Superintendent's contract raises more questions about PUHSD

The first-year contract of Superintendent Jose Luis Araux raises questions about his hiring. (File photo)

By Doug Spoon, Editor

An analysis of the contract of Jose Luis Araux, superintendent of the Perris Union High School District, lends further credence to allegations by current and former district employees and to public documents that suggest an unethical relationship between Araux and school board members.

As reported by Menifee 24/7 in commentaries Oct. 16 and Oct. 17, there are signs that the hiring of Araux – a former PUHSD board member – by a board including two of his former board colleagues is considered unethical by many district employees. Several who have spoken as anonymous sources to Menifee 24/7 for fear of retaliation have said they suspect collusion in the return of Araux as superintendent.

Questions have been raised about the amount of Araux’s initial contract, considering he had never worked in a position higher than principal, as well as the action taken at the Oct. 8 meeting to offer a new Supplemental Employee Retirement Plan (SERP) to employees including management, which has not been the case in the past.

In the board meeting of Aug. 21, 2024, trustees voted 4-1 in closed session (with Elizabeth Vallejo voting no) to appoint Araux superintendent. It was not announced to the public that night, however. That appointment was only confirmed in the minutes of the Aug. 21 meeting, which were approved in the board meeting of Sept. 18, 2024. There is no record of Araux’s appointment except in the minutes of the previous meeting.

Details of Araux’s contract are not included in those agendas or minutes, but it is currently listed on the district website with a Sept. 18, 2024 approval date. Araux’s initial salary is documented as $304,457 (prorated from Aug. 22, 2024 to June 30, 2025). The contract also acknowledges that his hiring was at Step 4 on the district salary schedule for the position, out of 5 steps. Also stated in the document is that, pending a satisfactory job evaluation, an annual adjustment would be made each July 1 “in accordance with the superintendent’s salary schedule.”

This means that Araux was paid a prorated salary of approximately $253,723 In his first partial year of service. Assuming he received a satisfactory evaluation on July 1, he would have advanced to Step 5, which calls for a salary of $316,635.

In contrast, previous superintendent Grant Bennett – who was promoted from an assistant superintendent’s position -- began at Step 1 ($243,782 at the time) and advanced one step each year until he reached Step 5, as is protocol.

In addition, Bennett was not offered a SERP when he retired in 2024 because the plan on the books at the time did not allow early retirement benefits for management employees. The current one, approved by a 3-1 vote (Campos voting no) on Oct. 8 does include management. It is unclear whether Araux, who worked several years ago in the district, would have the required five years in the district to become eligible at the end of this school year.

Concerns are also being expressed by multiple current and former district employees about the hiring of Chief Human Resources Officer Alfredo Andrade. As we reported earlier, an amended job description made it possible for Andrade to be hired with no experience in the area of education. He has never even been a teacher. Andrade’s only HR experience is in the private sector, which many say has led to a lack of knowledge that has hurt district operations. In addition, sources allege that he was hired by his “friends”, considering state campaign contribution documents show that he and his wife were campaign treasurer for three school board members – Anthony T. Stafford Sr., Edward Garcia Jr., and Jamie Anaya.

“There was an assistant superintendent in Colton, and he was also a business guy,” said Chris Maddalena, who retired from Heritage High School last year after 22 years as a teacher in the district, regarding a case from the early 2000’s. “He was promoted to superintendent, then they kicked him to the curb. Coming out of the business sector to education … it’s totally different.”

“We (including me, personally) have had many issues with Andrade -- his lack of knowledge regarding school law, Ed code, and our contract .... probably because he never worked in education before,” said a district employee who asked not to be identified.

Concerns that began with questions about Andrade’s hiring with no experience in education were followed by actions that prompted further questions. Some of those concerned Andrade’s handling of the termination of substitute teacher Jacob Burnard, as reported here.

Burnard argued with schools officials at Paloma Valley High on Sept. 18 when told he would be paid for only half a day because of limited needs for his services. Burnard argued that the Substitutes Handbook states that substitutes work on a “Full Day Assignment” basis. Burnard appealed to Andrade, who on Sept. 19 responded to Burnard saying, “I apologize for the miscommunication. We do have a Full Day Assignment policy as described in our handbook. If there are any corrections to your time, please let me know and we will work to correct your timesheet accordingly. Again, I do apologize and we will correct our messaging to our staff and sites.”

Five days later, Burnard was stunned when another HR employee emailed him that he was being terminated. Burnard was not given his final check immediately, as state law requires. Instead, he went back and forth in email correspondence with Andrade until Oct. 6, when Andrade emailed saying the district was reinstating him.

Burnard continued to seek answers to questions about his termination and about when he would receive the pay owed to him. One day last week, Burnard informed Andrade that he had retained legal counsel. Burnard said that the very next day, the amount owed him was deposited in his bank account. The two sides still have not met personally to resolve the issue.

At the Oct. 8 school board meeting, there was a proposal by district staff to create a new position of Coordinator – Human Resources. This would be in addition to Andrade, the Chief HR officer; Maribel Escobar, Director of HR; and nine other employees in the department, according to the district website.

The job description called for this employee to oversee all components of Title IX compliance – duties currently assigned to Andrade. It also called for the employee to “research information regarding relevant policies and current practices for the purpose of ensuring compliance with state and federal law, and securing general information for planning and/or responding to requests from a variety of internal and external sources.”

Andrade was questioned by board members during discussion of the proposal. He stated that his department was currently handling three Title IX complaints and nine complaints overall.

“I hope we’re addressing the root of the problem of the complaints,” board president Steve Campos said. “Are you anticipating the complaint process is going to continue grow?”

Adrade responded, “We’re hoping once we get someone in there who can help with accounts and training, complaints will reduce.”

The proposal failed when board members voted 2-2 (Garcia and Anaya yes, Campos and Charles Hall no). There was no tiebreaking vote because Stafford left the meeting early, reporting illness.

In essence, Andrade’s plea for help failed and he retains oversight of Title IX, an important issue among school districts these days. What that says about the board’s confidence level in Andrade remains to be seen.