Still wondering how the Mercury News could endorse a school board candidate whose scandalous political behavior would make Nixon blush (read this: [1] and you might as well read this: [2] and while you’re at it read this: [3] and oh go ahead and read this too: [4] and you might as well read the recap that showed up Friday morning [5] Having read this site, are you curious as to why anyone would endorse a school board candidate who tried to run over a political rival? If you haven’t read this story yet, it’s long, it’s worth it, and it’s straight from the Mercury News archives: [6]

Want someone to blame? Look no further than the San Jose Mercury News’ John Fensterwald. You see, contrary to the common perception that an editorial reflects the views of a news organization’s entire editorial board, the Mercury assigns their op-ed writers specific local government and community agencies to cover. Those places become that particular op-ed person’s domain. East Side’s designated editorialist happens to be Fensterwald (the Merc never mentions the author of any editorial by name, creating the illusion that each op-ed article is the fruit borne of thoughtful editorial board discussions and debates. Although Team Unruly knows the inside scoop about the district’s go-to guy, the Merc did offer an introduction to an on-going series about James Lick that publicly establishes the Fensterwald/East Side connection, which you can read here: [7]

Fensterwald is directly responsible for two glowing, full page editorials glorifying East Side’s superintendent Dr. Esperanza Zendejas, as well as a couple of other flattering laudatory blurbs, all of which graced the back of the Valley section over a mere six month period. Enraged by his first editorial’s implication that the only people who didn’t like Zendejas were Coto loyalists “with old-boy connections” (which you can read here: [8]), small groups of teachers from a few schools filled Fensterwald’s voicemail, stating that they were not fond of Coto but had no confidence in Dr. Zendejas’ leadership. He ignored the concerns, later opining in his second full page editorial that these types of complaints came from “union activists” whom he feels need to “tone down their rhetoric” (read it here: [9])

Truth be told, John Fensterwald doesn’t have to report facts. He is an editorial writer; his job is to offer opinions based on his impressions and personal views. And in this age of infotainment, opinions are often interpreted as fact, fueled by the overwhelming volume of editorial commentary that increasingly dominates the corporate media. If one accepts the truism that the general public mistakenly accepts opinions as fact, a good editorial writer will adhere to the journalistic ethic of substantiating claims with hard evidence. For example, Team Unruly could argue that the Mercury News’ editorial board is decidedly anti-union, which might be one reason why Fensterwald supports Dr. Zendejas, Craig Mann, and Juanita Ramirez. That is unsubstantiated opinion. But you could read the opinion offered in this article: [10] and stories about the Merc’s treatment of their own employees in “People Before Profits” here: [11] and “Rewriting the Story” here: [12] as well as the way the Mercury distorts statistics that directly impact the public’s perception of union issues, like affordable teacher housing, here: [13] and, guess what? You still have an opinion. But the evidence, like the silken thread a skilled tailor hand-weaves into a fine garment, validates that opinion, casting the argument in a more persuasive light to a discerning eye.

Fensterwald spins deceptive and transparent yarns like the scheming tailor who sews the emperor’s new clothes. He does so in unabashed support of a superintendent whom he tersely concedes is viewed as “remote and autocratic” by some (full-page editorial #2). In many ways his brazen support for Zendejas was the impetus for Team Unruly to create this website. Fearing retribution, teachers from schools across the ESUHSD anonymously contacted the Mercury to alert them of the ESUHSD’s board and administrative problems. Employees lamented that morale throughout the district had reached an all-time low. The Mercury’s attempt to shed light on the controversy, in an article by Joelle Tessler, only managed to further glorify Zendejas, labeling her as an “inspirational person” while balancing the criticisms of her “few detractors” with lengthier praiseworthy comments from “plenty of others who insist Zendejas is ushering in a new era of accountability” (you be the judge: [14] ) It appeared to district employees of all stripes that the Mercury would never seriously investigate their complaints. How could they? The Mercury routinely conducted the bulk of their investigative journalism by obtaining information from the superintendent, her cabinet, and the board of trustees. What’s worse, with an unchallenged forum to print opinions and control the information they want to let the public know, the Mercury could influence and distort public perception about the district’s leadership however they wanted.

