Backtracking on the Wrong Horse: Team Unruly's Rapid Response to the Information Minister's Dear John Letter to Esperanza Zendejas

Godspeed, John Fensterwald. Write when you find work.

On Wednesday July 6, the San Jose Mercury News published their editorial on Esperanza Zendejas’ resignation from the East Side Union High School District. Unlike previous editorials that sang Zendejas’ praises from the flatlands of Alviso to the top of Mt. Hamilton, this one had a decidedly different tone. Sure, the editorial writer, John Fensterwald, argues that Zendejas “should have been given more time to work on the district's problems,” but for the first time in two years he notes that while he and the editorial board “grew to admire and respect her,” he admits that he “too became aware of her faults.”

This editorial does not share the “love letter” quality that previous full-page Zendejas articles demonstrated. There is no “tough love, tough year” headlines for the woman he once labeled “the gutsy educator.” This is a Dear John letter, a severing of the blanket support thrown Zendejas’ way since she first came to the East Side Union High School District and established a Mercury News connection with Fensterwald. It’s also the closest the Mercury News will ever get to admitting that they mistakenly backed the wrong horse.

And because it came from the Mercury News, it is full of inconsistencies and factual errors that require the nimble-fingered semi-rapid response from Team Unruly.

The Mercury News has just figured out that in order to say “this article will be available for a limited time” they actually have to make the article “available for a limited time.” There are two parts to this article: the main text and a sidebar chronology of what is now officially called “the Zendejas era.” We will comment on the sidebar in another article (See “Chronicle of a Death Untold”). The full text of the main article follows:

Zendejas deserved better fate

SUPERINTENDENT WAS ABRUPT BUT SHE TRIED TO TACKLE DISTRICT'S PROBLEMS

Mercury News Editorial

In June 2004, trustees of the East Side Union High School District gave Superintendent Esperanza Zendejas a good review and extended her contract through July 2007.

Last week, they forced her to quit.

What happened in the past year reflects how severe the problems are in the 24,000-student district -- and how badly the district needs a strong manager and a consensus builder.

Zendejas probably deserved a bad review for 2005. But she should have been given more time to work on the district's problems. Instead, buffeted by complaints and distressed by staff morale, trustees determined it was too late for a second chance. She bears some blame for that.

In her two years with the district, Zendejas exposed and started to fix the district's dissolute finances and $200 million budget. She made massive changes in leadership -- for the most part, long needed. She scaled back and cleaned out a badly run district office.

Initiatives left unfinished

Now, it will be left to someone else -- after an interim superintendent takes over for probably a year -- to finish what she started. If her successor can establish the trust Zendejas failed to build, the district, the largest high school district in Northern California, will be better off.

Zendejas faced a series of crises from her first day to her last. She handled them bluntly and directly. Sometimes, though, she handled them poorly.

The biggest disaster -- and turning point -- happened in March, when the district mailed more than 900 preliminary layoff notices, mostly to certified teachers. That was more than five times the maximum number of possible positions the board had authorized cutting, and was clearly overkill. Zendejas said she was following legal advice, because district personnel files, listing teachers' credentials, were in disarray. But it wasn't just the number of notices. It was the manner in which they were handled -- legalistically and formally, without an expression of regret or empathy for the disruption to people's lives.

Even though most teachers' jobs were never in danger, the effect was devastating. Teachers who hadn't paid much attention to district politics joined the side of activists who had disliked her from the start.

At the board meeting following the layoff notices, she sat stoically, while teachers and other employees upbraided her and the trustees; some signs called for her ouster.

The daughter of a migrant farm worker, Zendejas had courage and a fervent desire to raise the aspirations and achievement of East San Jose children, especially those who, like her, faced poverty and language barriers. But the pink-slip fiasco showed that Zendejas also had a tin ear to trouble. She proved a surprisingly poor communicator who failed to rally others behind her.

Active but not persuasive

Trustees hired her because they wanted someone very different from her predecessor, Joe Coto. She proved to be his diametric opposite, to a fault. Coto, an amicable man who let problems build, was mostly talk, little action. Zendejas was a lot of action, not enough persuasion.

