I don’t know how this story escaped me, but when I saw it, I was shocked. I thought I had become numb to whatever Trump does or says, but my reaction to this story proves it’s not true.
I’m shocked and stunned to learn that he is suing the board that awards Pulitzer Prizes for journalism for libel because it awarded one to The New York Times and The Washington Post for stories about the investigation of Trump’s ties to Russia. When Trump complained to the board that the stories contained many factual inaccuracies, the board reaffirmed its awards.
Before Trump was elected in 2016, he had been involved in 3,000 or more lawsuits. That’s his style.
President Trump on Wednesday celebrated a ruling from a judge allowing his lawsuit against the Pulitzer Board to proceed.
In a decision Wednesday, a Florida judge ruled Trump’s defamation lawsuit against the body, which awards the annual Pulitzer Prize recognizing the year’s best journalism, can proceed.
Trump, after he left office following his first term, sued the board in 2022 in connection with Pulitzers that had been awarded for stories about Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election.
The president, in a Truth Social post Wednesday, called the ruling a “major WIN in our powerful lawsuit against the Pulitzer Prize Board regarding the illegal and defamatory ‘Award’ of their once highly respected ‘Prize,’ to fake, malicious stories on the Russia, Russia, Russia Hoax, by the Failing New York Times and the Washington Compost, the Florida Appellate Court viciously rejected the Defendants’ corrupt attempt to halt the case.”
“They were awarded for false reporting, and we can’t let that happen in the United States of America,” he continued. “We are holding the Fake News Media responsible for their LIES to the American People, so we can, together, MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!”
Lawyers for the board had asked the judge in January to pause consideration of the case until after Trump was no longer president.
In a statement to The Hill on Thursday, a spokesperson for the Pulitzer Board said “allowing this case to proceed facilitates President Trump’s use of state courts as both a sword and a shield — allowing him to seek retribution against anyone he chooses in state court while simultaneously claiming immunity for himself whenever convenient.”
“The Pulitzer Board is evaluating next steps and will continue our defense of journalism and First Amendment rights,” the spokesperson said.
The lawsuit about whether the case should be heard then went to an appellate court in Florida.
Politico reported recently that one of the judges who ruled in Trump’s favor had applied to the Trump administration for a promotion before the judgment. After the decision was rendered, he got the promotion.
After hours of test taking last May, Karen Ramirez perked up when she saw a district leader and a camera crew walking onto her high school campus.
She had a hunch good news awaited.
Her instincts were right — then-17-year-old Ramirez was about to learn she had been elected as LAUSD’s student board member.
“I turned around, and I was like, ‘Wait, I think this means something happened,’” Ramirez, a senior at the Girls Academic Leadership Academy, said. “Eventually, I walked into my classroom because they brought cameras to film my reaction, and that’s when it hit. I was like, ‘Oh my goodness, I think I got it!’”
Since launching her campaign last February, Ramirez has made it her mission to promote student leadership across the district and to support the district’s Latino community.
“I know this is a position that not every student has in the district,” she said. “And to be able to be the one to experience all this, I feel very privileged.”
A path to the board
Ramirez’s path to LAUSD’s school board began when she was in the eighth grade and on LAUSD’s Superintendent’s Student Advisory Council, a group that meets with the superintendent several times each year to provide student input on the district’s efforts.
“I thought it would be a really nice idea to get an insider’s perspective into what’s going on,” Ramirez said. “Being able to see how (the committee has) evolved has definitely been an amazing thing.”
Ramirez has remained on the Superintendent’s Student Advisory Council since, tallying up nearly five years of district leadership. Being part of the board, she said, has been a “constant” in her educational journey.
One day during her junior year, an older mentor on the advisory council told her about the student position on the Los Angeles Unified School District board, and Ramirez’s campaign began.
“I started off just kind of thinking ‘Oh, OK, I just want to see what happens next,’ but then, as I got involved in the campaign process and started seeing how many students I would actually be representing in the district, that’s when it really became such a big passion for me,” she said.
“I know that my representation on the school board is something that is pretty big, especially for the Latino community.”
Last April, following an application and interview process, the district posted introductions to each of the position’s 10 finalists on its Instagram account, along with a brief speech made by each. Students then had two weeks to vote through an online portal.
“Everyone would start reposting on their Instagram stories, and they would all start campaigning for me on their own, and I didn’t even know that it was happening until after the fact, when I would talk to some friends who told me, ‘Oh, I voted for you!’” Ramirez said.
Elevating student voices on LAUSD’s school board
A critical forum for Ramirez to amplify student voices is through LAUSD’s school board meetings, where she speaks on behalf of students and co-sponsors resolutions, including one honoring Latino heritage.
Each month — and after a week of reviewing roughly 600 pages worth of materials and a summary in preparation for the board meeting — Ramirez is pulled out of school around 11:00 a.m., after her second period class, and is driven to downtown Los Angeles for the board meeting.
“Once I get there, I have lunch. I prepare, I look over all the board resolutions we might be discussing in the boardroom, and I take notes. I circle any things that might be relevant to students and that I might want to comment on,” Ramirez said. “And I also look for any board resolutions that I might want to co-sponsor.”
LAUSD’s student board members’ votes don’t technically count in board decisions, but they can introduce resolutions and can cast advisory votes, which school board member Tanya Ortiz Franklin said is “powerful” when making major decisions for the district.
Ramirez said it is vital that students’ voices are heard by school board members and the community at large, noting that district leadership often has to prioritize other challenges and communities.
