A Notice of Intention to recall Palo Alto Board of Education Vice President Shounak Dharap was released at 8:50 a.m. on Feb. 18. The notice, which requires at least 30 signatures, included 31 signatures when sent to Dharap. The notice must be sent to the County of Santa Clara Registrar of Voters by Feb. 25.

Out of over 50 community members directly involved in the recall, The Campanile spoke to a group of five PAUSD parents who agreed to an interview only on the condition they stay anonymous due to safety concerns for their children. 

“This recall is led by concerned parents, educators, and community members who believe in preserving high academic standards, fairness, and transparency in our education system,” the group wrote in an FAQ released to The Campanile. “It is a grassroots effort, independent of political parties, and focused solely on the well-being and success of students.”

The recall group members said they initially formed through in-person and online discussions and garnered donations to address concerns heightened by the Jan. 21, Jan. 23 and Feb. 11 board meetings. 

Story continues below advertisement

“Shounak Dharap is being recalled due to a pattern of decisions that undermine academic excellence, transparency, and public trust,” the group wrote in the FAQ. “His anti-merit stance has weakened academic standards, restricted opportunities for high-achieving students, and attempted to ‘fix’ declining achievement by lowering standards instead of adequately preparing our students for success. Additionally, he has failed to engage the community in critical curriculum decisions, refusing to provide transparency or meaningful public input. His rushed approval of major, controversial educational changes—without disclosing full curriculum details or following established board policies—has eroded trust and deliberately excluded parents, teachers, and students from the decision-making process. Rather than prioritizing the best interests of students and families, Dharap’s leadership has put ideology before fairness, transparency, and educational excellence.”

Dharap said board members Josh Salcman, Alison Kamhi and Shana Segal pledged support for him and board member Rowena Chiu has not yet taken a position.

“Speaking as an individual and not on behalf of the board, I believe the recall campaign against Shounak Dharap is not in the best interest of our students, teachers, staff, or community,” Segal wrote in a statement to The Campanile. “The process would divert valuable time and resources from our students and lead to greater divisions within our communities. While I recognize the frustrations of some in our community, I encourage us to listen, engage respectfully, and work together toward solutions that strengthen our schools.”

According to California State Recall Procedures, for a school district like PAUSD with over 10,000 but less than 50,000 registered voters, signatures from at least 20% of registered voters must be collected to file the recall petition. For a voter population between 10,000 and 50,000, the signatures must be submitted to election officials within 120 days.

After determining signature validity, within 14 days of receiving a certificate of sufficiency, the governing body must issue an order to hold a recall election. The election should be held within 88 to 125 days after the order is issued unless the November election is within 180 days of the order. 

If the recall effort makes it that far, during this election, voters have the option to vote “yes” or “no” to recall Dharap and select a replacement candidate. If the majority of votes are in favor of recalling Dharap, the replacement candidate with the majority of votes will replace Dharap. Otherwise, Dharap will remain on the board until his second term expires in 2026. Dharap will not be able to run again in 2026 as board members are limited to two terms.

The Notice of Intention lists several grievances against Dharap, including “undermining excellence and merit” after he voted to de-lane middle school math courses in 2020 and high school biology courses in January. PAUSD high school parent Jian W., who requested to only use their last initial to avoid retaliation, wrote in an email to the Campanile that they disagreed with Dharap’s votes.

“As a parent of a high-achieving student, I’m concerned about some of the recent changes to our school’s curriculum, like the removal of advanced courses,” Jian said. “My child not only has worked hard to be in honors classes but actually loves math and science, just like some kids love theater and sports. She shouldn’t be punished for enjoying these topics and wanting to learn as much as she can, just like athletes shouldn’t be prevented from the lead role in a Paly theater production or playing on the Gunn varsity football team.”

Dharap said the notion that de-laning lowers the bar for excelling students is false.

“The recall petition, the notice of intention, frames this narrative that PAUSD is in decline, and that’s both false and really problematic for our community,” Dharap said. “We were the number one school district in California when I was elected. We’re the number one school district in California now. We’re the number eight school district in the United States, which has actually gone up in the last six years. Our test scores have only gone up. Fifteen percent more students are college and career-ready than when I first got into office … We’re expanding advanced math offerings. Based on climate surveys and Healthy Kids surveys, students are thriving, they’re high achieving, they’re happy and they’re well prepared for college. I’m really proud of my record (in) our district.”

And Dharap said he is being unfairly targeted for his policy votes.

“I would say that holding me responsible for something is interesting, given that, for the (decision to de-lane) biology, for example, Shana voted for it, and Alison voted for it too,” Dharap said. “I have no power to accomplish anything on my own. I’m a single board member out of five. So whether we’re talking about Bio H, ethnic studies, all the votes that these proponents seem to be upset about, I did not do those on my own. This was a majority of board members, and at least one new board member that was elected in the last election voted for each of these.”

The notice also stated Dharap had “failed to provide responsible oversight of curriculum,” particularly with the merging of Biology Honors and Biology because, according to the FAQ, “the science department changed the Honors Biology curriculum so that both Honors and regular Biology became the exact same course” without “openly discussing this shift with parents and students.” Dharap said this was false.

“The teachers said that over time, to meet the changing requirements, the Bio H and the Bio classes for freshmen had become closer and closer in similarity to the point where it made sense to have a single class,” Dharap said. “That’s a pedagogical decision. We have state requirements, and the teachers teach their courses to comply with the changing requirements. If at a certain point it makes sense to change the class, the teachers are in the best position to tell us.”

