Yvonne Katz, formerly supt. of Beaverton OR and Spring Branch TX school districts, embarrassing retiring Westview High principal Len Case.











Dan Wieden talks about the night he wrote "Just do It" to a fascinated Wesview High School Media Studies class in 2001.

TSPC director Vickie Chamberlain conspires with OEA attorney Tom Doyle

TSPC director Vickie Chamberlain conspires with OEA attorney Tom Doyle
Chamberlain's three-and-a-half year manipulation of teacher discipline case conceals misconduct of Linda Borquist and Hollis Lekas of the Beaverton School District while interfering with the outcome of a federal lawsuit in support of an attorney formerly employed by the Beaverton School District, Nancy Hungerford.

Oregon ALJ Andrea Sloan collaborates with TSPC director Vickie Chamberlain & OEA atty Tom Doyle

Oregon ALJ Andrea Sloan collaborates with TSPC director Vickie Chamberlain & OEA atty Tom Doyle
"First of its kind in Oregon" decision helps unethical lawyers manipulate federal law suit after Beaverton administrators violated teacher employment contract

Signing a confession to conceal misconduct and influence a federal law suit

Signing a confession to conceal misconduct and influence a federal law suit
Tom Doyle of the OEA collaborates with OAH lawyers and Vickie Chamberlain of the TSPC

TSPC director Vickie Chamberlain makes finding based on secret "first of its kind" hearing

TSPC director Vickie Chamberlain makes finding based on secret "first of its kind" hearing
Chamberlain's delay protects Nancy Hungerford, former attorney for the Beaverton Schools, who colluded with attorneys for the OEA and the state of Oregon to violate a teacher contract and deny due process in a federal civil suit.

Confederation of Oregon School Administrators

Leadership Academy for Beginning Principals
July 18, 19 and 20, 2007
Linfield College

The Faculty:

Linda Borquist, Academy Coordinator

Victor Musial, Field Operations Director, OSEA

Colin Cameron, Director of Professional Development,COSA

Jill O'Neil, Principal, Beaverton Middle School - OMLA President

Vickie Chamberlain, Executive Director, TSPC

Kris Olsen, Principal, McMinnville High School - OASSA President

Matt Coleman, Principal, Westview High School

Shannon Priem, Communication Services Director, OSBA

Vickie Fleming, Superintendent, Redmond SD 2J

Perla Rodriguez, Principal, Cornelius Elementary School - OMLA President

Shawna Harris, Field Representative, OSEA

Nanci Schneider, NWREL

Craig Hawkins, Communications Director, COSA

Valerie Sebesta, Oregon Education Association

Sally Leet, Principal, Oak Grove Elementary School - OESPA Past President

Brian Traylor, Principal, Corvallis Elementary School - OESPA President

Holly Lekas, Regional Administrator, Beaverton SD 48 Joe Wehrili, OSBA

Michael Carter, Superintendent, Rainier SD 13

Philip McCullum, Director Administrative Licensure, University of Oregon

Authentic evaluation legally dated

Authentic evaluation legally dated
signed by retiring principal Len Case

Post-dated Westview High School evaluation 2002-03

Post-dated Westview High School evaluation 2002-03
Entered fraudulently at Fair Dismissal Appeals Board hearing: Malcolm Dennis (forced resignation; secrecy agreement) and Chris Bick, signing principals

To: Camellia Osterink, BSD attorney "Las vacas se olvidan que fueron ternevas."

Thu, July 29, 2010 7:33:30 AMLas vacas se olvidan que fueron ternevas
From: Don Bellairs View Contact
To: Camellia Osterink ; Jeff_Hicks@beavton.k12.or.us; leeann_larsen@beavton.k12.or.us; Mary_VanderWeele@beavton.k12.or.us; Sarah_Smith@beavton.k12.or.us; jerome_colonna@beavton.k12.or.us
Cc: gail.rasmussen@oregoned.org; Sen Bonamici ; Sen Hass ; Betsy Hammond ; Jessica Van Berkel ; billgraves@news.oregonian.com; Hanna.Vaandering@oregoned.org... more

11 Files View Slideshow Download All
3. What is the Responsibility of the Superintendent.doc (20KB); 2002 article about nancy Hungerford and Special Ed.doc (23KB); 03 Feb Westview Facilities Use doc signed by J Hogue s suptbck up.jpg (623KB); p 3 Dennis deposition about Borquist and resignation.JPG (361KB); 04 July 28 Dennis ltr Leslie's Systems Audit.jpg (1409KB); 04 Nov 12 Beaverton will replace Westview principal.doc (27KB); Nov 14 05 letter to Husted p3.jpg (585KB); Meeting w Toledo to request new lawyer Oct 19 06.jpg (880KB); Nov 14 05 letter to Husted p1.jpg (873KB); Nov 14 05 letter to Husted p2.jpg (1094KB); 05 Mar 7 ltr from V. Chamberlain Notice of Opp for Hearing.jpg (718KB)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To the BSD lawyer

Camellia,
The colleges whose athletic teams cheated to win are giving back their trophies and titles. These occasions are examples of repentant leaders accepting accountability for the misconduct of representatives of an institution...baby steps in the forward progress of reform. They are actions that ethical leaders in government are embracing to regain public confidence.

What will Jerome Colonna do in the twilight of his career? Despite all the goodwill surrounding his work in the "shadow of the Swoosh," you and I both know he would no longer be superintendent if the Beaverton taxpayers had discovered how much his lawyers had been cheating (earning public education $) to cover up for some of his leadership decisions.

It is why you have your current job.

I worked very hard for the the community of Beaverton for seven years and some BSD representatives (with your protection) continue to deceive the public about my work record with the school district.

That is unacceptable. I would like my name cleared of the false, defamatory accusations Ms. Lekas sent to the state government. You should all be ashamed of yourselves--as long as you lie to the public who pays you, you are little more than bunco artists.*

Las vacas se olvidan que fueron ternevas.

BTW, how is the case with Amy Gordon going? Oh, that's right, you can't say...she's on administrative leave. The neighbors are paying her to be quiet while classrooms spill over.

Sincerely,
Don Bellairs, teacher

Below is evidence of how an Office of Administrative Hearings judge and the state director of teacher licensing helped Mr. Colonna avoid accountability for violating the conditions of my employment contract in 2004. The contents of the message are still on Yahoo's server. Tom Doyle is, by creating conflicting interests in his roles as OEA attorney and as advocate for my free speech rights in federal court, demonstrably subverting the law and manipulating me on behalf of OEA leaders who, like Colonna, are avoiding responsibility for their lawyers' misconduct.

