San Rafael Saga: Mayor Gordo Exclusive Interview

“It’s wrong to lash out at an entire neighborhood, painting it with the same brush.”
PASADENA MAYOR VICTOR GORDO

San Rafael Elementary School with signs from parents who support embattled Principal Rudy Ramirez. Photo: Doug Forbes

September 9, 2022

NOTE: I have attempted to report this series through outlets such as pasadena now and pasadena star news. both organizations are not interested in working with me. with the exception of a handful of engagements a few years ago, these outlets are not interested in pursuing my investigative or hard news pitches, which is their prerogative. this is why i am reporting this important series on my site. i believe that reporting on critical, complex matters — that involve personal or systemic abuses — demand the long game. this includes proactively pursuing the facts, inclusive of public records requests and attempts to interview subjects who are parties to the issue at hand. I have attempted to interview california metro patrol owner joseph perez who did not comply. i have interviewed PUsd superintendent brian mcdonald. I’m awaiting word from legal scholars. and, the following is an interview with pasadena mayor victor gordo who has not been interviewed by any outlet about this incident since he published his letter. should any school parents or staff wish to voice their opinions, i am most willing to listen and report. email me.

PASADENA, Calif. — In the wake of the recent emotionally charged dust-up at San Rafael Elementary School, Pasadena Mayor Victor Gordo agreed to address his controversial public letter and much more for this article.

Soon after a video surfaced in which San Rafael Principal Rudy Ramirez made race and gender-fueled statements, the mayor responded with a searing public rebuke. Ramirez had been rattled by an incident in which police responded to a neighbor’s 911 call about a suspicious person who scaled the school’s fence.

The call turned out to be nearly entirely erroneous. The police response was arguably overkill. The suspect in question was the school’s head custodian — a Latino male — who was working overtime at Ramirez’s request. And, the subsequent recording of the embattled principal by a private security guard might have been illegal.

The vast majority of school parents demanded that Ramirez retain his job, that police publicly apologize for their actions and that Gordo acknowledge he was wrong about Ramirez who was using “emotional words to react “to the injustice in our community.”

According to the parents’ letter, “Regrettably, but not surprisingly, Mr. Ramirez’s comments are being used as a distraction from the central issue at hand, namely that the police racially profiled our head custodian and did not have a basis for treating him so harshly.”

The comments that the parents and school staff referred to ran the gamut. Ramirez said, “Fuck those nosy ass white neighbors.” He called a school parent who happened by the scene on bikes with her child “a nosy fucking punk.” He also claimed that she would likely complain about him to all of her “white neighbors.”

Ramirez mentioned another female neighbor as a “[mother]fucking bitch,” adding that if she and other neighbors saw him off duty “they wouldn’t fuck with me.” He followed that comment with how he is not some “wetback,” because his money is as green as a white person’s money.

Nonetheless Pasadena Unified School District Superintendent Brian McDonald has effectively agreed with the parents and school staff. He decided that Ramirez will keep his job with some measure of discipline.

McDonald said he would not discuss the disciplinary action, which was a private matter. Asked whether any other PUSD principal had come under such fire, he said, “We have had teacher cases but not any accusations made against a principal.”

Contrarily, at least two dozen parents, some of whom I have spoken with, believe that the real distraction is Ramirez himself. They said he should be fired because this incident is one in a long list of dubious acts, including a history of physical and emotional intimidation, racially charged statements and misogynistic behavior especially unbecoming of a public figure, let alone an elementary school principal.

Gordo also believes that Ramirez has crossed a line without proper contrition.

In his public letter four days after the incident, he said, “We believe our officers acted professionally, respectfully, and with caution while responding to a call by a resident.” He said of Ramirez, “There is no place in our society for these types of statements, and certainly not in Pasadena… I have a difficult time accepting [Ramirez’s] apology.”

The mayor took a measured approach during our conversation in which he began by saying that “he felt for the families of the kids… lots of [San Rafael students] are immigrant kids.” He said he is a firm believer there are “no negative traits or racist traits inherent in one’s skin.”

Pressed about his decision to abruptly draft a letter that was, in no uncertain terms, an indictment of Ramirez’s actions, Gordo said he still cannot accept the principal’s apology. “His public apology was more about the idea that he didn’t know the camera was on.”

According to the public apology that Gordo referenced, Ramirez said:

“I was hurt because the entire scene brought back my personal trauma of growing up in Paramount where gun violence and police harassment were normal. I reflected on friends that had lost their lives because of guns. In this moment of fear, anger, confusion and pain, I made some offensive and inappropriate comments in the presence of a Metro Patrol Officer who had his body camera on without my knowledge. I am deeply ashamed of the language that I used and some of the things that I said. I love our school and only want what is best for it. I will continue to work on being the leader that this community deserves and I am deeply sorry that I allowed my emotions and fear to overpower me.”

