Showing posts with label contractors. Show all posts
Showing posts with label contractors. Show all posts

Wednesday, September 10, 2014

Ex-San Ysidro district superintendent Manuel Paul admits squeezing contractor for donations

If we look at the extremely high percentage of women and people of color among the officials indicted by the District Attorney's Public Integrity Unit over the years, we are forced to conclude one of two things:

1) either women and people of color are more corrupt than white males; or

2) the people who are targeted for prosecution do not enjoy the same protections and immunities that white male public officials in San Diego tend to enjoy.

I'm not saying that the DA is racist.  I don't think that's it.  I think the explanation for the gender and color imbalance is simply that the public officials with the most power tend NOT to be women or people of color.  The truly powerful public officials are mostly white males, and the DA wouldn't dare go after them.

And the big money isn't in parking lots in San Ysidro.  It isn't even in $20 million solar panel deals.

A few years ago the FBI was investigating kickbacks to public entities in San Diego from insurance companies. Nothing ever came of that. My guess is that they couldn't find an ideal defendant to indict: someone without connections in the high ranks of the San Diego political establishment.

Here is a link to my page about the County of Santa Clara vs. Driver Alliant Insurance Services, Inc., et al lawsuit.  These are the types of transactions that involve significant amounts of money.  The really big deals are not as much fun for the political establishment to talk about as a small cash envelope in a parking lot--so you don't read about them much in the paper. The big players almost always avoid criminal court. Note the lack of prosecutions in the 2009 Financial Crisis that was caused by the greed of the wealthy and powerful.

The big guys generally don't see the inside of a criminal court, and their civil cases get settled, not tried, where the public might get wind of what actually happened. (Of course, the Manuel Paul case wasn't tried in court, either. Why no trials? Who knows what information might come out in a trial that might expose a big fish?)

Here's a sample of a school district deal worth $1 billion: Superintendent John Deasy of Los Angeles Unified school district (LAUSD) probably isn't worried. I suspect that you need a lot better political connections to become superintendent of LAUSD than you do to get the top spot in San Ysidro School District.

Given that we live in a system in which huge corporation and billionaires believe they can buy elections, it's sort of embarrassing that the FBI is chasing down such small-time players.

Clearly, Bonnie Dumanis and the FBI aren't going to be able to stop campaign finance corruption.

But wouldn't it be nice if the public--and Bonnie Dumanis--started looking a little closer at some of the well-heeled districts on the north side of town?

In CVESD we also had a superintendent using his power to affect the school board election.



See all posts on white chalk crime.


Ex-San Ysidro district superintendent Manuel Paul admits squeezing contractor for donations
Channel 10 News
Aug 20, 2014

SAN DIEGO - A former San Ysidro School District superintendent pleaded guilty in federal court Wednesday to extracting political contributions from a prospective contractor by threatening to withhold work on future building contracts.

Manuel Paul, 63, faces up to a year in federal prison and a $100,000 fine when he is sentenced Nov. 18.

According to his plea agreement, Paul admitted he asked a contractor to contribute $3,600 to three political candidates for the 2010 School Board election...

Read more.

Saturday, March 12, 2011

How often do people get away with cheating at the San Diego courthouse? Even the contractors who fix the court toilets are under suspicion

Court repair costs cluster just under limit
High number of jobs come in just under authorization threshold of $500

By Greg Moran, UNION-TRIBUNE

Saturday, February 26, 2011 at 6:55 p.m.
Court lightbulb changed under contract
Previously

Court cost to fix a squeaky door? $460.35
Court lightbulb changed under contract

A balky toilet in a basement restroom in the downtown courthouse, blinking lightbulbs in a South Bay courtroom, a runny faucet in the El Cajon courthouse.

Those three routine repair requests from local courthouses were all made over a five-day period in June. Because they were all pegged to cost less than $500, the repair work was automatically authorized by the Administrative Office of the Courts, the state agency in charge of courthouse maintenance.

The cost for each of the repairs looked like this:

•Toilet: $487.37

•Lights: $462.60

•Faucet:$461.70

They were not the only examples of routinely approved repair work that ended up just under $500.

The Watchdog reviewed $1.6 million in billings for about 3,450 maintenance work orders for the San Diego courts in the first eight months of 2010. The data showed that by far the largest number of billings, 981 jobs or 28 percent of the total, fell between $400 and $500.

The bunching is an indication of how the court system, and taxpayer dollars, have been poorly managed, said San Diego Superior Court Judge Dan Goldstein He is a director of a group of judges around the state who have been critical of court management and pressed for reforms over the past year.

“We have a lack of oversight and costs controls and a lack of accountability at the state level, at a time when most agencies are being required to take cuts, including us,” he said.

Under the terms of the contract the courts agency inked in 2006 with a newly-formed subsidiary of the Fortune 500 company Jacobs Engineering Group of Pasadena, maintenance jobs up to $500 are approved with no initial oversight, although they are reviewed later.

A spokeswoman for Jacobs, which is based in Pasadena, did not respond to requests for comment on the findings by The Watchdog.

The provision pre-authorizing work under $500 is intended to speed along minor repairs, and not require courts or the workers to get clearance first. Philip Carrizosa, a spokesman for the court agency, said the bills are scrutinized by agency officials when submitted and “in many instances” the full amount billed is not paid.

“So the $500 threshold is not a loophole that allows the maintenance contractor to bill whatever it wants below $500. All bills are scrutinized and reviewed,” he wrote in an e-mail.

The average off all the work orders examined by The Watchdog was $467. Carrizosa noted the average of the ones under $500 was $290.

Still, the agency is considering a change in the future. He said a new maintenance contract now up for bid calls for all work under $2,000 to be done under a firm fixed price for each task, not on a job-by-job basis as is done now.

Jacobs is one of a dozen companies in the running for the new maintenance contract, which would go into effect later this year.

Courthouse maintenance costs were the subject of a hearing in the state legislature last year and have become a rallying point for critics of the court system management. A previous story by The Watchdog and media partner 10News highlighted how routine repair tasks, such as fixing squeaking doors or replacing light bulbs, frequently cost hundreds of dollars.

Kris Vosburgh, the executive director of the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, said he was not surprised what the data showed.

“This is something that goes on at every level of government,” he said. “They use this fly just under the radar to run up millions of dollars. It’s a common problem and I can’t offer a solution other than more frequent auditing.”