Date:Tue,31 Jan 2006 05:26:13 -0800 (PST)
Subject:Re: TSPC Case
Tom Doyle wrote:

Don:
Here is the memo I referred to on Friday. I was going to put it into a letter, but give your recent e-mail, I wanted to get it to you ASAP. I also received an e-mail from your brother asking me to "interface" with him regarding your case, so I am cc'ing him on this e-mail also. Per your instruction, I will not send out anything challenging the ALJ's decision until I receive a go ahead from you, although I will prepare it since if you decide to challenge the decision, I would like to do it ASAP after you make that decision.
Tom


Dear Don:

I am writing pursuant to your request that I provide a more detailed explanation of the effect of the Administrative Law Judge’s recent ruling in your case. The TSPC had asked that the ALJ find that certain findings of fact from the FDAB decision be applied to the TSPC case. We countered that the FDAB decision could not preclude litigation of those issues for a number of reasons, including that it was an unreviewed decision. Unfortunately, the ALJ agreed with TSPC. This means that the judge will accept as true several allegations relating to alleged misconduct that we had hoped to contest at the TSPC hearing. At this point, we have several options to challenge this decision. Our choice as to which option to pursue is influenced by tactical considerations relating to the pending Court of Appeal’s case. Specifically, it may be of some value to move the TPSC case forward quickly to obtain a decision before the Court of Appeals issues a decision. This is true because one of our strongest arguments against preclusion is that FDAB decision is unreviewed at this time. However, a challenge to the ALJ’s decision will slow the time for having a hearing. Therefore, when reviewing these options we must consider the effect of the timing of these decisions. The balance of this letter is to review those options.

First, we can appeal this decision to the Chief Administrative Law Judge. The Chief ALJ can review the decisions of subordinate ALJ’s. I think in light of the fact that our current ALJ rendered a decision inconsistent with a Federal Judge on this same issue, that we have a chance of success going this route. It is likely, but not certain, that we will have to reset the currently set hearing if we are appeal this decision.

Second, from the Chief ALJ, we can appeal to the Commission. It is unlikely that the Commission itself will reverse the ALJ’s decision, so this route is unlikely to result in an change in the current posture of this case. Arguably though it is prerequisite to our third option, below.

Third, we may file what is called an interlocutory appeal to the Court of Appeal from the Chief ALJ’s or the Agency’s decision, if it is adverse to us. The court’s granting of such a petition is unlikely, but this is an important issue that may be of interest to some court of appeals judges.

Fourth, we can do nothing in terms of a direct appeal of the ALJ’s decision, and proceed with the TSPC hearing. We would then make our challenge to this decision part of any appeal on the merits, if the ALJ rules against us on the merits. The advantage to this position is that it moves the case forward potentially ahead of the Court of Appeals decision on the FDAB case, thus strengthening our case on any TSPC appeal. Of course, though, the Court could issue a decision this week affirming the FDAB decision, in which case, the strength of any challenge to a TSPC case will be weakened.

Ultimately, the question is as follows: do we challenge the decision now or do we include any such challenge in any appeal to an adverse TSPC decision? There are advantages and disadvantages to both directions. Would we prefer to know definitively the "lay of the land" on the TSPC hearing before the hearing? Certainly. However, there are tactical advantages to proceeding with the hearing and making the preclusion issue a cornerstone of any appeal. In any such appeal though, if the Court of Appeals affirms the FDAB in the meantime, then it is likely that the court will not find the preclusion finding by this ALJ to be reversible error. Given that fact, it makes the most sense to challenge this ALJ’s decision now through steps one through three above. At this point, an appeal the Chief ALJ has the highest likelihood of obtaining reversal of the ALJ’s decision. Appeal to the Agency and the Court would be the next steps. We are prepare to file such an appeal immediately if this is your wish.

Finally, we should talk about possible settlement. As you remember, over a year ago, the Commission was willing to settle this matter for a reprimand, probation, and an agreement to go through an alcohol evaluation and follow-up treatment. You rejected that offer. Again this past December, the Commission was willing to enter into the same agreement. However, you rejected that offer also. It is possible that Commission will be willing to enter into the same agreement now, although in December they said that that was your last time they would make an offer of that level of sanction. With your authority, we can broach the subject again, although we would have to be willing to sign off on the exact offer they gave us before. However, part of the reason you rejected that offer was that it would have a prejudicial effect on a related piece of litigation you have pending in Federal Court. At this time, entering into this stipulation would still have a negative consequences on the Federal lawsuit, which is scheduled for trial in March.

In sum, I know the ALJ’s decision is unfortunate. It is the first of its kind here in Oregon and must be challenged through some route. The question is, what method of challenging this decision is in your best interest as a tactical matter. There are a number of matters to take into consideration: the effect of the FDAB decision on the TSPC matter, the effect of the TSPC matter on your federal case, and the effect of Federal litigation on those administrative proceedings. I hope this memo provides a certain level of clarity on those considerations. In the end, my gut says to challenge the decision now.

-----Original Message-----
From: Don Bellairs [mailto:bellairsd@yahoo.com]
Sent: Saturday, January 28, 2006 9:07 PM
To: Tom Doyle
Subject: No further action
Mr. Doyle,
Do not act further on my behalf until we have had a chance to meet. Do not appeal actions or send documents that represent me.
Don Bellairs

Tom Doyle wrote:
Don:
I haven't forgotten about you, I'm just trying to be thorough in my e-mail/letter explaining the decision.
Should have something by Monday.
Tom

(*thieves who prey on vulnerable people ex: lawyers who made my mother suffer unnecessarily at her death to "silence" me... I look forward to meeting you personally some day--it will mean that someone is finally taking responsibility for his actions. Maybe, at such a gathering, the Hungerfords and Doyle and Toledo and all you well-compensated lawyers can impress us with the educational acumen you have acquired in your service to public schools.)


Julie Leahy, Todd Telle and Sam Vore in 1999 Westview High School TV Production class movie "Kentucky Killer"

"The first responsibility of a leader is to define reality..." To Oregonlive.com regarding Beaverton's new leaders

The first responsibility of a leader is to define reality. The last is to say thank you.
- Max DePree


Beaverton schools will see changes in leaders...?

Response posted by equityined
July 24, 2010, 9:55AM
(3rd edit)


The actual Beaverton School District is a vibrant and diverse community of wonderful, can-do people who, by and large, want schools to work as well as they can for as many people as they can. The leadership of the BSD schools still, however, resembles that of the Katz-era cronyism that created unqualified principals and disposable classroom teachers.

All of those new appointees to whom Ms. Navas introduces us should provide the public with the reasons they have been promoted to their new jobs. Did Mr. Colonna and the school board ever step outside their inner circle for any of these promotions? In this job market, they couldn't find anybody bright and eager who was working somewhere else?!?

Surely there is a system of demonstrable merit to support the appointments of these new folks who will soon be evaluating "effective teachers" to help our community qualify for essential federal funds...

My personal experience is, sadly, that there is not. I was one of several people to have my career damaged by unsupervised principals working for the BSD administration. Ms. Robertson, who is in this instance disingenuously attempting to defend a costly and secretive "administrative leave" payment, is on the record as spending pubic money to conceal my mistreatment as well. The lawyers who were hired to protect BSD administrators' images did so by smearing my reputation falsely, and were paid secretly out of a half-million dollar slush fund the BSD school board leaders hide from public view (see below).

