More Parents Sue School District, Charter School, and County Superintendent over Secret Camera Scandal

This story first appeared at Newsmakers with JR.

Two sets of parents, whose children attended Santa Barbara Charter School while now-fugitive teacher Steven Schapansky allegedly made secret video recordings of students undressing, have sued S.B. Unified School District (SBUSD), seeking a judicial takeover of school safety protocols.

It is the latest legal fallout in a still-unfolding scandal, which began in July, when the Sheriff’s Department disclosed that investigators found hidden cameras with which Schapansky — for seven years — recorded students without their knowledge while they were in a closet of his 5th- and 6th-grade classroom where they changed clothes, among other places.

The publicly chartered school is on the campus of Goleta Valley Junior High.

Schapansky was arrested and charged this month with two felony counts of child molestation and 70 misdemeanor counts of unlawful electronic peeping. He was released on $100,000 bail and then failed to appear at his September 13 arraignment, and he remains at large with a warrant out for his new arrest.

What the Lawsuit Says

The new civil lawsuit, following another on behalf of a different student, was filed in Santa Barbara County Superior Court on Friday. Given the sensitivity of the matter, the parents are identified in it only as Joan and John Doe, and Roberta and Richard Roe, while their children are named as Jane Doe and Rachel Roe.

Because of arcane legal procedures, the filing does not yet ask for monetary damages, although it states that such claims “shortly will be filed.” Instead, its asks that a judge take control of school safety planning in the district, and appoint an outside “referee or compliance monitor” to prevent further “predatory and other criminal behavior.”

The lawsuit, filed by high-profile attorney Barry Cappello, names SBUSD as the lead defendant, along with the charter school and Susan Salcido, county superintendent of schools.

It calls the Schapansky case part of an “appalling reality that public schools in Santa Barbara failed to provide the most basic care and supervision of the minor children in their custody,” and cites the California Constitution, the state Education Code, and other regulations requiring a “comprehensive safety plan” at each school and regular reevaluations of it.

“The District has done nothing to inspect the locations throughout its system, or establish procedures and assign staff to assess and inspect premises to ensure that surveillance cameras or audio equipment is not placed where it would invade the privacy of the minor children whose care and custody the parents have entrusted to the District,” the suit alleges.

What the District Says

Ed Zuchelli, SBUSD’s public information officer, told Newsmakers he could not comment directly on the suit because he has not seen it, but “any case of sexual abuse is unacceptable. Our schools must be a safe place for children.

“Last year, our District started annual training of all staff on how to detect and report grooming and sexual abuse behaviors,” Zuchelli said in an email statement. “It is incumbent on our whole District community to look out for our students and create safe learning environments.”

Significantly, he also noted that Santa Barbara Charter School, under state law, “operates independently” from the district, with its own board of directors and staff, “which is responsible for the operation of the school, and agrees to defend and indemnify SBUSD for anything that may occur.”

What the Superintendent Says

County Superintendent Salcido emailed a statement, saying she was previously unaware of the lawsuit:

“I learned this morning that I have been named in a claim related to the case involving a former Santa Barbara Charter School teacher. As Santa Barbara County Superintendent of Schools, I am concerned for the safety and well-being of all children and families and am deeply saddened by the news of this case.

“Without responding to any specifics relating to pending litigation, I do feel that it’s important to clarify that the oversight of the County Superintendent of Schools does not extend to charter school personnel, facilities, or day-to-day operations and that under California law, charter schools act independently as a separate legal entity.”

S.B. Charter School did not respond to a call seeking comment.

There’s More Work for Lawyers

According to the lawsuit, the defendants “have not protected the children entrusted to the public schools,” and the county Superintendent and SBUSD have not “regularly monitored or inspected the Charter School facilities, nor directed the Charter School to comply with these and other safety requirements.”

Therefore, the suit says, the plaintiff parents are seeking what is known as a writ of mandamus, an order by which the court would take over control of safety planning; “retain jurisdiction” to ensure that each school has a safety plan that is reviewed annually; and appoint what would effectively be a special master to oversee and monitor implementation.

This is the second lawsuit filed by parents since news of the hidden cameras broke last summer, and it is unlikely to be the last.

Noting that sheriff’s investigators are still reviewing “years of tapes,” the suit says that parents “do not know whether the secret recordings were disseminated … by Schapansky to third parties or posted on online websites.”

School administrators “cannot be trusted to provide basic care for, and freedom from, predators on their premises, including their own staff,” according to the suit.