less hopeful about the cut of the School Climate Coordinator position.

This position arose out of very serious concerns in this community about the "climate" on campus especially with regards to race relations and bullying. Indeed in 2004, several hundred parents and students came forward at a Davis Human Relations Commission meeting held at the Veteran's Memorial Center to press for changes to district policy on bullying and racism.

One of the outcomes of the changes was the creation of the then part-time School Climate Coordinator position which is now held by Mel Lewis.

In the fall of 2006, in the wake of events that centered on the anti-gay harassment of a junior high school student, one of the proposals put forth was to expand the climate coordinator position to full-time.

The Vanguard wrote on November 21, 2006:

"During the meeting last week, the school board asked Mel Lewis, now the district's School Climate Coordinator, to draw up an action plan designed to reduce or eliminate harassment not just at Harper but at all Davis schools.

Lewis at the meeting pointed out he was doing a 1.5 time job on a half-time salary. The school board seemed to agree that the Mr. Lewis needs to be better sourced as did the father of the student, Guy Fischer. Fischer said "this is a full-time problem. There are a lot of things that could be done."

What followed in 2007 was a series of events on the Davis High School Campus and in the community that underscore the need for a continuation of that program.

Instead what we see is that as soon as the budget gets tight, this will be one of the first things that go. Nevermind the recommendations that have come from a whole variety of studies that the district has invested time and money into. Nevermind the continuing complaints about disparate treatment for students of different races with regards to discipline policy. Nevermind the stark findings of the Achievement Gap Task Force or the DHS Catalysts for Social Justice Student report. Nevermind that last year Tansey Thomas stood up and told the school board that in 1990 they had done a "Racial Climate Assessment Report" and at that time the district struggled with the same problems that they are currently struggling with. Those recommendations were put on a shelf and never acted upon. Let us shelve promising new programs such as the school ambassador program, because we simply are out of money.

I understand that we need to cut money. I also understand that we cannot cut money from core programs if possible, and that these cuts will be painful to all. But if we set ourselves back we are literally setting ourselves back another 18 years, because these programs will not come back until the next incident occurs. And, we will once again wonder why it is that we never acted upon the recommendations of the 2007 Achievement Gap Task Force just as we never acted upon the recommendations of the "Racial Climate Assessment Report."

When we cut programs for the most vulnerable students, the students who we have long since determined are at-risk, we risk truly damaging the students.

For all of the people who have said that this school district is irresponsible and we should not approve a parcel tax until they demonstrate they have their house in order, I disagreed. I disagreed because these are students, they are kids, and I do not believe we can play politics with the education of students.

At the same time, we cannot merely cut programs for at-risk kids, because we have a budget crunch and it is "easy" (and I know it is not easy) money to cut. Too much work went into establishing this program and this position in the first place to merely throw it out the door.

We need to have the same commitment to school climate and helping at-risk kids as we have for core curriculum because for some kids, without this work and these programs, there is no core curriculum. The achievement gap will grow. Students who are at-risk will not graduate, they will not go to college, they will not succeed in life. That sounds harsh, perhaps too harsh, but in my mind that is what we are facing here.

I'm sorry, but I think we have to find a better way than to balance our budget on the backs of the most vulnerable in our schools just as at the state and federal level we cannot merely balance our budget on the backs of the poor and the working class.

---Doug Paul Davis reporting

Commentary: Gay Homecoming Court and the Meaning of Diversity

This week I got an interesting email from New York with a link to the Sacramento Bee article describing the fact that the Davis High Junior Homecoming court was comprised actually of two princes--as the honor went to a gay couple, elected by the student body.

Now what was interesting about this email is that this individual had discovered Davis and the blog last year during the incident where a Junior High School student was harassed because he had two gay parents.

He asked how the same district that was somewhat indifferent at least originally to the issue of harassment of a student could also be so path breaking as to honor a gay couple.

From the Sacramento Bee article:

"People were so excited for us," Gatewood said of the couple's victory, announced a few weeks ago. "We were a little surprised, but Davis ..."

"Is a liberal town," interrupts his boyfriend of four months, Raphael. "Go 10 miles in any other direction and you'll get some other feeling."

Indeed, the news might surprise few in Davis, a city embraced and, at times, mocked for its liberal leanings.

In my opinion, this fits very neatly into my perception of Davis. In many ways it is on the surface very liberal, very progressive, very tolerant. That manifests itself in many very overt demonstrations that are strong on symbolic value, but very weak in terms of actual policy matters.

There is what I have termed: the dark underbelly of the People's Republic of Davis. Everyone asks me what that means, to me the People's Republic of Davis implies that Davis is some far left Utopian. The dark underbelly is one of ugly reactionism. It is the voice of hatred, division, corruption, and conservatism. It is the part of ourselves that we all deny and try to hide away in the dark recesses of our minds and souls.

But it looms there at every step of the way. We support diversity when it is easy, simple and symbolic.

But when we talk about hiring a more diverse faculty, there is a strong voice of dissension.

We had a long discussion earlier this week on the Vanguard as to whether we really need a more diverse teaching workforce.

There was a strong undercurrent that a more diverse teaching workforce means having to hired less qualified teachers.

Jann Murray-Garcia, one of the organizers of the Diversity Forum on Monday, wrote on the blog:

"Here we are again...when we ask for racial/ethnic diversity in the teaching workforce, for the good of all students..some folks are assuming we NEED to settle for lower quality teachers. Wow.

I don't know what to say, Neighbors. It's 2007. A diverse teaching workforce does not HAVE TO mean a less qualified teaching workforce. Give us as applicants and as parents a little more credit than this.

Hear the implicit notion screaming from many of the comments: racial/ethnic diversity means inferiority. "

So we go back to square one: how does a city that will celebrate, not just tolerate, but celebrate the fact that it has a gay couple for the junior homecoming couple, at the same time argue that we do not need diversity in the teaching force and that such discussion is really looking at PC. At the same time there has been lack of follow through regarding issues of diversity and tolerance in the school district. We have a pervasive achievement gap between whites and Asians on the one hand and African Americans and Latinos on the other--even in households where the parents are college educated. We have tough problems, that require tough solutions.

I do not have answers to these questions, but for a town that is so firmly liberal or perceived as such, there are many non-liberal opinions that end up posted on this blog from people who claim to be liberals. These are not liberal views that I know, support, and believe in. These are not the values that I was taught to embrace and celebrate.

If Davis can have a gay homecoming couple, we can certainly find a way to hire more minority teachers. We can certainly find a way to make minorities feel more safe in their homes, our community, and in our schools. I do not think that is such an unreasonable request.

---Doug Paul Davis reporting

"School Climate Survey" Missing Key Issues

In response to the Harper Junior High School incident last fall where a student was repeatedly harassed based on his fathers same-sex relationship, the district developed a number of programs including the school climate action plan as a means to assess the school climate and begin to attempt to teach students about diversity. One of the items on tonight's agenda will look at the steps needed to be taken to address the needs of a diverse community. This includes such important issues as hiring teachers and other staff who reflect our student demographics. This seems to be a strong and positive step that address some of the key concerns that have been presented here in recent weeks.

However, just before that item, another item appears on the agenda tonight at the Davis Joint Unified School Board meeting which will inform the school board on the climate action plan which includes the "school climate survey" which contains 41 questions and was supposedly mailed out to all of the parents in the school district.

According to the agenda:

"This Action Plan has been developed and reviewed by principals, the District School Climate Council, and site staffs. The Yale Survey has been delivered to each site, Holmes Junior High has obtained a grant and has held Safe School Ambassador training, assemblies on school climate are being presented, and many more complementary activities are happening to implement the actions in this plan. This is continuous work that will be focused in the future on the new comprehensive survey results.

