Harden said in a written statement that he is aware the Los Angeles County Registrar-Recorder/County Clerk has approved a recall petition against him for circulation. The county cleared petitions against Harden and Board of Education President Tina Fredericks on Aug. 13.
The recall campaigns trace to internal district emails and text messages obtained through public records requests by G. Warren Bleeker, a Pasadena Unified parent who lives in Trustee Area 2 and opposes closing public schools. Bleeker contends the records show Harden, Fredericks, and School Board members Kimberly Kenne and Dr. Yarma Velázquez deliberated privately about a school closure resolution and had a premeditated plan to close schools while publicly saying otherwise. Bleeker said he believes that violates the Brown Act’s ban on serial communications among board members.
“The allegations against me are unproven and simply untrue,” Harden said. “Words have been taken out of context and narratives twisted to serve the political gain of a few powerful influencers outside of District 4 determined to protect their personal priorities at all costs.”
Harden said he firmly believes the voters of District 4 will not stand for “a recall framed around personal vendettas, organized by outside special interests.”
If the recall effort succeeds, Harden said, the district could be forced to spend up to approximately $2 million on special election costs — dollars he said would come directly from teachers, programs and the services students rely on every day.
“A recall pursued at the expense of our students is not how we resolve our differences,” he said.
Fredericks, in an open letter to district residents issued Thursday, cited cost figures printed in the petition: an estimated $981,000 to $1.06 million for a District 6 recall election and an estimated $857,000 to $928,000 for a second election against Harden, bringing the combined total to nearly $2 million.
Bleeker argues the cost runs the other way. These trustees’ actions are driving families out of the district and taking money out of classrooms now, he said, and continued discussions about closing schools have created such instability that many families have already left, which he said could cost the district millions in lost revenue.
No election is triggered unless proponents first clear a signature threshold. Petitioners have 120 days, until Dec. 11, to gather signatures from 20% of eligible voters in each trustee area — 3,543 voters in Harden’s Area 4 and 4,075 in Fredericks’ Area 6.
The county must verify the signatures. If a petition falls short by Dec. 11, it expires and no election is held. If one qualifies, the recall measure would go on the ballot in 2027 for voters to decide.
Harden said he has supported public education in Pasadena for more than 15 years as a parent volunteer, a PTA leader and now as a board member, and that from the day he took office he has consistently and faithfully served District 4 to ensure every student has access to the best educational opportunities possible. He said he has never wavered from that mission.
“I didn’t step forward to serve because I expected this job to be easy,” he said. “I stepped up because I believe with all my heart that doing what is right for all students is the calling of this office — and it’s what my constituents elected me to do.”
Before signing any petition, Harden urged voters to learn the facts at https://hardenforpusd.com, where he said they can also reach him directly with their views and questions.
The district produced hundreds of internal emails and text messages among the four trustees in response to a series of California Public Records Act requests Bleeker filed last spring. Bleeker contends four trustees voted to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars on a consultant billed as independent, and that Fredericks, Harden and Velázquez had pre-selected the firm. The board later rejected the consultant’s findings, he said.
Bleeker said in written responses to questions from Pasadena Now that Harden violated the Brown Act, lied to his constituents and lost the trust of the community. Harden denies the allegations.
No court has yet determined whether any Brown Act violation occurred. Under Brown Act procedures, Bleeker said, no lawsuit could be filed because the board rescinded the original closure resolution and voluntarily agreed to cease and desist from the acts alleged to be violations.
Neither Harden nor Fredericks is up for re-election this year, so recall is the only way to remove either from office before their terms end, Bleeker said.
Kenne and Velázquez, named in similar allegations, hold seats up in the Nov. 3 general election and are not subject to recall under state law. Velázquez is not s
The Los Angeles County Registrar-Recorder/County Clerk’s office did not immediately respond to a request for further information.
Get our daily Pasadena newspaper in your email box. Free.
Get all the latest Pasadena news, more than 10 fresh stories daily, 7 days a week at 7 a.m.