Perhaps she was destined to be a short-timer. Upon arriving, she was handed an independent audit that showed mismanagement in the district office. She was forced to confront her bosses, the trustees, over credit card spending. She was plunged into a budget morass that Coto had disguised.

But in addition to the layoff notices, she launched a plan for common student dress without anticipating the reaction. It blew up in her face. She demoted administrators at low-performing high schools and made some good hires. But the way she did it, with a series of abrupt mid-year of moves -- appeared rash and autocratic.

Employees who are constantly worried about their jobs are neither loyal nor open. There was no give and take at principals' meetings, we are told. Zendejas spoke; they listened.

We have covered East Side Union extensively during Zendejas' tenure. We grew to admire and respect her. Over time, we too became aware of her faults.

East Side Union trustees hired Zendejas to make big reforms. The collateral damage got her in the end."

(Read it for a limited time here: )

About six months into Zendejas’ term, the Mercury News published the first of many pro-Zendejas editorials, in diametric opposition to the majority negative opinion of her leadership taking root throughout the district. A group of employees at a couple of schools contacted Fensterwald to protest, but their complaints fell on deaf ears. Eventually, people got tired of the pro-Zendejas spin. When this website started, Team Unruly dubbed Fensterwald the ESUHSD Information Minister. Unlike those folks who cry media bias foul every time a story they do not like appears in the paper, our nickname had a pragmatic purpose. The Unruly Advocate learned from media insiders that superintendent Zendejas and trustee Craig Mann were feeding stories to local reporters, at both mainstream and alternative media outlets. Of all the reporters in Zendejas and Mann’s email address book, it was Fensterwald who became their strongest ally. He often reported what they told him without question, which is why he admits the Mercury News has “covered East Side Union extensively during Zendejas’ tenure.” They spent a lot of time covering East Side because they didn’t have to ferret out information from a tight-lipped administration; the quid pro quo of this unholy alliance never made investigating facts a high priority.

So what caused the change in Fensterwald’s perspective? Even though he still appears ready to support Zendejas’ blanket-termed but never defined “reform” agenda, something about her “faults” made him realize the severity of the grave errors in his judgment. There is also the strong possibility that he is taking a cue from trustee Mann and the other board members who negotiated a “resignation” instead of a “buyout” in order to minimize the political damage. The trustees stand to lose reelection or higher office. Fensterwald and the Mercury News pay their price by losing journalistic credibility.

That price was paid when Fensterwald decided to make the employee unions the focus of his attacks, often at the behest of Mann. After a year of attacking the unions for not doing their share to address the East Side’s budget crisis, they made the concessions he wanted—after the unions were given the time to verify that the budget crisis was real and not a pre-bargaining year snow job. The fact that the employee unions had to spend so much time trying to verify the numbers testifies to the depth of mistrust between district administrators and employees that will forever characterize the Zendejas era. It only took 965 pink slips to convince Fensterwald that the argument against Zendejas might have some merit.

Fensterwald opens the article noting that the trustees extended Zendejas’ contract at the end of her first year, implying that they thought she was doing an excellent job. He fails to note—most likely because he does not know the complete story—that when Zendejas was considered for the job, the first closed session vote was 3-2. The two ?against? votes—George Shirakawa, Jr. and J. Manuel Herrera, changed in order to publicly demonstrate unilateral support from the trustees. But that support was not wholeheartedly there from the beginning. He also fails to note that the balance of power on the board heavily favored Zendejas, thanks to the support of former trustee Juanita Ramirez. The extension of Zendejas’ contract at the end of her first year outraged those in the rank and file who bore witness to Zendejas’ ?faults.? Shirakawa and Herrera even then noted that some problems were brewing. They saw a number of administrators leave the district. Then there was the question of former deputy superintendent Bill Kugler’s unprofessional dismissal. Even the normally even-keeled Herrera felt guilty and shamed enough to apologize to the ESUHSD staff over the incident (read the text of his email here: )

Could the sentence that follows, “Last week, they forced her to quit,” be another example of the pipeline between some of the trustees and a certain member of the Mercury News editorial board? Luis Zaragoza, the Mercury News education editor who wrote the first article on Zendejas’ resignation, called it a “surprise.” Local television station NBC 11 called it “sudden.” Fensterwald’s mundane acknowledgement that she was “forced to quit” is not the same as showing shock over news of her departure. While it is easy to connect the dots to complete a forced resignation picture, the lax nature of the Mercury News’ investigative journalism leaves little room for doubt that the information minister was given advanced notice to prepare for her departure.