The Yale Survey will be administered during the first 2 weeks in May, and the results returned prior to the end of the school year. The results will be shared with the district and at the sites through staff meetings, within classrooms, Site Councils, PTA, and School Climate Committees. Further actions will be developed from these results."

While I increasingly believe that a lot of the problems stem from the lack of responsiveness and poor handling from school administrators, I think that a good school climate survey could be a very informative means for the school district to assess the problems that exist in the schools.

The operational word here being "good" and the operational phrase being "climate survey."

An enraged parent delivered a copy of the survey for me. Perhaps the district has a different sense of what "school climate" means than the rest of us because not one question relates to the issues of harassment, discrimination, race relations, bullying, diversity of faculty, or any of the major issues that we have been dealing with this school year.

I even checked to make sure that this survey was intended to test the kind of "climate" issues that the climate coordinator was hired to handle. From the agenda item and the response I got, I believe the answer is affirmative.

What is on the survey? Well there are five questions about the appearance and/ or condition of the school buildings. I do not recall the condition of our schools to be a huge issue.

There are questions about participation by parents, standard of work, the way the principal treats the students, whether the students at the school enjoy reading, whether the school has a high standard of work, etc.

It is not that some if not many of these questions are not important. It is that there are clearly questions that are left out and those are questions which deal with the key issues that have been addressed this year and those are the key issues that the school district specifically created the climate coordinator position to address. To not have any of those kinds of questions on the survey, calls into question the entire survey and the entire program.

There is simply a lot of information that the school district needs to deal with issues such as race relations, bullying, discrimination, harassment, and the like, that they will not get from this survey.

I would like to know who was involved in the selection of this survey. The agenda item mentions principals, climate council, and site staffs. It leaves me to wonder if the school board looked at this survey before it was approved and sent to all the parents in the district. From the responses I have gotten, I would suspect not. And I would like to know what oversight is available for such matters because those who I talked to were unaware of the survey's existence even, much less its content.

It is my hope that the community and the board get some key answers to this tonight at the school board meeting. I would encourage any parents involved in these issues to come to the board meeting and ask questions.

To read the full survey with all 41 questions for yourself, please click here.

---Doug Paul Davis reporting

Commentary: Incident Represents the Latest in a String

To be honest, I do not even know where or when to start with this, but to be very frank, everyone should be very concerned at this point with the Davis Joint Unified School District. Last summer the Davis Human Relations Commission was disbanded for a number of reasons, most of which had to do with the mishandling of a case involving a 16-year-old Davis High School student of Muslim heritage. And I think if you pin down those involved in the situation from the police to the city council, at some point all will admit that they did not handle it as they should have. What should have been a minor incident became a major incident that eventually led to a city manager, police chief, and a city commission all being fired in one sense or another.

What does this have to do with the Davis Joint Unified School District? Bear with me on that for a moment. The Davis Human Relations Commission had the authorization according to the Anti-Discrimination ordinance to "investigate and mediate" any alleged violations of the anti-discrimination ordinance. However since the body was placed on hiatus, the body has largely been a ceremonial body--hosting a few community events, but taking no part in the more formal functions it once served.

Therefore, in each of the incidents that have occurred, there has been no body sanctioned by the city that could act on the behest of aggrieved or allegedly aggrieved parties.

In November, we discovered that a Harper Junior High School student had been harassed by his peers because of his fathers' (plural), sexual orientation. The concerning aspect of this is that the initial response at the administrative level was completely inadequate. The Principal in this case was much too lenient initially which created a safety issue and turned a small incident or string of incidents into a situation where the student would be unable to return to school and the school district is being sued, now not by one student, but by two students. The school board did eventually and fairly quickly step up and make strong changes to the discipline policy, but by that point, the damage was done. Could a body like the HRC have stepped in and prevented this case from going into the legal system? Hard to know, but that was one of the reasons it was established to begin with.

On March 1, 2007, the Davis High School principal suspended the Black Student Union at the Davis High School. A huge rift had developed in the group following the resignation of the popular club adviser Courtenay Tessler. Tessler's resignation was due to internal tensions in the group, mainly with some of the parents. Those tensions blew up in the wake of Tessler's resignation and a subsequent meeting that created a power struggle that devolved into "rude and disrespectful behavior" according to Ginni Davis, the association superintendent of the Davis Joint Unified School District. Climate Coordinator Mel Lewis was temporarily named as adviser following Tessler's resignation, but that moved served to just further fuel the flames, part of which seems to centered over a rift between black immigrants versus US born African Americans.

Aside from the fraternal nature of this incident, there are two key issues. First, that there are around 60 African American students but no African American teachers at the school. Second, and related, the BSU had served as a group vital to the student in terms of support, community, and solidarity, and now that outlet is gone. That vehicle has at least temporarily been disbanded to create a "cooling-off" period, however, this has not prevented the tensions from continuing as the students marched in the streets and have held a serious of meetings to attempt to rectify the situation and force the school district to reconsider their policy.

At around the same time, the school district led strongly by an appointed task force, made the determination to close down the most heavily minority and section 8 school in the district. The closing of Valley Oak Elementary school has been covered extensively here. While in none of these incidents would I suggest that racism played a role in the handling of the situation, I would suggest that the handling of each of these was poor. I would also suggest that in the case of Valley Oak, that the fact that this particular school was slated to be closed may have to do with some political situations. There may have been a thought that it would be easier and less controversial to close Valley Oak as opposed to say North Davis Elementary or Cesar Chavez Elementary.

Regardless of intention, the effect I believe will be to put disadvantaged kids at a greater disadvantage. The sad thing was that this was a successful school. I am of the belief that you do not close down successful schools, you find ways to fund them. Already, I am hearing that the proposed closing is having a huge impact on enrollment and parental activities. Moreover, now the parents at Valley Oak Elementary and deciding how to proceed and one option that they are considering is a charter school--which would be a very risky and difficult venture, at best. Unfortunately, there does not seem to be a great option, even the one available, the parcel tax, will be exceedingly difficult to pass.

That leads us to the most recent incident involving a Davis High School student, apparently asked to take down a poster of Malcolm X because it contained the phrase, "by any means necessary." The teacher then explained to the student in front of class why the poster was inappropriate. She mentioned a "terrorist" message--which is ludicrous. The student then was asked to give a speech before an assembly, he sent the organizers two speeches, they picked the one that he gave and was told not to mention the teacher, the teacher left the assembly in tears, and the student was suspended for three days. Now the teacher has informed the family that the student is not wanted back in class.

From what I have seen this situation was completely mishandled. There is no way I can see to justify a three day suspension (which carries with it permanent repercussions to the student's academic future) for an incident like this. There is no way that this situation should have been handled as this one was. This once again seems to be a failure of the administration to properly handle a tough situation.

The school board despite some controversy did the right thing when they "fired" Superintendent David Murphy in early March. However, what appears to be in order is a thorough house cleaning of many of the administrators that were hired under his tenure. Each of these situations except for the Valley Oak one, stem from an initial mishandling of a situation by a site administrator. In some cases an overreaction and in another an underreaction.

The initial mishandling set the tone for future interactions and the sad fact is that somehow the district has been unable to extricate itself from the problem once the initial incident was mishandled. Will that continue in the latest case? Will this end up being another lawsuit and drawn out incident? Too early to tell, but the district needs to take the initiative early on in this case and prevent it from being an ugly legal battle. There should be room from compromise and room to work out an acceptable arrangement, but the trajectory on this latest incident does not appear headed in that situation.

At some point the board needs to step in early and prevent this from becoming a lawsuit and from harming a promising student's academic future. It is very important that they act soon. In the meantime, we have to all ask ourselves why these situations continue to occur in our community. At the recent Caesar Chavez event a couple of city officials asked me point blank why there were so few (no) minorities in attendance? The same was true at the MLK day event. It is a simple answer to unfortunately a very serious question. Meanwhile just last week, the Davis City Council took another step toward re-writing the city's anti-discrimination ordinance. And people wonder why so few minorities attended events that used to be the most diversely attended events in the city.

