Dr. Bobby Cruz’s attorneys filed a motion to disqualify the Pro Tem Administrative Hearing Officer and to enter a finding that administrative remedies have been exhausted.

Cruz, a long-time public school educator on Saipan, says that former Commissioner of Education Dr. Alfred Ada sexually harassed him at five Public School System events. The grievance also includes other instances of professional misconduct. Dr. Ada categorically denies the allegations. Cruz is the State Education Agency Project Co-Director under the Public School System's Office of Student Support Services

In Cruz’s most recent filing, his attorneys argue that the Administrative Hearing Officer “engaged in impermissible ex parte communications with the Board of Education through its legal counsel in which the AHO was directed by the Board of Education on what issues would be heard at Dr. Cruz’s administrative hearing for his sexual harassment grievance.”

Cruz says his constitutional right to due process was violated.

In a screenshot of an email included in the motion, the Board of Education’s Legal Counsel wrote to the Hearing Officer that since Dr. Ada resigned as Commissioner of Education, the harassment portion of the grievance “has become moot.” Instead, as the correspondence indicates, the issue of Dr. Cruz’s salary should now be the focus.

In October 2022, in the process of salary negotiations, Dr. Cruz received a decrease in pay and he said that since then he has remained on 90-day contract extensions pending the results of his grievance.

Cruz’s attorneys say that the hearing officer “affirmed that despite her reservations, she would follow the instructions of the Board and skip an investigation, only hear the salary claim, and would not hear the allegations of discrimination based on sexual harassment and a hostile work environment.”

Cruz’s attorneys note that the matter has been pending for 14 months.

They added, “Despite PSS’s repeated anthems of transparency and integrity, the only transparent takeaway here is that PSS is determined to bury what is obviously a continuing sexual harassment problem at PSS. And who would expect any different? If PSS allows sexual harassment to occur to multiple employees by the head of the institution, the Commissioner of Education, how would anyone expect that sexual harassment would not multiply and flourish for the last decade, now apparently to the detriment of underage students? There is no transparency where the Board engages in secret communications and directives to the Hearing Officer. There is no integrity when the Board dictates what issues can be heard by controlling the Hearing Officer.”

KUAM News reached out to the BOE legal counsel and Administrative Hearing Officer for comment.

BOE legal counsel Tiberius Mocanu responded, “For those who believe that they have exhausted all administrative remedies, we remind them of their right to seek further adjudication through the appropriate federal or state court systems. A legal determination in such forums would validate their position and potentially expedite the resolution of these matters, moving beyond the current exchange of letters. This encouragement has been ongoing but Mr. Cruz has yet to avail of it.”

He added, “It is within the BOE's remit, and not in conflict with procedural propriety, to issue such directives. The communications received, which have prompted this response, serve as an acknowledgment of the BOE's oversight role over the AHO. The consistent correspondence on this topic underscores an understanding that the administrative process falls under the BOE's purview, thereby granting the board, through its counsel or otherwise, the discretion to define the scope of issues the AHO is to consider.”

Mocanu explained, “It is important to note that the BOE operates within the bounds of Public School System (PSS) regulations, statutes, and federal law. As such, the BOE does not have the authority to conduct investigations or impose disciplinary actions on former employees. The grievance process is specifically designed to address the conduct of current employees, with the tribunal's jurisdiction extending only to matters related to employment within its purview. The BOE's jurisdiction does not extend to members of the community (former employees) it is instead limited to only those currently employed by PSS. “