“Sometimes the responsibilities that we (students) hold are big, but it’s not as big as what board members are doing. They have so much more on their plate,” Ramirez said, stressing the importance of providing students one-on-one attention.
“We are accessible, and (students) can reach out with any worries or comments, or just things that they want to see in the district. … I will always be attentive to the needs. … That’s the biggest thing.”
Ramirez also emphasized the importance of individual, one-on-one interactions, where she meets with students and encourages them to attend board meetings and join the various student councils at the district level, including an Asian American Pacific Islander council, individual board members’ councils and the Superintendent’s Student Advisory Council.
“Oftentimes, we feel a gap or lack of connectivity with our school board members, especially because our school board members are always on their platform … and so as students, a lot of times, we feel like we can’t really reach out to them,” Ramirez said. “My biggest thing is to really bridge that gap that we might feel.”
Bridging gaps
Beyond attending regular school board meetings, Ramirez has attended leadership conferences, appeared on television for Latino heritage month, reached out for collaboration with the Mexican Consulate and is working to launch a podcast later this year.
The podcast, she said, is in Spanish and will specifically cover topics pertinent to English learners. “That’s a community that’s really close to my heart and I always want to support,” she added.
Ramirez’s commitment to her heritage makes her stand out, Ortiz Franklin said.
“What’s so clear from Karen is how proud she is to be Latina, how privileged she feels to be a representative on the board in a district that is almost three-quarters Latino, and just what that means for immigrant families in particular, given how much of Los Angeles has been influenced by immigrant communities over the past generations,” Ortiz Franklin added.
Moving forward with confidence
Ramirez’s motivation to enter public service goes back to her parents, who encouraged her to take advantage of every opportunity.
“Some of the things that we … don’t have access to are things that you do have access to,” she remembers her parents telling her. “So if you have that opportunity, then you definitely have to take it.”
Ramirez said, “When I was told about the student board member position, and I knew that I had the opportunity to do something for my community as a whole, I thought that that was something that I couldn’t give up.”
Ramirez said her education at the Girls Academic Leadership Academy — LAUSD’s only all-girls school — has been especially formative in developing her confidence, not only as a board member, but as a leader in her high school’s student body and various clubs.
“Being in that environment around so many women, I felt like my confidence grew. In school, we always like to support each other,” Ramirez said. “I bring that confidence and that energy anywhere I go.”
Ramirez has accepted a scholarship to Yale University, and this fall she will become the first in her family to attend college.
“It’s an honor. I’m so excited to see how I experience that,” Ramirez said. “And anything that I learn there, I’ll bring that to my family and bring back to my community.”
Editors’ note: This story has been updated based on information made available after publication.
Packed crowd anticipates discussion on Orange Unified Parental Notification Policy on Sept. 8, 2023.
Credit: Mallika Seshadri / EdSource
A grassroots movement propelled by small contributions from teachers and local residents ousted two board members from an Orange County school district who supported controversial causes.
The victory came despite opposing big money contributions from conservative organizations, Republican political figures and business leaders.
More than 85% of the $227,000 raised by recall supporters came from over 400 individuals giving an average of about $450 each, with the rest coming mostly from teachers’ unions. More than 1 in 10 of the donations came from people who listed their employer as Orange Unified, including more than 25 teachers and board member Andrea Yamasaki.
The money raised, said the recall movement’s co-chair, Darshan Smaaladen, “reflects the passion for our schools and our students in the district, and the care that our entire community has that we have great public schools.”
By contrast, just under a third of the nearly $260,000 raised by opponents of the recall came from 115 individual donors, with the majority coming from conservative groups — led by the Lincoln Club of Orange County, which describes itself as “the oldest and largest conservative major donor organization in the state of California.”
The donations are listed in disclosure forms filed Feb. 17, with some additional large donations reported before the election in early March. Board members Madison Miner and Rick Ledesma — who were repeatedly accused of promoting their own political ideologies at the expense of student learning and well-being — were removed when the recall passed by 3,500 votes.
Following the money
The No OUSD Recall group received a number of hefty donations — and was led by the Lincoln Club of Orange County, which gave a series of donations totaling $80,500, just under the $83,261given by all individuals to that same campaign.
The Lincoln Club’s donations, which came from their State PAC and Issues PAC, accounted for 46% of the total campaign’s organizational contributions and 31% of donations across the board.
The Lincoln Club of Orange County is funded by various business groups, and more than half of its income comes from the group Angelenos for Outstanding State Leadership, which gets all its money from one organization singly funded by the McDonald’s Corp.
The McDonald’s Corp. did not respond to EdSource’s multiple requests for comment.
On top of the contributions from the Lincoln Club, three organizations connected to Mark Bucher — the CEO of the California Policy Center, a think tank that stands for the belief that “until we rein in government union power, there’s little hope for reform in our state” — collectively gave $66,000.
Bucher said in an interview with EdSource that he “was always an advocate” for the donations to the campaign.
He also said he previously served on the board of the Lincoln Club and that he left about a year ago.He claimed that unions have “financed the campaigns of just about every elected official,” and that the donations were an attempt to “offset, very frankly, corrupt practices.”
Bucher, who supported the election of Ledesma and Miner, also said that “the trustees that got recalled were doing a spectacular job of representing parents and citizens and kids, and they were attacked constantly for it, and school board meetings have been a circus. It’s just ridiculous.”
He added that his future in political advocacy and spending, including in the upcoming November election, depends on the candidates and issues at stake.
