Is LA County's New DA Nathan Hochman Turning A Blind Eye to Public Corruption at LA Unified.
EDUCATION
Is LA County's New DA Nathan Hochman Turning A Blind Eye to Public Corruption at LA Unified.
Allegations of financial abuse of California taxpayer Prop 28 funds takes a backseat to prosecuting Protestors in the administration of newly elected DA Nathan Hochman
AmFed Staff
Just a few months ago the Citizen of LA County ousted ultra progressive District Attorney George Gascon, and elected Nathan Hochman.
As a candidate, Hochman blamed Gascón for creating a “golden age of criminals,” and rated Los Angeles safety on a “scale of 1 to 10,” at zero. It appears as Hochman starts his first term as Los Angeles County District Attorney, it appears that he may be one of the most significant enablers of public corruption since Attorney Matthew Monforton, a former prosecutor in the appeals division of the Los Angeles County District Attorney’s Office, said in 2001, the “personal relationship between then DA Steve Cooley and Former DA Robert Philibosian, who represented Cudahy, spared city officials from a detailed criminal probe that might have resulted in arrests a decade ago.”
Now, as Hochman embarks on his first term as the District Attorney of Los Angeles County, there are growing concerns that he might become one of the most notable enablers of public corruption in recent memory.
Hochman Prosecuting the "Huddled masses yearning to be Free,"
Hochman has been concentrating his efforts on charging Los Angeles citizens with felonies for protesting to uphold the rights of the "Huddled masses yearning to be Free," while turning a blind eye to multiple accusations of Fraud, Waste, and Abuse of Taxpayer funds by LAUSD Superintendent Alberto Carvalho.
LAUSD's mismanagement of Prop 28 funds has reached alarming levels. The arts funding jumped from $74 million to over $206 million between 2022 and 2023. LAUSD manages nearly 420,000 students with a $10 billion budget, and serious claims have surfaced about $77 million in state-allocated arts education funds being misused.
In accepting Prop 28 funds, school districts are required to use this money to increase and not replace funding for existing art and music instruction and to allocate at least 80% of the funds to hire arts teachers and aides to provide music and art instruction.
However, on his own Admission Carvalho has admitted that he engaged in misuse of taxpayer funds. According to Carvalho: Understanding the LAUSD Prop 28 Crisi
"Given historic staffing challenges in filling arts educator roles and because 80% of Prop. 28 must be spent on labor, the district prioritized the use of Prop 28 funds to cover existing staff as well as hire new staff." — Alberto Carvalho, LAUSD Superintendent
But former LAUSD Superintendent Austin Buetner says, "He [Carvalho] says he used the money to cover, to pay existing staff," Beutner said. "The law says you may not use the money, in plain language."
The money they believe was illegally "redirected" to other things such as "to increase senior staff salaries" claiming their pay has "increased fivefold since 2010, while student enrollment has plunged."
"We want to make sure the money that's supposed to go to the schools gets there," Beutner said.
According to the Lawsuit filed by Beutner “LAUSD now seeks to cover up their unlawful conduct. Section 8820(g) requires that LAUSD “(1) Certify that all [Proposition 28] funds are used to provide arts education” and “(2) Certify that such funds received will be used to supplement funding for arts education programs and that funds received in the prior fiscal year were, in fact, used to supplement arts education programs.” LAUSD has defrauded the State of California and its taxpayers by providing these certifications, falsely asserting that it has used Proposition 28 funds to supplement arts funding while in fact supplanting previously budgeted funds. LAUSD has defied the will of the voters and, as a direct and proximate result, deprived hundreds of thousands of students of the benefits of an arts education they are entitled to under the law.”
The attorneys from Kendell, Brill, and Kelly, who are former DOJ Prosecutors, have meticulously conducted a comprehensive analysis, shedding light on the significant level of corruption that has transpired under the leadership of LAUSD Superintendent Alberto Carvalho, forming the foundation of the allegations outlined in their civil suit. It is alarming that District Attorney Nathan Hochman appears to be prioritizing certain matters, such as aggressively pursuing protesters, while seemingly overlooking substantial allegations of financial misconduct within the LAUSD. Notably, Hochman's office gained attention for pressing felony charges against Martin Torres for his involvement in an incident where objects were thrown onto the 101 Freeway during an immigration protest. Furthermore, Hochman's decision to set Torres' bail at $775,000 underscores his strong emphasis on cases related to protests.
Prosecution of freeway protesters and not corrupt officials at LAUSD
District Attorney Nathan Hochman seems to ignore these substantial claims of fund misappropriation at LAUSD. The facts paint a troubling picture - 37 elementary schools saw their arts instruction funding stay flat or decrease, despite the huge budget boost meant to grow these programs.