Good journalistic practice demands a writer question authority by challenging those in positions of power. A Minister of Information succumbs to authority, happy to paint the picture the autocrat wants the public to see. As the assigned East Side information minister from the Mercury Information Ministry, Fensterwald promotes the party line using two of the tried and true techniques for disseminating false information: leave it vague or leave it out.

In the vague category, Fensterwald uses terms like “Gustsy Educator,” “bold changes,” “high expectations.” and “ambitious agenda” to characterize what he feels are Zendejas’ strengths. For example, in his second full-page editorial, Fensterwald quotes one of Zendejas’ favorite lines to introduce her bold and ambitious curricular initiatives: “’I WILL NOT TOLERATE MEDIOCRE RESULTS' Superintendent Esperanza Zendejas wants to raise expectations and performance levels in every East Side Union school.” Team Unruly wonders if there is a school superintendent anywhere that doesn’t share those goals. Fensterwald implies that these expectations make Zendejas unique.

Teachers have a term for redundant, overused political phrases that keep popping out of the mouths of educational leaders: “edu-ese.” If Zendejas is the only superintendent with a bold agenda of remediating unprepared ninth graders and expanding AP offerings, then she must be running this North Carolina school district: [15] while finding the time to head up this educational think-tank: [16] . Either that, or Fensterwald isn’t fluent in edu-ese.

Fensterwald’s other point regarding holding principals accountable for test scores and attendance sounds great, but lacks an important, specific follow-up worthy of mention. His example points to changes made at Lick and Evergreen, which is followed by more adverbial praise: “she moved decisively, changing principals without notice at mid-year.” There were many other moves made last year, especially at the district level, in order to rid the district of Coto’s presence. One district administrator was demoted to a site administrative position. While administrators have no union protections, they do have a contractual rule that says their job description cannot change mid-year. That particular administrator retired and is now suing the district for violating his contract, an unnecessary budget expense caused by “decisively” ignoring the fine print of a negotiated contract.

As mentioned, Fensterwald attempts to be balance his article by briefly alluding to “a perception among some teachers and community leaders that she is remote and autocratic.” Click here [17] to read how she humiliated one of these transferred administrators at a district meeting last January.

Fensterwald has also been quick to praise Zendejas’ fiscal management. He implies Coto is primarily responsible for the district’s financial problems, but never casts aspersions at the board of trustees — the very people with the power of the purse who approve those expenditures. “It may not be politic, but Zendejas has put the education of children ahead of all other interests,” he writes, without ever mentioning the “personal interests” Zendejas has managed to secure from the “blank check” school board for herself: a renegotiated contract with an additional 50k added to the initial 175k (making her the highest paid superintendent in Santa Clara county), a 400k home loan at 2% interest that allowed her to not only purchase a home in a gated Evergreen Valley community but a second rental property a few short months later, and the unnecessary monthly expense for a radio and television show. Recognizing the hypocrisy of complaining about unnecessary expenditures in light of these expenses, the board squelched this “media fund” in the spring, but lo and behold a community member sent us this e-mail after checking the approved expenditures for September 2004, which you can read here: [18]

Anecdotal stories about harassing statements and questionable district expenditures made in support of a newspaper’s favored superintendent may not be all the news that’s fit to print, but there are egregious lapses in the Mercury’s editorial “commentary as news”, issues that should have been investigated, reported, and presented to the public. Fensterwald chooses to leave out this vital information because, as stated in the endorsement of Mann and Ramirez, “Electing trustees who fully support and defend [Zendejas] is, in our mind, the overriding issue in the election.” Any story that might place doubt in the Merc’s east side readership about Zendejas and the ESUHSD board of trustees can damage the Merc’s authority and credibility.