Ms. Navas seems to approach this subject honestly but without much curiosity or depth. The article she has written is about the evolving leadership in a very large publicly-owned (self-insured) community school district whose fiduciary stewards spend a TON of public money each year...a lot of it secretly. Ms. Navas' report should be as important to Beaverton's citizens as the upcoming November elections.

For the record, I was fired in 2004 for insubordination (an unsubstantiated allegation with a salacious sound was initially thrown in because...well, that's what they pay the lawyer to do) because I stood up to substandard administrators.

I am an experienced teacher and have been astounded by some of the administrative choices made by the Beaverton school leadership. The solution to the concern I raise is simple: Be transparent, Beaverton School Board. Show us your reasoning, Mr. Colonna. How did these guys earn their promotions? Did they publish something? Lead some national movement? It is time for BSD officials to be held accountable for how they serve the community...and, perhaps Melissa is eager to finish her report?

Sincerely,
Former teacher*

The Oregonian (Portland, Oregon)
January 10, 2005 Monday
NORTHWEST FINAL EDITION
BEAVERTON SCHOOL DISTRICT SETTLES RACIAL BIAS SUIT
BYLINE: ANITHA REDDY - The Oregonian
SECTION: NORTHWEST; Pg. B02
LENGTH: 640 words
DATELINE: BEAVERTON

Summary: In the $120,000 deal, the district admits a custodian was called a racial slur but denies other allegations

The Beaverton School District has agreed to pay $120,000 to settle a discrimination lawsuit by an African American former custodian, after admitting in a court filing that a co-worker called the man a racial epithet.

District administrators agreed in December to pay nearly $80,000, including $10,000 in gross back wages, to James Sanders and $40,000 in fees to his lawyer, Thomas Steenson. As part of the settlement, the district denied Sanders' allegations against three other co-workers.

The settlement, drawn from the district's $1.55 million insurance reserve fund, did not require school board approval, said Linda Borquist, an assistant superintendent.

Board member Ann Jacks said Tuesday evening that district lawyers had briefed the board on the case but had never discussed possible settlement amounts.

"It's not an insignificant sum or an insignificant issue," Jacks said. "I'd like, in the future, to be a little more active in this."

Board approval is necessary only if the settlement amount exhausts the reserve fund, which is set aside during the budget process and requires a transfer from the general fund, said Janice Essenberg, district administrator for budget services.

Because the district's insurance policy covers liability claims greater than $500,000, board approval would be required only in rare cases involving hundreds of thousands of dollars. Large settlements can be entered into without board approval, unlike contracts, which require a board vote if they are worth more than $50,000.

In neighboring Portland, the school board must approve all settlements greater than $25,000.

Sanders, who was fired in October 2003, sued the district in June, saying his boss, Ron Strasser, Aloha High School's head custodian, had used racially derogatory terms and threatened him. Sanders cited other instances of harassment, but did not name the co-workers involved or describe the offenses in his lawsuit.

Sanders met twice with Anthony Rosilez, then the district administrator overseeing custodians, and submitted two written complaints describing the harassment between November 2002 and August 2003, according to court filings by Sanders and the school district.

In a June 29 court filing, the district denied all of Sanders' accusations except one. The district admitted that a co-worker called Sanders a "spear chucker" in August 2003. In the same filing, the district denied workers used other racially insensitive terms.

Borquist declined to identify the co-worker accused of using the term. She said the employee, who was disciplined for the incident, no longer works for the district.

The district initially responded to Sanders' complaints by giving him the cell and home phone numbers of Rosilez so he could report any further harassment immediately, Borquist said.

The district also offered Sanders a place on its "Diversity Committee," an employee group that supports and embraces a diverse work force, she said.

"We take any report of harassment or discrimination very seriously," Borquist said.

At Sanders' request, the district held a training session in January 2003 for custodial staff to review anti-discrimination policies and reporting procedures.

Sanders' suit names as defendants Mark Moser, the district's administrator for classified personnel, Art Heckel, a former Aloha High School vice principal, and Strasser, Sanders' direct supervisor.

The district investigated Sanders' allegations against the three men and found no wrongdoing, Borquist said.

Heckel, now a vice principal at Westview High School, and Moser still work for the district.

Strasser retired in September. District officials said his retirement was unrelated to the lawsuit.

Anitha Reddy: 503-294-5954; anithareddy@news.oregonian.com


*Duties and responsibilities in 6 1/2 years as a teacher contracted with the BSD:
-At Meadow Park Middle School: 7th grade English; theater arts (combined 6, 7, 8), sign language (combined 6, 7, 8)
-At Westview High School: 9th lit/comp, 10th lit/comp, media studies (9,10,11,12 combined), advanced media studies (10,11, 12 combined), keyboarding (10, 11, 12 combined), TV productions (10, 11, 12 combined); creative writing (9, 10, 11,12 combined).
Also, at different times, I ran study halls and had lunch duties, was the Activities Director and student government leader, coached girls' basketball and was the PA announcer for the football team.

The people who fired me allowed me to do all that work (often with kids other teachers didn't want to teach) while some of their coaching buddies were taken out of the classroom rotation and given quasi-administrative jobs.

Mr. Colonna fired me for asking to be treated fairly...

PRONOUN Lesson Plan for Professor Joanne Yatvin Portland State University July 20, 2010







Dear Professor Yatvin,

I continue to contact you because 1) your letters to the NYT and other media demonstrate your empathy for classroom teachers, 2) as former president of the ACTE, you possess a credential that impresses us (objective pronoun case used here in front of the rest of the object) English teachers, and 3) I have just about run out of people to bug with this stuff after all these years.

The following Oregonian article reveals the $500,000 settlement limit that BSD officials have used for years to limit their public accountability. The writer, Anitha Reddy, provides evidence of my own contention that the eminent Dr. Linda Borquist had filled Beaverton administration positions with cronies and sycophants and had concurrently co-opted the union representation to transform her employees into human property. The union leadership in Beaverton politely looked the other way while teachers received the illusion of due process from unaccountable lawyers who were paid well...regardless.

The people who fired me (object of relative clause) were misbehaving, and current BSD and OEA officials still refuse to acknowledge it--while preening in the press about their dedication to school reform.

There are many fine administrators in Beaverton. I had more good principals than bad ones. Those individuals who genuinely seek improvement in the way our public schools perform would do better to focus first on how to evaluate effective principals before determining how they will then evaluate effective teachers.

My building administrators at BSD were:
At Meadow Park: Diane Smith, Joe Wyatt and Sharon Fenner (2 years)
At Westview HS: Len Case (3 yrs.), Chris Bick, Lynn Blair-Thomas (4 yrs), Gail Vangorder (4 1/2 yrs), Malcolm Dennis (1 1/2 yrs), and Mike Chamberlain and Ken somebody (4 months).

(For the record, Gail Vangorder, Malcolm Dennis and Mike Chamberlain were the only building administrators called to testify at the "hearing" that is still being used by the TSPC to punish me. Vangorder would go immediately into early retirement, re-emerging ephemerally when Malcolm Dennis was secretly forced to resign the next fall. Chamberlain was promoted the following semester to a middle school head principal's job and is now the top guy at Westview. Not bad work if you can get it.)


