San Juan Unified School District recall, California (2021)

• Recall efforts
  • Recall efforts by state
  • Recall efforts by office
  • Recall efforts by year
  • Upcoming recall elections
• Local recalls
  • City council recalls
  • Mayoral recalls
  • County commission recalls
  • County official recalls
  • School board recalls
  • Sheriff recalls
  • Special district recalls
• State and federal recalls
  • State executive recalls
  • State legislator recalls
  • U.S. Congress recalls
• Laws governing recall
  • States that have pre-petition signature requirements for recalls
  • States that require grounds for recalls
• Analysis
  • What are recalls?
  • Recall terms
  • Analysis (2010-present)
  • 2025 mid-year analysis
  • 2024 year-end analysis
  • 2024 mid-year analysis
  • 2023 year-end analysis
  • 2023 mid-year analysis
  • 2022 year-end analysis
  • 2022 mid-year analysis
  • 2021 year-end analysis
  • 2021 mid-year analysis
  • 2020 year-end analysis
  • 2020 mid-year analysis
  • 2019 year-end analysis
  • 2019 mid-year analysis
  • 2018 year-end analysis
  • 2018 mid-year analysis
  • 2017 year-end analysis
  • 2017 mid-year analysis
  • 2016 year-end analysis
  • 2016 mid-year analysis

San Juan Unified School District recall
Officeholders
Pam Costa Zima Creason Saul Hernandez Michael McKibbin Paula Marie Villescaz
Recall status
Did not go to a vote
See also
Recall overview Political recall efforts, 2021 Recalls in California California recall laws School board recalls Recall reports

An effort to recall all five members of the San Juan Unified School District Board of Education did not go to a vote in 2021. Recall supporters did not collect enough signatures to put the recalls on the ballot.

The recall effort began in April 2021. Pam Costa, Zima Creason, Saul Hernandez, Michael McKibbin, and Paula Marie Villescaz were named in the recall petitions. To get the recall on the ballot, recall supporters would have had to collect 20,266 signatures per board member by October 19, 2021.

Recall supporters said the board members had failed to represent their constituents, denied students access to district staff and services, and voted to not return students to in-person learning during the 2020-2021 school year. The San Juan Unified School District started the 2020-2021 school year with online instruction due to the COVID-19 pandemic. The district announced in May 2021 that students would start the 2021-2022 school year with full-time in-person instruction.

In response to the recall, Costa said, "The Board has worked hard to balance student learning with safety for all, while complying with the complex layers of local, state, and federal law." Hernandez said he had spoken in favor of returning students to in-person instruction as soon as possible. The other three board members did not submit responses to the recall effort.

Costa, Villescaz, and Hernandez all won re-election to four-year terms on the board in an at-large election on November 3, 2020, defeating four opponents. On November 6, 2018, McKibbin was re-elected to a four-year term, and Creason was elected to her first four-year term. They defeated two opponents in the at-large election.

To read about other recall efforts related to the coronavirus and government responses to the pandemic, click here.

Recall supporters

Arguments for recall against Costa

The notice of intent to recall Costa said:

“

Parents and Citizens of Sacramento seek to recall Pam Costa, Board Member San Juan Unified School District. Costa is failing to represent her constituents. She is denying and rationing students access to schools, staff, and services. Her actions are having undeniably profound, and negative consequences on students, of which she is fully aware. Although the health department and the Governor issued guidance and executive orders concerning education, Costa is undoubtedly using her local authority to reduce the district's liability and keep students out of the classrooms. She continues to survey parents/staff, who have responded with a majority vote to return to school; and continues to vote against the return to in-person learning even when it was safe to do so. Much of the "guidance" Costa is using appears to conflict with or has superseded long standing taws and education codes. Actions of Costa have clearly reduced the instructional minute students receive. Parents can no longer condone these reckless and ill-advised actions of Costa. She was elected and sworn to uphold laws; not outside "guidance" she has allegedly received that facilitates disparities, widens achievement gaps, and harms students in ways she has failed to either calculate, consider, or resolve.

”

Arguments for recall against Creason

The notice of intent to recall Creason said:

“

Parents and Citizens of Sacramento seek to recall Zima Creason, Board Member San Juan Unified School District. Creason is failing to represent her constituents. She is denying and rationing students access to schools, staff, and services. Her actions are having undeniably profound, and negative consequences on students, of which she is fully aware. Although the health department and the Governor issued guidance and executive orders concerning education, Creason is undoubtedly using her local authority to reduce the district's liability and keep students out of the classrooms. She continues to survey parents/staff, who have responded with a majority vote to return to school; and continues to vote against the return to in-person learning even when it was safe to do so. Much of the "guidance" Creason is using appears to conflict with or has superseded long standing laws and education codes. Actions of Creason have clearly reduced the instructional minute students receive. Parents can no longer condone these reckless and ill-advised actions of Creason. She was elected and sworn to uphold laws; not outside "guidance" she has allegedly received that facilitates disparities, widens achievement gaps, and harms students in ways she has failed to either calculate, consider, or resolve.

