BY GUY P. GLAZIER with Followup by Mitch Lehman
If you see something, say something . . . unless you work for SMUSD. That’s according to recent claims brought by 10-year SMUSD employee Leyda Escamilla. On January 12, 2024, Escamilla filed an administrative complaint with the SMUSD Board of Education, a criminal complaint with the San Marino Police Department, and a Government Claims Act claim (precursor to a civil suit) with SMUSD, all alleging that SMUSD, Superintendent Linda de la Torre, Human Resources Director Jaso Rose, and SMHS Principal Benjamin Wolf retaliated against her for making protected disclosures under Sections 44110-44114 of the California Education Code, otherwise known as the “Reporting by School Employees of Improper Governmental Activities Act.”
The Education Code relied upon by Escamilla provides that criminal and civil penalties may be enforced against anyone “who intentionally engages in acts of . . . retaliation . . . against a public school employee . . . for having made a protected disclosure . . . ,” defined as: “a good faith communication that discloses . . . information that may evidence either of the following: (1) [a]n improper governmental activity[] [or] (2) [a]ny condition that may significantly threaten the health or safety of employees or the public . . . .” Improper governmental activity is defined by the code as “an activity by a public school agency or by an employee that . . . involves gross misconduct, incompetency, or inefficiency.”
According to Escamilla’s complaints, On August 29, 2023, she reported to her supervisors, including Principal Wolf that “SMHS Head Football Coach Nate Turner should not be on the SMHS campus in proximity to employees and SMHS students because he has a violent past, a history of gang violence and drug dealing, multiple felony arrests, and had recently been accused of several incidents of violence against women resulting in restraining order applications from his female victims.”
Escamilla also provided to her supervisors a packet of publicly available court documents she says substantiate her report. These documents contain arrest records and recent (2023) allegations of violence against women resulting in a restraining order against Turner. One of the documents contains an alleged transcript of a recorded conversation between Turner and one of his alleged victims. The conversation transcript, if genuine, presents a shocking indictment against Turner.
On September 1, 2023, Escamilla documented the information constituting her concerns in a letter addressed to her supervisors. In it, Escamilla stated: “[t]he presence of an individual with a history of domestic violence accusations can be particularly distressing for women in the district.
It sends a message that the district may not prioritize the safety and well-being of female employees.” Escamilla continues: “the mere presence of someone with a history of domestic violence can perpetuate harmful stereotypes and contribute to a culture where women are treated with less respect or seriousness.”
Escamilla counsels in her letter: “[t]o maintain a productive and healthy work environment, it is crucial that the district takes a stand against behaviors that perpetuate a hostile atmosphere.” Escamilla concludes: “the existence of these allegations about an employee who is meant to guide, coach, and shape our impressionable young men is also great cause for concern, and [because Turner is meant to fulfill substitute teaching duties, this] expands his access to all our students, including many young women, and the district has an obligation to provide a safe and comfortable learning environment to all or students.”
According to Escamilla’s complaints, her “August 29, 2023 oral report and September 1, 2023 letter constituted what [she] believed in good faith to be information concerning: 1) gross misconduct and incompetence by SMUSD in placing Mr. Nate Turner on the SMHS campus, and 2) a condition that may significantly threaten the health and safety of SMUSD employees and the public—specifically SMHS students.”
But, rather than address her reports, Escamilla claims that SMUSD, Dr. de la Torre, Dr. Rose, and Dr. Wolf turned on her instead and “conspired to protect SMUSD’s decision to hire Turner and keep him located physically on the SMHS campus in close proximity to and in a direct supervisorial role over SMUSD employees and students. Dr. de la Torre, Dr. Rose, and Dr. Wolf concocted a wholly false narrative of Leyda Escamilla’s reporting and conduct, erected entirely false standards for reporting protected disclosures, and engaged in a pattern of workplace harassment, bullying, and intimidation including:” 1) writing multiple letters to Escamilla containing false information and accusations, 2) running to Turner to reveal Escamilla’s identity and her reports, 3) threatening Escamilla with termination and referral to “the Justice Department,” 4) recommending her dismissal from SMUSD employment, and 5) placing her on administrative leave for exercising her due process rights to a preliminary hearing concerning her employment status.
According to the SMUSD Notice of Intent to Dismiss and Statement of Charges against Escamilla, attached to her complaints, SMUSD contends that, in violation of Board policies, Escamilla privately investigated Turner and then distributed the packet of adverse information concerning Turner on the SMHS campus and throughout the community. In her response to that Notice, also attached to her complaints, Escamilla denies these charges and presents evidence of her innocence in the form of sworn witness affidavits. According to SMUSD, the publicly available documents concerning Turner contained some of his private information, such as his social security number.
Again citing SMUSD policies, SMUSD takes Escamilla to task for distributing this private information. Escamilla contends in response that, 1) she provided the packet only to her supervisors, a SMUSD Board member who happened to be on campus that day, and her union president, all individuals who have access to that information anyway, and 2) that, now, de la Torre, Rose, Wolf, and Turner have conspired to conceal from SMUSD employees that Turner is the same individual who is the subject of the packet of adverse information, making the private information relevant as to Turner’s identity in any case.
In total, SMUSD levels two dozen charges against Escamilla including that she was rude and disrespectful to Turner, maligned his reputation, and spread rumors exaggerating or falsifying Turner’s past conduct, that she created unrest and disturbance at SMHS and throughout the community, and that she was insubordinate to authority and provided false information to her supervisors about how she came into possession of the packet of adverse information concerning Turner. Escamilla denies all of these charges and advances further sworn affidavits of her innocence.
Escamilla also claims that SMUSD and its administrators “have engaged in a campaign wrongfully to erect false barriers to Leyda Escamilla’s lawful protected disclosures.” According to her complaints, they “hurl invective at Escamilla for reporting information that does not rise to the level of criminal conviction in a court of law or to a level that [they] claim justifies adverse employment action against Mr. Turner.” However, Escamilla’s complaints refer to the Education Code and counter that “nothing requires Escamilla to prove beyond a reasonable doubt the information she lawfully reported. Indeed, [Escamilla] need not even be correct. So long as [she] maintains a good faith belief that she is disclosing ‘information that may evidence . . . improper governmental activity[] [or] [a]ny condition that may significantly threaten the health or safety of employees or the public’ . . . her report is protected by law.”
Escamilla is represented by Los Angeles-based attorney (and San Marino resident) Guy P. Glazier of the law firm Glazier Yee LLP. Reached for comment, Glazier stated: “It is just shocking that, in today’s world, where we are conditioned to speak up if we see or hear something that concerns us—especially on a school campus—the response would be to target the reporter of that information and come after her with guns blazing.” Glazier added, “it is equally shocking that SMUSD and its top administrators would so brazenly fashion the multitude of utterly false allegations against Leyda that they did. Their multiple allegations against her are just ludicrous and easily proven so through the sworn testimony of numerous witnesses.” Glazier concluded: “Leyda Escamilla has devoted ten years of dedicated service in our schools to protecting the health and wellness of our students. She is revered by teachers, students, parents, and this community for those efforts. Now, when Leyda speaks up in support of health and wellness, SMUSD and its senior administrators have decided to toss her aside in favor of protecting their ill-advised personnel decisions. The law does not countenance that kind of retaliation.”