People will accuse me, as they often do, of exaggerating this stuff even as more and more minorities tell me that they have to move out of Davis for the sake of their children and not wanting them to grow up in an environment of what they perceive to be intolerance but worse than that, indifference by the majority of the people to what is actually going on. I fear that this situation is about to come to a head. I would hope that those leaders in this community would be able to step in and prevent it before it reaches a boiling point.

---Doug Paul Davis reporting

Commentary: Whither Human Relations Commission

Somebody asked me last week if I was planning to go to Thursday night's Human Relations Commission meeting. I went to the first two--and it was a good thing that I did because at the second meeting, Guy Fischer showed up and told the story of his son's harassment. I have not been to one since and this was no exception. I looked at the agenda and there were two items about events, one item about the Thong Hy Huynh Awards, and one event on a Forum that they were deciding what topic to have it on. Those were their actions items which told me what I needed to know--they were taking no action.

I do not blame this on the membership per se, because they are doing exactly what the City Council had in mind when they disbanded the former Human Relations Commission back in June (where my wife had served as chair). Unfortunately, I have only a limited amount of time these days and I have to choose my meetings very carefully.

The anti-discrimination ordinance grants the human relations commission with the power to be an investigative body rather than an educational body.

Section 7A-15(C) of the Davis Anti-Discrimination Ordinance:

"Any person who believes he or she has been discriminated against in violation of the provisions of this ordinance may file a request to have the Human Relations Commission investigate and mediate his or her complaint. The Commission may adopt rules of procedure to accommodate the needs of such investigation mediation. A complaint to the Commission shall not be a prerequisite to filing a civil action under this section, and the findings and conclusions of the commission issued in response to such proceedings shall not be admissible in a civil action."

At one point the HRC was going to review this code to see if it needs revisions. I do not know what came of that.

On the other hand, there is a strong role to play even if the HRC is to be merely an educational rather than an investigative body.

This point came up in another discussion based on comments on the Sacramento Bee website in comment section following an article on the Fischer case. (See my commentary from earlier this week on those comments).

If one reads the comments there, there is a string of anti-gay comments. The school board has implemented a series of strong rules that impose a zero-tolerance policy against harassment. But it seems obvious that what is happening at the school level reflects a deeper seated societal bias against gay people--even in portions of progressive communities such as Davis.

A number of the protesters last week against Freddie Oakley were from Davis. People are entitled to believe that homosexuality is immoral or that the lifestyle is wrong. However there is a line between an expression of political and religious preferences and an expression that is simply hate speech--some of the protesters crossed that line and some of the commenters on the Sacramento Bee drove it into a gully of hate.

The school board can change the rules at the district level but what are they going to do about society? In past years, this is where the Human Relations Commission would have a strong role--helping to educate the community and bringing awareness to this problem. In fact, this is where this human relations commission could still have a role because they are after all now an educational body. But the Human Relations Commission found out about the Fischer harassment case in November (at the same time as myself) and other than the chair of the commission going to the School Board meeting, to my knowledge they have not done a thing.

The City Council wants no eggs broken by the HRC after what happened last year. But the history of social change and the movement for social justice call for eggs to be broken and milk to be spilled in order to change the trajectory of society and the mores of citizens.

Fredrick Douglass writing in 1857 recognized this as well anyone:

"If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and yet depreciate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground. They want rain without thunder and lightening. They want the ocean without the awful roar of its many waters."

The heroes of the Civil Rights struggle did so by creating turmoil against established authority.

For a body to be effective in producing social change, they must upset the current order.

The bottom here is that there remains a strong place in our city and in our governance for a body that can both educate the public and raise a ruckus to further the cause of social justice. The city council last year severed our government from such a body. While they were concerned about divisiveness in the community--how do you teach people that it is wrong to discriminate and hate gay people without causing divisiveness? How does one stop discrimination without drawing the ire of those perceived to be discriminating? How does one teach tolerance without going after those who are intolerant? How does one teach love without going after those who hate? Even the strongest teacher's of passive disobedience and non-violent resistance recognize that in order for you to turn someone from hate with love, it inevitably requires confrontation and confrontation means that one must spill some milk.

It will take this city a long time to recognize what they lost when the City Council disbanded the Human Relations Commission. At some point they may realize that maybe we gave up too much...

---Doug Paul Davis reporting

Anti-Gay Attitudes Persist Despite Progress In Society

Watching the recent events in Woodland unfold was a reminder both of how far we have come and how far we still have to go in this society in terms of attitudes toward gay people. I am not naive enough to expect people to accept gay marriage. I realize that there are strong religious and other forces working against that. On the other hand, I do not think it is too much to hope that if one is to oppose things like gay marriage based on religion that they nevertheless treat others with respect and dignity.

This moves us back full circle to the incident at Harper Junior High School that we have been covering since early November when the father Guy Fischer and the Principal David Inns first attended a Davis Human Relations Commission meeting.

Erika Chavez of the Sacramento Bee did a nice story on Sunday about the Fischer family whose son was the victim of harassment on the Harper Junior High School campus

It took the District awhile but under the Davis Joint Unified School Board has passed a series of changes to the discipline code to greatly improve it. Board President Jim Provenza who we previously praised for his work in forcing Superintendent Dave Murphy to make the language unequivocal, was quoted at length by the Sacramento Bee.

Davis district school board President Jim Provenza said the Fischer family's allegations prompted revisions to the district wide anti-harassment policy.

"It was already a priority for us, but I think the incidents at the junior high demonstrated the urgency of that priority," he said.

The anti-harassment policy is strategically focused on low-level incidents and clarified language regarding sexual orientation and gender, Provenza said.

"It's easy to ignore the little things going on. Then when the big things happen, everybody's surprised," he said. "We are going to enforce standards of conduct that prevent that from occurring."

I will say again, I think the district in the end made some very important changes and Provenza is absolutely correct that this incident demonstrated the urgency of the situation and forced action much quicker than it would have come without it. This is unfortunate, but it is the way things work sometimes.

What is unfortunate and frankly appalling are some of the comments made by readers of the Sacramento Bee web site: While it is unclear where these comments are coming from geographically, the comments themselves demonstrate strongly the need to continue to work to educate not only the students but the community as whole. This is a real wake up call to all of us, in my opinion.

Here are a couple examples of some of the worst (but unfortunately not all of it):

“These two "dads" need to grow thicker skin and teach their son to do the same. Kids are cruel. It's a fact of life. Get over it. The truth is most people do not think that homosexual behavior is normal because, well, it isn't. Not normal, not natural.”

“Grow a pair… Guy Fischer and his partner, Richard Carrillo should start acting like men. Having a hissy fit and threatening legal action to sanction their private (wait, no, it's public now) sexual appetites is so sad.”

“This is not the schools fault, it is the two male parents fault for the lifestyle they chose and to raise a boy in this lifestyle. Also it is everyone's right to speak their belief's at any time (Freedom of Speech). To surpress this right is to harm everyone, not just one boy being raised by two fathers...”

“This pretty much sums up why gay couples need not raise children. Its pretty disgusting how they expect the rest of the world to accept their sinful behavior.”

These are just some of the comments but I think they illustrate a couple of key points.

First, I understand that there are people who believe that homosexuality is a sin. But just as we saw outside of the County Clerk’s office last week, there is a difference between a loving Christian response and a hateful bigoted response.

Second, there is a vast difference between someone expecting others to “accept their sinful behavior” and someone expecting their children not to be tormented by other students. There is also a legitimate expectation that when their kids are bullied and tormented by other students the teachers and district will do something about it. Neither of these have anything to do with accepting the "sinful" behavior of the parents. Rather they have everything to do with not accepting the misbehavior of students.

Third and finally, I do not think people really understand the nature of bullying. These comments were far too dismissive about it.

