The story is finally starting to come out.
More than 13 months after first filing our public records request with the Pleasanton Unified School District, the Pleasanton Weekly this week received the key reports and associated materials (including screenshots) from the district’s investigation into allegations against Jonathan Fey, now-former principal of Amador Valley High School.
The records came following, in quick succession, the resolution of a lawsuit filed to prevent PUSD from releasing the documents to us and the settlement of Fey’s administrative challenge against the district in exchange for $254,000 and the ability to resign, among other terms.
Our reporter Christian Trujano is busy scouring some 350 pages PUSD’s lawyer shared with us late Monday afternoon, but his investigative story is not quite ready for primetime. Look for that in next week’s paper.
In the meantime, we felt compelled to shine more light on what we know and how we got here as a precursor to the upcoming exposé. Amador families and the entire Pleasanton community deserve, as soon as possible, to learn what the district says happened and to learn Fey’s side of the story.
The investigative reports confirm the rumors we’ve been hearing for months but have been unable to corroborate on the record: Fey was placed on indefinite administrative leave Aug. 12, 2024, following allegations that he engaged with one recent-former student and one then-senior student on the dating/hookup app Grindr and that he attempted to groom multiple young men at Amador. The matter was also referred to the Pleasanton Police Department.
Fey, a married father who lives in Pleasanton, “completely and unequivocally” denies the complaints against him. He has stood firm from the beginning, fighting for his professional career and personal reputation.
All the while, the district’s largest high school was left in leadership limbo with multiple temporary administrators cycling through the early weeks of last academic year until Jr Yee was appointed acting principal for the rest of 2024-25.
As the public records show, PUSD had contracted with an outside firm during this period to probe the complaints against Fey. The third-party investigator ultimately sustained key allegations in February, and the district moved to remove Fey as an administrator after the school year.
Fey, who was still on leave at the time, formally challenged the district’s determination. As we would learn, his consistent denials include assertions that PUSD has a culture of students impersonating other people on social media and that district leadership doesn’t stand up for its administrators.
He initiated proceedings with the state’s Office of Administrative Hearings in April. The case advanced along through the summer, with key hearing dates looming in autumn.
That’s when the Pleasanton Weekly entered the chat – unbeknownst to us.
We had submitted a comprehensive request to PUSD under the California Public Records Act on Sept. 9, 2024, seeking documents related to Fey’s abrupt and unexplained leave of absence.
The district’s response to us has been ongoing ever since. We’ve received thousands of pages worth of records on a monthly basis, largely innocuous emails and certainly nothing to even hint at the real reason for Fey’s ouster.
Lo and behold, on Sept. 4 of this year, PUSD’s attorneys with Lozano Smith informed Fey and his lawyer that they planned to release to us (and EdSource, which also submitted a CPRA request on Fey) records related to the complaints and investigation, unless he sued to stop them.
Fey did so two weeks later. He filed a “reverse-PRA” confidentially to prevent the district from giving us the documents. He received initial court clearance to proceed as an unnamed “John Doe”, but as the CPRA requester and based on details in the lawsuit, we knew the plaintiff was Fey. The records we obtained this week leave no doubt.
Lozano Smith alerted us to the “John Doe” lawsuit on Oct. 3. To their credit, the district leaders stuck to their position that as guardians of public records, the redacted documents in their possession should be disclosed.
Alameda County Superior Court Judge Michael Markman granted Fey a temporary restraining order, but as the case moved toward an Oct. 16 hearing on the ex-principal’s request for a preliminary injunction, we successfully scrambled to secure a seat at the table.
Thanks to a lawyer who worked quickly on short notice to represent us on contingency, we initiated conversations with both sides. At the very real threat of being responsible for covering our attorney’s fees when we inevitably prevailed, the lawsuit settled within days – dismissed without prejudice and the records to be released by Oct. 27.
And that’s exactly what transpired Monday. Then, on Tuesday, we obtained a copy of the sudden settlement between Fey and PUSD – approved unanimously by the Board of Trustees during closed session last week – to end the OAH proceedings before the big open hearings began.
Now the real work continues for our reporter and editor, closely reviewing the investigative records and supporting materials, pursuing comments from district leadership and Fey himself, interviewing other sources and conducting supplemental research – all with the aim of telling the full scope of this pivotal story in the days ahead.
This outcome would not have occurred in this efficient timeframe had we not intervened in the reverse-PRA lawsuit. It also would not have happened at all if not for our original records request 13 months ago, and our persistence in tracking the monthly output from the district.
It’s not over either. PUSD tells us another batch of responsive records will be delivered by Nov. 24…
The Pleasanton Weekly does it again; always looking out for their readers! Never a dull moment in Pleasanton thanks to the stories reported by the tenacious Weekly crew!
All investigative reporting is much appreciated. Thank you.