CUSD Staff Responds to Grand Jury Report

The Orange County Grand Jury issued a report titled: "Dealing with Asbestos in Orange County Public Schools". In the report the Grand Jury made detailed recommendations to Orange County school districts to establish documented and transparent processes to comply fully with AHERA requirements, to establish disciplined contracting processes for safely removing asbestos and other hazardous materials, and to commit to plans to remove asbestos from all Orange County schools.

The Capistrano Unified School District was to submit a written response to the presiding judge no later than September 28, 2016.

"The District's practice for responding to Grand Jury requests is for Staff to respond on behalf of the Board, and then share the response with Trustees prior to the response deadline."

Staff responded to the Honorable Charles Margines in a written letter dated September 8, 2016.

According to Agenda Item, Staff shared the written response with Trustees on September 16, 2016.

There was no Board meeting on September 16, 2016. September Board meeting were on September 14, 2016 and September 28, 2016. The Grand Jury Report was not on either agenda.

In December, the Grand Jury contacted CUSD asking if the response was from the District's governing body.

This item was placed on the Consent Calendar and would have been approved without discussion if a member of the public had not pulled the Item.

I pulled the item, and expressed some, but not all of my concerns about Staff's response (due to a 3 minute time constraint).

In particular-

Staff's response to Recommendation #3:

CUSD in in violation of Federal Law:

2644(5) Public Availability

(5) Public availability A copy of the management plan developed under the regulations shall be available in the administrative offices of the local educational agency for inspection by the public, including teachers, other school personnel, and parents. The local educational agency shall notify parent, teacher, and employee organizations of the availability of such plan.

John Forney's response to the Grand Jury repeatedly states that the District provides copies of AHERA reports for public review at its Maintenance & Operations office and at individual school sites.

Staff's response to Recommendation #5:

Recommendation #5

Each school district should within 9 months of the publication of the publication of this Grand Jury report create a comprehensive baseline plan for school facilities construction including new construction, retirement of schools or buildings at schools, modernization, hazardous materials abatement, and major repairs. Each effort should include estimated cost, planned funding source and status, and schedule for the start and completion of work. This plan should be up-dated annually and should be posted on the district's web site. (F9, F10)

Response: This recommendation has been implemented. The District's current master facilities plan is a comprehensive baseline plan for the District's facilities projects. The District's master facilities plan is available on line at: http://capousd-ca.schooloop.com/MasterPlan

Comment Dawn Urbanek: Attached is an August 9th, 2016 letter from Frank Ury; Mayor, City of Mission Viejo and Tony Beall; Mayor, City of Rancho Santa Margarita regarding CUSD's proposed $889 million dollar school facilities bond stating... at page 4

"... (for example, the facility improvement plan on which the proposed Bond is predicated includes line items for millions of dollars allocated for specific improvement projects that have already been completed, and others for school sites that are in the process of being closed)."

Staff's response to Recommendation #6:

Recommendation #6

Each school district should within 9 months of the publication of the publication of this Grand Jury report create a plan, identifying funding sources, to remove all asbestos from schools and other facilities in their districts within 20 years or sooner and report progress on this plan annually at its board meetings. If the removal of asbestos would include removal of other hazardous materials as part of the same effort, the plan should describe this. (F1, F2, F10)

Response: This recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted or reasonable for the reasons discussed below. As the Grand Jury report notes, current EPA standards provide that encapsulated asbestos does not present an immediate hazard to people who come near it. Although the District recognizes that the removal of all asbestos from schools and other facilities should eventually be the goal, the District is faced with budget restraints which require that expenditures be constantly evaluated and prioritized accordingly. The District will make all reasonable efforts to remove all asbestos from its schools and other facilities as soon as possible, but cannot commit to a fixed twenty (20) year time line. Please not AHERA regulations do not require removal of all asbestos.

Comment Dawn Urbanek: CUSD has given employees four consecutive years of across the Board compensation increases totaling over $120 million dollars while choosing NOT to fix or maintain CUSD facilities.

Attached is an August 9th, 2016 letter from Frank Ury; Mayor, City of Mission Viejo and Tony Beall; Mayor, City of Rancho Santa Margarita regarding CUSD's proposed $889 million dollar school facilities bond stating... at page 2

"What is the level of asbestos proliferations throughout the district? Currently 23 sites have asbestos. How much has been addressed in the past 5 years? Per AHERA every site is inspected every six months and documented. Some roofs and floors have been addressed as needed. Very little has been removed in the last 5 years. How much remains? District has a complete list of asbestos in the AHERA books. [Note: The CUSD used asbestos removal as one if the needs/reasons to justify the 1999, $65 million bond- yet even though CUSD received the prior bond money, CUSD apparently failed to complete the promised asbestos abatement."]

We have schools in this District that are over 50 years old (San Clemente High School as an example is 51 years old). When a building has materials in them that are now over 50 years old, asbestos, even if it is encapsulated, will break down over time. The asbestos issues should have been fixed in 1999, when the District received initial bond funds for the stated purpose of asbestos removal. It has already been 20 years. CUSD should be forced to fix these issues immediately. If they refuse, then the public has no choice but to file a complaint with the Federal Government EPA. To wait another 20 years, given CUSD's budget priorities is unacceptable.

Trustees voted 6-0-1 (Trustee Hatton-Hodson absent) to ratify Staff's response to the Grand Jury.

The only recourse the public has; given the Boards ratification of Staff's response, is to report the following facts to the Grand Jury and ask for relief. This matter should also be reported to the Federal EPA. It is unconscionable that CUSD continues to disregard the health and safety of students by fixing and maintaing facilities in order to provide compensation increases to staff.

The following information has been forwarded to the Grand Jury and the District Attorney.

The September 8, 2016 letter from Staff to the Honorable Charles Margines

My comments, as a member of the public, to Staffs Response to the Grand Jury.

The August 9, 2016 letter from City Mayors, Frank Ury (City of Mission Viejo) and Tony Beall (City of Rancho Santa Margarita)

The attachments can be seen at: http://cusdwatch.com/index.php...