Guns have certainly been a central issue of Pasadena policing. The three officers who responded to the San Rafael 911 call are seen on video with hands at their holsters and stun rifles slung about their shoulders.

Guns are also a consistent talking point for city politicians and police brass.

A few days before he assumed the role of new City Manager, to whom the police report, Miguel Márquez made a concerted effort to discuss police and guns with the media. “As much as we want to hold our police department accountable and try to build the kind of police department we want, we have to recognize the inherent dangers that they face every day, and they have every right to go home to their families as anybody else who’s reporting to work.”

Márquez continued to devote his pre-job media statement to one topic. “I think the bigger issue is actually guns. If you look at so many of the issues that have driven this community to come out and be vocal, it has a gun somewhere in the story.”

Some residents would vehemently disagree with his proclamation. They would contend that one of the bigger issues is how police respond, replete with guns firmly at-the-ready, to circumstances that do not warrant such aggression.

Pasadena police responses have been the subject of considerable scrutiny for many years, including the beating of Christopher Ballew, the shooting death of Anthony McClain and the recent beating of Bobby Cavazos during his child’s birthday party. As with most of the nation’s questionable or flagrant police violations, Pasadena has largely protected its police force from considerable consequences.

The four officers who responded to the San Rafael school call ambushed an innocent citizen as he worked hard on a Sunday to clean the school before it opened the following morning. His custodial gear was as clear to the naked eye as the school uniform he donned.

Were this a private school and a white woman in question, one can only wonder how that same response might have played out.

One thing we know from this incident and from one challenging headline after another, is that inappropriate actions can bare equally unbearable reactions. Pasadena is no stranger to this reality.

As previously mentioned, The City of Roses has historically been a thorny tale of two cities. One is the tale of an enclave steeped in extraordinary wealth and world renown. The other is stewed in a sordid history of “othering” minorities, including the massive push toward privatizing schools after forced busing in the 1970s, denial of Black and Brown presidents for the storied Tournament of Roses Association or the lack of diversity in Gordo’s position.

In fact, since the city incorporated in 1886, Chris Holden and Loretta Thompson-Glickman stand as its only Black mayors and Gordo is its first Latino mayor. Not to mention, Pasadena’s Latino residents outnumber its white residents.

Gordo repeatedly said that, when he campaigned for mayor, he told voters over and again, that he was not the mayor for Latinos or Black persons or white persons. “I knocked on doors throughout that [San Rafael] neighborhood when I campaigned,” he said. “I wanted everyone to know that I wanted to be mayor for all residents of Pasadena.”

Gordo dug deeper about the impact of this incident in the well-heeled San Rafael flats area where the school is located. “There are people in the neighborhood who feel shamed right now. What does that do to people? I told them that I would stand up for them and everyone.”

He said that another reason he wrote the letter within days of the incident was that the residents of the West Pasadena neighborhood in question could not speak for themselves, which could “bring on more retaliation.” 

According to school parents and administrators, including Ramirez, the neighborhood had already spoken for itself by way of excessive and unjust complaints about school operations. Ramirez’s statements on video, they said, were simply symbolic of the severe fracture between two factions.

In a rather surprising twist, Gordo asked who recorded the video and how it became public fodder in the first place, implying he had no idea how it was obtained and who made the unilateral decision to release it within days of the incident. However, in his public letter, Gordo said, “Principal Ramirez made very derogatory racial remarks that were caught on camera and recorded in a report by the school district’s security officer.”

Therefore, Gordo did know who captured the video. As the CEO of the city, one might think that he would also know why the police would readily release it to the public. In fact, it is hard to fathom why he himself would not be involved in such a decision, let alone a debate over whether proactively releasing it portended legal consequences.

It would also seem reasonable to assume that former interim City Manager Cynthia Kurtz would approve the public release of such information since the police department reports to that office.

When I requested the video, City Public Information Officer Lisa Derderian immediately provided multiple files of police body cam footage along with the private security guard’s written report and video of Ramirez. It was readily apparent that the guard had submitted the video and report to the police. If it was readily apparent to me, it most certainly should have been the same for the mayor.

Furthermore, although Derderian immediately released police video and security guard reports and footage, it has been three weeks since I asked her to clarify a number of questionable actions that the officers took during their response. She has twice said that she was awaiting a response from Police Chief Clawson.

I immediately questioned why a private security guard would record Ramirez without his consent, primarily because California is a two-party consent state. In an effort to draw clarity to the situation for the public good, I have requested records from seven city agencies and made a separate documents request from the Pasadena Unified School District.

Only five of the seven agencies have provided a handful of documents, all of which were not terribly revealing. A representative from the City Attorney’s office said they need more time to provide the rest. He said that I could also request documents directly from the police, which I already did through my records request.

Whether this is a simple delay or a stall tactic, we shall find out. Although plenty of media outlets have rushed to cover this story, apparently none to date have yielded any such documents or perhaps even made public records requests.