The kinds of teachers who can teach challenging kids are not the kinds of teachers who will accept unjust treatment from mediocre management. Some of my bosses were capable of being downright bullies. Our culture anoints school leaders with lots of power, and some of them quickly learn that they only have to please a base contingency of influential community members to retain their jobs.

The result: Major inequities that I witnessed and shared with Jerome Colonna a couple of weeks before I was fired (for sexually harassing the librarian the previous November--and then fired again three days later for "neglect of duty" for not turning in work due the day after I was fired and given written warning to stay away from Beaverton Schools).

I am haunted by the need to expose the hypocrites who have so altered my life. I require but one honorable soul with the juice to stand up to self-interested political people who have used our public schools as status ladders. Are you she? (Do you know this one? Both pronouns are in the subjective case because the verb is in the subjunctive mood...right?)

In closing, I would mention that none of the people who were used to damage my teaching career were teachers. None were working with Chris Larsen or Jeff Borquist. Just me (objective case in sentence fragment).

Thank you (object case used here as the direct object of the verb "thank" that serves as the predicate for the understood subject "I").

Sincerely,
Don Bellairs, teacher

The Oregonian (Portland, Oregon)
January 10, 2005 Monday
NORTHWEST FINAL EDITION
BEAVERTON SCHOOL DISTRICT SETTLES RACIAL BIAS SUIT
BYLINE: ANITHA REDDY - The Oregonian
SECTION: NORTHWEST; Pg. B02
LENGTH: 640 words
DATELINE: BEAVERTON

Summary: In the $120,000 deal, the district admits a custodian was called a racial slur but denies other allegations

The Beaverton School District has agreed to pay $120,000 to settle a discrimination lawsuit by an African American former custodian, after admitting in a court filing that a co-worker called the man a racial epithet.

District administrators agreed in December to pay nearly $80,000, including $10,000 in gross back wages, to James Sanders and $40,000 in fees to his lawyer, Thomas Steenson. As part of the settlement, the district denied Sanders' allegations against three other co-workers.

The settlement, drawn from the district's $1.55 million insurance reserve fund, did not require school board approval, said Linda Borquist, an assistant superintendent.

Board member Ann Jacks said Tuesday evening that district lawyers had briefed the board on the case but had never discussed possible settlement amounts.

"It's not an insignificant sum or an insignificant issue," Jacks said. "I'd like, in the future, to be a little more active in this."

Board approval is necessary only if the settlement amount exhausts the reserve fund, which is set aside during the budget process and requires a transfer from the general fund, said Janice Essenberg, district administrator for budget services.

Because the district's insurance policy covers liability claims greater than $500,000, board approval would be required only in rare cases involving hundreds of thousands of dollars. Large settlements can be entered into without board approval, unlike contracts, which require a board vote if they are worth more than $50,000.

In neighboring Portland, the school board must approve all settlements greater than $25,000.
Sanders, who was fired in October 2003, sued the district in June, saying his boss, Ron Strasser, Aloha High School's head custodian, had used racially derogatory terms and threatened him. Sanders cited other instances of harassment, but did not name the co-workers involved or describe the offenses in his lawsuit.

Sanders met twice with Anthony Rosilez, then the district administrator overseeing custodians, and submitted two written complaints describing the harassment between November 2002 and August 2003, according to court filings by Sanders and the school district.

In a June 29 court filing, the district denied all of Sanders' accusations except one. The district admitted that a co-worker called Sanders a "spear chucker" in August 2003. In the same filing, the district denied workers used other racially insensitive terms.

Borquist declined to identify the co-worker accused of using the term. She said the employee, who was disciplined for the incident, no longer works for the district.

The district initially responded to Sanders' complaints by giving him the cell and home phone numbers of Rosilez so he could report any further harassment immediately, Borquist said.

The district also offered Sanders a place on its "Diversity Committee," an employee group that supports and embraces a diverse work force, she said.

"We take any report of harassment or discrimination very seriously," Borquist said.

At Sanders' request, the district held a training session in January 2003 for custodial staff to review anti-discrimination policies and reporting procedures.

Sanders' suit names as defendants Mark Moser, the district's administrator for classified personnel, Art Heckel, a former Aloha High School vice principal, and Strasser, Sanders' direct supervisor.

The district investigated Sanders' allegations against the three men and found no wrongdoing, Borquist said.

Heckel, now a vice principal at Westview High School, and Moser still work for the district.

Strasser retired in September. District officials said his retirement was unrelated to the lawsuit.

Anitha Reddy: 503-294-5954; anithareddy@news.oregonian.com

To: Jerry Colonna, BSD supt. "Prioritizing Acquiescence to Substandard Leadership over Teaching Skills" July 18, 2010

Jerry,
Your inability to act honorably in my conflict has the potential to distract hard-working people from the challenges of improving Beaverton's schools.

I have a great deal to offer in ideas and actions but cannot because of the improper way your employees terminated my contract. You know that. All of the BSD board members know that, or they are being deceived--which seems possible, knowing what I know about the ethics of some BSD administrators.

When you break something, you buy it. You cheated me and my family for a long time with perverse bullying. I was supposed to have given up at some point, signed the stipulations and accepted a token from your crooked lawyers.

I have sent you the Saroyan quote before: Hope has two daughters: Anger and Courage. Damn you, sir. Because of the documents I have attached, I was pissed on and then punished for stinking...by a friend of yours who hides pedophiles in the classroom for expedience.

You have ignored my requests to meet and sort this out honorably. In doing so, you continue to demean me and, by extension, every teacher who works for you. We are expendable. I find your behavior cowardly and antithetical to the role most taxpayers assume you fill.

By ignoring me and allowing this obscene drama to fester, you are ensuring that other people will be distracted from important matters in the days ahead. Unlike some of the administrators you have spent public money to shelter, I truly value the time and energy that your teachers put into their classes and I hate to think anything I do distracts from their efforts.

But what I am doing is not entirely self-serving. The system I experienced devalues classroom teaching skills and prioritizes acquiescence to leadership that is frequently substandard.

You will see that phrase again.

I merely wish to be treated fairly and honestly by you, Jerome Colonna. Hasn't happened yet. Been a long time...

Sincerely,
Don Bellairs, teacher














To Jessica VanBerkel, Oregonian "Gail Rasmussen is covering up for Janet Hogue"

Tue, July 13, 2010 8:11:53 AM
"Gail Rasmussen is covering up for Janet Hogue, like Colonna did"
From: Don Bellairs
To: jessicavanberkel@news.oregonian.com; jessicavanberkel@news.oregonian.com
Cc: gail.rasmussen@oregoned.org; jerome_colonna@beavton.k12.or.us; Camellia Osterink ; leeann_larsen@beavton.k12.or.us; Mary_VanderWeele@beavton.k12.or.us; Jeff_Hicks@beavton.k12.or.us; sarah_boly@beavton.k12.or.us; Sarah_Smith@beavton.k12.or.us

To Jessica VanBerkel
Oregonian

Jessica,
I have written you a few times and included you in messages I have sent to various individuals involved in education in Oregon.