For example, Fensterwald’s first editorial mentions, “At the direction of the board, [Zendejas] has steered [budget] cuts away from the classroom and has chosen not to close any schools. But because 80 percent of district dollars go to salaries and benefits, the cuts primarily will be in personnel: in positions like janitors and secretaries.” He fails to mention the district’s attempt to cut student advisors from the school sites - hardly a cut away from the classroom. Student advisors are the people in the front office whose primary job is to keep campuses safe. They are credentialed teachers who meet daily with parole officers, police officers, social workers, psychologists, and parents, as well as process all of the referrals that get sent to the office. They are the front line that keeps East Side schools safe. Team Unruly knows Craig Mann in particular, with the support of his board colleagues like Ramirez, were pushing to create a “fourth administrator” in order to eliminate one of the positions. It was a bait and switch tactic that failed. Of course, that didn’t stop the board or Zendejas for taking credit for “saving” the position.

Who actually saved these positions? Teachers from around the district sent “all user” e-mails in support of school advisors. So many of these letters started going around that some members of the board and Zendejas moved to eliminate “all user” e-mails (read about Oak Grove’s e-mail frustrations here: [19]). This uproar was perhaps the first hint of a divide on the school board. Team Unruly learned that during the closed session prior to a public board meeting, one of the board members defended the teachers’ right to all user e-mail access, prompting Craig Mann to sarcastically question this dissenter’s advocacy for free speech.

Another curiously ignored story was the attempt to “pocket veto” international work visas for a large group of math teachers in order to replace them with “Zendejas-approved” teachers from Mexico and south Texas. In order to fill a drastic void in qualified math instructors three years ago, Coto and other district representatives traveled to the Philippines and other international locales to hire a cadre of math teachers. The district invested heavily in training these teachers to meet California’s credentialing requirements as well as providing assistance with work visas, housing, and other transitional needs. A couple of those teachers did not survive past the first year, but the rest were successful and on their way to becoming tenured. All of their work visas were due to expire at the start of 2004. After only two months in the district, Zendejas and a board member traveled to Mexico and south Texas to recruit bilingual math teachers. At the same time the district did not move on renewing the Filipino teachers’ work visas. Teachers started to raise questions - the coincidence was too disturbing. That winter, Zendejas met with the Filipino teachers, a union rep and a lawyer to discuss their status. In that meeting, Dr. Zendejas expressed some concerns she claimed she received from parents. One of the concerns was she received complaints about people’s accents. The teachers were furious, but they didn’t know where to turn.

The issue erupted further at an Andrew Hill focus group meeting with Board President Juanita Ramirez. Concerned math teachers raised the issue with Ramirez, who purportedly reiterated the superintendent’s concern about “accents”. Sources say one teacher asked the obvious question: wouldn’t the new teachers from Mexico have accents too? Ramirez smirked, but said nothing. The primary controversy about whether or not the Filipino teachers were being replaced by teachers from Mexico also remained unanswered by Ramirez (read the whole story here: [20] )

At the May board meeting East Side’s employees had had enough. Not only had advisors been threatened with pink slips, a last-minute “April Surprise” demonstrated how close to the classroom the board and Zendejas were willing to go. Librarians, career center technicians, school psychologists, and special education support staff were all on the chopping block. Word hit the district that the classified union was planning a march, and that teachers and students were teaming up. Zendejas quietly told the district’s librarian coordinator that librarians were reinstated for 2004-05 in the hopes of squelching the march.

It didn’t work.

