McCann wins Survivor Sweetwater

Barry Jantz Barry Jantz 11 Comments


Overturning her prior decision that embattled Sweetwater Union High School District Trustees Bertha Lopez and Jim Cartmill could remain on the school board after pleading to misdemeanors, Judge Ana España reversed the ruling today, thus leaving John McCann as the lone member.

Cartmill and Lopez have been suspended from the board pending sentencing.

Protocol I believe indicates the next step is the District seeking authority for the County Board of Education to appoint a couple of trustees.

The UT San Diego will have a more detailed story soon, I assume, if one isn’t posting while I write this.

More to follow. Undoubtedly.

Update 9:05 p.m. As of tonight, the District webpage shows the prior two vacated board seats, but it now includes two additional seats as “suspended,” thus confirming the previously reported information.

Ashly McGlone at the UT did have a story posted before mine went up. Here it is…


Comments 11

  1. And,,,,,, how much money did Ed Brand and John McCann spend of our hard earned tax dollars to fight this issue in court . In a nut shell this community wants John Mc Cann and Ed Brand gone. Month after month Mello monies are being borrowed. We are in a deficit yet the District is looking to purchase a building for a new District office. Will the madness ever end? Not as long as this ship of fools are in charge. For months Ed Brand’s evaluation has lingered; it was in fact the community had to demand that Brand be evaluated WHY? If I did not love the city of Chula Vista so much I would hope McCann would win the city council seat. At least there he could be controlled. It is time for Mr. McCann to retire from politics as he seems ill equipped to understand in life and politics your word is your bond. All of the promises he made when he ran in 2014 – empty. Up until the last Biard meeting he CONSISTENTLY voted as a block with Arlie Ricasa and Jim Cartmill and often with Pearl Quinones. Review Board Docs for verification.

  2. “…Cartmill and Lopez were suspended…” My understanding is that the judge said she had no standing to rule on the 1770.2 issue.
    Who is going to suspend them? Certainly not the Superintendent, or the attorney for the District, they are just hired hands and serve at the pleasure of the Board of Trustees. Like them or not, these people were elected and would normally be sent down by their peers. Given that they were the last two making a quorum, it may have to fall to a reconstituted Board with elected members from the County Board of Trustees. An elected official can only be removed by impeachment (recall), Court order after conviction and sentencing, or by an action of the body to which they were elected under certain circumstances.
    Be very careful here in what you wish for. From where I stand this sets a very dangerous precedent and could be the Sweetwater equivalent of a palace coup.
    I have grown accustomed to the Sweetwater way, but even for the 5 Board members and the Superintendent, this is getting into uncharted territory.

  3. Boy that speaks volumes to the poor quality of trustees we have here if John McCann is the winner.

  4. Yes Thor, but who suspended them?
    The precedent here could be that a City Manager suspends a council member because of an FPPC violation by not reporting meals and gifts from lobbyists and others. n The suspension may be righteous but no civilian should have the authority to do so.
    As an example;
    Mr. McCann has used the services of attorneys, some of whom do work for the District to threaten those who criticize him. But there is no mention of these services on his 700 form. When asked, the Superintendent declared the services were provided “pro bono”.
    When the inevitable FPPC complaint is made and the form is revised, does that rise to the level that could be cause for removal?
    I hope not, not for Mr. McCann’s sake, but for the good of our representative democracy.

  5. To all the McCann supporters I respectfully ask – if John McCann, for nearly 4 full years has aligned himself with Arlie Ricasa, Pearl Quinones and Jim Cartmill why, JUST IN TIME FOR ELECTIONS, is he posing as distancing himself from them? Why has he, who as a candidate for the 2010 elections, voted with them all as a block; when his campaigning promises vowed to RID the Board of corruption? Why did/does Mr. McCann treat those who went to the FBI and DA as though they were/are pubic enemy number 1. If anyone reading this finds themselves engaged in a conversation with him, ask McCann. No doubt the words antagonists, trouble makers, flag disrespecters will flow from his tongue – hmmmmm, seems FBI and DA didn’t think so.

    WHEN A POLITICIAN SHOWS YOU THEIR TRUE COLORS BELIEVE THEM – McCann needs to retire from politics!

  6. Kevin – based on your last post the community should look forward to John McCann stepping down since he like the others failed to report a gift; and we have all heard him say publicly that the other Board members failure to follow the law has caused the taxpaying community to loose confidence in them (paraphrase).

    What is that saying? Something about what goes around, comes around!

    Was that the only unreported item? Is that the sound of erasers and amended 700 forms I hear?

  7. Kevin,

    That is business as usual in the South Bay. The Otay Water Board Members admitted on the record in public session of a Chula Vista Board of Ethics meeting to violating the Brown Act while the water district’s attorney personally represented the board members on the water districts dime. The DA did nothing about the Brown Act violation even after multiple Ethics Members lodged complaints and no one did anything about the water board members using the attorney for a purely personal matter.

    As for your concern about the removal of duly elected officials I thought about that too. However, I think they are just clearly following the law that is in place. As long as there is a clear law I believe that it is OK. But you are right we do not “civilians” making the decision to remove elected officials. Fortunately, I do not think that is the case here.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.