This morning, very early, I read the hardcopy Oregonian and noted that you quoted Gail Rasmussen, the current OEA president.

As an OEA member for 10 years, I once had a crucial and desperate need to be supported by the OEA. I needed the backing of an organization whose leaders believe in the core mission of the teaching profession and whose officials respect the teachers and staff who pay their salaries. I instead was betrayed by the OEA, thrown under the bus by associates of Ms. Rasmussen's and subjected to years of abuse by lawyers being paid public education money to cover up for the misconduct of a number of Big, Important People.

Ms. Rasmussen knows that.

Ms. Rasmussen was also a super-delegate to the Democratic convention that nominated President Obama, by the way.

There have been times of frustration and despair in the past few years since I was attacked by BSD lawyers when I have gone to the OEA building--I didn't know where else to go...Twice Ms. Rasmussen, president, has come into the lobby to meet with me, once with Jerry Caruthers, the OEA executive director, and once with Mark Toledo, the union's head lawyer. She was courteous and genuinely comforting but she has not acted on my behalf.

She cannot. To treat me honorably would reveal too much about what has happened to me, and why.

I have been cheated by lawyers and state officials who were employed with public money because I pointed out to Jerome Colonna, then the new-superintendent of the Beaverton School District, that I had been treated unfairly by administrators who were able to violate state regulations as well as conditions of my employment contract. This ability to avoid accountability was connected to the influence wielded by an individual, Janet Hogue, who had improper and unsupervised control over the day-to-day operations and administration of the school in which I worked, Westview High .

My statement to Mr. Colonna in January of 2004 ("She may have even deserved the part") while I held up one of the student newspapers that were scattered around the room was to make the point that Ms. Hogue's influence had created vast inequities and poor morale at our school, inequities in teacher duties and assignments, in availability of work space and in pay. Under Ms. Hogue's leadership, the state's largest high school had become a teacher graveyard with high turnover for those poor smucks who lasted a year or two--the ones who were given less-desirable jobs and lots of extra duties while Westview's "insider" teachers were rewarded by being removed from classroom duties and getting quasi-administrative roles.

Disclosure: Ms. Hogue and I have a history. I taught her daughter Kaitlynn for part of her seventh grade year. When Ms. Hogue learned that there were no elite groups of students in my class, she had her daughter removed and assigned to an independent study with the Meadow Park tech ed teacher, Pat Bowers, where she did online writing courses connected with Stanford University. I was never brought into this decision-making process--Kaitlynn walked into my classroom and announced she didn't have to come to class anymore...I learned then that, in Beaverton, Ms. Hogue operated far above my station as a mere teacher.

Fast forward several years to the middle of the first semester of my final year as a teacher, to several weeks before I was fired by sneak attack. Nicole Hermann, then-president of the Westview HS 2004 senior class, had asked me to coach the senior girls "football" team in an annual game against the juniors that had been conceived the year before, when I had been Activities Director. I was very clear to Nicole: I agreed to volunteer my time on the condition that positions WOULD NOT BE ASSIGNED DUE TO POPULARITY but everyone would do station work at the required* practice (*during the previous year, the athletic director and principals agreed that students should have to attend one practice to be eligible for the game).

Long story short--the practice got sabotaged by a few girls who wanted to tell people where they played based on social standing. Several girls whom I knew wanted to play did not show up. There was another teacher there (I knew better than to work by myself in situations with potential conflicts) but that teacher was never called in to provide information about the practice. Ms. Hogue, fowarding false or exggerated information provided to her by a friend of Kaitlynn's, called a Westview asst. principal, Gail Vangorder to complain about me. Ms. Vangorder, continuing what would be come a game of "telephone" to damage my career, called Mike Chamberlain, who had been an asst. principal at Westview for TWO MONTHS at the time. mr Chamberlain called me in and told me I should stay away from the girls' football game that night. I sat in his office, numb.

Katilynn Hogue started at quarterback. Weeks later, I was fired from my teaching job in part for the girls' football incident and, five years later, was disciplined by the TSPC for it. I was never able to call Nicole Hermann, whose father is the Washington County District Attorney, to testify in my behalf. Neither was the teacher who worked with me at the practice, Krista Brask, ever called.

In the seven years that I worked for the Beaverton community, often doing 70-hour weeks so everybody got access to a computer for their video projects, I watched Janet Hogue and people whom she influenced poison the moral of two schools by creating stratified layers of differing status that reinforced class distinctions in public schools, among the students and the staff. At Meadow Park Middle School, the privileged kids got their own "hall," C Hall. Westview's north end housed C. J. Reid's globe-trotting million-dollar drama program, which featured Hogue's kids for eight of it's first ten years. It was exclusive territory and subject to different rules than the rest of the school.

I had a reason and a right to point to a picture of Kaitlynn in the school paper and say, as I did to jerry Colonna and Tom Greene in January of 2004, "She may have deserved the part." Ms. Hogue had so gamed the system at Westview in favor of her own kid that we will never know what Kaitlynn deserved and what she was given through her mother's interference.

So, Jessica, I am hopeful you and Ms. Rasmussen, when next you meet, can talk about the many, many ways the teachers' union can serve it's members. Ms. Rasmussen, in her denial of my abuse, is tacitly supporting a politicized system that does not much value classroom teachers.

Maybe one day the people who were told lies about me can be told the truth. Maybe I can work in an honest system again some day.