”

Arguments for recall against Hernandez

The notice of intent to recall Hernandez said:

“

Parents and Citizens of Sacramento seek to recall Saul Hernandez, Board Member San Juan Unified School District. Hernandez is failing to represent his constituents. He is denying and rationing students access to schools, staff, and services. His actions are having undeniably profound, and negative consequences on students, of which he is fully aware. Although the health department and the Governor issued guidance and executive orders concerning education, Hernandez is undoubtedly using his local authority to reduce the district's liability and keep students out of the classrooms. He continues to survey parents/staff, who have responded with a majority vote to return to school; and continues to vote against the return to in-person learning even when it was safe to do so. Much of the "guidance" Hernandez is using appears to conflict with or has superseded long standing laws and education codes. Actions of Hernandez have clearly reduced the instructional minute students receive. Parents can no longer condone these reckless and ill-advised actions of Hernandez. He was elected and sworn to uphold laws; not outside "guidance" he has allegedly received that facilitates disparities, widens achievement gaps, and harms students in ways he has failed to either calculate, consider, or resolve.

”

Arguments for recall against McKibbin

The notice of intent to recall McKibbin said:

“

Parents and Citizens of Sacramento seek to recall Michael McKibbln, Ed.D., Board Member San Juan Unitied School District. McKibbin is tailing to represent his constituents. He is denying and rationing students access to schools, staff, and services. His actions are having undeniably profound, and negative consequences on students, of which he is fully aware. Although the health department and the Governor issued guidance and executive orders concerning education, McKibbin is undoubtedly using his local authority to reduce the district's liability and keep students out of the classrooms. He continues to survey parents/staff, who have responded with a majority vote to return to school; and continues to vote against the return to in-person learning even when it was safe to do so. Much of the "guidance" McKibbin is using appears to conflict with or has superseded long standing laws and education codes. Actions of McKibbin have clearly reduced the instructional minute students receive. Parents can no longer condone these reckless and ill-advised actions of McKibbin. He was elected and sworn to uphold laws; •ot outside "guidance" he has allegedly received that facilitates disparities, widens achievement gaps, and harms students in ways he has failed to either calculate, consider, or resolve.

”

Arguments for recall against Villescaz

The notice of intent to recall Villescaz said:

“

Parents and Citizens of Sacramento seek to recall Paula Villescaz, Board Member San Juan Unified School District. Villescaz, is failing to represent her constituents. She is denying and rationing students access to schools, staff, and services. Her actions are having undeniably profound, and negative consequences on students, of which she is fully aware. Although the health department and the Governor issued guidance and executive orders concerning education, Villescaz is undoubtedly using her local authority to reduce the district's liability and keep students out of the classrooms. She continues to survey parents/staff, who have responded with a majority vote to return to school; and continues to vote against the return to in-person learning even when it was safe to do so. Much of the "guidance" Viltescaz, is using appears to conflict with or has superseded long standing laws and education codes. Actions of Villescaz have clearly reduced the instructional minute students receive. Parents can no longer condone these reckless and ill-advised actions of Villescaz. She was elected and sworn to uphold laws; not outside "guidance" she has allegedly received that facilitates disparities, widens achievement gaps, and harms students in ways she has failed to either calculate, consider, or resolve.

”

Recall opponents

Response by Costa

Costa submitted the following response to the recall effort.

“

There are no grounds to justify an expensive recall of the San Juan School District trustees, the majority of whom were just re-elected in November 2020. I was proud to be re-elected to my third term by the San Juan community and have faithfully sought to fairly represent students, staff, and families, not only during this horrible pandemic, but for over 30 years in the San Juan School District. I have read every email, listened for hours to public comment at Board meetings, read every survey, Superintendent communication, and California Department of Public Health and CDC guidance memo. The Board has worked hard to balance student learning with safety for all, while complying with the complex layers of local, state, and federal law. We modified students' academic learning programs, followed science and recommendations from our national and state health officials, instituted distance learning, issued laptops and "hot spots" to students who needed help, and increased social/emotional services through district counselors and social workers. Students now are returning safely to schools but there is much more that we need to do. The last thing we need is an expensive and divisive recall election that distracts us from the hard work which lays ahead.

”

Response by Creason

Creason did not submit a response to the recall effort to the Sacramento County Voter Registration and Elections Office.

Response by Hernandez

Hernandez submitted the following response to the recall effort.