The board room was filled with teachers, students, and other employees who spoke passionately about a variety of these issues for over an hour. But the dominant issue was the deportment of Filipino teachers. Leaders from the Filipino community came to admonish Ramirez for her comment about accents. Since this was the public response part of the forum, Ramirez was forced to listen as these community members demanded an investigation. Ramirez was stunned, specifically because she didn’t know where the information came from or quite possibly when she made the statement. That is, until one of those community members singled out the Andrew Hill meeting. At that point, in a violation of the Brown Act, Ramirez stood up and started yelling, telling the Filipino community members that she would never say such a thing, declaring that she was not a racist, complaining that she would have expected these particular community members to have met with her first, promising she would launch an investigation, and, while staring at a group of teachers, ending with a promise “to never meet with teachers again!”

At the last board meeting of the year, the board, Zendejas, and her cabinet decided to keep librarians and career center technicians. The Filipino community members who spoke out at the May meeting returned and apologized to Ramirez. The board promised that the district would work immediately to resolve any work visa issues regarding these teachers. Fensterwald attended that meeting, and wrote a short blurb praising Zendejas for “wisely [listening] to students and parents” in reinstating the librarians and career center technicians. He never mentioned the Filipino teacher issue. Read the entire article here: [21]

In September, Zendejas held her first teacher meeting of the year. She told the assembled group that some of the Filipino teachers were going to be deported. Then she blamed the Filipino government. Read about it here: [22]

In both his most recent editorial and his endorsement of Mann and Ramirez (which you can read here if you must: [23] ), Fensterwald alludes to a division on the board but offers no explanation as to the cause. In the editorial he says “some trustees are squabbling in public, putting [Zendejas] uncomfortably in the middle.” In the endorsement, he states Ramirez is “at a loss over how to keep scrapping board members in line.” What exactly are these people fighting about? The May board meeting fiasco sent a disturbing message to the other three board members: employees and the public were angry. They were angry about bad policies. They did not like the “top-down” management style. They were mad about credit cards, home loans, and exorbitant administrative salaries. In light of it all, they kept hearing about health care increases and salary reductions. They heard cuts would come to successful programs that teachers had invested years of hard work to implement. They heard the district had hired an “energy manager” who got paid a six-figure salary to send e-mails that reminded people to “turn off the lights.” Ultimately, they were tired of being ignored.

The first “squabble” was another “April surprise.” Zendejas reviewed the collective bargaining agreement and found a clause she thought she could invoke to save the district a little cash. She declared the district faced “extraordinary financial circumstances” and moved to suspend class size limits. These limits, generally set at 30 students to one teacher, require the district to ensure they have enough qualified teachers so that students are not forced to learn in overcrowded, unmanaged classrooms. Fensterwald’s first editorial mentions that Zendejas planned to save money “by raising class sizes by a couple of students.” He didn’t bother to tell his readers that the “couple of students” he mentioned was a change to the staffing ratio, a formula used to determine how many teachers need to be allocated to a school site, not just an extra two students per class. He also didn’t mention that Coto made a similar move the year before, or how he went to all of the schools to be up front about the change in an effort to build consensus with teachers. The original formula was 26 to 1, which, after taking in the special need of some departments, like special education and English language development, left most classes hovering near 27 students. Coto raised the formula to 28 to 1, which packed classes to right at or just above 32 students: the maximum contract limit. Zendejas’ proposal was a violation of the collective bargaining agreement that would prove disastrous if implemented. As a kindergarten teacher in the Franklin-McKinley school district, board member Patricia Martinez-Roach understood the impact this proposal would have on the district’s students. She didn’t feel this was a cut far removed from the classroom. In a bold and compassionate move, Roach refused to sign on to the 2004-05 budget.The motion passed, and employee predictions proved accurate. The opening of school saw class sizes explode, with some campus’ reporting individual classes of nearly 50 students. Realizing it was probably not a good idea to make parents angry in a school board election year, the board reversed their class size decision and authorized the hiring of new teachers in order to open new sections. But summer was over and the job pool had shrunk considerably. Finding quality teachers to fill these vacancies was a tall order. Problems persisted for weeks. ESTA filed and won a grievance against the district, but word on the street is some schools, like Independence still have unresolved scheduling issues. The Metro had a short blurb on this debacle, which you can read in “Expanding and Contracting” here: [24]

