Trending

Advertisement

Judge backs Poway Unified’s stance against Painted Rock parent

Share

A Superior Court judge on Friday refused to end a restraining order obtain by the Poway Unified School District against a Painted Rock Elementary School parent who lost an October School Site Council election.

Judge Tamila Ipema ruled that the attorney for parent Christopher Garnier failed to prove her contention that Garnier’s criticisms of Principal Mary Jo Thomas were protected under the First Amendment. The attorney, Genevieve Suzuki, said she plans to appeal the decision once it becomes official in writing.

The judge also scheduled two half-day hearings, on Jan. 15 and 20, on the question of whether the temporary restraining order against Garnier should be made permanent. It would be in effect for three years. The order prevents Garnier from stepping on campus or having any contact with Thomas.

Garnier, a Rancho Bernardo High School graduate and former Marine Corps helicopter pilot, was one of several candidates running in October for an open seat on the School Site Council. Thomas invalidated the election when it was discovered that, in addition to ballots distributed by the school, Garnier passed out his own ballots which had a photo of his family on them. A second election was held several days later, with Garnier and Cristina Gerardi as the only two candidates. During the second balloting period, Garnier passed out leaflets in the campus parking lot stating that the school principal “does not want minorities at Painted Rock.” An image behind the text showed a slave in chains.

Garnier is an African American.

Gerardi was declared the winner of the second election. A legal brief submitted by Garnier’s attorney contends that her client won the first election.

The district provided extra campus security during the second election, then went to court to obtain a temporary retraining order, called a “workplace violence restraining order,” against Garnier. The district’s attorney contended that the principal was concerned about her safety.

A brief filed by Suzuki in support of her motion to strike the restraining order said the order is based “on oppressing (Garnier’s) speech and improperly targets his exercise of protected constitutional rights.” The brief said that Garnier “never made an actual or credible threat of violence to Mrs. Thomas nor did he commit unlawful violent acts.”

Advertisement