Sincerely,
Don Bellairs, teacher

Then-Westview asst. principal Mike Chamberlain’s sworn testimony
FDAB June, 2004


Q. The last paragraph states that he has not been pleased with much administrative guidance in the past, and it often seemed uninformed. Did you believe that referred to anyone?
A. Yes, I did.
Q. To whom?
A. Gail, Malcolm. I believed he was referring to administrators that had been at Westview, who are currently there, or those that had been there recently.
Q. Did you sometime after that point have information that was shared with you about women's
football?
A. Yes, I did.
Q. How did that information come to you?
A. It came to me from Gail. It also came to me from Monica Gorman, who was the activities director, who had been hearing some rumblings of things that kids were unhappy about some
things.
377
Q. They came to you because you were Don's supervisor; is that right?
A. Yes. But, I mean, as administrators you'll hear lots of things. Just because you're not the administrator evaluating doesn't mean you're not going to hear things.
Q. What did you do with the information? First of all, let me ask you, what was the nature of the information that you had about the women's football in relationship to Mr. Bellairs?
A. That they had had some kind of practice over the weekend for the powder puff football game that was coming up the Friday afternoon. That the practice had not gone well. That Mr. Bellairs had become very angry. That there had been some swearing from him toward the
girls
about some involvement in practice, something with the practice. The girls were upset. They were hesitant to participate. They were not sure how to proceed.
Q. What did you then do with that information?
A. I went and talked to Don.
Q. What did he say to you?
A. First of all, that he appreciated me coming directly to him. He said that there had been some issues at practice. He said that there were some girls who weren't following his plans. He had spent a lot of
Time outlining a plan for practice, and they were kind of
going
378
off on their own. They were basically doing their own thing, weren't listening to him. Some of the girls were not attending practice, and he was very upset about the commitment.
Q. What, to your understanding, was the role of the faculty member in relationship -- this was not a competitive team; is that correct?
A. Correct.
Q. What was the role of the
faculty member assigned to this activity?
A. My understanding is that the faculty role was to make sure that the girls are organized, they understand the time line, they have the permission forms in, and that they're there as a faculty rep for safety. So make surethe kids are safe when they practice.
Q. Is the faculty rep supposed to be the coach?
A.
No. The understanding was, no, that the coaches were boys. So freshman boys would coach freshman girls, senior boys would coach senior girls.
Q. Okay. Did you have other information about what had happened? Did Mr. Bellairs acknowledge the fact that he had used inappropriate language?
A. I asked him. He said no, he had
not.
Q. Gail testified that she had talked to one student and had gotten a phone call from one parent. Did
379
you have any independent contact with either students or parents about this episode, besides what you got from Gail?
A.
I talked to Monica Gorman, who is the activities director. She had some of the senior girls in class, in the activities class -- in student government class. She said that there were some rumblings that they were upset about some things. I did talk to two students in the afternoon on Wednesday, October 8th or 9th. I can't remember the exact day, but I talked to two students.
Q. What did those students tell you about what had gone on?
A. That Mr. Bellairs had gotten angry at them. That they really wanted to have a good experience. They wanted it to work. They weren't -- you know, they didn't want to have any kind of conflict. They wanted to make this work and have fun. And they felt like it was
becoming much more serious than they ever intended it.
Q. Then if you take a look at Exhibit No. 17, did you get this message back from Mr. Bellairs
after your conversation with him about the weekend episode?
A. Yes. Yes. I had talked with students, and on Wednesday -- and, you know, we finished our conversation before school was out, so it was about 2:15 on Wednesday, the 8th of October.
380
Q. Okay. Now, this e-mail says at the end of the first paragraph, "I will post the list today so you can handle all the complaints about my fictitious outbursts." He is still maintaining that his outbursts were
fictitious, that that was something that the girls were inaccurately or dishonestly portraying to you?
A. Yes.
Q. The next paragraph says, "I realize this will create for you some issues, but I know that you will do what's right and not cave in to self-interested parents who believe the system should serve a few kids well and give the vast majority what is left." What's that
about?
A. There were some students that were seniors that Don felt -- some of the same kids at Meadow Park – that were after him and their parents were after him. So he felt like it was the same parents that were constantly trying to sabotage him and get him in trouble.
Q. He told you that?
A. Yes.
Q. Did you then have a conversation with him about that same time about the e-mail? And I'm going to refer you to the conference summary that you wrote a few days later at D-18. There's a reference there in the first paragraph to the fact that you and Don met in your
Office at your request because of a concern you had about this
381
e-mail we just looked at, that there were other individuals involved. What was the reason why you decided that you needed to meet with Don Bellairs on October 9th?
A. The original e-mail from the issue with eSIS and the student -- which I guess was 16 -- when that came to me, I met with Don, and I -- we talked about the issue of: "What do you mean by the fairy's spreading dust?" And I explained to him once again that I was the one who had walked by and seen the girl. But in that meeting I clearly expressed to him how I did not want him to be
speaking to me or
e-mailing me negative things about administrators that were currently in the building. I said, "These are people I work with." So I said, "We can talk about this kind of stuff, but it's not something that I feel good about." He would continue to say things to me in person about administrative decisions that had been made in the
past. On the 18th or -- on Thursday, October 9th, this kind of e-mail came through again. This time the e-mail had cc'd two teachers and the principal. So I met with him on Thursday, October 9th, to once again express my concern about the pattern of e-mail that are disrespectful
to staff members.
Q. In that meeting did you get any kind of concurrence from Don that he shouldn't be e-mailing and
382
copying to other people and using disrespectful language of that sort?
A. He remembered our conversation before. He knew that we had talked about it. He knew that I had clearly expressed my wishes. And he understood that it was only a couple weeks ago that this had happened. He knew all about my requests.
But he said to me very clearly that this was the way he was going to do business. This was Don, and he was going to continue to do it this way.
Q. He told you that on October 9th?
A. Yes. Very clearly.
Q. Were you aware -- I think I asked you generally about the problems between Gail and Don. Were you aware of the series of angry outbursts that Don had had specifically directed at Gail in the prior year?
A. I was aware of them, yes.
Q. Did you have a concern about the kind of working relationship you were going to have with
him?
A. Actually, our relationship was very good. I mean, we had never had that kind of an outburst. It was a concern of mine -- I can't say that I didn't think about it, but he -- I didn't have angry outbursts with Don. So it took me by surprise, because the September -- late
September early October issues were pretty sudden and pretty unexpected. So I was aware of
them, but I didn't
383
have that kind of outbursts with Don.

WESTVIEW ASST. PRINCIPAL GAIL VANGORDER'S 2004 FDAB TESTIMONY

Q. In the fall of 2003 you're not involved with the technology piece anymore. Did you get some sort of contact about a powder puff football event that was going on?
A. A parent called me to express her concern
Over what Don had allegedly said at a powder puff football practice. She told me that he had used inappropriate language, had sworn at the students, and also had told them something about, "Don't go running to your mommy to complain about this the way you did when you were in
middle school."
Q. Were these some of the same girls who had been involved in complaints against him in middle school?
A. Yes.
MR. DOYLE: I'm going to object. This is --we are so far afield from the termination notice. And, once again, the district is trying to get a lot of things in that have already been reviewed and already decided
As not the basis of termination. Ms. Hungerford is going
to
Bolam & Associates
503.294.0346
314
that this is background, but this is just a
back-door attempt to dirty up the record.
MS. LINDA HUNGERFORD: The powder puff football incident mentioned is in the dismissal letter. But beyond that, the phone call, as we will hear, came from Mrs. Hogue, so this definitely plays into thesituation in which on January 14th Mr. Bellairs denigrated this student in front of others and suggested that she--the student didn't deserve the lead in the school play. This is the same family -- one of the families that was involved back in 1999. So I do think it is directly connected to three of the incidents mentioned in the dismissal letter.
MR. DOYLE: Mrs. Hogue is available for testimony?
MS. LINDA HUNGERFORD: This is not hearsay. This witness received a phone call from her, and that's what I am calling this for. It is not even for the truth of the matter of what went on in that football game,
But what was the kind of information that the
Administration was dealing with along about October.
MR. DOYLE: Once again, I don't know. I've heard reference to something in 1999. I think we all eee what the district is attempting to do now, whether by way of background or whatever argument they would use to be
315
able to have veiled references to items that were never subject to any discipline and never were even – merited even being put in the personnel file, yet being presented to you through this testimony. I think that's inappropriate.
MR. SMITH: I think part of what we have
Been presented has to do with the football game and with the Hogues. I think we'll hear it in terms of what the witness can testify that she heard from the parent and how she reacted to it, not to the truthfulness of what occurred at the football game.
MR. DOYLE: Thank you very much.
BY MS. LINDA HUNGERFORD:
Q. This phone call was from Mrs. Hogue?
A. Yes.
Q. Were you aware of the situation involving theHogues at the middle school?
A. No.
Q. This was the first time you learned about
that?
A. Yes. A parent called me to express her concern over what Don had allegedly said at a powder puff football practice. She told me that he had used inappropriate language, had sworn at the students, and also had told them something about, "Don't go running to your mommy to complain about this the way you did when you were in middle school."
Q. Were these some of the same girls who had been involved in complaints against him in middle school?
A. Yes.
MR. DOYLE: I'm going to object. This is --we are so far afield from the termination notice.
Q. And so your understanding was that there was something that had gone on at the middle school that had involved which girl? Do you remember which Hogue daughter it was?
Well, the only daughter at Westview now is
316
Kaitlyn.
Q. Mrs. Hogue's report was that Mr. Bellairs was bringing up the episode from the middle school years?
A. That was my understanding, that the reference
to "You can't go running to your mommies the way you did in middle school" was a reference to that.
Q. And what did you do with the information you got?
A. I told her that I would share that information with Mr. Chamberlain, and I told her that we didn't – the school does not approve of teachers or other adults using profane language or inappropriate language with students,and that also we didn't approve of, you know, teachers
trying to denigrate students or bully students, and that we would deal with it.
Q. Did you have a concern about comments that students couldn't talk to their parents about something?
A. Yeah. Students have to be able to talk to their parents about things. I mean, I'll chastise a student when they don't share information with their parents.