Class size wasn’t the only contentious issue dividing the board of trustees. Prior to the infamous final board meeting of the year, then-deputy superintendent Bill Kugler came to work and early that afternoon found out that he had become a grandfather. A short while later, two of his administrative colleagues entered his office to escort him from the building. Kugler had submitted a letter of resignation to the board; he intended to depart at the end of August. The anti-Coto league decided to move against Kugler in order to remove the final Coto appointee from their midst. While the board technically violated no laws, they did a severe injustice to a man who dedicated nearly 40 years of his life to serving the ESUHSD. There was no formal goodbye, nor an acknowledgement of his years of service by any board member that night. Instead, Kugler had to have his attorney negotiate terms inside his now-former office with the district’s legal counsel while the board continued patting each other on the back for changing their decision to not cut librarians.

The next day word spread to teachers in their summer school classes. A couple of angry “all-user” e-mails were sent. Unlike Coto, Kugler had earned everyone’s respect. He was not part of the “old boy network” Fensterwald describes in his first pro-Zendejas editorial. He was the union’s choice to replace Coto, not only because he had a proven record of success as a site principal at two East Side schools; he understood from his experience in the classroom, in the principal’s office, and as a district administrator what needed to be fixed and how to do it. He had made at least one enemy at the district, though: Craig Mann. The short story is as a principal Kugler once had to reprimand Mann for his child’s inappropriate behavior. Mann felt insulted. Even more, Mann had convinced himself that Coto was a bad seed. He zealously anticipated the day Coto left so that he could reform the district as he saw fit. Kugler was appointed by Coto, one of the only appointments Coto made that teachers uniformly supported. For those reasons, Mann felt he had to go.

It should be apparent to readers by now that Craig Mann has a serious lack of integrity. He also seemingly has no regard for loyalty or employee morale. Neither does Ramirez. Still stinging from the racism charge she entangled herself in, Ramirez associated Kugler with the radical teachers whom she blamed for disrupting the contentious May board meeting; she fully supported the decision to immediately oust the popular administrator.

But they both forgot about the deep respect students develop for inspirational teachers.

Before noon on the day following this board meeting, J. Manuel Herrera sent a public apology to all teachers for Kugler’s disgraceful treatment by the board of trustees. He went on to describe in detail Kugler’s distinguished career, noting that he was personally fortunate to have had Mr. Kugler as an English teacher in the late 1960’s. The letter was a genuinely heartfelt tribute to a respected mentor. It was also a harsh condemnation of Ramirez, Mann and Zendejas’ behavior. You can read it in its entirety here: [25]

The following week Zendejas forwarded an official e-mail from Board President Ramirez. The terse e-mail emphasized that Kugler submitted a letter of resignation and the board honored the remaining details of his contract. One part of the e-mail quotes this legalese from an attorney’s statement that Ramirez believed would pacify the angry masses: “I wanted to emphasize that Mr. Kugler and the District have expressly stated their mutual desire ‘to amicably resolve any and all disputes between them, without malice or ill will towards each other.’” A one-sentence wish of “good luck” closed the e-mail, an insult to a long and dedicated East Side career.

The damage was done. The district and Kugler might have “amicably resolved” their dispute, but district employees remain angry over the incident. It seems Herrera does too.

All Fensterwald felt obligated to tell the public about that meeting was how the board acted “wisely” in reinstating career center technicians and librarians. Perhaps he, like Mann and Ramirez, held a grudge that he didn’t get a chance to find out the juicy details to run in the next day’s paper. You see, Fensterwald was at that board meeting. Shortly after Kugler entered the office with his attorney, Fensterwald tried to enter the office to find out what was going on. Kugler and his attorney told him in not so many polite words to take a flying leap.

