CASE #0300
LINDBERGH EDUCATIONAL CENTER
REASON FOR INVESTIGATION
A citizen's complaint was received asking
for an investigation of the Lindbergh Educational
Center in the Manteca Unified School District.
The complaint alleged improper use of a Regional
Occupational Program, of grants and the use
of district vehicles.
BACKGROUND
1) The complaint alleged vehicles owned by
the principal, were repaired by the Automotive
Instructor and his students and questioned
the expense to the district in respect to
the cost of parts. In addition, because the
principal would be responsible to evaluate
the Automotive Instructor, a conflict of
interest was in question.
2) The complaint alleged the use of School
to Career Grant and the SAPID (School Age
Parent and Infant Development) Grant was
in question.
3) The complaint alleged the principal was
using a district vehicle for personal use.
METHOD OF INVESTIGATION
Members of the Grand Jury met with the Superintendent,
Asst. Superintendent of Manteca Unified School
District, the Principal and the Automotive
Instructor of Lindbergh Educational Center.
A review was made of the policy pertaining
to the use of district vehicles and of the
admission records of all students currently
enrolled in the Lindbergh Educational Center.
A comparison to Manteca Unified School District
was done on the use of district vehicles.
The Grand Jury looked into the policy versus
the practice at Tracy, Stockton, Lincoln
and Lodi Unified School Districts.
FINDINGS
1) After reviewing the policy and procedures
of the Regional Occupational Program, the
Grand Jury finds there is no written policy
in regards to the vehicle repairs. There
is a practice that any vehicle can be repaired,
if the students do not have their own vehicle.
The owner of the vehicle being repaired purchases
all parts.
2) After interviewing the Superintendent
of Manteca Unified School District and the
Automotive Instructor, the Grand Jury finds
that the Superintendent feels it to be reasonable
for the Principal to evaluate the Automotive
Instructor.
3) After reviewing the admission records
of students enrolled, interviewing the Superintendent
and Asst. Superintendent of Manteca Unified
School District,
the Grand Jury finds no evidence of misuse
of the School to Career Grant or the SAPID
Grant.
4) After receiving the written policy on
the use of district vehicles and conducting
interviews with the Superintendent and the
Asst. Superintendent of Manteca Unified School
District, the Grand Jury finds Manteca Unified
School District has a written policy that
provides for mileage reimbursement and use
of a district vehicle for district travel.
The district has a practice that provides
a district vehicle to administrators and
permits personal use of their vehicles.
5) After comparing the Manteca Unified School
District's vehicle policy and practice to
Tracy, Stockton, Lincoln and Lodi Unified
School Districts, the Grand Jury finds:
a. Tracy Unified School District has no written
policy. The district has vehicles available
to administrators on occasion. When a vehicle
is needed, one can be assigned for the day.
The director of maintenance is the only position
that is assigned a vehicle, to insure a quick
response anytime of the day or night. The
district does not permit personal use of
their vehicles.
b. Stockton Unified School District has no
written policy. The district has vehicles
available to administrators on occasion.
When a vehicle is needed, one can be assigned
for the day. The SUSD Chief of Police and
Asst. Chief of Police are the only two positions
that are assigned vehicles, to insure a quick
response anytime of the day or night. The
district does not permit personal use of
their vehicles.
c. Lincoln Unified School District has a
written policy, and no district vehicles.
d. Lodi Unified School District has a written
policy that the district follows. When a
vehicle is needed, one can be assigned for
the day. The district does not permit personal
use of their vehicles.
Manteca is the only district that has a policy
that differs from the practice. No other
district reviewed allows personal use of
their vehicles, or supplies vehicles to the
administrators.
CONCLUSION
The Grand Jury concludes that the vehicles
repaired for the Principal by the Automotive
Repair class is the acceptable practice of
the District. However this can leave the
appearance of partiality when the person
whose vehicle is being repaired is responsible
for the evaluations of the Instructor.
The Grand Jury concludes there was no misuse
of the School to Career or SAPID Grant in
question.
The Grand Jury concludes that the personal
use of district vehicles is consistent with
the acceptable practice at Manteca Unified
School District.
RECOMMENDATIONS
The San Joaquin County Civil Grand Jury recommends
that Manteca Unified School District write
a policy and procedure for the Regional Occupational
Program to establish guidelines in regards
to the automotive program.
We further recommend that Manteca Unified
School District update their policy and procedure
to reflect a more accurate view of the district
towards the use of district vehicles.
RESPONSE REQUIRED
Pursuant to Section §933.05 of the Penal
Code:
1) The Superintendent of Manteca Unified
School District shall report to the Presiding
Judge of the San Joaquin Superior Court,
in writing and within 90 days of the publication
of this report. That Statute requires that
as to each finding in the report, the response
indicate one of the following:
a. The respondent agrees with the finding.
b. The respondent disagrees with the finding
with an explanation of reasons therefore.
Section §933.05 also requires as to each
recommendation, the response indicate one
of the following:
a. The recommendation has been implemented,
with a summary of action taken.
b. The recommendation has not yet been implemented,
but will be, with a time frame for implementation.
c. The recommendation requires further analysis,
with an explanation of the scope of the analysis
and a time frame not to exceed 6 months.
d. The recommendation will not be implemented,
with an explanation therefore.