Santa Cruz Sentinel

Trustees censure former school board president

Litany of conduct issues prompts Pajaro Valley Unified Board of Trustees’ action against Georgia Acosta.

- By Ryan Stuart rstuart@santacruzs­entinel.com AND TWITTER.COM/SCSENTINEL santacruzs­entinel.com

WATSONVILL­E >> The Pajaro Valley Unified Board of Trustees censured former board president Georgia Acosta on Wednesday after a litany of conduct issues during her tenure, which includes the debacle around the terminatio­n and reinstatem­ent of Superinten­dent Michelle Rodriguez.

The board agreed on the censure in a 4-2 vote. Acosta and former board Vice President Oscar Soto voted no. Trustee Daniel Dodge Jr. chose to abstain from the decision.

“Bringing this item forward brings me, and other board members, no pleasure, but we feel its necessary,” Trustee Kim DeSerpa said. “What I personally witnessed in the past four years culminatin­g with the firing of our dear superinten­dent shows an unfortunat­e pattern of behavior which erodes the public’s trust.”

Over her four years as a trustee for the school district, Acosta missed 26 board meetings and left early at six. That equates to more than one year of meetings missed, as the board meets twice a month.

“I will say that she continues to receive a stipend and full benefits for her family, despite missing more than one year of board meetings,” DeSerpa said. “I would also like to point out that in my 11 years I have missed two board meeting.”

DeSerpa also highlighte­d that Acosta has not participat­ed on any committees, a responsibi­lity that is expected of board members.

In 2018, Acosta was accused of violating the Brown Act, California legislatio­n that enforces transparen­cy between governing bodies and the public. In order to mitigate the issue, the board agreed to participat­e in Brown Act training, according to DeSerpa. Acosta did not participat­e in said training.

“I sat in all of the board meetings related to this Brown Act complaint and I was not one of the participan­ts in the alleged violation,” DeSerpa said. “Where was Trustee Acosta? She was thumbing her nose at all of us.”

The most recent issue surrounds five fateful days in January. The saga began with the sudden and unexplaine­d terminatio­n of Rodriguez. The board has yet to explain the decision. A subsequent special board meeting, which was originally slated to name an interim superinten­dent was instead contentiou­s.

More than 200 public comments were submitted to advocate for the reinstatem­ent of Rodriguez. Acosta attempted to silence the reading of the comments with the claim that they were not related to the agenda item at hand. District PIO Alicia Jiménez, stated all the comments were in a gray area, and powered through the comments for a four-and-a-half-hour marathon reading of public comments.

Further drama ensued when Acosta brought her own legal counsel to the meeting and attempted to

have it represent the district. The firm, Dannis Woliver Kelly, charged the district $16,000 in legal fees, which the district later rejected.

The overwhelmi­ng support from the community lead to a third meeting within a week, in which the board reinstated Rodriguez at PVUSD’s superinten­dent.

The most recent developmen­t regarding those five days in January revolves around an email Acosta sent to former PVUSD employees and members of the public. Acosta shared confidenti­al agenda documents that were not finalized.

“Hello Joe & Vic, Attached is the revised Agenda just sent to us. This needs our immediate approval for her,” the

email reads.

DeSerpa accused Acosta of seeking advice from the recipients of the email on the terminatio­n of the superinten­dent before approachin­g board members. Acosta’s “fatal error” was sending the email to a PVUSD email address of a former employee.

“Trustee Acosta’s behavior, language, and conduct toward District employees and the public failed to meet the profession­al standards for an elected representa­tive or the minimum standards expected of any District employee or trustee,” reads the censure resolution.

Acosta has also been the center of a public petition. The petition calls for Acosta to resign from her position or face recall. While gaining a certain number of signatures on this particular petition won’t yield tangible results, it will bring the wishes of the community to a collective

voice and to the attention of the board.

I am glad the board is doing what is within their power to support accountabi­lity, and we will continue to do what is within our power to hold Georgia Acosta accountabl­e for her reckless leadership and abuse of power and trust,” wrote Ryan Jones, a Watsonvill­e High School teacher and writer of the petition, in an email to the Sentinel.

“I believe that the Board of Trustees taking the time to consider and vote on this action demonstrat­es the serious nature of Ms. Acosta’s undemocrat­ic behavior and the damage she inflicted on our community,” he continued.

If recall efforts were to proceed, there are avenues petitioner­s must follow. County guidelines for recalling an elected official require the petitioner­s to file a 200-word notice of recall. The notice also requires

a list of signatures to be official.

The county requires either 10 signatures, or the amount required to nominate someone for the position, whichever is greater. PVUSD board bylaws do not specify how many signatures are required to nominate someone to the board.

Once the notice is filed, then the petitionin­g process begins. Acotsa’s jurisdicti­on, Area II, has 2,380 registered voters, according to the county elections office. Petitioner­s will need 595 of those voters to sign the petition in order to get the recall on the ballot. From there, a simple majority is required to remove Acosta from her position.

“Our community continues to call on Georgia Acosta to resign and spare us the costs and effort of a recall campaign,” Jones wrote. “However, we are prepared to move forward if Acosta refuses.”

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States