The Info Minister claims Zendejas “bears some of the blame” for the forced resignation, but contradicts his point by saying she “Should have been given more time to work on the district's problems.” If she caused problems, and “bears some of the blame”, why on Earth should she be given more time to work on the district’s problems? Hasn’t she proven that she is incapable of solving problems? That’s why the district needs both “a strong manager and a consensus builder.” Zendejas is neither.

Fensterwald credits Zendejas for “ [exposing] and [starting] to fix the district's dissolute finances and $200 million budget. She made massive changes in leadership -- for the most part, long needed. She scaled back and cleaned out a badly run district office.” The phrase “for the most part” saves his opinion. If there is one constant in Zendejas’ totalitarian approach to governance, she drove good and bad administrators out the door. Team Unruly would argue that the good who left outweighed the bad who remained for her second year. And while she scaled back the district office, she also managed to drive out all the people with long-term knowledge of the district’s history—and those who knew the problematic depth of the district’s bureaucracy.

And when it comes to fixing the budget, had she been open about the budget process from the get go, she might not have decimated the level of trust between district management and employees. She did nothing to bring money into the district: instead, she turned the district’s grant writer into a straw man in her attempt to assist a couple of trustees in vilifying former superintendent Joe Coto, costing the district 3 to 5 million a year in the process—on top of the undisclosed settlement from the resultant lawsuit (read “Pending Litigation” here: ). Her style continues to cloud the severity of the budget crisis, and her employment history demonstrates a pattern of carrying out “slash and burn” orders from a board all too willing to clean its house (read “The Manufactured Crisis” here: ). And if you want a fine example of how she tried to cover up budget matters to protect her malefactor ally on the ESUHSD board, take a look at the final paragraphs of this article from the Hollister Free Lance: ).

The Information Minister claims her successor will complete the reforms she started, but again, leaves out the details of what reforms she championed. But the statement that follows is the most accurate statement to ever come out of the Mercury News: “If her successor can establish the trust Zendejas failed to build, the district, the largest high school district in Northern California, will be better off.” This matter of trust is significant. It will take time to heal the wounds Zendejas opened because she “handled them bluntly [. . . ] and poorly.”

What turned the tide of opinion at the Mercury News? “The biggest disaster -- and turning point -- happened in March, when the district mailed more than 900 preliminary layoff notices, mostly to certified teachers.” Or, another way to describe the event: the largest unnecessary layoff in the history of California public education. On March 15, the day that district’s are legally bound to layoff teachers, various broadcast media noted that over 3000 teachers statewide were let go. ESUHSD was responsible for a third of that figure. After a month of trying to figure out an actual total, the final 965 number represented a layoff of about 80% of the district workforce. In Fensterwald’s words, That was more than five times the maximum number of possible positions the board had authorized cutting, and was clearly overkill.” Zendejas tried to blame the necessity of the layoff on Coto, which Fensterwald seems to want to believe. But his “turning point” shows when he finally acknowledges the despotic disposition of the district’s departing dictator, informing readers “It was the manner in which [the pink slips] were handled -- legalistically and formally, without an expression of regret or empathy for the disruption to people's lives.” It was this single event that forced Fensterwald to reach the similar conclusions his op-ed colleagues in Brownsville and Indianapolis reached: “Zendejas also had a tin ear to trouble. She proved a surprisingly poor communicator who failed to rally others behind her.”

