Santa Clara County Grand Jury
• 2009-2010
2009-2010 Santa Clara County Civil Grand Jury Report Management Missteps at the Santa Clara Unified School District
⚠️ Translation Notice: This content has been automatically translated. The original English text is the official version. Translation may contain errors.
⚠️ Este contenido ha sido traducido automáticamente. El texto original en inglés es la versión oficial. La traducción puede contener errores.
Findings and Recommendations 4 findings
F1
Only 25% of the total Measure J bond funding was spent from 2004 to 2009. The current schedule states that the remaining 75% is scheduled to be spent by early 2014. Given past performance, it seems unlikely this deadline will be met.
Related Recommendations (2)
R1a
The Board should periodically require performance versus plan data on Measure J to ensure schedules are on track.
R1b
The Board should ensure that adequate resources are available to complete the remaining Measure J projects on schedule.
F2
The TMAP Board of Directors failed to effectively oversee the program.
Related Recommendations (1)
R2
The TMAP Board of Directors should continue to meet regularly to oversee the program, in conjunction with District Board meetings. 5
F3
In 2005, TMAP’s first Program Director, who was not a teacher, awarded himself a TMAP loan, with the consent of the District Superintendent. In 2009, the new District Superintendent required repayment and removed the Program Director.
Related Recommendations (1)
R3
The TMAP Board should adhere to the intent of the program and limit approval of loans to qualified teachers in accordance with the charter.
F4
Loan delinquencies are high and effective follow-up is lacking. Currently, 35% of the 48 outstanding loans are in arrears and 12 hardship requests asking for reduced payments have been received by the Board.
Related Recommendations (1)
R4
The TMAP Board should aggressively renegotiate outstanding loans with delinquent borrowers, and secure the loans with deeds of trust and secure legally binding new repayment schedules. This report was PASSED and ADOPTED with a concurrence of at least 12 grand jurors on this 25th day of May, 2010. Angie M. Cardoza Foreperson Judy B. Shaw Foreperson pro tem 7
Conclusions 7
-
CL1 Page 5Only 25% of the total Measure J bond funding was spent from 2004 to 2009. The current schedule states that the remaining 75% is scheduled to be spent by early 2014. Given past performance, it seems unlikely this deadline will be met.
-
CL2 Page 5The TMAP Board of Directors failed to effectively oversee the program.
-
CL3 Page 6In 2005, TMAP’s first Program Director, who was not a teacher, awarded himself a TMAP loan, with the consent of the District Superintendent. In 2009, the new District Superintendent required repayment and removed the Program Director.
-
CL4 Page 6Loan delinquencies are high and effective follow-up is lacking. Currently, 35% of the 48 outstanding loans are in arrears and 12 hardship requests asking for reduced payments have been received by the Board.
-
CL5 Page 5There were serious delays in the Measure J bond program. The Grand Jury found that there was a lack of proper management to execute the program in a timely manner. There was also ineffective oversight.
-
CL6 Page 5The Grand Jury is concerned that the public may assume, as we did, that the CBOC has extensive oversight powers over the bond program on behalf of the voters. However, our investigation revealed that the CBOC has limited scope and responsibilities, as defined by the Code.
-
CL7 Page 5It is essential that all of the TMAP delinquencies be addressed as soon as possible in order to ensure that TMAP remains solvent and the program is able to provide continuous funding for teacher loans. Findings and Recommendations Finding 1 Only 25% of the total Measure J bond funding was spent from 2004 to 2009. The current schedule states that the remaining 75% is scheduled to be spent by early 2014. Given past performance, it seems unlikely this deadline will be met.