Several former and current Sweetwater Union High School District officials are being charged in what might be the largest corruption case of its kind in San Diego County’s history.

The District Attorney’s office announced on Wednesday, Jan. 4, that criminal charges against five defendants in a wide-ranging public corruption case involving Sweetwater Union High School District School Board members, the former district superintendant and a South Bay contractor—all of whom were involved in a “pay-for-play culture with businesses that were awarded voter-approved bond projects worth hundreds of millions of dollars.

“The widespread corruption we uncovered during our investigation of this case is outrageous and shameful,” said District Attorney Bonnie Dumanis. “For years, public officials regularly accepted what amounted to be bribes in exchange for their votes on multi-million dollar construction projects. The corruption was nothing short of systemic. Today’s charges begin the process of holding those officials accountable for their actions on behalf of the taxpayers, who footed the bill for lavish dinners, concert and theater tickets, and much more.”

Sweetwater Union High School District Superintendent Dr. Edward M. Brand said at a follow-up press conference the same day the charges were announced he will keep the district focused on maximizing student achievement, even while acknowledging the serious concerns and challenges raised by the ongoing investigation of elected district officials.

“Education is job one,” Brand said. “Our responsibility as educators and as staff and employees is to help our kids be successful. So my message to everyone is we’re going to get this ship back on track, we’re going to get it focused on the main thing, which is student achievement.

“At the end of the day that’s my goal, that’s my purpose and that’s the only reason I came back,” he said.

Defendants charged include former Sweetwater Union High School Superintendent Jesus Gandara; school board trustees Arlie Ricasa, Pearl Quiñones, and former 16-year board member Greg Sandoval. Also charged is Henry Amigable, a contractor who worked for a construction company hired by the school district.

Felony charges include bribery, perjury, filing a false instrument, influencing an elected official and obtaining a thing of value to influence a member of a legislative body. Additional misdemeanor charges include wrongful influence. If convicted of the charges, defendants face between four and seven years in state prison, as well as fines.

The defendants from the school district, who were entrusted with making decisions on behalf of the best interests of students and schools, received tens of thousands of dollars worth of meals, tickets and hotel stays from construction companies vying for voter-approved bond projects. Shortly after board members received financial favors, they approved contracts with the contractors for bond projects stemming from Sweetwater’s $644 million Proposition O.

Between 2008 and 2011, the defendants frequented San Diego-area restaurants with Amigable and others racking up hundreds of dollars in food and drinks at a time, in some cases reaching more than $1,000 per outing. Defendants were given Los Angeles Lakers playoff tickets, concert tickets, theater tickets, Rose Bowl tickets, Southwest Airlines tickets and a trip to Napa Valley. Officials did not report the gifts on their Statement of Economic Interest, as required by state law. In other instances, administrators and trustees solicited cash for their children’s beauty pageants or field trips. They also demanded campaign donations and other favors.

“This case is an excellent example of our office’s commitment to prosecuting public integrity cases,” Dumanis said. “It also shows how such investigations are, by their very nature, tedious and lengthy. We precede carefully on public integrity cases and often, the public isn’t aware of the work we’re doing behind the scenes. But when we discover criminal activity, we act to hold defendants accountable.”

Sweetwater is taking steps to prevent any further improprieties by reviewing the code of ethics mandated by the California School Boards Association with the board as well as all employees. “We will also continue to provide ongoing training for our staff about conflict of interest rules,” Brand said.

In addition to suspending SGI from conducting any further work for the district, Sweetwater has also suspended the former district counsel, GCR Legal, from representing the district in any legal matters. Under new guidelines, any attorneys working for the district must sign a 41-page retainer prohibiting them from contributing funds to Sweetwater school board candidates.

It is unclear as to whether the district may incur any responsibility for covering legal costs of defending the current or former officials involved.

“Currently, we have not authorized any defense for current or former board members or for the previous superintendent,” Brand said. “However, we are doing a legal analysis to see what our requirements would be. At this time, we have not authorized any funds for (their defense).”

The defendants are scheduled to be arraigned on January 13. The District Attorney’s investigation is ongoing and additional charges are possible.