Here’s the article’s description of the actual incidents:

“What started as occasional muttered slurs, they contend, escalated into vicious name-calling, shoving and public ridicule.”

Even this statement does not give the full extent of some of the things that the son in this incident was actually exposed to. Frankly, most of those things have not been repeated here because they are too graphic, but perhaps they need to be in order for people to realize just how serious this is.

We all should commend Board President Jim Provenza and the rest of the board for the work they have done to improve the language of their discipline code. But what these comments tell me is that there is much work to be done in our community—realizing that a lot of the people who commented do not live in Davis—nevertheless, I think they are an adequate reflection of some of the Davis community as well. I have seen this first hand in the comments on the youtube videos, some of which were so bad, I had to delete them.

It is appalling. Frankly, I do not know what is worse—the homophobia or anti-gay statements or the appalling lack of concern for what a junior high school student is going through. But it seems pretty obvious why these types of incidents are so prevalent in our society—too many people think they are no big deal.

---Doug Paul Davis reporting

New Harassment Policy in Schools Moving Toward Completion

On Thursday Night, the Davis Joint Unified School Board took the next steps toward completing a new harassment policy when they unanimously approved much more specific, detailed, and strong policies that laid out severe and strict consequences for students who harass other students. Additionally, the school board moved toward the creation of a new category in their discipline matrix that will be one that deals with the violation of a student's civil rights.

This is a much needed update to the school district's discipline process. Part of the frustrating aspect of the Fischer harassment case was not just the fairly light punishments for the students involved in this incident, but the extent to which the district's policy's created a discrepancy in the severity of some punishments versus others. Two key examples, if a student called another student a racial epithet that was a more severe penalty (automatic suspension) than if a student called another student an anti-gay epithet. Moreover, smoking marijuana was also a much more severe penalty than the verbal harassment of another student. Not that smoking marijuana is a good thing, but it seems to be much more serious to harass and bully another student.

If the school district did nothing else, it had to clean up these seeming inconsistencies in their policy. And to their credit they did. School board member Sheila Allen was quoted in the paper as saying that these polices had been drafted and adopted in record time. I guess that is a good thing that the district can be responsive when a glaring hole in their current policy is found. I am certain from Mr. Fischer's perception it comes much too late. That is not necessarily a criticism of the board per se, but rather a recognition that hopefully in the future we can figure out these holes before a serious incident occurs.

In my opinion, it should not take a crisis and a lawsuit to induce fast action and change. Again, and let me reemphasize, the board did the right thing here. And they did it very quickly, I first reported on this story in the Vanguard on November 10, 2006 and the board itself first met on November 16, 2006. So it took less than three months to make drastic changes and that includes Thanksgiving, Christmas-New Years, in between. That is quite impressive.

Finally, as Mr. Fischer points out in the Davis Enterprise, the next key thing is for the district to ensure that these policies will be enforced. Again, the language is very strong and I think fairly clear. But they will only work as well as they are followed. And that is the crux of it all, they can have all of the language they want but if the principals are not following the provisions laid out then they will not work.

One suggestion would be to periodically (and I honestly do not know if they already do this or if they even could do this) monitor the schools and see how discipline policies are carried out and not just on this issue obviously, but overall. However, what I fear will happen is that the next time an incident like this occurs, the policy will be put to the test and we will only find out if it is working if the parent complains in a loud and vocal way so as to ensure that the public hears about this incident.

A couple of other quick notes. First, there are several youtube videos that I have created for use on this site. However, they are also available on the youtube website. There have been a number of comments posted by people who obviously live in this community that are rather troubling (I actually had to remove some of the comments because they were too vulgar and several of those obviously came from people who appeared to be in this community and PARENTS of students in this school district). There is also prevailing perception that Zach Fischer somehow brought this upon himself. While I think that the idea that he would be a completely innocent is probably not accurate, given the depths of this incident, I think I can safely say there can be no excuse for what happened to him. None at all.

Second to the implication that this will somehow deprive the school district of vast resources and that Mr. Fischer is suing the school district merely to line his own pockets, I would like to point out a few actual facts. First, the district has an insurance policy that will mean they will pay some sort of deductible and the rest of the cost will be mitigated by the insurance. Second, he is hardly asking for enough to line his pockets. Third and most importantly, the school district's actions show that school policy was lacking in this area. I will quickly also suggest that their quick action shows a good faith effort to correct it. I am not going to weigh in on the merits of this case, other than to suggest those actions taken in the last few weeks suggest that this is not merely a frivolous waste of everyone's time. People need to inform themselves on the facts before they make derisive comments, it has been a bit of an eye-opener to read some of those comments on youtube. (If you look on the side panel you can click on the videos that relate to the Fischer case and view them for yourselves).

---Doug Paul Davis reporting

District Takes First Step Toward Tough New Anti-Harassment Policy

The People's Vanguard of Davis first reported on this incident on November 10 involving the harassment of a Harper Junior High School student based on his perceived sexual orientation. Since then, there has been a second student at that school who has come forward with complaints about harassment and the district handling of that policy. Now over two months later, the district is taking very strong steps toward remedying that situation.

Last night, the Davis Joint Unified School Board approved language for a strong new anti-harassment policy. One of the chief complaints made by the Fischers was the discrepancy in the punishment for racially based harassment versus harassment based on sexual orientation or the perception of sexual orientation. The direction taken last night by the school board goes a long way toward remedying that situation.

All of this will need to be heard again, perhaps as soon as next week for final approval, but the first steps taken last night were very important. The direction set by the board was crystal clear--the administration knows exactly what the board wants on this matter. All civil rights type harassment were subsumed into a single category in the district's punishment matrix. That includes sexual orientation and also gender identity. There is still a sliding in terms of punishments depending on the number and severity of the offenses, but the language in the code was shifted from "may be disciplined" to "shall be disciplined." This eliminates any ambiguity. Students know that if they engage in harassment using epithets that are racial or based on sexual orientation there will be immediate and severe penalties, including suspension. Suspension is the penalty with the teeth.

But Board President Jim Provenza went even further. First, he proposed language changes that directed staff to be responsible to monitor and report such incidents. There is some question as to whether this constitutes new duties that would have to be handled under the collective bargaining agreement. However, the direction from the school board on this issue was very clear and now it is up to the Administration and their legal team to write up a policy that will fit.

The most impressive part is that there came a point when Superintendent David Murphy seemed to be hedging in terms of the clarity of language and both Provenza and Keltie Jones pushed him very hard to ensure that any ambiguity was taken out. Murphy suggested that the Principals already knew these rules, but Provenza and Jones really forced him to make the language strong and unambiguous so that there could be no mistake what the board's policy and direction were.

Moreover, the board was giving direction to give very strong advertising of the message that this behavior is unacceptable. It will be written into the student handbook and to some extent into the employee handbook as well, however, again that issue is a bit more tricky due to collective bargaining agreements.

One of the things that upset the Fischer's was the ambiguity of the current policy and the discrepancy between the punishments for smoking pot, calling someone a racial epithet, and calling someone an anti-gay epithet. They saw that there was very serious harassment that seemed to be punished very lightly.

I have been very critical of the school district's handling of this matter, but what I saw last night was very positive and very impressive. All five members of the board of trustees were in strong support of these changes. Mr. Provenza and Ms. Jones were very strong and forceful advocates for this policy and it was impressive to watch them press this issue home.

This was a much needed policy change. It puts harassment based on sexual orientation, perceived sexual orientation, and gender identity into a class of civil rights offenses. It differentiates the use of these words as epithets versus merely saying the words. And it gives district personnel strong guidance as to how to handle such future incidents.