The law firm of Shawn Steel — the co-founder of the recall campaign, who has also served as the Republican Party of California’s national committeeman and wrote for the California Policy Center — also supported the No on Recall movement. Assemblyman Essayli, R-Riverside, who authored a failed statewide Assembly bill that would have required schools across California to notify parents if their child may be transgender, also contributed.
His bill AB 1314 laid the foundation for a similar policy that has been adopted by more than a half-dozen school districts throughout the state.
The Lincoln Club of Orange County’s executive director, Seth Morrison, along with Bucher criticized the teachers’ unions for backing the recall effort, and Morrison also claimed they were “tied in with a larger Democratic Party.”
He said that “they were looking for an excuse to do something like this. This is a bigger thing for them. …That’s something we saw, and we’re happy to engage to defend the people who just got elected.”
On the other hand, the recall campaign collected more money for their campaign from a number of individual contributions.
Most donors to the recall effort gave small amounts, and Smaaladen said that the recall movement’s strategy of asking community members to “donate in honor of” a teacher, along with their matching events, made a large impact on the campaign.
Among a wealth of smaller contributions is also a series of sizable donations from the Orange Unified Education Association, which gave $52,086.50 — or 74% of the campaign’s organizational money and 19.5% of total contributions.
Educators and the unions representing them played an important role in both organizational and individual contributions. Teachers — including both the union and individual educators — gave the recall campaign $61,048.82, or 22.9%, of its money.
Teachers unions from neighboring districts, alongside organizations and political action committees representing educators’ interests, also pitched in, giving just over $7,000 collectively.
Local organizations with political affiliations — including the Democratic Women of South Orange County and Democrats of North Orange County — carried far less weight, while the Josh Newman for Senate campaign donated $5,000.
Women for American Values and Ethics, which identifies itself as a “grassroots group dedicated to advancing progressive values and ethics,” gave $1,041 to the campaign, and the Community Action Fund of Planned Parenthood donated $2,500.
What drove each side of the recall
After OUSD’s board fired then-Superintendent Gunn Marie Hansen without explanation in January 2023, a group of OUSD parents and teachers banded together to start the grassroots recall movement.
The OUSD recall website explains that the group was motivated by decisions made by the school board, including a series of alleged violations to the Brown Act, banning the pride flag, passing a policy that requires school administrators to notify parents if their children show signs of being transgender and a temporary suspension of the district’s digital library because it included the book “The Music of What Happens,” a coming-of-age story about two boys who are in love.
“We knew that this board was not going to listen to parents and the district, and they weren’t going to do what was best for our students,” Smaaladen said. “We became this kind of ragtag group that has evolved into a grassroots movement of hundreds of involved parents.”
Smaaladen said the group opted to pursue the recall during the March primary in an effort to save the district money. The recall effort started gathering signatures in June2023, and by October had collected enough to place the recall question on the ballot.
Recall leaders also decided to focus their effort on Ledesma and Miner — and dropped the attempt against board member Angie Rumsey and board President John Ortega because they are up for re-election this coming November.
However, the No OUSD Recall group has repeatedly stated in social media posts dating back to April 2023 that the recall effort is an attempt to attack parents’ rights.
“When we won our elections to the OUSD Board less than two years ago, we did so on the promise of defending parents’ rights, fighting for curriculum transparency, working to improve test scores, prioritizing student safety and ensuring education is not replaced with indoctrination,” Miner said in a statement to EdSource.
“We proudly followed through on those promises, and the radical recall attempt is the resulting backlash.”
Now, the five remaining school board members will have to decide whether to appoint two new members or to hold a special election; plus, three of the remaining board members’ terms expire this year.
“It has been a tumultuous year with the numerous changes within Orange Unified. The voters have spoken, and I look forward to our board being able to move past the politics and collaboratively focus on how to best support our districts’ students,” said Orange Unified School board member Ana Page in a statement to EdSource.
“I deeply appreciate the diverse perspectives and expertise that my fellow trustees will bring to future civil discussions that directly impact OUSD students and look forward to continuing the valuable work of supporting public education.”
Beyond Orange Unified
Before the voting started, both sides believed that the recall election against Ledesma and Miner would be consequential — not just for their district but for the state, and possibly, the nation as a whole.
“We’re going to see more of this, which is all the more reason why … we’re getting involved to stop it, to tell them that turning around and recalling someone not even a year after they’ve been in office is just a waste of taxpayer dollars. It’s just wrong,” the Lincoln Club’s Morrison said.
Efforts to recall members of a school board aren’t uncommon in California and across the nation — though relatively few actually make it to the ballot, said Joshua Spivak, a senior research fellow at the UC Berkeley School of Law’s California Constitution Center and author of “Recall Elections: From Alexander Hamilton to Gavin Newsom.”
Spivak said the number of school board recall efforts across the country grew especially during the Covid-19 pandemic — which he described as “arguably the biggest impact that a government ever had on our lives in our lifetime unless you were in WWII. But hardly any of them resulted in the removal of an elected official, he said.
Since then, the number of recalls has dwindled, Spivak said.
In 2023, he said there were 102 recall attempts across the country — 29 of which were in California. Michigan, which is known to be the state where recalls are most popular, had 35 attempts that same year.
“Orange Unified will be setting a precedent,” Smaaladen said before the election. “But I hope the precedent we set is to send a clear message to those that are elected to school boards: to listen to their community and to make moderate decisions that are in line with what is best for the students and not necessarily their own personal agendas.”
She added that the recall election has forced the community to pay more attention to local politics, which she said has already and will continue to “change the trajectory of the district.”
“I’ve had numerous voters say, ‘Oh, I didn’t vote in November 2022,’ or even ‘I voted for Madison and Rick, but, you know, I wasn’t really paying attention because everything was fine,’” Smaaladen said.