Fensterwald is just as entitled to his opinions as we at Team Unruly are. He just has a much broader means of reaching an audience than we do. We feel we’ve amply demonstrated that evidence exists to contradict every opinion he offers. There are many issues we haven’t covered - yet. Bringing all special education students in small county schools back into the district and then severely cutting support staff from an already out of compliance special education program comes immediately to mind. But the issue isn’t just about Fensterwald’s misguided opinions. We’ve dubbed him the Minister of Information because he has an open and direct line of communication with the superintendent, her cabinet, and the board of trustees. For example, on September 1st Fensterwald congratulated all East Side schools for increasing their API scores. Of course, while acknowledging it isn’t very prudent to give credit to any one group, Fensterwald goes on to credit Art Darin, the district’s chief academic officer, and Esperanza Zendejas for supporting a remedial summer program that has been in the district for about six years. What’s more disturbing is the timing of the article. Fensterwald published the editorial on September 1; most teachers and some site administrators found out about the test score increases from the Mercury. Such is the power of an information minister.

Fensterwald also appears on the CC: list of many district-level e-mails. Team Unruly has only received two e-mails from the public (and please, feel free to send us a letter, or a blurb to print. Unlike the Mercury, we will protect your anonymity unless you give us the okay to print your name), one positive and one negative. The negative came from a bob@hotmail.com whose simple first name alias raised suspicions. The text condemns our site for spreading “hate,” and the repetitious use of the possessive plural pronoun was an attempt by “bob” to imply that he was a teacher, just like many - but not all - of Team Unruly. There are contributors from eight different schools and a couple of community members involved with unrulyrus.com, none of whom could think of an angry “bob” in our midst. Then someone suggested we check the CC list on the e-mail. Guess whose name we found? John Fensterwald. You can read the text of Bob’s e-mail here: www.unrulyrus.com/letters.html. Then, if you desire, you can compare that letter to other letters CC’d to Fensterwald written by this guy: [26]

Oh, and Craig, don’t worry. The irony of you condemning Team Unruly as cowards while anonymously trying to pass yourself off as a teacher with a fake e-mail address is not lost on us. We have a great sense of humor. We hope your information minister does too.

---

[1] http://www.metroactive.com/papers/metro/09.04.03/public-eye-0336.html
[2] http://www.metroactive.com/papers/metro/12.11.03/public-eye-0350.html
[3] http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/news/opinion/8978065.htm
[4] http://www.metroactive.com/papers/metro/09.29.04/fly-0440.html
[5] http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/news/local/states/california/peninsula/10045290.htm
[6] www.unrulyrus.com/ramirez.html
[7] http://www.siliconvalley.com/mld/mercurynews/news/special_packages/jameslick/9528228.htm
[8] http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/news/opinion/8374279.htm
[9] http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/news/opinion/9687066.htm
[10] http://www.metroactive.com/papers/metro/07.07.04/merc-0428.html
[11] http://www.sjguild.org/mbb20.htm
[12] http://www.metroactive.com/papers/metro/09.15.04/merc-0438.htm
l[13] http://www.stanford.edu/group/gradethenews/pages2/teachershousing.htm
[14] http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/news/local/8638268.htm
[15] http://www.cms.k12.nc.us/departments/advancedPlacement/index.asp
[16] http://www.hobel.org/lwved/id26.htm
[17] http://www.unrulyrus.com/cookies.html
[18] http://www.unrulyrus.com/letters.html
[19] http://www.unrulyrus.com/gaffes_speech.html
[20] http://www.unrulyrus.com/gaffes_filipino.html
[21] http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/news/opinion/9030068.htm?
ERIGHTS=6305070420656855322
[22] http://www.unrulyrus.com/gaffes_spin.html
[23] http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/news/opinion/9925269.htm
[24] http://www.metroactive.com/papers/metro/09.01.04/fly-0436.html
[25] http://disgruntledteachers.blogspot.com/2004/06/my-response-to-mr-herrera-on-b-kugler.html
[26] http://www.unrulyrus.com/mann.html