FSD Forks Over $35k to Fired Lunch Lady

The Fullerton School District had the summer off while our attention was diverted to more important matters. Under that cover and with the convenient assistance of closed session, the Board handed a ridiculous $35,000 cash settlement (our money, not theirs) to a previously fired six-figure employee who didn’t like getting terminated.

Lisa Reynoso is an ex-Director of Nutrition Services who presumably neglected her job duties so badly that the district took on the daunting task of actually terminating her employment and replacing her with someone better.

The board had been wanting to fire Ms. Reynoso for years, but the first attempt at some sort of action in 2007 was overturned by the Personnel Commission, a crazy union invention in which a dubious mix of unelected and unaccountable bad-employee sympathizers actually have power above and beyond the school board itself.

An unsettling agreement

So the lunch lady’s tenure was extended by a few years, which was more than enough for her to earn herself another termination by doing something else bad. We don’t know what she did this time, but anyone who’s tried the meatloaf knows that the bar is pretty low in a grade school cafeteria.

Did the board take charge and let her go this time? No. Our spineless representatives took the easy way out and gave her a parting settlement instead. At the taxpayers’ expense, of course.

It’s lost on these unprincipled, short-sighted administrators that handing cash to an ex-employee who doesn’t deserve it only encourages future bad apples to pursue the same jackpot. Shampoo, rinse, repeat, waste money, hope nobody notices.

What a mess.

The scam was ultimately abetted by the spineless “ayes” of board members Bev Berryman, Janny Meyer and Hilda Sugarman in closed session, with Chris Thompson dissenting.

22 Replies to “FSD Forks Over $35k to Fired Lunch Lady”

  1. The FSD Board has been a sinkhole of incompetence for as long as I can remember. I wonder if Ms. Reynoso poisoned somebody with her Tuesday Meatloaf Special.

    In the educrat world that would be rewarded with a big severance check.

  2. It looks like just two members of the board were able to make this decision, with one dissenting. What are all of the squiggly lines?

  3. Is the Fullerton Joint Union High School District part of this bunch? My son has been in an IEP with them for over 3 years now, and I can tell you about countless screwups on their part; one in particular was when a home school teacher called me to say he was in the library at his high school to meet my son for his home schooling one particular day. I happened to be in the front office at that school with my son when he called. The office staff said he should have come to the office first to get a visitors pass. This teacher, with the district should have known this. When the staff lady called the school librarian, the librarian told her there was no one in the library. Obviously this teacher was flat out lying. When I confronted the entire IEP team at our next meeting about this, everyone including the school principle, the director of special ed, Greg Endleman and their attorney just stared at me as if I were nuts and said Nothing. I told them “Silence is Guilty”. They operate very similar to the FPD. The BIG problem now is that the District has claimed ‘home schooling’ is not going to work for your son. They completely ignore their lack of responsibility in the matter.

  4. These three School Board members, or the “Three Stooges”, should be the next candidates up for a recall.
    They are all in cahoots with the teachers union, much like our city councilman are with the police union.
    Let’s clean house now before they clean out our wallets!

    1. Like I said, Fullerton is no different than any other city. We all complain all the time about what idiots city council members are, the school boards, how could they make decisions like these, etc. City government is consistent. It’s easy to place blame in a time like this, but Fullerton will get rid of some and the same type will end up back in office in a few years.

  5. usually cafeteria workers, and that is what this woman really is if you minus her title, are rarely fired for bad food. Usually blatant theft over a long period of time of monies or materials or both finally forces a district to fire one of these slob/thiefs. she will probably use her 35,000 to hire an attorney who will legally force the district into re-hiring her

    1. I hope the Fullerton city officals are not that stupid. The $35,000 should have been conditional on all legal issues being gone; no right to future suits.

      1. It was. Only problem was the decision by the Board is part of a corrupt system that makes it IMPOSSIBLE to get rid on anybody – unless they commit an actual crime.

  6. They might just have conducted a cost/benefit analysis.

    Give the worthless piece of human garbage $35,000 or she fights and the tax payers give $70,000 to some worthless lawyer.

    No win here.

  7. First of all, she was not a “cafeteria lady”, she was “Director of Nutritional Services”. The rumor is, Her husband (Ken) was “Assistant Director of Maintenance” @FSD. This pompous ass liked to throw his weight around and intimidate those under him by taking a camera everywhere He went and documenting every little thing His “subjects” did wrong. Seems He trumped up some charges against one of the maintenance workers (for reasons we wont get into here Ken), anyway the maintenance worker fought back by retaining an attorney and a private-eye. Seems that Mr. Reynoso wasn’t all He claimed to be. Someone down at good old FSD hired this BOOB without checking his credentials. His claims of having a Master’s Degree in Engineering and further checking on His work history all showed He had (AHEM) “misrepresented” himself. He quietly disappeared from FSD one day without explanation. But we all knew why. As for Lisa…no one really knows what happened except “them”. But rest assured, it’s politics as usual and sometimes it’s worth the extra expense to make certain things “go away”. If you were the wife of a disgruntled ex-employee what would YOU do?

  8. By the way, regarding item #4 in the above legal document mentions certain “claims’ Mrs. Reynoso may have against the district. I wonder what those were exactly? Why would the district fork over 35 grand to make those claims stay private? HMMMMM?

  9. Maybe Ken can buy a better pair of sunglasses with that 35K? Looked like a fuckin douche wearing those cheezy wrap-arounds in meetings. Oh wait, He IS a douche.

Leave a Reply

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