“And when things are fine, it’s good, you can let it be. But now (voters are) paying attention.”
The Fresno Unified school board on Friday appointed Misty Her, the district’s deputy superintendent, to lead the district on an interim basis while the board conducts a national search for someone to fill the permanent role.
The decision came after closed-session discussions at a Monday meeting and during special board meetings about the interim position on Wednesday and Friday.
As interim superintendent of California’s third-largest district, Her becomes the nation’s highest-ranking Hmong education leader and brings stability that the district needs, board members said at the news conference after Friday’s meeting.
Her appointment, which becomes effective on Wednesday when her contract is approved, allows Fresno Unified to “maintain momentum” without rushing the search process, board President Susan Wittrup told reporters.
“We need an interim superintendent who will continue to implement the important initiatives that the district is pursuing and who will ensure that we are fully prepared for the first day of school in the fall,” Wittrup said.
The school board said on April 10 that it would consider both internal and external candidates in the search for a new superintendent — a change in the search process that was spurred by weeks of community outrage.
The outrage followed a March 20 closed-session decision to interview internal candidates before deciding how to proceed with the search process. Details of the 4-3 decision were leaked to the media, sparking community anger that pushed the board to reverse course on April 3 and postpone already scheduled interviews.
After the April 10 decision, the search process was supposed to include community participation with the board providing additional updates at other meetings. Although board members met on April 24 for a regularly scheduled meeting, the board president didn’t disclose a timeline in a seemingly stalled process, The Fresno Bee reported.
Superintendent Bob Nelson announced his resignation on Jan. 22; his last day is July 31. The school district confirmed in a media release about Nelson’s resignation that Her would be named interim superintendent, but naming her on Friday is a move that most likely won’t restore community trust, according to Fresno Teachers Association President Manuel Bonilla.
“The FUSD school board continues to erode community trust with its handling of the superintendent search process,” Bonilla said in an emailed statement following the announcement. “The board’s decision to announce the appointment of Interim Superintendent Misty Her during the Friday News Dump period, following two abnormally scheduled special meetings that effectively sidelined public input, undermines transparency and further erodes community trust in the superintendent selection process.”
So far, the search process has been engulfed in community angst about an alleged lack of transparency and accusations that the process had been tainted by politics, EdSource reported. District employees at the center of the search, including Her, even faced racial harassment and threats.
Reflecting on the last few weeks, board member Elizabeth Jonasson Rosas said on Friday that the board is now where it needs to be — united to find its next superintendent who can advance student achievement. Most Fresno Unified students failed to meet the state standards in 2023.
The district leaders did not answer questions at Friday’s news conference but will host another one Wednesday before the board’s regularly scheduled meeting.
“Moving forward, the board must demonstrate a commitment to inclusivity and transparency in its decision-making processes,” Bonilla said. “We urge the board to prioritize meaningful community engagement and input in the selection of the next superintendent to rebuild trust and ensure accountability to all stakeholders.”
Nelson, board members say the appointment is what Fresno Unified needs
The board’s unanimous decision to appoint Her is what the Fresno Unified community needs, district leaders said.
“There is nobody I am more confident in leading our Fresno Unified family through this transitionary period than you,” Nelson said, addressing Her, at the Friday special board meeting. “You have never apologized about your relentless focus on student achievement, and that’s what we really need at this time.”
Her’s entire 30-year career has been in Fresno Unified where she’s held many positions, including a bilingual instructional aide, a school leader and deputy superintendent in 2021.
“Most important to me,” trustee Veva Islas said, “Misty’s lived experience allows her to relate to our disadvantaged students that no other superintendent can.”
Born in a prisoner of war camp in Laos, Her’s family escaped to a refugee camp in Thailand after the end of the Vietnam War before eventually coming to the United States and settling in Fresno when she was a young child, Fresno Unified said in an emailed statement. That firsthand experience and her understanding of the challenges faced by students from diverse backgrounds have shaped her into a passionate and effective leader, the school district stated.
Based on 2022-23 state data, more than 92% of Fresno Unified students are minorities, and according to 2023-24 district data, 88% of students are living in disadvantaged circumstances.
The school board, which has yet to lay out a timeline, share a job description for the next superintendent or select another search firm to lead the search, will update the community about the national search at its May 8 meeting.
The board is “committed and unified” to not only find the next superintendent but to support Her in the meantime, board members said.
“Fresno Unified is my life. From elementary school through more than three decades as an employee and a current Fresno Unified parent, my commitment runs deep,” Her said in the district’s statement.
“I am proud to serve our students and their families as one of their own,” she said. “Our Fresno Unified family deserves a leader who is a successful Fresno Unified graduate, is committed to this community and truly believes in our students and staff.”
Anya Ayyappan, left, being sworn in as the student member of the California State Board of Education by Board President Linda Darling Hammond.
Credit: Courtesy California State Board of Education
As education policy and issues at school boards across California continue to grab headlines, it’s more important than ever that K-12 students — especially those in a state as diverse as ours — have a representative at the table who can voice concerns and have their opinions and input heard.
That’s why, as the current student member of the State Board of Education, I strongly encourage all eligible high school students to apply to be the student member for the 2025-26 school year. The application window is now open.
As student member, you can represent the voice and perspectives of millions of students across California. Your input ensures that student concerns and interests are considered in educational policymaking and decisions made by the State Board of Education. Your insights and experiences as a student can shape policies related to curriculum, standards, assessments and other aspects of education in California.
