Orange School Board Accused of Misconduct : Education: Parents’ group files complaint with district attorney alleging abuse of power, violation of open-meeting laws and other abuses. District’s counsel calls it a ploy to support a recall bid.

The county district attorney’s office is reviewing a complaint from parents in the Orange Unified School District that accuses the district’s seven-member board of misconduct, abuse of power, violation of state open-meeting laws and other illegal activity.

Deputy Dist. Atty. Jim Tanizaki said he received the 17-page complaint from a committee called Responsible Parents for a Responsible School Board late Tuesday and will “do a preliminary inquiry and review to determine the essence of the case.”

The group represents some parents from each of the 38 schools in the school district, a spokeswoman said, and is the same committee that started a recall petition drive against six board members in April.

“Even if the district attorney doesn’t do anything, the public needs to be aware of these things, and they need to watch the board,” said Marvella McAllister, the group’s chairwoman.

According to the complaint, the district’s Board of Education regularly violates state laws and district bylaws by taking actions in closed session without first allowing public discussion, and in some cases without notifying the public of the subjects to be discussed.

Moreover, the letter accuses board member Alan E. Irish of conflict of interest and the board of financial mismanagement.

Board President Barry Resnick refused to comment on the complaint and referred questions to the district’s special counsel, Spencer E. Covert Jr.

Covert said as of late Thursday that he still had not seen the complaint and could not comment without reviewing it.

However, he added: “In my 20 years of representing school boards, it is very common to file a citizens complaint with the (district attorney) in conjunction with a recall petition. It’s a political tool to support a recall campaign, because it gets publicity.”

Board member and clerk Bill Lewis agreed.

“There are certain elements of the PTA who are really out to terrorize the school district . . . and interfere with the way business is conducted in the district,” he said. “I’ve yet to see anything improper that’s being done (by the board), so (the complaint is) politically motivated.”

The complaint cites the board’s May 14 decision in closed session to buy out the contract of Supt. Norman C. Guith as an example of violations of the Ralph M. Brown and Bagley-Keene acts, which mandate open meetings for public entities.

According to the complaint, board members returned to closed session that night after a regular public meeting without properly notifying the public or Guith.

Salary increases for interim superintendent Richard Donoghue also should have been discussed in public before a decision was made, the letter states. Violation of the Brown Act is a misdemeanor punishable by up to six months in jail and a $1,000 fine.

The letter also alleges that the board abused its power when it fired Guith and demoted three principals and assistant Supt. Roger Duthoy because the personnel changes were “based on personal vendetta by board members and not justifiable.”

The complaint requests an investigation of possible impropriety because Irish accepted campaign contributions from two companies that supply construction services to the district. Howard Mason, chief executive officer of one of the companies, Howard Mason & Associates, was recently hired to head the district’s maintenance, operations and transportation office.

Irish has denied wrongdoing.

The letter also indicates that there may be a “a considerable amount of misappropriation of funds” in the district and cites high legal expenses and an $800,000 error made in estimating the cost of moving district headquarters to a new location.

The board members, the letter states, are “in general are not being honest . . . with their constituents.”

“We pray that our suspicions and information is invalid,” the letter concludes, “But if this data is correct, it is our responsibility to stop this cancer before it continues to spread and kills our district.”