“

I have always felt and expressed publicly that we need to have our students return to in person learning (for those who wish to do so) as soon as legally possible. I have not been shy in making my voice extremely clear at every possible opportunity. Unfortunately through a combination of constant shifting by the State of California, we were prevented from a full in person classroom setting until recently. My comments made publicly from board meeting held on February 23, 2021. "l would like to thank all that reached out concerning the topic. I too, was hoping/praying that the state would allow or give us something to return under our current agreement. However, I feel we are passed on relying on the state and we are at a point that we do ALL and Everything we can so that our kids return ASAP. Even if that means our K-6 return first and hopefully our secondary will follow thereafter. I am hoping we can work together with all parties to make this happen. Districts that surround us have returned to in person learning and we too must return to in person learning for our kids"

”

Response by McKibbin

McKibbin did not submit a response to the recall effort to the Sacramento County Voter Registration and Elections Office.

Response by Villescaz

Villescaz did not submit a response to the recall effort to the Sacramento County Voter Registration and Elections Office.

Path to the ballot

See also: Laws governing recall in California

Recall supporters submitted the notices of intent to recall to the Sacramento County Voter Registration and Elections Office in April 2021. To get the recall on the ballot, recall supporters would have had to collect 20,266 signatures per board member by October 19, 2021. Recall supporters announced that they submitted petitions on the deadline. They did not collect enough signatures.

About the district

San Juan Unified School District is located in Sacramento County, California.

San Juan Unified School District is located in Sacramento County, California. It is classified as a large suburban school district by the National Center for Education Statistics. The district served 39,953 students during the 2018-2019 school year and comprised 68 schools.

During the 2018-2019 school year, 52.7% of the district's students were eligible for free or reduced-price lunch, 14.7% were English language learners, and 13.5% of students had an Individual Education Plan (IEP).

Racial Demographics, 2018-2019
Race	San Juan Unified School District (%)	California K-12 students (%)
American Indian/Alaska Native	0.6	0.5
Asian or Asian/Pacific Islander	7.9	11.7
Black	6.8	5.4
Hispanic	24.1	54.6
Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander	0.7	0.5
Two or More Races	6.8	4.5
White	53.2	22.9

Note: Percentages for race and ethnicity may add up to more than 100 percent because respondents may report more than one race and the Hispanic/Latino ethnicity may be selected in conjunction with any race. Read more about race and ethnicity in the census here.

Recalls related to the coronavirus

See also: Recalls related to the coronavirus (COVID-19) and government responses to the pandemic

Ballotpedia covered 35 coronavirus-related recall efforts against 94 officials in 2022, accounting for 13% of recalls that year. This is a decrease from both 2020 and 2021. COVID-related recalls accounted for 37% of all recall efforts in both 2020 and 2021. In 2020, there were 87 COVID-related recalls against 89 officials, and in 2021, there were 131 against 214 officials.

The chart below compares coronavirus-related recalls to recalls for all other reasons in 2020, 2021, and 2022.

2021 recall efforts

See also: School board recalls

Ballotpedia tracked 92 school board recall efforts against 237 board members in 2021. Recall elections against 17 board members were held in 2021. The school board recall success rate was 0.42%.

The chart below details the status of 2021 recall efforts by individual school board member.

See also

• San Juan Unified School District, California
• San Juan Unified School District, California, elections (2020)
• San Juan Unified School District elections (2018)
• Recall campaigns in California
• Political recall efforts, 2021
• School board recalls

External links

• Search Google News for this topic
• San Juan Unified School District
• Sacramento County Voter Registration and Elections

Footnotes

Political recall elections

Recalls
by year

Upcoming recalls • 2025 • 2024 • 2023 • 2022 • 2021 • 2020 • 2019 • 2018 • 2017 • 2016 • 2015 • 2014 • 2013 • 2012 • Historical recalls • Recall statistics and analysis

Recalls
by office

Governors • State legislators • County officials • County commission • Sheriffs • Mayors • City officials • City council • School board • Special district

Recalls
by state

Alabama • Alaska • Arizona • Arkansas • California • Colorado • Connecticut • District of Columbia • Delaware • Florida • Georgia • Hawaii • Idaho • Illinois • Indiana • Iowa • Kansas • Kentucky • Louisiana • Maine • Maryland • Massachusetts • Michigan • Minnesota • Mississippi • Missouri • Montana • Nebraska • Nevada • New Hampshire • New Jersey • New Mexico • New York • North Carolina • North Dakota • Ohio • Oklahoma • Oregon • Pennsylvania • Rhode Island • South Carolina • South Dakota • Tennessee • Texas • Utah • Vermont • Virginia • Washington • West Virginia • Wisconsin • Wyoming

Recall
laws

Alabama • Alaska • Arizona • Arkansas • California • Colorado • Connecticut • District of Columbia • Florida • Georgia • Hawaii • Idaho • Illinois • Kansas • Louisiana • Maine • Maryland • Massachusetts • Michigan • Minnesota • Missouri • Montana • Nebraska • Nevada • New Hampshire • New Jersey • New Mexico • New York • North Carolina • North Dakota • Ohio • Oklahoma • Oregon • Rhode Island • South Dakota • Tennessee • Texas • Vermont • Virginia • Washington • West Virginia • Wisconsin • Wyoming • States that require grounds for recalls • States that have pre-petition signature requirements for recalls