Old habits do die hard at the Mercury News, however. Fensterwald still holds onto the misconception that Coto is largely to blame for the district’s woes. He notes that “[Zendejas] proved to be his diametric opposite, to a fault. Coto, an amicable man who let problems build, was mostly talk, little action. Zendejas was a lot of action, not enough persuasion.” The Merc is, as always, heavy on supposition and short on evidence. Did Coto let problems build? No more than any other superintendent in California. That is why, as reported this week, one third of the school districts in California are facing budget shortfalls within the next two years (read the Mercury’s take on the news for a limited time here: ). For a man who was mostly talk, here’s a short list of his “little actions”: ROTC programs at nearly every campus, specialized magnet programs tailored to specific student interests, increased soft money revenues to support district programs, across the board declines in expulsions and drop out rates, technology implementation and infrastructure to all schools. In the past Fensterwald attributed James Lick’s declining API scores to Coto’s inaction, but he also failed to attribute Andrew Hill and Yerba Buena’s meteoric API successes to reforms began during Coto’s watch. As we have noted a number of times in articles on this site, Coto was not without his faults (see “Coto Cronyism” here: ) But to blame Coto and lionize Zendejas for the budget crisis is specious (read this early editorial here: ) Other stories dealing with Zendejas’ departure claim Andrew Hill’s move to become a charter school was in direct response to Zendejas’ “actions,” not just her inability to persuade. What specific positive actions can Fensterwald point to that Zendejas initiated? We compiled a good short list of accomplishments back in January when we compared Zendejas to San Diego’s autocrat Alan Bersin (read it here: ). Besides the generic statements about increasing student achievement and ensuring we all work harder to help disadvantaged students, the evidence shows Zendejas did much more damage than good for the ESUHSD.

Attributing her demise in part to the now-infamous credit card scandal, saying “She was forced to confront her bosses, the trustees, over credit card spending” is also a specious claim, given the high drama, cover-up and board member reaction that took place after the scandal was publicized. Mann, who was implemented the most by the scandal, quickly became Zendejas’ staunchest defender, even though some speculated that the credit card indiscretions she exposed caused him to lose his job with former councilmember Terry Gregory. (Read here: ). Roach and Mann eventually gave a whole new meaning to histrionics when they publicly cut up their credit cards at a board meeting. And whenever the opportunity arose, Mann took it upon himself to attack teachers who he wound up blaming for protracting the scandal (read the latest example here: ) And in case you missed the link above, there’s not much confrontation in forgoing integrity to cover up the depth of Mann’s credit card problems by suppressing the audit so he could win reelection to the board (read it again here: ). There are lots of possible reasons for Mann’s screwy alliance with Zendejas. The strongest argument is Mann’s self-aggrandizing narcissistic tendencies. His political vindictiveness seems to have led him to conclude he’d get more mileage out of using Zendejas to vilify Coto.

And let’s not forget about the administrative shuffle. Festerwald defends Zendejas for “[demoting] administrators at low-performing high schools and [making] some good hires,” only to acknowledge that “the way she did it, with a series of abrupt mid-year of moves -- appeared rash and autocratic.” Had the Mercury done any sort of investigative work, they would have discovered that this pattern of autocratic management contributed to her demise in Indianapolis (read the criticism against Zendejas in this Indianapolis Star article: ) and Brownsville (read the last two paragraphs of this article from the Brownsville Herald here: ) He is right though, that the mid-year moves appeared “rash and autocratic.” That conclusion about her style has now been reached in three different school districts in three different states. But he’s wrong about making “good hires”. One significant factor in Zendejas’ forced resignation was the administrative exodus from East Side. After a year of totalitarian rule, up and coming administrators were refusing to apply for jobs (read “Don’t Pee in our Job Pool” here: ), while others decided to seek employment in places where morale matters (read the June “Did you Know?” here: ) If there was one crisis the board could readily see, it was the abundance of administrative resignations and early retirements, not to mention lawsuits, adorning their closed session agendas. By noting the conventional wisdom about employee and management relations that “Employees who are constantly worried about their jobs are neither loyal nor open,” Fensterwald is able to draw a conclusion about the effect of Zendejas’ dictatorial style. He is correct in pointing out “There was no give and take at principals' meetings, we are told. Zendejas spoke; they listened.” He just fails to reach the logical conclusion about the end result of this behavior: people don’t like working for bullies.

Morale matters. Teachers, parents, students and community members have been trying to alert the Mercury News editorial board about this problem for two years. That is why, “Over time, [The Mercury News Editorial Board] too became aware of her faults.” And even though he merely ascribes Zendejas’ failures to the “collateral damage” of her amorphous reform implementation, the fact that Fensterwald notes the district needs a “consensus builder” to restore employee morale is a significant change in the Merc’s opinion. The "union radicals" were right all along; the management crisis was severe.

At last, John Fensterwald finally gets it.