During my term, I have advocated for increased student involvement in decision-making processes like adopting instructional materials, designing local control and accountability plans and determining actionable goals based on school climate surveys. I have also forged connections with student leaders across California’s various regions, including the Central Valley and Northern California, that have been traditionally underrepresented.
These channels of communication allow for coordinated student-led initiatives and diverse input on items discussed by the state board. Based on my conversations with students, I have supported the integration of artificial intelligence in classrooms and increased project-based learning opportunities.
Recently, I joined the Statewide Model Curriculum Coordinating Council to review lesson plans on Native American history and culture, ensuring they capture authentic, diverse voices. I will be continuing this work beyond my term.
In addition to providing me with the opportunity to serve my state, this role has given me a deeper understanding of California’s education system. Seeing the incredible work that is being done, along with all the work that remains to be done, has had a profound impact on me, sparking my desire to continue exploring education policy in college.
Serving on the board provides you with a unique learning experience regarding governance, policymaking, and the educational system. You’ll gain valuable insights into how decisions are made at the state level and how they impact students and schools.
The application is the first step. The selection process starts with the board’s Screening Committee reviewing all applications and selecting 12 semifinalists. Of those 12, California law requires that student members of a school district governing board select six for further consideration by the State Board of Education. The state board uses the annual Student Advisory Board on Education conference — which takes place Nov. 10-13 in Sacramento — to perform this function.
At this conference, the semifinalists make individual presentations to all other advisory board participants about why they should be the next student member — an incredible opportunity to gain valuable experience and make personal connections. Following a secret ballot by the advisory board participants, six candidates will be submitted for further consideration by the state board’s Screening Committee.
Each of the final six candidates will be interviewed by the committee, after which committee will recommend three finalists to the State Board of Education. Following the board’s action to select the three finalists, the names of the three finalists will be sent to the governor for the final decision.
Hopefully, after reading this, many students will be inspired to apply. If you or someone you know qualifies for the student member position and wish to apply, you have from now through Sept. 20 to do so. And with summer coming soon, we encourage you to apply soon.
If appointed by the governor, you’ll have the opportunity to network with other board members, educators, policymakers and stakeholders in the education field. This networking can open doors to future opportunities and collaborations.
Serving on the board can enhance your leadership, communication and advocacy skills. It’s a chance to develop as a leader and make a meaningful impact on education in your state while also enhancing your resume and future academic or career opportunities.
Merely going through the process allows you the chance to gain valuable experience and provides many opportunities to help your community. It also helps you think more critically about the education system and how your help can impact students across our state.
As a student, your voice is powerful. I highly encourage you to apply!
•••
Anya Ayyappan is currently serving as the student member of the California StateBoard of Education. She is a senior at Dougherty Valley High School in San Ramon.
The opinions expressed in this commentary represent those of the author. EdSource welcomes commentaries representing diverse points of view. If you would like to submit a commentary, please review our guidelines and contact us.
Members of the Los Angeles Unified School District school board continued to discuss student safety Tuesday — and are still a ways away from determining whether to revamp its police presence on individual campuses.
A safety task force — which previously recommended each campus choose whether to have police stationed at its site — made a presentation about LAUSD’s approach to student safety, including community-based safety methods such as restorative justice. They will continue to meet in the coming school year.
Discussions about reintroducing police to individual LAUSD campuses are taking place for the first time since George Floyd’s murder amid a 45% increase in incidents between 2017-18 and 2022-23, including suicide risk, fighting/physical aggression, threats, illegal/controlled substances and weapons.
Here’s what the board members said at Tuesday’s meeting. Their remarks have been edited for length and clarity.
School board President Jackie Goldberg: ‘Not really desirous of having armed police on campus’
I spent 17 years teaching in Compton. … We had two sets of gangs. … We then hired school police to come onto campus. The problem was that there were two (officers). The problem was that when the gangs came over the fences, they came over in 10s and 20s. … How did they have guns? They came over in sufficient numbers to disarm the police. So, I’m not really desirous of having armed police on campus. …
LAUSD Board Member Jackie Goldberg
What do I think school police can do? I think school police can be in neighborhoods where most of the problems happen. … What we mostly had to do was to have them in the community around the school and for us to be able to find out from trusted — usually — graduates of ours when trouble was about to happen. And so, (police) could be not in twos, but they could be sent in fours and fives to neighborhoods where things were about to come down.
… If you want to stop drug abuse, are you going to have a police officer sitting in the bathrooms because that’s where the exchanges take place? No, we’re not. We’re not going to put a police officer to sit in classrooms. Do we want school police on campus when there’s a fight? Yeah, that may be useful.
… Most of the fights are not bad. And I think as we keep statistics, I would like us to have a notion of what the types of fights were. Was this two or three kids who … called your mother something and they’re fighting and it gets stopped? I think they should be counted, but I think they aren’t the problem. The problem is the massive fights, and those do need to be treated differently.
Secondly, we do not have restorative justice in this district. Period. I visited all 151 of the schools I represent, several of them several times, and in only a handful of them did I see anything that resembled restorative justice.
School board Vice President Scott Schmerelson: ‘I also believe in school police’
Let me just tell you what really bothers me: when people think that school police are supposed to do discipline at school. They’re not supposed to be doing discipline at school. That’s the teacher’s job. That’s my job as the principal, or the assistant principal, or the dean. …
LAUSD Board Member Scott Schemerelson Credit: Julie Leopo / EdSource
I do believe that we need climate advocates at school. Absolutely — all the help that we can get at making peace at school. Very, very important. … Yes, I do believe in restorative justice. I do. Our kids need to see what they’ve done wrong and how to make amends for what they have done. Very, very important. I also believe in school police.
