The Alisal Union School District plans to revoke the charter of Oasis Charter Public School if the school doesn’t voluntarily surrender it, a move the district has demanded must happen by June 30.
The charter revocation, in effect, would lead to the school’s closure because the charter serves as the school’s permit to exist.
In a letter sent April 27 to Oasis Executive Director Juanita Perea and Oasis Board President Augustine Nevarez, a copy of which was obtained by the Weekly, Alisal Superintendent Dr. Hector Rico and Board President Fernando Mercado Luis write that the district has lost confidence in the school’s leadership.
“As you are aware, the district is currently investigating a complaint filed by a charter school parent alleging numerous violations by Oasis Charter Public School of its charter and the law,” the letter states.
“Although the investigation is still ongoing, a preliminary review of the allegations, coupled with recent admission by Charter School staff, has caused [AUSD] to lose confidence in the Charter School’s leadership/governance.”
Among the complaints listed in AUSD letter: failing to implement mandatory state testing for the 2015-2016 school year; hiring uncredentialed emergency permit teachers to teach core subjects for entire school years; using prohibited and unregistered pesticides in student instruction areas; failing to comply with all conflicts of interests laws in hiring and contracting; failing to comply with the California Political Reform Act and financial disclosure requirements for board members under that act; and requiring students to perform bathroom and other school cleaning duties as part of an educational program not approved by the AUSD Board of Education.
“Based on the foregoing, the District demands that you take action to surrender the charter effective no later than June 30, 2018,” the letter states. “If you opt not to take that action, the district will have no alternative but to commence public proceedings for revocation,” pursuant to rules laid out in California’s Education Code.
In addition, the district told Perea and Nevarez they are required to attend a meeting at the district office to be scheduled no later than May 4. Sources tell the Weekly that meeting is scheduled to take place sometime this morning, May 3; it will be closed to the public.
In a written statement provided by email, Rico writes as follows: “The investigation is still ongoing but, based on preliminary findings, the District will be meeting with Oasis to discuss the status of the investigation to date and possible options."
Perea and the other board members did not respond to the Weekly's requests for comment Tuesday night.
This morning, all Oasis teachers were called into an unscheduled meeting and aides remained in the classroom with students, according to school officials who declined to be named because they are not authorized to comment on the record.
Also scheduled for May 3, but at 1:30pm and very much in public: A Monterey County Superior Court hearing for the parent who made the complaints to the Alisal district in the first place. Andrew Sandoval, a Salinas business owner whose four children attend Oasis, was hit with a temporary restraining order on March 15 by Perea, who wrote that she has suffered “severe emotional distress as a result of Mr. Sandoval’s unremitting harassment.”
Among her claims: that Sandoval has made over 40 complaints to Oasis’ board and other entities; that several other parents reported feeling bullied and intimidated by Sandoval; that Sandoval “stalked” her at a Juntos Podemos event at Alisal High School; that support staff feel Sandoval’s presence and behavior undermines a teacher’s authority; and that the school’s lead custodian has threatened to resign because of Sandoval’s behavior. Taken as a whole, Perea wrote in her restraining order application, she was forced to curtail his interaction with the school’s faculty and staff.
But Sandoval filed a motion of his own, in a legal move known as “anti-SLAPP,” or strategic lawsuit against public participation, effectively arguing that the restraining order is meant to silence him from exercising his rights to participate in the public process as a concerned citizen and school parent.
Superior Court Judge Vanessa Vallarta will hear that motion at 1:30pm, May 3.
If Sandoval prevails with his anti-SLAPP motion, the restraining order will be thrown out.
Sandoval was served on March 15 with a temporary restraining order by Perea, standard procedure when a request for a restraining order is filed in court. Perea is seeking to make that order permanent, with a hearing set for May 10; that hearing will only go ahead if Sandoval does not prevail in his anti-SLAPP motion.
There are 244 students currently enrolled at Oasis. If the school’s charter is revoked and the school closes, all kindergarteners through fifth-graders will have to re-enroll in other elementary schools.
UPDATE: Andrew Sandoval prevailed in court on May 3. Monterey County Superior Court Judge Vanessa Vallarta granted his anti-SLAPP motion and ordered Perea to pay his attorneys fees and court costs.
In addition, the temporary restraining order against him has been dismissed.