Multiple sources confirmed that the district has a contract with the private security service, California Metro Patrol, which is owned and operated by former Pasadena police officer Joseph Perez. Nobody has disclosed why the district found it necessary to contract the service or how much taxpayers are investing.

Should said contract between Metro and the District stipulate that the private guards have the right to record persons on public property without their knowledge or consent, that poses three distinct challenges. The first is the fact that the District greenlighted the recording of private citizens on public property without public knowledge. The second is that such private persons can include children-minors. In this case, the private security guard did record the child of a parent who had stopped to ask Ramirez what had occurred. And the third issue is that, even if the District condoned the recordings, such a decision might not ultimately comply with state law.

I have contacted Thalia González, Occidental College Professor of Politics and nationally recognized interdisciplinary legal scholar for her opinion. Should legal experts suggest that the recording violated any manner of privacy rights, including the law in general, perhaps Gordo, Márquez, police, the city attorney, the Board and Metro Patrol will have much more to concern themselves about.

After all, that would make them potential subjects in a legal action, should Ramirez choose to pursue one.

Gordo said, “I can’t comment on the legality or form a legal conclusion.”

If the contract between the Board of Education and Metro Patrol reveals that the Board executed its authority without due discretion or right, we might prepare for an entirely new wave of vitriol from already disgruntled parents and community members who were stonewalled for voicing their opinions at a recent Board meeting.

I asked Gordo if he had any regrets about sending the letter as he did. While he did not say he had regrets, he said, “I wish I highlighted how well the custodian handled the situation. He handled it exceedingly well. He should be recognized for having kept a level head under very difficult circumstances. He showed self awareness and self-control. As did the police.”

Self-awareness is different from situational awareness. According to the body cam footage, the police were well aware — and even discussed — that the person in question at the school was likely a custodian. Yet, they hid behind a retaining wall, abandoned their instincts and decided to ambush him as if guilty before proved innocent.

Gordo recalled feeling the same way. He said he was bullied as a child in Pasadena, especially because he was learning the English language. Numerous parents, however, said that the police bullied the custodian without any reason other than a questionable phone call from an unidentified neighbor and arbitrary protocol that remains a mystery.

Gordo did not further address the police response other than reiterating that their response was appropriate. By contrast, he offered another take on Ramirez’s behavior.

“This is a government employee, someone who works for the public. It’s one thing for hateful comments to come out but another coming from a representative of the people. In my view, this is a person who is supposed to teach the inappropriateness of that language.”

Asked about whether he wanted McDonald to terminate Ramirez, Gordo said, “I am not going to weigh in on the discipline since I do not have access to prior complaints or employee records. I have to respect the process. I cannot form an opinion as to an outcome without all the information.”

Although he did not have all of the information prior to submitting his public letter, he said his opinion was based on the now questionable video and Ramirez’s apology.

“I hope we can all can learn from the experience. By all appearances, San Rafael has a stellar staff. I hope the administration and the Board and all residents and neighbors of Pasadena can learn from this very difficult and divisive moment. It’s a reminder that words matter and can have a serious, painful impact.”

Words do matter. But so do actions or inactions. Media coverage of this issue has all but concluded.

On August 23, Pasadena Now Managing Editor André Coleman said in a column, “I don’t want to get into the police response. That’s been discussed ad nauseum [sic].” He continued, “We all have to do better with tact and self control. Especially Black and Brown people who are always under the microscope. I’m a Black man and for that I am judged differently. Of course I have had to run faster and jump higher. But that’s all the more reason, I have to control my temper and watch my words. Breaking News, if the District fires [Ramirez’s] ass, being right won’t pay his mortgage or put food on the table.”

The District is not firing Ramirez. And, while Coleman believes the police response has been discussed ad nauseam, many might say that it has hardly been discussed, in earnest.

Do people know that many police trainings involve countless videos of police being accosted by suspects, which fosters an us vs. them mentality and unwarranted responses, perhaps like the one at San Rafael? Did Coleman or anyone do a wholesale public records request and battery of interviews to truly assess the police response? Did anyone do a deeper dive into the relationship between the police and this private security service run by an ex Pasadena cop? Did anyone do a deeper dive into the legalities associated with the coordination between the police and this private security service?

Not as far as I can tell. But I am giving it a go, because citizens deserve to know.

The saga is far from over. We do not know how Ramirez will respond on the job. We do not yet know if the police and the officials to whom they report will continue on without recourse. We do not know the outcome of the Police Oversight Commission. We do not know if the mayor has made his peace or if he will suggest additional interventions, such as a public dialog or even process changes so that all facts are, indeed, gathered before assumptions are widely distributed.

But we do know that our beautiful children are back at their desks. And, we do know that parents are scrambling to juggle work life and home life, as usual.

The question is, what will happen next time? Because, if history is our best teacher, there will be a next time.