We are responsible from the minute the kids leave home to the minute they get to school. And, we’re responsible from the minute they leave school to the minute they go home. … That’s why safe passage is really so important too. Kids need to have check-in points along the way home to and from school. Extremely important. Everybody has a job at school, and we should not be pushing people under the bus whether you’re a school police officer, or a climate control officer.
Board Member Rocio Rivas: ‘We do have the data on what we need to do’
We’re not the same since the pandemic. Things have changed. Our students are suffering. They have high anxiety. There’s increase of suicidal ideation.
LAUSD Board Member Rocio Rivas
… We have (positive behavior intervention and support) and restorative justice, but they’re not strengthened. They’re not bolstered. So, the district does have that system in place where we can create safe, loving, culturally responsive schools, but we’re not giving the investments or the support that our schools need.
… The area that needs that support are middle schools. … That is where we start seeing the suicide ideation, when we start seeing the fights, when we start seeing our students needing to medicate themselves.
… We love our kids, and at early ed centers, we love them; we want to protect them. But once they leave those early ed centers, it’s almost as if they lost that system of love and compassion and care. And we put in other systems, and we look at them (as though) all these kids are deviants. No, they are children. They are children until even after they’re 18 … because their brains are still developing.
… We know exactly what we need to do, but we’re not putting the money or the strength or the emphasis. … We’re talking about test scores, but you know what? You are not going to see increases … in student achievement unless that child feels that they’re being heard, that that school cares about them, that they have somebody in there.
… We do have the data on what we need to do. We have the funds. We just don’t have the buy-in from this district, from this building, because it’s so disconnected from our schools and from our communities.
Board Member Tanya Ortiz Franklin: ‘We’ll keep the conversations going’
LAUSD Board Member Tanya Ortiz Franklin
I’ll just bring our attention back to the Community Based Safety Resolution. The last resolve does ask us … to strengthen community-based safety approaches … and resources as a primary means of cultivating and maintaining positive school climates and keeping school communities safe even in emergency situations.
… We need the (restorative) training throughout for all of the staff members — as many folks can come back before the school year starts. We’ve got $350 million invested in people who are focused exclusively on safety. If we can focus on this community, restorative approach as the primary means — really shifting away from that punitive, traditional, policing model — I think we’ll get even closer to the vision of this resolution that we all passed. I think we’ll keep the conversations going next year in the school safety committee.
Board Member Kelly Gonez: ‘It’s about creating a true infrastructure around community-based safety’
I was looking just at the (Local Control and Accountability Plan) information for our meeting later, and it highlights different demographic groups of students and the percent of students reporting that they feel safe in the school experience survey, and there are significant gaps — like for our Black students, who are rating the lowest in terms of whether or not they feel safe, which obviously is very concerning, as well as the number of students who feel like they are part of their school.
LAUSD Board Member Kelly GonezCredit: Julie Leopo / EdSource
Those numbers, it looks like, took a significant dip in the wake of the pandemic and have not really fully recovered, and I would just surmise that there’s a connection between feeling disconnected or not seen at your school site and whether or not there is true safety and belonging for students.
… It’s not just about restorative justice and the practices, but it’s about creating a true infrastructure around community-based safety. And, I think that’s inclusive of a number of staffing positions as well — beyond, just for example, your restorative justice teachers and beyond the partnerships with community based organizations, which are also integral. It’s about, for example, our classified staffing positions. We know that a number of our incidents happen during lunch, during dismissal.
… I would just ask that in any plan … that we’re providing for the necessary staffing and supervision that our schools and our students really deserve — and especially looking at our secondary schools, because we know that’s where the majority of these incidents are happening.
Board Member Nick Melvoin: ‘The glaring omission (is) … the data on the fights.’
LAUSD Board Member Nick MelvoinCredit: Julie Leopo / EdSourc
Regardless of our views of what’s happening outside of the school, our responsibility is for school safety on the school campus, and we have different ideas. … But I do think really the glaring omission (is) … the data on the fights.
… I’m trying to understand where we can trace that based on grade levels, and Covid, and the effects of the pandemic and the success or lack thereof of our positive behavioral intervention supports and restorative justice. … (and) on school campuses with the current deployment model, which is not having police there, except for rare emergencies.
… We have different ideas … and I just hope that we can engage, starting from the premise that we all want kids to be safe and talk to each other and not just about or past each other.
And then the last thing, too. … I just want to make sure that the city and the county aren’t off the hook for this — and that as we’re talking amongst each other, we’re also bringing them in.
Board Member George McKenna: ‘We still haven’t come to grips with the reality of what makes the schools safe’
I’ve been in this for 62 years — I’ve never seen police criminalize the children. I’ve seen them respond.
… Do you know that there is no guideline in a teacher’s contract — or even an administrator’s contract — that says you must go break up a fight? The only one that has to do that is someone who’s trained to do that. And that will be a school police officer.
Board Member Dr. George J. McKenna IIICredit: Julie Leopo / EdSource
… I have no problem with the climate coaches or whatever they’re called, in addition to the people that have been there in uniform with the licensure and the legal responsibility for student safety … And the only people that have voted for the safety of school police being on campus are people who have been on the campus as administrators, including principals. … The most important people in the school district are the people who run the school, that’s the principal.
… The most police officers we’ve ever had on the campus … is two, and I think it’s understaffed if you only put one on it because they have no backup. They need to be visible in order to assist the students and the prevention of incidents that occur because … the students will confide in them.
