VISTA: Judge rebuffs call to kill Richart's contract

Page says he plans to appeal

By PAUL SISSON - Staff Writer | Wednesday, September 24, 2008 6:09 PM PDT ∞

VISTA ---- A Superior Court judge has sided with former MiraCosta College President Victoria Munoz Richart, declaring that a state statute does not require her to return a settlement valued at $1.6 million.

Leon Page, a Carlsbad resident and attorney who sued MiraCosta and Richart on grounds that her settlement was illegal, said Tuesday he disagrees with the ruling handed down by Judge Thomas P. Nugent and plans to appeal it.

"We will ask the court of appeal to uphold the statute in a way that this judge was unwilling to do," Page said. "For the time being, I've done all that I can, and I think now it's the public's turn. Elections are coming up, and now the public has a turn to decide whether they believe the MiraCosta board acted appropriately when they gave the former president a $1.6 million settlement."

Richart said she was pleased with Nugent's ruling.

"To me it validates the action of the board," she said. "I don't think it's a vindication for me but for the trustees who have been under an enormous amount of attack."

She said of Page's decision to appeal: "He would, wouldn't he? More expense on the taxpayers' shoulders, when the judge has already said he has no case."

Richart's settlement came after a two-year roller-coaster ride at MiraCosta that started with her investigation into the illegal sale of palm trees by some members of the college's horticulture department. The community college's Faculty Senate disagreed with the breadth and results of Richart's investigation. After an all-night meeting with a mediator, the entire board voted to settle with Richart after she claimed the board minority worked against her.

In a 10-page ruling filed Tuesday, Nugent disagreed with the central tenet of Page's argument that Richart's settlement should be declared invalid. In legal papers and in court, Page and his attorney Ron Cozad, argued that a state law limits all "cash settlements" with public employees to 18 months salary and benefits.

Attorneys for Richart and the college countered that state law does not prohibit "tort" claims that any person can file if they believe they have been wrongly damaged by another person or organization.

Nugent agreed with MiraCosta's take on the meaning of the law.

"The court finds that the statute is clear and unambiguous on its face and applies only to the maximum amount of cash settlement an employee can receive for claims arising out of the contract being terminated," Nugent wrote in his ruling, adding that nothing prevents an employee from suing for additional damages.

The judge further ruled that the MiraCosta board has good reason to settle with its former president and superintendent.

"It is the finding of this court that the decision of the board to pay settlement monies to Richart was not arbitrary, capricious, entirely lacking in evidentiary support, contrary to established policy, unlawful or procedurally unfair," Nugent wrote.

Jack Sleeth, the attorney who represented MiraCosta in defending Page's lawsuit, noted Tuesday afternoon that the statute specifically states contracts and not the broader matter of claims for damages.

"The Legislature knows how to write this stuff," Sleeth said. "If they wanted to do it like he (Page) suggests, all they would have had to say was something like 'all claims made by an administrator' instead of using the word contracts."

Page said he is confident that the state Legislature intended to limit not only contract settlements but also any claims for damages when it made the law that limits settlements with administrators like Richart.

"I looked at the legislative history," Page said. "I looked at what was presented to the legislators when they decided to vote for the bill that created the legislation. The judge didn't look at the history."

News of the ruling traveled fast among MiraCosta board members.

Board Chairwoman Carolyn Batiste said Wednesday she was "thrilled" with the ruling, but added that she was disturbed by Page's decision to appeal. She said fighting the appeal will only suck more money from MiraCosta's coffers.

"It takes away from serving students better," Batiste said. "I would believe that, as a concerned citizen, that's what (Page) would want us to do."

When asked to explain what he meant by the public speaking in the upcoming Nov. 4 election, Page said he intents to vote against Batiste, who holds one of three open seats.

Batiste said it did not surprise her that she will not get Page's vote.

"I would expect him to vote against me because my actions were vindicated," Batiste said. "That's what happens when people won't see the facts and the truth."

Contact staff writer Paul Sisson at (760) 901-4087 or psisson@nctimes.com.

First name only. Comments including last names, contact addresses, e-mail addresses or phone numbers will be deleted. Attempts to misrepresent your identity or impersonate any person will not be approved. All comments are screened before they appear online, so please keep them brief. Comments reflect the views of those commenting and not necessarily those of the North County Times or its staff writers. Click here to view additional comment policies.