Hochman's office wants to prosecute protesters "to the fullest extent of the law", yet seems blind to serious financial mismanagement claims at LAUSD. His office claims they work closely with county and state agencies to hold people accountable for fraud but Hochman. has taken no public action about the $77 million Prop 28 funding controversy.
LAUSD superintendent Alberto Carvalho admits to ABUSING Prop 28 funds
LAUSD Superintendent Alberto Carvalho openly admitted misusing Proposition 28 funds. His August 2024 memo to the Board of Education revealed he used new Proposition 28 money to pay existing staff, breaking the law's requirements. The lawsuit against LAUSD shows the district used these funds to replace funding for all but one of these 227 elementary arts instructors during 2023-24.
The mismanagement reaches staggering levels - LAUSD received $76.7 million in Prop 28 funds [, with 80% meant specifically for hiring new art teachers. Instead of expanding arts education as required, we used these funds to cover existing costs. Long Beach received about $10 million from Prop 28 and hired 150 new arts teachers. Using this ratio, LAUSD should have brought in more than 1,000 new teachers.
Major labor unions backed legal action against LAUSD, including United Teachers Los Angeles (UTLA), Service Employees International Union Local 99, and Teamsters Local 572. UTLA President Cecily Myart-Cruz pointed out the district's dishonesty about its use of Prop 28 funds .
LAUSD's mishandling of Prop 28 funds not only sheds light on financial issues but also uncovers deeper concerns. Superintendent Alberto Carvalho is under scrutiny for allegedly manipulating attendance records to secure additional public funds. These allegations hint at a systemic problem within one of the nation's most extensive school systems, raising questions about accountability and transparency in educational governance.
LAUSD Superintendent Alberto Carvalho also accused of falsifying records to recieve taxpayer dollars for students not at school
Financial investigations at LAUSD have exposed systematic manipulation of attendance records. The district allegedly inflated student numbers to get more state funding under Carvalho's watch. California taxpayers feel the effects directly since the state's education funding depends heavily on daily attendance figures.
Carvalho's background reveals additional red flags. Prior to his tenure at LAUSD, he held a leadership position at Miami-Dade County Public Schools, where issues regarding financial management were also raised. Despite his humble beginnings as an undocumented immigrant, inquiries into his fiscal stewardship have persisted throughout his career in educational administration.
Allegation of Fraud being ignored by DA Hochman of LAUSD's crisis Abuse of public funds becomes clearer through these numbers:
Prop 28 allocated $76.7 million specifically for arts education expansion
The district received funding for thousands of students whose attendance records show discrepancies
Multiple whistleblowers have provided documents that support claims of record falsification
Hochman's office seems to give minimal attention to these grave allegations, focusing more on pursuing charges related to protests. This disparity in enforcement highlights a concerning trend where systemic corruption is overshadowed by the prosecution of individual acts of civil disobedience.
Audit and Whistle Blowers
The problems go beyond arts funding misuse. School Board candidate Dan Chang found fraudulent attendance reporting that led to inflated funding. LAUSD officials claimed this happened only at Madison Middle School, but the pattern of financial irregularities points to systemic problems.
The district's November 2024 audit findings revealed multiple contract violations and overcharging cases. A vendor had to return $25,286 for overcharged unit prices and unpaid volume rebates. These findings highlight the need for better oversight of Alberto Carvalho’s Mangement LAUSD's financial practices.
Community response
Parent groups are upset about LAUSD Superintendent Alberto Carvalho and sentiment that DA Hochman will face if he continues his double standards. His office pushes for $775,000 bail in protest cases but seems to ignore $77 million in taxpayer money that wasn't handled properly.
Now, three significant labor unions - United Teachers Los Angeles (UTLA), Service Employees International Union Local 99 (SEIU Local 99), and Teamsters Local 572 - have joined forces to collectively seek clarification. This collaborative effort underscores the mounting discontent regarding the Los Angeles Unified School District's (LAUSD) financial practices and the selective approach of Hochman in addressing corruption allegations.
Conclusion
DA Nathan Hochman follows his predecessor Steve Cooley's playbook by picking and choosing which cases to prosecute. He ignores LAUSD's $77 million fund mismanagement but makes sure to set $775,000 bail for protest-related cases.
Hochman's firm stance on protesters starkly contrasts with his lenient approach towards addressing Public Corruption and Fraud Waste and Abuse issues linked to LAUSD's financial challenges. By prioritizing cracking down on demonstrators, Hochman appears to be neglecting the crucial matters of safeguarding the interests of LAUSD students and taxpayers. This shift in focus raises concerns about his commitment to upholding justice and accountability within the education system. The community's previous criticism of Gascon for being "Soft on Crime" now seems to be echoed in Hochman's handling of criminal activities affecting students and public funds. Such a pattern suggests a continuation of the previous administration's lack of transparency and accountability in dealing with public corruption issues.