Yao Tzio and Jeff Hanson create "Eyes of the World" about Westview High School diversity ca. 2001

Westview High advanced media studies students Jeff Hanson and Yao Tzio provide an insider's perspective of "being different" in a school (one of Oregon's largest public high schools) full of people who are good at being different.

To: Wendy Owen @ Oregonlive.com "TSPC disciplines Washington County teachers" July 10, 2010

In 2004, when I stood up to (former) administrators in the Beaverton schools who had paid and treated me unfairly, I was fired for insubordination. Additionally, one of my assistant principals convinced a colleague who worked under her (not a teacher) to sign a sexual harassment complaint against me, alleging three incidents that I had never been told about, even though they had all occurred months before I was fired for them. These incidents were demonstrably neither sexual nor harassment, but were a lawyerly tactic to help dishonest BSD administrators avoid accountability for misconduct.

The sex complaint was thrown out (six months too late) during a hearing process that some teachers must endure, called (unfortunately) a Fair Dismissal Appeals Board hearing (a process created by the OEA and run by lawyers for the school districts and the union, if you get my drift...no judges).

I was surprised to learn when I was fired, on the last day of the first semester in 2004, that teachers in Beaverton are appointed their union lawyers by the BEA representative (in my case, Tom Husted) after the Beaverton School District officials call the union office and inform them of the teacher's impending needs. I met my OEA lawyer, Tom Doyle, at the BSD administration building three days after I had first been fired, when I was being fired the second time, for work I failed to do after I was placed on administrative leave and told to stay away from Beaverton schools.

Under Mr. Doyle's guidance, I was treated to four years of demeaning delays, re-scheduled appointments and hearings and a deluge of threats and harassment by state employees because I refused to sign a list of false charges--basically a confession designed to cover the unlawful way that my contract had been violated. In what must be an act of questionable legality, Vickie Chamberlain of the TSPC had state lawyers request a state judge to accept hearsay testimony from (now-disgraced) former BSD administrators Linda Borquist, Malcolm Dennis and Gail Vangorder; in doing so, Ms. Chamberlain used her office to effectively prevent me from calling witnesses who would have provided less-biased insight into my conduct as a teacher.

Even though the sexual harassment complaint was found without merit at the FDAB, I faced over three more years of abuse by Vickie Chamberlain and her (former) investigator, Susan Nisbet. I would learn later, in a 2008 meeting with Borquist, that Chamberlain was acting to support Beaverton's (former) lawyer, Nancy Hungerford, who apparently makes her living demonizing people who conflict with her school-administration gravy trains.

Hungerford and Doyle were bookends in a "million-dollar" (conflict of interest) federal law suit they had designed to separate me from authentic union representation and to distract and manipulate me while my career and reputation were being damaged. My mother was dying at the time and I had asked to quit after I had been cheated out of several thousand dollars and could see I was being set up for termination.

When human beings are give power without accountability and oversight, they misbehave. That is self-evident. How Victoria Chamberlain continues to serve as the arbiter of education morality in Oregon is a source of amazement to me. She precipitates trickle-down ineptitude--I have encountered a host of absurdities in my interminable conflict with her. She and Hungerford hide pedophiles in classrooms with secret agreements while using their (limitless?) power to tarnish us untrained monkeys. She exists, I am convinced, because the current OEA leadership is also without accountability.

I worked in the largest high school in Oregon, and the taxpayers were deceived about what happened there. When I pointed out to a new superintendent that our principals were not treating employees fairly because a few influential parents had hi-jacked our school's administration, I was tied to a stake and burned by Nancy Hungerford's cronies in the state's education bureaucracy...

The embers continue to smolder, six years later. I am trying to cast light on the teacher discipline process as I experienced it, as well as demonstrate what really happens when a teacher needs the OEA. The system I have been exposed to uses and exploits teachers, who truly have no real voice in Oregon.

Perhaps politicians with no debt to the OEA will work with civic-minded community members to find out more about teacher discipline in Oregon. They might begin by looking farther than the Oregonian?

www.statesponsoredtheft.blogspot.com

Tom Husted, BEA Uniserve, retires August 2010...Remnants of "Katz' Litter" Almost Gone




Beaverton Human Resources chief Linda Borquist "little bit unique' method of compromising Beaverton employees union representation. Below is FDAB testimony (June 2004) of Linda Borquist, former Beaverton Human Rsources chief forced into early retirement by a new superintendent and school board members.
Q. Do you have contact with the Beaverton Education Association as you work with various personnel problems?
A. Uh-huh. I think we probably are a little bit unique in how we work with our association. The person who is the administrator of certificated personnel, which is a job I have also held in the past, and I meet usually twice a month and go over any kind of what we call
Issues sessions. We look at, you know, things that have been brought to either of our attentions, and we go through and have an open discussion about what we're hearing or seeing. The hope is that we would, again, resolve it at the smallest level. We are very frank with each other. We don't really hold any secrets or hold any information back. But we try to proactively work together. We've operated that
47
way for at least 12, maybe 15 years, ever since I can kind of remember with, you know, past association presidents. It is a culture that we have built. Because of that we have very, very few grievances. I can maybe think of three in my ten years in -- 12 years in HR. You know, I've never sat before this kind of a board before with a Fair Dismissal hearing. We're actively working together. Obviously they have a role of representing in this case a teacher, and we have a role that we need to play. But we try and work cooperatively. When I have a meeting that I'm going to be setting up with a teacher, I give what I would call a heads-up phone call to the association president or the Uniserv rep saying that this person will be expecting a call from X because they'll probably be calling you. We're going to have a meeting. I want to make sure
you're available when they call so they can have representation. That's how open our relationship is.
Q. You mentioned that you had these meetings generally twice a month. Who are those with?
A. It's my administrator for certificated personnel, the Uniserv rep and the BEA president.
Left to right – Jack Felmet, Marsha Molstrom, Hanna Vaandering, Tom Husted, Trish Parks, Bruce Adams, David Wilkinson