….We’re not OK the way we are. And we still haven’t come to grips with the reality of what makes the schools safe and whether or not our school safety officers are a benefit to us. When you start with the premise and use the word the “punitive school police” and that’s the way you introduce it, you are already biased because that means you don’t understand what they do. And you can fill up the room with your accolades and your people that you’ve encouraged to be here, but we have to go to the schools on a regular basis. It makes a school safe.
West Contra Costa Unified’s Stege Elementary School in Richmond.
Photo: Andrew Reed/EdSource
Most school districts across California have already approved budgets for the upcoming school year along with a required planning document that gives a road map on how funds should be spent. It’s a routine process that by state law must happen by June 30, the end of the fiscal year.
But what happens when a board fails to approve both by the deadline?
After the West Contra Costa school board last month voted down the planning document, better known as the Local Control Accountability Plan (LCAP), Contra Costa County Office of Education officials are stepping in to support the district as it works to secure approval. The board didn’t get to vote on the budget at the June 26 meeting because the LCAP must be approved first.
The accountability plan, which also includes district goals to improve student outcomes and how to achieve them, and the budget are linked; one cannot exist without the other. There’s $64.8 million of funding in the LCAP that can’t be used until the plan is approved by the board.
“You have to adopt the plan first before you can adopt the budget,” said Michael Fine, chief executive officer of the state’s Fiscal Crisis and Management Assistance Team (FCMAT).
“The budget becomes subsidiary to the plan in that it just becomes a supporting role to the plan, it’s one of the mechanisms that facilitates getting the plan done and implemented.”
Although the West Contra Costa Unified School District doesn’t currently have an adopted accountability plan or budget, the district is using its $484 million 2024-25 proposed budget in the interim to pay salaries and general operating costs, said Marcus Walton, director of communication at the county office of education. Previously, district officials thought they would revert to using the 2023-24 budget, but that has since changed.
At the June 26 meeting, district officials and some board members had the same concern — that rejecting the 203-page LCAP and not voting on a budget would mean losing local control. At the time, district staff didn’t have all the answers about what would happen next because they had never dealt with this situation. One district consultant even asked the board to consider voting on the LCAP again because without one, it would put the district in an unprecedented situation.
West Contra Costa is not losing local control.
The county office of education isn’t taking control of the LCAP or budget, confirmed Lynn Mackey, the county superintendent of schools. Since the vote, Mackey said she’s spoken with district Superintendent Chris Hurst, and the county and district’s LCAP teams have met. But there are no plans to re-create the LCAP or budget for the district, she said.
This isn’t a scenario where a district would need to be taken over, Mackey said. That happens when a district goes insolvent and runs out of cash.
“The LCAP can be a very complex document, it’s a beast,” Mackey said. “They’re (district staff) doing a great job, and they have done a great job. We will be meeting with them and supporting them as it goes back to the district for a vote.”
The next board meeting is set for July 17, but it’s unlikely the accountability plan will be brought back for a vote then, Mackey said. Key West Contra Costa staffers who work on the plan have been on vacation and are just starting to return. There won’t be enough time to post the LCAP before the meeting, which is a requirement, Mackey said. Neither the budget nor LCAP are currently on the agenda to be discussed or voted on at that meeting.
What happens if the board rejects the LCAP again?
“Unfortunately, the California education code does not address what happens when an LCAP is not adopted by a school district,” Hurst said in his message to community members. “This is an unprecedented event in the state of California.”
Mackey said she would need to confer with state officials for next steps.
In a message to the community, district Superintendent Hurst said the county has advised the district to pass the accountability plan by Aug. 15, the county’s deadline to review LCAPs. After school boards pass them, the county must make sure the plans comply with the requirements, then give final approval.
The county then has until Aug. 30 to respond to districts if they have questions or need clarifications on the documents, Mackey said.
If the board approves the accountability plan and the budget by the Aug. 15 deadline, Mackey said, it signals to the county that major revisions aren’t necessary. However, the county still needs to impose that budget because it wasn’t passed before the June 30 deadline required in the state education code.
The county could bill the district for helping it get the LCAP and budget approved, Mackey said, but the county has no intention of doing that.
What happens if the board does not pass a budget?
Mackey said the county would review the proposed budget, and as long as it meets all requirements, that budget would be imposed by her office.
It would be “foolish” for the board not to approve a budget, Fine said. “They need to approve the budget because that would give the county superintendent information, plus, then the district owns its budget. And that’s important.”
Passing the LCAP
Between now and when the accountability plan will return for a vote, district officials are working to get it to a place where the board will approve it.
The two district board members who voted down the LCAP — Leslie Reckler and Mister Phillips — said a major problem for them was the lack of transparency in the document. Board President Jamela Smith-Folds was the only “yes” vote. Otheree Christian abstained, and Demetrio Gonzalez Hoy was absent.
Many parents and other community members addressed the board during the June 26 meeting, asking the board to reject the LCAP and the budget, saying community input wasn’t reflected in the document. Public commenters said there was a lack of transparency in both proposals, that neither met student needs, and that they disenfranchised low-income students, English learners and students of color. Some speakers questioned whether the accountability plan complied with the law.
It’s rare for districts to turn in an accountability plan that fully complies with the law, Mackey said. However, when a board approves it, the county can work with districts to bring the documents into compliance.
Trustee Phillips said community concerns and not having a balanced budget were other reasons he voted down the LCAP.
“I want to be very clear: The community needs to be heard,” Phillips said. “That’s not me saying everything the community wants should be put in there, but they are supposed to be heard, and I don’t feel like that happened.”
