Natomas School Board has a mess on its hands, but blame the state for dumping it there
The headline is that an elected school board member was removed from her post and was being investigated by the state of California for bilking thousands of dollars from her district.
That’s bad enough and Ericka Harden, the embattled trustee of the Natomas Unified School District board, has a lot of explaining to do beyond her denials published in The Bee.
But as a community, we need to understand the story within this story. This isn’t just about Harden. This is about how Harden has been investigated for more than four years by the California Department of Consumer Affairs.
When considered in the context of proportion and common sense, a four-year probe into Harden is a ridiculously excessive amount of time.
It only took two years from the time burglars broke into the Democratic National Committee offices at the Watergate hotel and office building in 1972 to the historic moment in 1974 when President Richard Nixon resigned from office in disgrace. Yes, large events in American history have moved faster than the California Department of Consumer Affairs.
What happened while state investigators made a career of looking into Harden?
She was elected narrowly to the Natomas school board last November. That means she would represent the very district she is accused of bilking at least $16,000 for services she may not have been licensed to provide. The state didn’t seem to get serious about Harden until she was elected last November by less than 300 votes. Suddenly, there she was: Being sworn into the Natomas school board.
Better late than never, huh guys?
Actually, no, because once Harden was sworn in, she became empowered with fiduciary responsibilities that include attending closed-session meetings where she had access to proprietary Natomas Unified School District information.
That’s awkward.
On Tuesday, the district held a special meeting with the only agenda item to decide whether to strip Harden of her leadership post on the board. She has been board clerk.
The accusations, as reported by The Bee are: “The state’s review has intensified in recent months, with investigators subpoenaing the district for receipts, emails and other documents involving Harden’s speech therapy work with children in the district. The receipts show Harden claiming more than $16,000 from dozens of speech services in 2016 and 2017.”
Here is the important part: Harden has a license as an assistant speech pathologist, according to The Bee story.
But in January 2017, Natomas district officials began to balk at invoices submitted for repayment by Harden because they were submitted without the proper documentation.
The Bee reported: “In January 2017, a district official appeared to become wary of some of the documentation that was coming in. Invoices were omitting her registration number. “Do not process anymore (sic) receipts from this vendor without licensure documentation,” one person wrote...A few months later, in April 2017, regulators with the Department of Consumer Affairs levied a $1,000 citation against Harden for not providing documents and cooperating in an investigation. Harden said she attempted to appeal the citation, but was told it was too late.”
Why should you care? Because the state cared enough to fine Harden $1,000 four years ago and, despite that, nothing happened. She ran for office and won. Nobody was the wiser. Voters who elected her should feel angry. Natomas parents should feel angry. Harden should feel angry.
This should have been resolved years ago, before Harden ran for office. If the state Department of Consumer Affairs had taken care of business in a timely manner, this mess wouldn’t be a story because it would have been resolved before she was elected. Maybe then, her issue with the state could have been handled privately.
It wasn’t, she was elected, and now we have this mess. Thank you, state of California!