To Oregon ALJ John Mann (Convoluted ethics in OAH process) July 6, 2010

Don Bellairs View Contact
To: John M MANN ; Camellia Osterink
Cc: Sen Bonamici ; Sen Hass ; Representative Bruce Hanna ; Betsy Hammond ; billgraves@news.oregonian.com; Joanne Yatvin ; jessicavanberkel@news.oregonian.com; jessicavanberkel@news.oregonian.com; gail.rasmussen@oregoned.org; David Wilkinson ; Hanna.Vaandering@oregoned.org; Jim Huffman

12 Files View Slideshow Download All
06 Dec Exceptions to the Findings of ALJ John M. Mann p 2.jpg (1220KB); 06 Apr 4 Doyle email district threaten to wd settlement.jpg (61KB); 06 Apr 26 email from Doyle TSPC willing to settle with stipulations & reprimand.jpg (279KB); 06 Aug 22 to ALJ Mann from DoJ--reassignment to Ramirez.jpg (230KB); 06 Dec Exceptions to the Findings of ALJ John M. Mann p 1.jpg (1195KB); 06 Jan 6 Doyle email ALJ Sloan called 15 min ago to reset.jpg (730KB); 06 Jan 30 Email from Doyle w memo of first of its kind ruling.1.jpg (1034KB); 06 Jan 30 Email from Doyle w memo of first of its kind ruling.2.jpg (1225KB); 07 Apri 24 L Wolf letter of denial.jpg (920KB); 07 Aug 10 V.Chamberlain Re Final Order.JPG (220KB); 07 June 5 letter from OAH administrator David Gerstenfeld letter p 1.jpg (1081KB); 07 June 5 letter from OAH administrator David Gerstenfeld letter p 2.jpg (336KB)


John Mann, ALJ
Office of Administrative Hearings

"Judge" Mann,

I enter a place of more resolve; I continue my quest to be treated fairly by the OAH and to have my record and reputation cleared of false, unsubstantiated charges. I am hopeful to hold you and "Judge" Sloan accountable for your misconduct. You were suspiciously assigned to my case with the TSPC years after it began--your mission was to give imprimatur to the TSPC's unsupported charges resulting from documents improperly filed by Hollis Lekas that resulted from a secret hearing with ALJ Andrea Sloan, DOJ attorney Liz Denecke and Tom Doyle, a lawyer supervised and compensated by the OEA--the organization that created the TSPC.

The result of my case in your hearing room was predetermined. You knew that you were providing cover for Beaverton's attorney, Nancy Hungerford, and her associates at the TSPC. Hungerford convinced state employees to protect her in a federal law suit where she was deceiving a judge. What happened was a blatant denial of my right to due process. It was, as you probably remember, one of several demeaning processes I was forced to endure because I wouldn't sign a confession.

You violated the law by not revealing the improprieties of my case and you have damaged my reputation and ability to earn a living by your misconduct. By supporting unethical bureaucrats, you diminish the principles behind our schools and our laws. Your misconduct in my case goes a long way in explaining why so many schools fail so many kids. The TSPC director used a "first-of-its-kind" legal maneuver THROUGH YOUR COURT to sabotage my (conflict-of-interest) civil case against Beaveron School District representatives who were behaving criminally. You were used to shelter the collusion between Beaverton's high-paid hired guns at Hungerford Law and the OEA lawyer who was "representing" me for years
.
It is no wonder our culture has become so corrupt. Bullying and cheating are mainstream.

I just asked my bosses to treat me fairly. I wanted what I had contracted for: a fair opportunity to teach my classes. I got instead a lopsided injustice in an over-politicized school with a ruling faction of entitled folks with far-reaching influence.

When I got there, Beaverton was already polluted with a duplicitous union rep and a culture of conflicts-of-interest, largely a result of role modeling by then-superintendent Yvonne "Kick Back" Katz and several other BSD leaders who saw schools as ATM's. What has happened since I complained to the new superintendent is the best evidence that my concerns were justified...and long overdue. No teacher should have to hire a lawyer to defend him from a union who took his money. (Read that statement again--then look at the attachments, your honor.)

Pardon the pun, but "Mann up." Please act honorably to correct the false record with the TSPC created by Susan Nisbet and Raul Ramirez in your hearing room in the fall of 2006.

Sincerely,
Don Bellairs, teacher

Janet Hogue, then CEO of the BSD's fundraising organization, the BEF...

Janet Hogue, then CEO of the BSD's  fundraising organization, the BEF...
...representing herself as superintendent.

Oct 06 letter from new BSD HR director Sue Robertson

Oct 06 letter from new BSD HR director Sue Robertson
...blocking access to evidence that would demonstrate Beaverton administrative misconduct.

Response to Sue Robertson, BSD HR chief, concerning false allegations to conceal misconduct

Response to Sue Robertson, BSD HR chief, concerning false allegations to conceal misconduct

Letter from Jennifer Hungerford, former Beaverton atty referencing BSD money manager Dan Thomas

Letter from Jennifer Hungerford, former Beaverton atty referencing BSD money manager Dan Thomas

Hollis Lekas, former Beaverton HR admin., June 2004 "complaint" to TSPC...

Hollis Lekas, former Beaverton HR admin., June 2004 "complaint" to TSPC...
...after waiting on FDAB results.

Justice delayed...

Justice delayed...

...is justice denied, Tom Doyle-style

...is justice denied, Tom Doyle-style

Former TSPC investigator Nisbet working unethically with Tom Doyle, OEA atty

Former TSPC investigator Nisbet working unethically with Tom Doyle, OEA atty
Her actions were designed to affect the outcome of a federal lawsuit. She lost her job consequently (Like me, she was small enough to fail). The improper use of TSPC "stipulations" and "pass-the-trash" deals effectively lets lawyers and bureaucrats in Oregon education play "God" with student welfare and teacher careers...

TSPC director Vickie Chamberlain trying to work a "deal" with Doyle

TSPC director Vickie Chamberlain trying to work a "deal" with Doyle
Signing stipulations to protect BSD administrators who violated employment and civil rights laws

OEA Legal Conceals Fraud

OEA Legal Conceals Fraud
Mark Toledo tries to cover up for Tom Doyle

Former OEA President Larry Wolf denial of illegal civil suit filed by OEA atty Tom Doyle

Former OEA President Larry Wolf denial of illegal civil suit filed by OEA atty Tom Doyle
Wolf abdicates leadership of union's membership to OEA "Advocacy"