At a special Coronado Unified School District board meeting on April 9, trustees decided to continue their litigation against Veolia North America – a court action that has since sparked controversy about how and why public school leaders initiated the lawsuit.
District President Alexia Palacios-Peters said the board vote was 3-2, with trustees Renee Cavanaugh, Palacios-Peters and Malachy Sandie in favor of continuing the lawsuit. Scot Youngblood and Fitzhugh Lee were opposed.
Veolia maintains and operates the South Bay International Wastewater Treatment Plant, treating Tijuana sewage. The lawsuit alleges that company failures are to blame for millions of gallons of pollutants that spew into the ocean and are carried north by currents, contaminating Coronado beaches and endangering children.
The district first announced its decision to sue on March 6, after board members approved a contract for legal representation during their Feb. 20 meeting.
However, the agenda for that meeting did not indicate the lawsuit was to be discussed in the closed session, and the board did not publicly mention any action regarding Veolia, according to the meeting minutes.
The Feb. 20 meeting agenda did, however, show that trustees approved a contract for an unspecified amount of money with Frantz Law Group regarding “Imperial Beach Contamination.” (Frantz – the name was misspelled in the agenda – represents CUSD in the suit against Veolia.) The contract’s start date was Feb. 21.
Following the special meeting, Palacios-Peters released a statement saying the board acknowledged that the initial process to enter the lawsuit — which she noted was done in compliance with both the law and current board policy — could have been more transparent.
“While all board members were aware of the items included in the February 2025 consent calendar, it would have been better agendized as a stand-alone action item,” she said. “As such, the board has directed Superintendent (Karl) Mueller to draft a new policy regarding potential litigation that will be presented for board approval at a future meeting.”
CUSD said in the March 6 statement that legal fees under the contract are contingent on a settlement.
“CUSD is not responsible for paying attorneys any money other than a portion of what is recovered from the defendants (CUSD would pay thirty percent (30%) of any monetary settlement or recovery),” the district’s statement said.
In November, the Frantz firm announced a complaint on behalf of four plaintiffs, all of whom are South Bay residents.
James P. Frantz, CEO of Frantz Law Group, said the firm was in the process of filing lawsuits on behalf of several school districts affected by the pollution.
No decision was announced by Coronado Unified School District at that time.
The school district’s lawsuit is one of at least five civil cases against Veolia.
In a post on social media, during a City Council meeting – and during an April 9 school board meeting – Coronado resident Brad Gerbel questioned how the lawsuit came about, and whether Mueller initiated the case without prior approval from board members.
Lee said the board strongly supports efforts to end the sewage crisis that have plagued the community for too long. They just differed in their opinions of whether or not the lawsuit was the best step forward.
Lee said he’s concerned that the lawsuit could ultimately be counterproductive — potentially delaying a solution, rather than accelerating it — and mirrors those of local officials, environmental researchers, and cross-border policy experts.
“They’ve consistently emphasized that while legal action has its place, real progress depends on cooperation, funding, and binational coordination,” he said.
“If they’re [Veolia] pulled into litigation, it could delay the very fixes we all want to see, or worse, lead them to walk away from the contract altogether.”
Lee noted the vote follows a healthy, principled debate.
“I respect my fellow trustees – we just didn’t agree on the best path forward,” he added. “Now that we’re moving forward with this course of action, my hope is that it helps the cause, not hinders it.”
The board also recognizes there were serious process missteps that must never be repeated and acknowledges early public comments from district counsel did not serve the issue well, Lee said.
Mueller could not be reached for comment on this issue.
School board policy 3312 states that the “superintendent or designee may enter into contracts on behalf of the district. All contracts must be approved or ratified by the governing board. No contract made under this delegation of power shall be valid until the board approves or ratifies the contract.”
Simon said that CUSD “affirms that it followed all legal requirements and its bylaws in approving a contract with the Frantz Law Group…”
The lawsuit was filed in San Diego County Superior Court on March 3.
At a press conference announcing the litigation two days later, Frantz said William B. Shinoff, another attorney with his firm who is representing the district, spoke directly to the superintendent.
Frantz’s marketing and public relations coordinator said the firm cannot comment on pending litigation.
Palacios-Peters’ recent statement says the board remains committed to transparency and ensuring future legal matters are handled with clear communication and in alignment with updated district policy.