The recall group also alleges Dharap was involved in the delay of Public Records Act requests for the California Ethnic Studies curriculum. They also criticize Dharap for mandating the course “without transparency, eliminating a semester of World History without disclosing what content was being removed.”

“As an elected school board member and the most senior member of the board, Mr. Dharap bears responsibility for failing to represent the interests of parents, despite being fully aware of the delays and refusals surrounding this Public Records Act (PRA) request,” the group wrote in an email to The Campanile. “For months, the district has hindered access to instructional materials, which parents are legally entitled to receive. Instead of advocating for transparency and timely disclosure, he has allowed this obfuscation to continue, without taking meaningful action to ensure compliance with the law.”

But Dharap said he is not associated with the denied or delayed PRAs.

“Board members have no control over PRA requests,” Dharap said. “This is completely outside of our scope. The district has a legal team and a PRA team that does that, so the idea that a single board member could even have the ability to hold up a PRA request is just not true. I have personally never received a PRA request from somebody, and I wouldn’t, because it goes to the district.”

In an email to the Campanile, PAUSD high school parent Naomi D., who requested to only use their last initial to avoid retaliation, said they are dissatisfied by Dharap’s leadership, particularly around the transparency of the California Ethnic Studies course. 

“PAUSD deserves a leader on the school board who values transparency and makes sure parents have a seat at the table before changes are made,” Naomi said. “The bottom line: parents shouldn’t have to beg to be involved with their children’s education. This whole mess in PAUSD could have been avoided if we’d had board leadership that just followed the law and did the right thing.”

Other community members, including PAUSD parent Nana Chancellor, said they were against the recall.

“This recall threat is yet another distraction from serving our students,” Chancellor said. “Recalls should be used for egregious behavior — not political revenge, retaliation or policy differences. I support Trustee Dharap 100% and look forward to hearing our school and city leaders speaking out against it.”

The group also alleged Dharap “repeatedly ignored parental and student safety concerns at Hoover Elementary,” referring to the installation of gender-neutral bathrooms on the campus. Dharap disagreed.

“This is expressly false because I actually listened to the student and parent concerns,” Dharap said. “I brought it back to the district, and the district then changed its approach and included both gender neutral and gender separated restrooms. I did listen, and I engaged, and we, the district, changed its approach based on that.”

The group also claimed Dharap contributed to and “dismissed concerns about declining enrollment” because he “suggested that families seeking stronger academic opportunities look outside PAUSD” instead of “working to improve academic rigor within the district.” Dharap attributed declines in enrollment to other reasons.

“Enrollment is a trend,” Dharap said. “Enrollment increases and declines over a period of years, over time. There are so many factors that contribute to it, but by and large, it’s because people are having fewer kids and young families can’t afford to live in Palo Alto. That’s what’s contributing to declining enrollment. The idea that there’s a mass exodus of families from PAUSD because they’re unhappy with all this is just not true.”

The group also alleged Dharap “created division and hostility,” especially toward the Asian community by engaging in “dismissive and exclusionary tactics that undermine fair representation.” In response to controversy over the reassignment of board member Rowena Chiu from her prior duties, Dharap said the conflict with Chiu has become unnecessarily racialized.

“I don’t agree that this is an Asian, non-Asian issue — I think that’s a harmful narrative,” Dharap said. “I say that as an Asian man, and I say that as someone to whom many Asian community members have reached out saying ‘We feel really concerned about this perceived narrative that there is something anti-Asian going on because we don’t agree that that’s the case, but we don’t want to speak out, because it just will create further divide.’ This is an issue of certain community members (who) have certain values on what they want in our schools and certain ones who don’t. And that’s the entire point of having five independent board members who vote independently on each issue and try to convince each other of the merits of each other’s positions, which is exactly how it’s supposed to work.”

PAUSD parent and community volunteer Jessica G., who requested to only use their last initial to avoid retaliation, wrote in an email to The Campanile they supported the recall due to parents being not listened to.

“I’ve always believed in the importance of parental involvement in our children’s education,” Jessica said. “In fact, PAUSD used to seem to agree with this. Lately, though, it feels like the community has not been allowed to be as involved in key decisions, like changes to courses or curriculum. That’s why I support the recall — because I want a leader who listens to parents and makes decisions that reflect the needs of all students.”

Paly senior and former Paly school board student representative Karthi Gottipati said he is hesitant to support the recall.

“The bar to recall a sitting school board member is very high because this kind of thing is going to take away time from important issues at our schools,” Gottipati said. “If there is a compelling reason, I’d be happy to see it. If not, the bar ought to be pretty high. I think one of the biggest sources of discontent has been some people feel like he has been a little bit like an ivory tower and not responsive to the concerns of the community. I understand that he prioritizes action over intent and perception, but I’d love to see him be a bit more open and communicating his rationale behind some of the decisions he makes … it’s important we move on as a community and in this case, I think that means giving some extra consideration to optics.”

Dharap said he will re-establish trust with supporters of the recall by prioritizing students.

“I think that they will see my actions over the next two years in decision-making, and they will come to understand that what I’m doing every step of the way is in the best interest of the students,” Dharap said. “If that doesn’t rebuild trust, then that’s okay. I’m termed out in 2026. Somebody else will take my place, and I’m still only one of five board members.”

Kamhi and Salcman did not immediately respond to requests for comment. Chiu declined to comment on the story.

Read the full Notice of Intent here. Read the full FAQ from the recall group here. Access the recall website here.

This is a developing story. We will continue to update this story as more information becomes available.

This story was updated to accurately account for the current number of registered voters in PAUSD.