It is unfortunate that it took an incident such as this to call the board's attention to the holes in their policy. That is the nature of government it appears, changes only occur when there are problems that arise. It is unfortunate that Mr. Fischer and his son had to suffer for these lack of policies. However, last night was definitely a good night for them. The school board came through with some very important measures and I believe, only as the result of the actions taken by Mr. Fischer and the attention that he drew to this issue did these changes occur.

---Doug Paul Davis reporting

Commentary: On Confidentiality and Its Misuses by Government

Recent events have brought the issue of confidentiality to the forefront. There are times in government when dealing with the issue of minors or personnel issues that confidentiality is not only legitimate but also necessary to protect the people involved. The dismissal of former Davis Police Captain Nick Concolino is one such use of legitimate confidentiality. He as a former at-will employee of the City of Davis is entitled to having the issue of his dismissal remain confidential. (Although if the city manager is serious about considering him for the new police chief position, the council ought to request he waive that right). That is a perfectly legitimate use. However, other recent uses by both the Davis City Manager and the Davis Joint Unified School District seem more questionable.

The hiring of a new police chief

Tuesday’s Davis Enterprise article cited just such a case where the use of confidentiality is questionable at best (and perhaps inappropriate according to our reading of the law): “Davis City Manager Bill Emlen declined Monday to identify the seven candidates by name.”

In fact, Emlen according to multiple well-placed sources has not informed the members of the Davis City Council as to who the seven candidates are. His rationale was that this was a personnel matter.

Personnel matters do receive a large degree of confidentiality protection. However, under almost no circumstances, are names of applicants or candidates for a job considered confidential. Indeed, as one person I spoke to pointed out, the university is actually required to hold part of their interview process in public at which point the names of those who make it to the presentation stage of the interview are divulged and those individuals have to present their research in front of the public in addition to the hiring department.

In fact, according to the public records act: Personnel, medical and similar files are exempt only if disclosure would reveal intimate, private details. (§ 6254(c)) Employment contracts are not exempt. (§ 6254.8). See also: California Government Code.

While I am not a lawyer, I would have to guess that the name of applicants is not exempt from the public records act, as revealing a name does not reveal any information that is intimate or private. City Manager Emlen then could be required to divulge this information to the public.

This issue also goes back to the heart of our city government model that was discussed last week. Who makes the hire of police chief? The unelected city manager. The city council itself has the power to hire and fire the city manager who then has the sole power to hire and fire employees. There is no transparency in this process.

More concerning is the implication that the elected representatives are being kept out of the loop. Again, some personnel matters I understand being kept from the public. What I continue to not understand is how they can be kept from the City Council who are representatives of the public. And in this case, this appears to be an abuse of confidentiality requirements.

The handling of the Harper Junior High harassment case

We have been reporting on the case stemming from a harassment incident involving a 13-year-old student at Harper Junior High who was harassed by 14 of his classmates because of perceptions about his sexual orientation based on the lifestyle of his father who is gay and lives with a partner of the same sex.

The school district and school board had a long meeting in public about this issue in mid-November where they discussed numerous ways that they were going to deal with it to prevent such occurrences in the future. Let me make this clear—I absolutely applaud those actions. There seems to be a misconception among some in the district and on the board that we are neglecting to include all the things that the District is doing to address the situation.

However, from day one, our main concern has been to get Zach Fischer back into school. And now we have this other kid who likewise we need to get back into school. We just do not believe that the District has addressed these concerns in a timely or adequate manner. Perhaps the District wants to counter this contention, they are welcome to correct this on the record at any point in time.

The school district is basically now arguing that they cannot talk about it on the news or in blogs because of confidentiality requirements. This is an argument or perspective that I simply do not understand. We do not need to know that a specific student, John Doe, has been suspended for three weeks or has an expulsion pending. That is a confidential matter and not our business.

However, if the school district is implementing a zero-tolerance policy for anyone who uses sexual orientation as a means to bully another student—how is that a confidential matter? Or if the school district offered to have an escort for these students between classes to ensure that they were not bullied—how would that be a confidential matter?

What seems to be happening here once again is that the school district is using the fact that there is a pending court case and the fact that these are incidents involving both students and teachers, both of whom are protected by such requirements—to avoid going on the record with a discussion about what is being done to prevent incidents from happening in the future both in general and with specific regard to this student.

Once again, this is an abuse of the confidentiality laws. They are using them not to protect the students or their employees but to protect the district. They are using and misusing confidentiality to cover up and avoid talking about their wrong doing. They undermine transparency in that way. We cannot hold our elected official accountable when they declare these matters closed or use a gag order to keep it secret.

Buzayan Case

This is precisely what we saw happen last spring in the Buzayan case. The juvenile justice system seeks to protect the identity of juvenile offenders precisely to avoid the type of situation that occurred last spring when the release of sensitive material was used to harm the reputation of a minor. A minor in this case who was cleared of any wrongdoing by the judge. Now, Councilmember Don Saylor, Ted Puntillo, Officer Pheng Ly, and Deputy District Attorney Patricia Fong all pointed out that the judge dismissed the case based on the civil compromise. Well it does not matter. In this country, there is a presumption of innocence unless someone is proven guilty by a court of law and when the District Attorney’s office chose to disclose these tapes they violated the rights of a minor to keep such matters confidential.

The District Attorney’s office got upset because the minor and her family were able to talk about the case, but not them. Well that’s how the law is designed and as a public agency that goes with the territory. Under the law, the juvenile and her parents have every right to talk about the case. The law is set up to protect the minor from a smear campaign not to protect the prosecutors and law enforcement from charges of misconduct.

All three of these cases now represent a misuse of confidentiality laws to protect a public agency from charges of misconduct or prevent scrutiny by the public of their actions. We as a community should demand transparency in our government and we must recognize that government officials operate under a public trust that does not exist for private individuals. That means there are different standards of behavior that public officials need to adhere to that private individuals may not. At times that may make it more difficult for the public agency to deal with charges of impropriety, but that is the cost of doing business in a free and open society where the value of accountability and transparency must be paramount.

---Doug Paul Davis reporting

Wednesday Midday Briefs

Dunning must now lie in the bed that he helped to make

As I have been a critic of Davis Enterprise Columnist Bob Dunning at times, I must acknowledge that we share the conviction that we not see a closure of the Valley Oak Elementary School. In fact, if Dunning were paying attention after my criticism of his column on Councilmember Heystek's alleged "privileged" life, he would have noticed a few columns asking that we keep the elementary school open.

So it is from a standpoint of agreement that I still must call Dunning to task for his column entitled, "Don't be shocked, it's not in their back yard." In it he writes:

YOUR SILENCE IS DEAFENING … as we approach the national celebration of the biggest name in the civil rights movement, it's distressing to see that civil rights organizations and civil rights activists in this town have largely stayed on the sidelines of the impending closure of Valley Oak Elementary … I guess if your kid goes somewhere else and your school isn't threatened with closing, you can look the other way and pretend it isn't happening …

These, of course, are the same folks who get worked into a frenzy about something as silly as the name of a street, then are missing in action as the most vulnerable neighborhood in the city is gutted of one great source of pride, its long-standing elementary school …

In a town that consistently finds a way to protect toads and owls and hawks, protecting a neighborhood and its cherished school should be elementary …

Dunning is inaccurate and misleading when he writes the above. Many individuals contacted the People's Vanguard of Davis to share their concerns which have been tagged on as comments to our articles. Many citizens have written letters to the editor which have been published in the Davis Enterprise criticizing the proposed closure. Many citizens have spoken out publicly at school board meetings in opposition to this proposal too. Even fellow Davis Enterprise columnists Jann Murray Garcia and Jonathan Landon have written in opposition to the closing of Valley Oak.

And yet if Bob Dunning would take a step back and see the bigger picture, he is one of the reasons why there is not an overwhelming response in opposition on this issue. In June 2006, it was Bob Dunning among many others who led the way towards the removal of Cecilia Escamilla Greenwald and many others from the Human Relations Commission In fact, the City Council put the HRC on hiatus, removed all of its members, and then reconstituted the commission in September under much tighter rules. Bob Dunning APPLAUDED these moves and the purge every step of the way.

