Esau Ruiz Herrera Board of Trustees, Alum Rock Union School District In accordance with applicable law, I submit this*

Disagree. This is a political opinion masquerading as a finding of fact. Expressing such political opinions in a formal Grand Jury report is inconsistent with the the purpose and statutory authority of a Civil Grand Jury, and unworthy of its time and expenditure of its assets.

Disagree. This subcommittee of the Grand Jury has misread the relevant report of legal counsel, or perhaps the subcommittee was influenced by the political aspects surrounding the issue.

Disagree. The Board is regularly informed by the Superintendent and the Assistant Superintendent of Business that contracts are awarded according to law and Board regulation.

Disagree. Such a practice is not uncommon and is recommended according to the needs of the particular public agency.

Disagree. The subcommittee of the Grand Jury is simply wrong on the facts, and thus is incorrect in its conclusion.

Disagree. The subcommittee of the Grand Jury is simply wrong on the facts, and thus is incorrect in its conclusion. The subcommittee reads into board regulations content that is simply not present, and so the subcommittee offers it own conclusion of what it feels should be the end result. Such an approach dangerously veers into political conclusions, and is inconsistent with the duty and authority of a Civil Grand Jury.

Disagree. The Board had more than adequate time to review and assess the material submitted by General Counsel applicants. The sense of dissatisfaction and expression of related concerns are more political in nature, reflecting the political differences of adults.

Neither agree nor disagree. "Staying committed to improving student education and parental involvement" should be the minimum expectation of a school district Superintendent. Meeting such minimum expectations is not a substantial reason for commendation.

Disagree. Only one trustee, Andres Quintero, engages in juvenile political tantrums during public meetings, talking and yelling over other trustees just to get his own political opinion out. If a student acted like that in a classroom, the teacher would quickly send that youngster to the Principal's office. If a member of the Superintendent's Cabinet acted in such a manner, the Superintendent would take steps to remove that offending adult from the educational team. It is somewhat bizarre that members of the subcommittee (who claim to have attended a number of board meetings) feel spiritually compelled to commend such behavior. Such "finding" does not inspire confidence in the dignity and credibility of the Civil Grand Jury. Esau Ruig Herrera . e- . . .