The D11 Fact Sheet

There is much disinformation and misinformation circulating around the School District 11 community. Much of this misinformation is being spread by those who are intent on maintaining the status quo. This blog will set the record straight and it will educate the public on the identities of these defenders of the status quo.

Thursday, October 29, 2009

More on Tanner's pizza shenanigans

As a follow up to the Jan Tanner pizza dealings, a reader pointed out that Tanner used campaign funds from her 2009 board run to pay a profit to her Cheezer’s Pizza business. She paid off a $488 pizza donation with over $760 in campaign contributions. The link to the Secretary of State web site which contains this campaign contribution information is here: http://www.elpasoelections.com/fcpa/2008/FCPA_PDFs_2008/D11_CommitteeToElectJanTanner_RptContExp_01222008.pdf.

This is obviously a small amount in comparison to the $160,000 that Tanner made off of D11 last year, but it shows that she is making a continuous living off of D11 tax payer dollars. Take note that while in Gazette articles about this issue, Tanner keeps referring to Cheezer’s as “my husband’s business.” On the SOS site, she correctly identifies Cheezer’s as her employer.
As the reader also notes, it is no coincidence that former D11 procurement guru John Elliot’s wife, Linda, was Tanner’s campaign manager during this time when Tanner gave her company a little profit from campaign funds.

More to come in response to the Gazette article on Tanner’s pizza deals.

Tuesday, October 13, 2009

Gazette runs interference for Tanner (sort of…)

Remember the days when every personal detail and every utterance of D11 board members was considered front page news when those personal details involved reform board members? Remember how even unfounded allegations of illegal activity against specific board members were considered to be in the interest of the public, and therefore worthy of top-of-the-fold coverage? With progressives running the D11 board, the Gazette philosophy has dramatically changed. Not only are very clear financial shenanigans not worthy of a news article, they are a reason for the Gazette education writer, Sue McMillin, to run interference for the board member in question.

The issue of D11 board member Jan Tanner’s sweetheart pizza contract with the school district did catch the attention of McMillin, but she was not interested in exerting any energy to determine if Tanner or district administrators were violating any state statutes, or even district policies and regulations. The most that McMillin was willing to do was to place an entry into a back page blog on the Gazette website where she produced a rather weak defense for Tanner. In this blog entry, McMillin claims that Tanner’s pizza companies have been conducting business with D11 for over a decade. McMillin, with no professional curiosity at all, then points out that D11 issued a Request for Proposal (RFP) in July 2009 for this contract, and that Tanner’s pizza franchises won against several other pizza shops. Since McMillin has obviously chosen to become the advocate for Tanner rather than a reporter, she fails to inform her readers why Tanner has held onto this lucrative pizza contract for over a decade without ever having to bid through an RFP or any other contract. Keep in mind that Tanner became the school district treasurer in 2004 and has held these contracts without any public notice through the current date. As I pointed out in my prior post, Tanner made over $160,000 during the 2008-2009 school year alone.

McMillin sniffs that there is a paper trail for all of Tanner’s district business, yet McMillin never produces any part of this trail. One has to question whether or not McMillin presented D11 with an Open Records Request or if she simply took Tanner’s and D11 CFO Glenn Gustafson’s words that this paper trail actually existed. If McMillin did officially request this paper trail of transactions, D11 had only 72 hours to comply with the request. If there were extenuating circumstances (ie, time was needed for D11 and Tanner to CREATE this so-called paper trail), then D11 had only 7 days to produce these documents, according to state law. McMillin has never indicated that she has ever received any documents from D11.

McMillin tells us, with no proof or explanation, that Tanner signed an “official conflict of interest” document in January 2007, but that this document was never made public. Proving once again that she has very little interest in facts, McMillin does not sufficiently explore or explain why a conflict of interest document, which is used to inform the public of a public official’s conflict of interest, was never made public. Tanner explained to McMillin that she did not believe that she had to tell anyone of her conflict because “everyone knew” that she was making big money off of the school district. Really, Jan? Everyone knew? When you were appointed board Treasurer in 2004, I did not know that you were engaged in contracts with the school district, nor did at least two other board members. In fact, I did not know until quite recently that you were engaged in a six-figure annual contract with D11.

So who did know of Tanner’s hidden business dealings with D11? Glenn Gustafson knew, as did ex-procurement manager John Elliott. What makes this deal smell even more rotten is that, according to D11 Policy DK, written in 1972 and revised in 1979, the person who writes the checks for approved bills in the district is….the Treasurer or Assistant Treasurer. Unbeknown to the D11 tax payers, Jan Tanner was literally writing herself checks from the public trough for several years – unless, of course, she was allowing Gustafson to have the honor of making those payments.

Now let’s take a look at D11 policy DJG, “Vendor Relations.” Under this policy, the CFO (Gustafson) is responsible for, “The establishment of procedures to ensure that purchases shall not be made from a member of the board or their immediate households, or from any enterprise in which a board member holds a substantial interest, except for public utilities, when the purchase is in the best interest of the district, or when there is no conflict of interest.” While Sue McMillin argues in her blog that Tanner was not a “member of the board” until her election in 2006, she is incorrect. Tanner was a member of the board and a public official as soon as she was appointed “Board Treasurer” in November 2004.

McMillin points out that the Board of Education (BOE) does not routinely vote on food service contracts, and that the district purchases milk from Sinton Dairy in a “similar” fashion. That is not quite the case. By BOE policy EF (Food & Nutrition Services) the BOE will approve the prices set for meals and milk. Therefore, the BOE is aware of the contract with Sinton and BOE members are aware of the cost of milk purchases because they are required to set the price for milk.