Dunning on June 29 wrote:

"the City Council had little choice but to give the Human Relations Commission and its insult-a-minute chairwoman a prolonged kindergarten-style "time-out"

Well Mr. Dunning what you reap, so shall you sow... And therein lies the rub, Bob Dunning was all too willing to throw Mrs. Escamilla Greenwald and the Human Relations Commission under the bus when they were rallying people to help those they deemed oppressed by the Davis police department. Now Dunning is wondering why no one is rallying to the defense of his children and their school that stands in the way of closing. Perhaps he would take some comfort in reading the words of Pastor Martin Niemöller who wrote about the inactivities of those in Nazi Germany. His closing line was, "When they came for me there was no one left to speak out."

Well Mr. Dunning, fortunately you have the People's Vanguard of Davis, but when the HRC was disbanded, leaving with it were the best means to mobilize those in the community and bring awareness to problems such as the one that you write about. Perhaps next time you decide to pillory members of this community who are standing up for those in need of assistance, you will remember that one day the children in need may be your own.

Speaking of children in need... what in the world is going on at Harper Junior High

Yesterday we reported on an incident last week that related to the issue of harassment of children due to perceived sexual orientation. Now this week in the Davis Enterprises "Briefly" we get yet another assault that required police intervention...

Teen arrested for assault on campus

Davis police arrested a 15-year-old Harper Junior High School student Monday after he allegedly assaulted another student on the East Davis school campus.

The boy, whose name was not released because he is a minor, reportedly tripped and pushed the 14-year-old victim during a verbal argument, then kicked and punched him once he was on the ground, Lt. Colleen Turay said.

Police took the boy into custody and booked him at the Davis police station, then released him to a parent with a notice to appear in court, Turay said.

The Davis Joint Unified School District better figure out a way to handle these problems, but at some point people are going to get tired of seeing all of these lawsuits being filed against the district.

---Doug Paul Davis reporting

Gay Harassment

NG Blog covered the on-going Fischer story today. On his blog he posted a video from the CurrentTV network.

It created by a couple of teens describing incidents of anti-gay harassment against them in Pennsylvania.

It's well worth a watch.

New Revelations in the Fischer Harassment Case

In the latest in what now has to be described as an escalating situation at Harper Junior High School, we saw this mention in the "Brieflies" in the January 3, 2007 Davis Enterprise:

Davis police cited two 13-year-old Harper Junior High students Tuesday — one on suspicion of assault, the other for allegedly possessing drugs.

Officers were first called to the East Covell Boulevard campus shortly after 1:30 p.m. after one of the boys entered a classroom and attempted to strike a student, nearly hitting a school employee who tried to stop him, Lt. Colleen Turay said. The Davis boy was cited on suspicion of assault and released to a parent.

About an hour later, a school administrator received information that another 13-year-old allegedly was in possession of marijuana on school grounds. The administrator confronted the boy, who turned over a plastic baggie containing the drug, Turay said.

Police again responded to the campus, and the boy, a Woodland resident, was cited and released with a notice to appear in court.

What the "Brieflies" do not mention is the connection between this event and the ongoing harassment at Harper Junior High School

This incident involved the second victim who came forward after Zach Fischer and his father Guy Fischer complained about a string of continuing harassments.

The second victim reported the problem to the administration and according to anonymous sources, the administration once again did not take this situation seriously. However, they would eventually follow up with some of the victim's friends that had witnessed the new round of harassment. Upon the administration receiving confirmation from the victim's friends they proceeded to suspend the harasser.

However, they sent the student home without the parents being present. So the student returned to the school site and waited at the classroom door where the victim was until the end of class. When the class ended, the student proceeded to attack the victim once again.

A female teacher, alertly noticing what was about to take place, stepped in between the victim and the harasser to prevent the student from harming the victim. The harasser then struck the teacher (reportedly in the stomach). Several other faculty members intervened and the police were called.

In addition to the assault, there was another student (may or may not involved in the initial incident) that was in possession of drugs. The police interviewed this student and discovered a small bag containing marijuana.

Once again, the school district appeared slow to respond to what quickly became a very serious and dangerous incident. It was not until the teacher was actually physically struck before they actually called the police. In addition, this situation was created because they sent the offending minor home without parental supervision. The district is now reportedly in the process of expelling the offending student.

This incident further validates the fears that the Fischer family has that their son is not safe returning to school. At this point, their son is receiving in-home tutoring. The family has now made the decision that their son will not be safe returning to school. Part of their pending lawsuit in federal court will be for compensation for their son having to go to a private school rather than attending public school in Davis.

Originally, one of the reasons the second family withheld their name was to enable their son to remain in school. However, after this most recent incident, they too have pulled their son from school. Neither student will be returning to the Davis Joint Unified School District anytime soon.

---Doug Paul Davis reporting

Seven Early Stories for Davis in ‘007

At the end of 2006, we covered the top 10 stories in Davis for 2006. In today’s blog entry, we will look ahead to some of the stories brewing as the largest for the first part of 2007. As always, new stories will undoubtedly arise at a seconds notice, but the People’s Vanguard of Davis already has a full plate. These are just some of the stories we plan to be covering in the ‘007.

Open Seat in the 8^th Assembly District

Outgoing Incumbent Lois Wolk's (D-Davis) third and final term as Assemblywoman for the 8th Assembly District of California has barely begun and the speculation for her replacement has already started. In a district that is heavily tilted toward the Democrats, the primary winner will for all practical purposes determine who becomes the next Assemblymember for the 8th Assembly District.

The gauntlet has been thrown down by Woodland Daily Democrat Editor Jim Smith in his blog:

Posturing is taking place right now between supervisors Mariko Yamada and Mike McGowan and West Sacramento Mayor Chris Cabaldan. The word from Assembly speaker Fabian Nunez is that it’s “Chris’ turn” for the 8th District seat. McGowan, an attorney who represents West Sacramento, may be given a judgeship to keep him from seeking higher office. Yamada, if she stays true to the Democratic Party, could have her chance by 2014.

It seems that Nunez has jumped the gun a bit here. Yamada would be an extremely formidable candidate if (and that's still a big if) she chooses to run. Cabaldon is not without baggage of his own. He is unpopular with the unions for bringing Wal-Mart to West Sacramento and for supporting anti-union positions on a variety of issues. He has upset a lot of Democrats for supporting development interests rather than neighborhood and constituent interests.

The race for 8th Assembly District is far from over and the race will be decided on the west side of the Sacramento River, not the East Side.

Continuation of Law suits against the Davis Police Department and Yolo County District Attorney’s Office

At least two major lawsuits have gone forward against the District Attorney's Office in November 2006.

Last week, we reported about Khalid Berny, a farmer from Clarksburg who is suing both the Yolo County and the Yolo County Sheriff's Department and Animal Control. This is an amazing case that stems from allegations that Mr. Berny intentionally allowed his goats to run at large. For this horrendous crime, Berny faced 170 misdemeanor charges which carried a maximum sentence of 60 years in prison. Mr. Berny's case was dismissed after a last minute recusal by Yolo County Judge Timothy Fall brought retired Judge Bill Lebov into the case who then oversaw the dismissal of all charges against Mr. Berny. Through a civil lawsuit, Mr. Berny now charges Animal Control and the Sheriff's Office with discriminatory enforcement of the law based on the severity of the punishment inflicted on him in comparison with others for similar offenses. In addition, Berny is charging the Yolo County District Attorney's Office with malicious and discriminatory prosecution. Prior to the dismissal of charges in Judge Lebov's court, Yolo County Deputy DA Deanna Hayes had offered to drop the charges in exchange for Mr. Berny dropping his suit against the county--an offer that Berny refused.

