Alberto Carvalho, former superintendent of the Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD), resigned in June amid allegations of unprofessional conduct and violations of state laws and district policies, according to an internal district letter obtained this week. Carvalho’s departure followed a federal investigation that included FBI raids on his home and office earlier in the year.

The confidential school board letter, dated June 8, outlined concerns leading to Carvalho’s ouster, including failure to disclose gifts, receipt of outside income, and acceptance of travel paid for by donors. The board also cited misuse of a district-provided vehicle and driver, intended strictly for official business, as well as acceptance of gifts from contractors and lobbyists in excess of legal limits.

Carvalho was placed on paid leave shortly after the FBI’s February search of his properties and remained on leave for nearly four months before tendering his resignation. The LAUSD Board of Education unanimously voted to place him on leave and later threatened dismissal “for cause” over undisclosed travel and baseball tickets linked to a technology vendor, according to the board’s letter.

Carvalho’s legal representatives from the law firm Holland & Knight denied all allegations of illegal activity, stating the district’s findings were incomplete and misleading. “Alberto Carvalho has broken no laws,” their statement read, emphasizing disagreement with the district’s portrayal of “issues of concern.”

Carvalho led the nation’s second-largest school district for more than four years and was widely regarded as a prominent figure in educational leadership prior to the investigation. His salary at the time was reported to be $440,000.

The revelations have cast a shadow over Carvalho’s tenure, with new details emerging as closer examinations of his record continue. District officials have sought to hold Carvalho accountable for ethics violations and failure to meet professional standards, but the superintendent’s legal team maintains his conduct was lawful. The controversy highlights ongoing scrutiny over governance and ethics in one of the country’s largest public education systems.