For even more information on yet another angle in this Tanner money-making scheme, visit Spydrasweb once again at http://www.spydrasweb.blogspot.com/. In the latest Spydra blog entry, read how another pizza salesman named Anthony Mand also had a lucrative pizza contract with D11 and learn how he entered a partnership with – you guessed it – the Tanners, in 2003. As Spydra notes, this legal partnership quickly dissolved after Spydra first wrote of the shady Tanner business dealings.

By the way, Jan Tanner wants to be the D11 board president after this fall’s elections. If the Treasurer slot pays $160,000 per year, one can only imagine how Tanner will profit while seated in the President’s chair.

Sunday, October 04, 2009

Her hand – Your wallets - (Updated)

Back in October, 2004, the D11 board majority made a very unusual board appointment. It is almost always the case that school board officers are school board members. The reason is so that the board officer will be representative of the electorate. There is no policy or law that forbids boards from appointing non-board members to board officer positions, but it has never happened in D11 until 2004.

Eric Christen was the board elected treasurer after the 2003 board elections. The board treasurer is the official treasurer of the school district. The paid Chief Financial Officer (in D11’s case, Glenn Gustafson), reports to the board treasurer. Christen made it clear that he would take time to examine the D11 budget expenditures line by line to weed out waste, fraud, and abuse. Needless to say, Gustafson and other D11 board members and administrators were not excited about the prospect of having a public airing of the expenditure of D11 funds.

In November of 2004, the board majority produced a list of “allegations” against Christen that they used as a reason to remove him from his role as D11 Treasurer. These “allegations” were not required to be proven before the board voted 4-3 to remove Christen from his role as treasurer and appointed Jan Tanner as the new treasurer. Why Tanner? We were never sure. She was (and remains) an anti-parent elitist and an apologist for the status quo in the district, so in that regard, she was a good fit for the board majority’s inner circle. She has never been a proponent of transparency or fiscal accountability in D11, so Gustafson certainly approved of her appointment. Most important, Tanner was no threat to review the D11 budget and have public discussions about the destination of tax payer dollars.

The “official” reason given for the appointment of Tanner was because she was the accountant for her husband’s Domino’s Pizza franchise. In fact, according to Colorado Secretary of State records, Tanner is a registered agent and an officer for the franchise owned by her husband Carl Tanner. The Tanners named this Domino’s franchise “Cheezer’s.” Carl’s brother, H. Mark Tanner, owns a Domino’s franchise called “Inflated Dough.” It turns out that this is a very appropriate name when considering the relationship between D11 and the Tanner family.

Against the protests of Glenn Gustafson, beginning with the 2008-2009 school year, D11 began to place copies of its check register online through the D11 homepage. Much to Gustafson’s regret, some D11 tax payers have actually begun to look at these expenditures.

There is a new blog called “Spydrasweb.” It can be found here: http://www.spydrasweb.blogspot.com/. Spydra is one of those people who has taken the time to look through the details of some of these D11 expenditures, and she blogs about some of her findings with regards to Cheezer’s and Inflated Dough. Her research sheds some light on why Tanner was so interested in becoming the D11 treasurer.

Any board officer is required, by law, to inform the board and public if there is a financial conflict of interest between his or her official duties and his or her business. While Tanner has been asked about the fact that her franchise has supplied D11 with pizza, she has maintained that her husband has only donated pizza to the district. OK, no conflict there. Spydra points out that with this regular donation of pizza, the bookkeeper for the franchise (Jan) certainly must write off this “donation” from the franchise taxes. Unfortunately for Tanner, the D11 check register does not support her claim that she was only donating anything to D11. Look here to see for yourself: http://www.d11.org/transparency/AP%20Payments%20FY08-09.xls.

During the 2008-2009 school year alone, Jan and her family have been paid over $160,000 from D11 for pizza. In most financial circles, that is not considered a “donation.” Spydra raises other questions about this undeclared conflict by Tanner. Is she writing off these pizza sales as donations? Is taking payments from the district and then taking money from the point of sale to students in the schools? How long has Tanner been on the D11 payroll? If she has been taking funds from D11 since she was first appointed as treasurer, she has made over ½ million dollars without ever declaring her conflict.

Who besides Tanner has been aware of this money-making venture by the Tanner clan? D11 CFO certainly knew since he is giving Tanner weekly checks from the district. As Spydra also points out, John Elliott, the ex-D11 procurement guru, also knew of these healthy tax payer payments to a board member. What about the board members who appointed Tanner to the treasurer position? Did they know of her financial dealings with D11? It is hard to imagine that they did not know. Keep in mind that Karen Teja, who tried to sue me for exposing the fact that she was receiving a $5,000 annual voucher for her own child while preventing other parents from receiving academic help for their children, counted Tanner as one of her close allies. Just as the other status quo board members turned a blind eye to Teja’s corruption, they certainly would not be too concerned about learning that Tanner has her hand deep into the tax payers’ pockets as well.

Kudos to Spydra for unearthing Jan Tanner’s special relationship with the district that she serves for “free.” $160,000 per year is not bad for a volunteer position. Don’t think for a minute that this is the only case of a “favored” person making a decent living off of D11 under the cloak of secrecy. No doubt there will be more to come.

Update: The El Paso County District Attorney and the Colorado Attorney General have become involved in this issue.

free html counters
Circuit City Discounts