Along similar lines, one of the top stories from last year, is the case of then 16-year-old Halema Buzayan who was arrested for an alleged bumper bender in a Davis supermarket parking lot in 2005. Ms. Buzayan, who is now a freshman at UC Davis, and her family are suing the Davis Police Department including former Chief Jim Hyde, Former Internal Affairs Sgt. Gina Anderson, and Officer Pheng Ly for a variety of offenses. In addition, they are suing the Yolo County District Attorney's Office and the Davis Enterprise newspaper.

Some of the most troubling aspects of the case are: Internal Affairs Sgt. Gina Anderson during her interview of Halema Buzayan (while supposedly conducting an internal review of the actions of Officer Pheng Ly), allegedly threatened her mother with jail if Ms. Buzayan did not confess to the crime. The Yolo County District Attorney's office after the case was dismissed, illegally leaked the arrest tapes to the Davis Enterprise, thus violating juvenile confidentiality laws. The Davis Enterprise not only published the story on the tapes, but posted the tapes on their website, in the process releasing confidential and private information about the Buzayan family but also the victim, Ms. Adriene Wonhof. The District Attorney's office then continued their smear campaign against the Buzayans into May, with Deputy District Attorneys Tim Wallace and Clinton Parish claiming that the Buzayan family paid off Ms. Wonhof to keep her from testifying. Finally, Bob Dunning, a Davis Enterprise columnist got into the act with a long interchange with the ACLU and attorney Bill Kopper. For more on the Buzayan case, please view the video from KGO ABC News 7 in San Francisco.

Ironically both Mr. Berny and the Buzayans filed their court cases in early November and will be proceeding during the course of the year.

Anti-Gay Harassment of the Junior High School Student

Last November, the People's Vanguard of Davis broke the story of a thirteen-year-old Harper Junior High School Student was being harassed because he has two Gay fathers. For good background see the following video clips: Father Speaks at City Council Meeting, Father Speaks at School Board Meeting, and the ABC News 10 in Sacramento report.

There are new revelations coming out tomorrow on this case. Check out the People's Vanguard of Davis first thing tomorrow.

Closing Down of the Valley Oak Elementary School

On Saturday we reported that the Davis Joint Unified enrollment projections were not looking good in terms of the issue of school closure. Neighbors seeking to keep Valley Oak Elementary School open cited possible future development projects as a possible source for future students. This argument was dismissed by the school board, claiming that they should not take into account development plans that are not yet approved. On the other hand, Baki Tezcan pointed out it is "ironic that after counting [the expected population growth] for [the unapproved] Covell Village [development] in building Korematsu, now they [the school district] say they cannot count for something that does not exist even though it will not require a city-wide vote and will probably happen in due course and produce new students in need of a school to go." The decision on the closure has not been made, but parents are concerned about the loss of a neighborhood school in one of the lesser affluent neighborhoods. This figures to remain a very hot issue for 2007.

Writing of the new general plan

In December 2006, the council moved forward with a plan that would create a steering committee to help draft an update to the city of Davis' general plan. This drew a strong and contentious debate between the council majority faction and the progressives Mayor Sue Greenwald and Councilmember Lamar Heystek. And this was just over a procedural issue that would create a 15-member committee comprised of three appointees per council member. The moment of absurdity occurred when Mayor Pro Tem Ruth Asmundson complained about the use of the world "surrogate" being used to describe the members of the proposed commission. Our crack team of lexicon experts however, surmised that this was a correct usage of the term and it did not have a pejorative connotation at all.

One of the issues that the Vanguard figures to follow is one of affordable housing. This comes amid a report that the average family in Yolo County must earn around $17.50 per hour to afford the average two-bedroom apartment. We have also been told that the Eleanor Roosevelt project which was supposed to be provide affordable housing to seniors, has laid mostly vacant due to some rather severe restrictions.

Continued Harassment of Area Minorities by the Police

In May of 2006, 150-200 UC Davis Students Marched on the Davis Police Department complaining of racial profiling and harassment by certain members of the Davis police department. Racial profiling and police oversight were among the large problems of 2006, and the year of 2006 ended the way it begun. We have a video clip of an African American resident getting harassed once again by the Davis Police, this one was caught on tape.The basic problem that faces Davis is a practice of "phishing" by the Davis Police whereby they spot a vehicle that does not appear to "belong." It might be old or poorly maintained. The police officer then looks for a pretense to pull the person over--sometimes it is real as in the case of the video above, other times it may be suspect. In any case, they are looking for people they believe might be gang members, wanted criminals, or on probation. They are using these minor stops as a pretense to see if they can make a big arrest.

Davis hired an Ombudsman in 2006, but that will not put this problem to a rest. Policies must be changed and that will be a large part of the focus in 2007.

New District Attorney for Yolo County

Today, Monday January 8, 2007, the new District Attorney of Yolo County will be sworn in. As we wrote last week, Jeff Reisig faces a formidable task with a department heavily under investigation, many of whom are facing actions in law suits. Reisig faces his own questions with regards to the gang injunction in West Sacramento. That case comes up for appeal in April. Moreover, the Buzayan and Berny cases cast a lot of scrutiny on the actions of the previous District Attorney David Henderson as well as a number of people who currently work as Deputy District Attorneys including a large number of strong supporters of Jeff Reisig. On KDVS, Ron Glick was arguing that we should wait and see how the new DA does, but he has a tough task ahead of him and that will be a large focus of the first part of '007.

Look forward to further coverage in '007 of these stories and much more, here on the People's Vanguard of Davis.

---Doug Paul Davis reporting

Sunday Evening Briefs

Well Wishes to Kingsley Melton

I wanted to send out well wishes to Kingsley Melton who was seriously burned down in San Diego on his way to a winter vacation. Kingsley is the son of public defender Barry Melton and active in politics and the community himself.

Davis Enterprise Poll on Iraq

I was looking the latest "poll" in the Davis Enterprise. I haven't taken their polls very seriously since I saw the manipulation that occurred with the one last July pertaining to the Human Relations Commission. Assistant Publisher and Editor Debbie Davis was informed of this manipulation, she acknowledged problems with the polls, and yet the poll results were still published in the paper with no explanation.

Nevertheless this one was somewhat interesting.

This question is:

"Do you think President Bush's plan to increase U.S. forces in Iraq will help bring a quicker resolution to the conflict?"

I was thinking about this, I ended up voting "no." But in honesty I think the answer is yes, but in the opposite direction that the President hopes. I think it will speed up the ending unfortunately because it will place more of our brave troops in harms way. The Iraqi security forces added 70,000 or so troops to Baghdad in late June. July became the largest month casualty-wise in Iraq. Why? Because they put some many people in harms way. And I fear this is what is going to happen now. So I'd like to vote yes, because I think that would be the straw that ends this war. But I couldn't in good conscience, because most people would interpret it the opposite way.

Regardless, it is nice to see the Democrats at least verbally applying some resistance to this new plan.

KDVS Broadcast

I wanted to thank Richard Estes and Ron Glick for having me on their show on KDVS "Speaking in Tongues." We had a great conversation mainly on the Junior High School harassment story, the Buzayan story, and the Khalid Berny story.

If you would like to hear that broadcast click on:

MP3 Stream (56kbps, dial up)
MP3 Stream (128kbps, dial up)

Make sure you select the top tab which should be for the January 5, 2007 broadcast.

Senior Citizens Commission Meeting

While I am not completely certain what this item is about, I was directed to the Senior Citizens Commission agenda.

Item D under new business reads: "Review and discuss information related to the Internet blog" Vanguard"

What they will be discussing, we shall find out.

