More than 10 months after Superintendent Cuauhtemoc Avila was placed on administrative leave, Rialto Unified School District officials and his attorney are growing impatient with an investigation into sexual harassment allegations against him.
“Why the hold up? I do not understand why it’s taken so long,” attorney Robert Stanford Brown said in a phone interview. “The only thing I can conclude is that it is to subject him to as much humiliation as possible.”
Brown said he understands the investigation has wrapped up and there have been findings, but he has yet to see them.
“Regardless of what the findings are, Mr. Avila can’t get those nine months back, and his reputation has been damaged, and now he has this stigma attached to him as a sexual harasser. And Mr. Avila is still in a holding pattern,” he said.
Avila, who was hired as superintendent in 2015, was placed on non-disciplinary, paid leave on May 8, 2024, on a 3-2 vote by the school board, with members Joseph Martinez and Stephanie Lewis dissenting.
Though rumors were swirling around the district at the time, board members did not say why they took the action against Avila. And they still had no explanation the following week when they appointed Edward D’Souza, a lead academic agent for the district, acting superintendent on a 3-0 vote.
It wasn’t until nearly six months later, when Avila filed a damage claim against the district, that the public learned he had been accused of sexual harassment by a subordinate, lead innovation agent Patricia Chavez. Chavez claimed Avila retaliated against her when she rejected his advances.
Avila’s Nov. 5 claim against the district alleged Chavez conspired with school board member Edgar Montes to trump up the sexual harassment allegations for their own special interests and to defame him. He claimed Chavez leveled her accusations against him after he refused to promote her.
Avila in limbo
For more than 10 months now, Avila has been in limbo at home collecting his base salary of more than $31,000 every month while the Glendale law firm Garcia Hernández Sawhney investigates the allegations against him, but it is unclear when the firm will report back to the board. It was hired by the district in late May 2024.
Neither Rialto Unified spokesperson Syeda Jafri nor any other district administrator responded to repeated requests for comment on the status of the investigation and its duration.
Bonifacio Bonny Garcia, a partner at the firm hired by the district, said in an email Friday that “the privacy rights of the parties involved preclude us from providing any comment at this time.”
Lewis, who is currently serving as president of Rialto Unified’s Board of Education, said in a telephone interview Friday she has not been made aware of any findings from the investigation.
“If there were findings and a conclusion, we’d be able to act,” Lewis said. “We have not been given that information.”
But she hopes the investigation is nearing the finish line.
“It’s taking so much attention way from what we need to be focused on. I am very much pushing for this thing to be wrapped up,” Lewis said. “We really want to make sure things are done fair and properly. We’re anxiously awaiting for things to come to closure so we can end one chapter and start another.”
Tim Prince, a longtime San Bernardino civil litigation attorney who has been following the developments unfolding at Rialto Unified over the last several months, said the Avila investigation seems “unusually long.”
“There’s been nothing revealed that would justify such a lengthy delay. These investigations are often concluded in 60 to 90 days, sometimes 120 days,” said Prince, who has more than 30 years of experience representing public employees in civil cases against their employers, colleagues and supervisors, including sexual harassment cases.
“This district is out of control,” he said. “There’s a lack of professionalism and a lack of accountability.”
Avila’s claim
Avila’s claim largely blames Montes for a campaign to remove him from his position at the helm of the district. The claim alleges Montes conspired with Chavez to sully his reputation because the superintendent had refused to “acquiesce to demands” that Avila reasonably believed to be unethical and/or illegal, including Montes directing Avila to hire friends and family members at the district who were not qualified for positions.
Following publication of an article by the Southern California News Group about Avila’s claim, Montes fired back at Avila during the Feb. 5 school board meeting, unleashing a 14-minu tirade against the absent superintendent and other adversaries of Montes.
He noted, no less than three times, that Avila had been placed on leave due to sexual harassment and retaliation allegations filed against him by a “subordinate,” and that, based on those allegations, the district was following proper procedure and protocol and treating Avila no differently than any other employee.
Chavez’s claim
More than two months after Avila filed his claim, which typically is a precursor to a lawsuit, Chavez also was placed on administrative leave without public explanation. She then responded with a claim of her own against the district on Jan. 17.
The claim, obtained through a public records request, alleges “decisionmakers” within the district, including board members, had “failed to take all reasonable steps” necessary to protect her from Avila since 2016, and instead retaliated against her and, ultimately, placed her on administrative leave.
The claim alleges Avila engaged in a “pattern and practice of sex-based harassment and discrimination,” creating a hostile work environment and disparate treatment. Among Chavez’s allegations are that Avila engaged in repeated sexually charged discussions regarding her physical appearance, propositioned her for sex, and touched her in a sexual manner, according to the claim.
Additionally, the claim alleges, Avila stripped Chavez of her duties for “refusing to be receptive” to his advances and, later, for mistreating her during her pregnancy, according to the claim. Chavez is asking for a minimum of $35,000 in damages for mental and emotional harm and other noneconomic damages, as well as economic damages to be determined.
Reached by telephone Friday, Chavez declined to comment on why she was placed on leave. Her attorney, Michele Akemi McKenzie, could not be reached for comment.
Service record
Avila came to power in Rialto Unified after another dark chapter in the district’s history.
He was hired as superintendent in April 2015 following a scandal involving Judith Oakes, an accountant with the district’s nutrition services department, who was convicted of stealing $1.8 million in student lunch money over a period of eight years. She pleaded guilty and was sentenced in January 2015 to five yeas in prison.
Then-Superintendent Harold Cebrun, who was linked to Oakes personally but not criminally, retired amid the scandal, and Avila was brought in to lead the district. Before coming to Rialto Unified, Avila had 20 years of experience working in the public education sector without complaint.
He served as assistant superintendent of student programs for the Los Angeles County Office of Education from 2012 to 2015. Previously, he had worked 13 years as a teacher and school administrator at the Compton Unified School District. And prior to that, he worked for five years at the Glendale Unified School District as an administrator and school principal.
According to employment contracts provided by the district, he was hired in at a base annual salary of $211,600 and, by the time he was placed on leave, was earning approximately $374,000 in salary as superintendent.
Sullied reputation
Brown, his attorney, said Avila’s previously unsullied reputation has been tarnished by the unfounded allegations against him that are playing out playing out in the public arena.
“I don’t understand why there doesn’t seem to be any sense of urgency to get this thing resolved, given his years of dedication and service to the district,” Brown said.
“Mr. Avila’s reputation is presumably taking a beating while the district seems to be hanging him out to dry. Again, I don’t understand why that’s the case,” he said. “I would hope the district is not just exposing him to further retaliation regarding these false allegations that have been leveled against him.”