---Doug Paul Davis reporting

Commentary: Some things are just not funny

I sat back last spring and watched as Bob Dunning savaged the Buzayan family. In fact, Bob Dunning did not just savage the Buzayan family, he savaged anyone who stood with the Buzayan family and anyone who stood up and defended the Buzayan family. And when he was done savaging the Buzayan family he wrote, “Time for some folks to give this case a rest.” Nevermind that he gets to write five columns a week. Nevermind he never gave it a rest when someone would say something or write something on the subject. He had the final word and he determined it was time to give this case a rest.

The thing that gets me is that as much as he can give it out with the best of them, but he cannot take it. You should see the email that he sent me after I criticized him for intentionally distorting his column on Councilmember Lamar Heystek.

It is within this context that I speak about his New Year’s Eve column where he talks about his predictions for the year 2007. I enjoy a political lampoon as much as the next guy, but it should be funny.

Are lawsuits funny? Is it funny that a 16-year-old girl was arrested by a police officer who then purportedly violated her constitutional rights?

Dunning writes, “Bay Area father-son-mother-daughter law firm of Lie, Lie, Lie and Lie files suit against city of Davis for having police cruisers capable of going faster than the cars of criminals.”

I wonder who Dunning is referring to? Bay area law firm? Lie? Could he be talking about Whitney Leigh? Clever Mr. Dunning but I see through your rouse.

Of course the subtext here is that the Bay Area Attorneys (Gonzalez and Leigh) are a bunch of liars who are filing a frivolous lawsuit.

While we are at it with lampooning lawsuits, Dunning writes:

“Best Uses of Schools task force recommends closing Valley Oak Elementary School when jury awards Republican third-grader $2.4 million after other students call her a “Gopper,” a slang term considered highly slanderous in Democratic Davis.”

I will give Dunning credit for throwing several different events into a single category, but it’s obviously hilariously funny to be making fun of a lawsuit filed by a junior high school student who was harassed because his fathers are gay. Yes, that is great fun.

I don’t want to be priggish here. But you know, perhaps certain things are not fair game to be lampooned in polite political discourse. Perhaps people’s lives deserve a little dignity—even if god forbid, we might not agree with everything that they did. The Buzayans are not public officials. The Fischers are not public officials. Perhaps the fact that they had to endure these events does not make them fair game for political satire?

Fischer Case

That provides me with a nice segue into the next topic of conversation. I watched last spring as the Davis Police Department and the District Attorney’s office worked to smear the reputation of the Buzayans. Tim Wallace and Clinton Parish are employees of the Yolo County District Attorney’s Office, they are Deputy District Attorneys, they get paid their salary by the taxpayers of Yolo County. Officer Pheng Ly is an employee of the Davis Police Department, he is employed by the City of Davis and gets his salary paid by the taxpayers of the city of Davis.

These public employees accused the Buzayan family of paying off Adrien Wonhof in order to avoid criminal prosecution. They did this on publicly accessible web pages. We’ve posted the quotes in the past. You can read the exchanges here.

I find it distasteful and outrageous that public employees can publicly smear people who are suing their employers.

Well folks, I’m now hearing from reliable sources now that the Davis Joint Unified School District is doing the same to Guy Fischer, who is suing the school district because of the harassment his son has received at Harper Junior High School and for their failure to protect his son’s safety and welfare when they are acting in loco parentis.

According to my source, they are accusing Mr. Fischer of suing the school district because he is broke and needs the money.

That does not even pass the smell test to me, why would you sue for only $100,000 if you were in it for the money. Given legal costs, that’s nothing and suing is a high risk endeavor. That just makes no sense. And it is not true.

Public agencies should not be engaging in smear campaigns against litigants, I’m sorry but that is completely unseemly in my opinion.

Finally some positive news

I put in an announcement last week, but I wanted to make a personal plug and appeal for this upcoming event. Max Harrington is the son of former Davis City Councilmember Mike Harrington. Max has been working with an organization in Myanmar that helps orphans.

On Saturday January 13, 2007 from 6 pm to 8:30 at the Palm Court Hotel right on the Corner of 3rd and D in Davis, there will be a benefit for the Myanmar Children’s Foundation.

All the proceeds will go directly to benefit 185 children of Myo Oo Orphanage in Myanmar.

Folks, the suggested donation is $10/ person. I would personally like to see each and every one of you who can afford to give $50 or $100. That’s pennies to most of us, but that can help to feed and clothe one of those children for a long time.

If you would like further information please contact Rita Montes-Martin at (530) 759-8434 or email her at rita@myanmarchildrensfoundation.org

---Doug Paul Davis reporting

Monday Briefs

Setting the facts straight about lawsuit against school district

There seems to be a great deal of misconceptions around the community dealing with the issue of a lawsuit filed against the School District by Mr. Guy Fischer because of the alleged failure by the district to deal with issues pertaining to the harassment of his son.

We discussed this briefly last week, but again in yesterday’s Davis Enterprise, Richard Hogan of Davis writes, “This lawsuit will have a direct impact on my purse. With a child attending school in the Davis school district, I will be required to compensate for the loss in funding…. I will pay in the end.”

The suggestion has been made that the district would pay out potentially the $100,000 that Mr. Fischer is suing for plus lawyer fees and that this would take money from the school district's budget that would otherwise go for learning and education. While I am still trying to get a hold of the school district (I think they are out for the winter break, so this may have to wait until January), my understanding is that most government agencies have an insurance pool for such cases. A number of entities will buy into the pool for insurance against such lawsuits. They may have to pay a deductible. However, the bulk of the costs are paid by the insurance pool and not directly from educational funds. So the direct effect of this lawsuit on Mr. Hogan’s child’s education is not going to be noticeable.

Mr. Hogan then closes his letter with: “This is what happens in a sue-happy world. Enough already!”

We all hate frivolous lawsuits, but with all due respect to Mr. Hogan and his opinions—how dare he judge the merits of Mr. Fischer’s case on the basis of a single article in a newspaper? We have a legal process where the facts will come out and a jury after hearing those facts will determine if Mr. Fischer and his son have been wronged and if they are entitled to compensation for their wrongs.

As suggested in last week’s blog, if people are so concerned about the district having to pay out money in lawsuits, perhaps they ought to take action and put pressure on the district to be more responsive when situations like these arise.

---Doug Paul Davis reporting

Second Family to File Suit Against School District

A second student has stepped forward and is alleging that he was harassed while at Harper Junior High School in Davis. The family is protecting their name in order to shield the student from the type of scrutiny that has befallen the Fischer family.

In a statement released by Attorney Bruce Nickerson who is also representing the Fischers:

"It's a case of anti-gay harassment. It's not based on parental orientation, but on the young man's perceived orientation."

The student is reportedly small and therefore perceived to be gay.

One of the students involved in the harassment of Zachary Fischer was involved in this incident. In fact, he was the student who harassed Fischer in the first incident and then upon Fischer's return to school which prompted the father to finally pull him out of school.

I find two other disturbing aspects about this incident.

The school district was informed about this incident after the eighth-grader was attacked by four students who threw him to the ground and robbed him of personal items. They beat him up badly enough that paramedics were called and medical attention was required.

The district supposedly then conducted an investigation but found no witnesses to the event. One must question how hard the district investigated because it turns out Zach Fischer witnessed the event and saw most of the incident. Yet he was never contacted by the district during the course of their investigation.

The family wants to protect their identity and the identity of their son. Information is difficult to obtain about this incident; however, the alarming aspect once again is not just that the incident itself occurred, which is alarming in itself, but the pattern that is emerging with the district not properly handling the incident in terms of their investigation and ability to prevent future incidents. The community needs to look long and hard about how they want government officials to respond to attacks that put students in need of medical attention. It seems to me that the system is currently failing to adequately protect our students.

The other day we mentioned a member of the public who wrote a letter to the Davis Enterprise complaining that the Fischer's $100,000 lawsuit would hurt other kids by taking away resources that would otherwise go to the classroom. I think if anything it will help other kids if it forces the school district to protect their safety.

---Doug Paul Davis reporting