Some trustees have called the vote a failure of the board, but Phillips said that’s not accurate.
“It was an opportunity for me to put brakes on another unbalanced budget. That’s why I did what I did. But it was not a failure,” Phillips said. “It was a conscious decision, I did it on purpose.”
District officials are projecting a $31.8 million budget deficit over the next three school years, with about $11.5 million in shortfalls projected for the upcoming school year. The plan was to use reserve funds over three school years to make up the deficit, which is a typical move, Fine said.
West Contra Costa has been in “financial distress for quite a while,” Fine said. “They were deep in distress, and they are working their way out of that hole.”
In an emailed statement, Reckler said the district should now “retool their presentation to the board and public and re-present it, tailoring it to specific questions” raised by board members and the District Local Control Accountability Plan Committee (DLCAP), which consists of parents and members of community organizations.
The board can then give district staff comments and direct it to take any additional steps, Reckler said.
Christian also said he abstained from voting on the accountability plan because the document lacked transparency and failed to include parent feedback. He said the document should plainly state how money is being spent to meet district goals and how programs are benefiting students, which hasn’t happened.
“Those who get paid the big bucks should be the ones to make sure this stuff is done right,” Christian said. “Let’s do it right, let’s make it right, let’s not have hidden agendas, and let’s spell it out.”
If there are substantial changes to the LCAP, it could mean big changes to the budget. It’s too soon to know what kind of changes are being made, but Mackey said even if money needs to be shifted around, it doesn’t appear there will be major revisions.
“It’s challenging,” Mackey said. “As much work as you do on transparency, I do feel like there’s always going to be somebody who doesn’t feel the LCAP is very transparent.”
Even if the accountability plan meets all the state requirements, some boards want more or for staff to go “above and beyond, which is understandable,” Mackey said.
“My hope is that they (board members) don’t hold it hostage for things that you can’t go back and fix,” Mackey said. “If they want something different in the future, set that up now so as the LCAP writers are going forward, they know exactly what is expected so this doesn’t happen again.”
California State University officials meet for the July 2024 meeting of the board of trustees.
Credit: Ashley Bolter / EdSource
California State University is taking the forecast of a snowballing budget gap so seriously, even a recent message touting a new hire came with the equivalent of a financial weather advisory.
That sobering message was repeated to the system’s 23 campuses at the last board of trustees meeting before the fall term — a moment of truth when campus leaders aiming to reverse declines in student enrollment will find out if their bids to attract and retain students worked. Even if efforts to boost enrollment succeed, cutting costs could prove a necessity on many campuses, CSU officials warned. Board Chair Jack B. Clarke Jr., addressing school presidents directly, said they ultimately will determine how to manage limited resources.
“Presidents, we understand that you’re going to have to make some hard decisions and, within your campus communities and your general communities, you’re going to be criticized,” he said. “Understand that we’re behind you in terms of making the hard decisions.”
CSU could be staring down a $1 billion budget gap in the 2025-26 school year as the result of dwindling state support for higher education and rising costs, staff said at the July board of trustees meeting.
CSU has also unveiled a plan to reshuffle dollars from campuses that fall short of enrollment goals. In April, the system released a preliminary budget document sketching how the system could reallocate $32 million in enrollment funding from 12 campuses that didn’t meet resident enrollment targets or target increasesand shift it into nine campuses where 2024-25 resident enrollment targets have been increased. A CSU spokesperson said the system is finalizing those plans over the coming weeks.
The system expects more budgetary trade-offs going forward, CSU Chief Financial Officer Steve Relyea said to trustees at their July meeting. Major expenses include a backlog of facilities and infrastructure projects, employee compensation costs and obligations the schools must meet under legal mandates such as Title IX, the federal law barring sex-based discrimination in schools.
“We anticipate negative impacts on academic offerings and student support services,” Relyea said. “The funding that we’re receiving, while it’s more, is still not sufficient to cover the increased cost on our current operations, and at this point universities will likely have to redirect significant dollars from existing university budgets to cover employee compensation commitments.”
Enrollment drops lead to cuts
CSU earlier this year agreed to a 10% raise for faculty represented by the California Faculty Association following a one-day strike. Trustees last week voted to approve salary increases for four campus leaders over the objections of some speakers during public comment.
Campus efforts to entice students back to campus include easing transfers into the system, reengaging students who started but did not finish a degree and more support for students of color. And CSU leaders say they remain focused on long-term goals like boosting graduation rates for historically underrepresented students and rebuilding trust in Title IX and other anti-discrimination programs.
Funding those priorities will require hard choices. Officials anticipate they can partially plug holes in the budget with reserve funds, but they said school presidents and the system itself must tighten their belts to cover the rest — cuts they acknowledged could prove painful and unpopular. The university system also will have to contend with pressure from faculty, who argue they should have a greater say in university decision-making.
Cuts are nothing new at some CSU campuses. In recent years, as enrollment fell more than 15% from pre-pandemic levels at schools including Cal State Channel Islands, San Francisco State and Sonoma State, campus leaders have held off on filling some open positions or launched voluntary separation programs to reduce staffing costs. Cal State Monterey Bay in May announced 16 layoffs and an additional 86 departures under an early retirement program. At Cal State East Bay, another campus that has seen a dip in enrollment, campus leaders in May announced that the school would no longer sponsor its women’s water polo to save money.
“Upending 19 student-athletes’ East Bay careers is without precedent,” said Jeff Newcomb, a lecturer and president of the California Faculty Association’s East Bay executive board, at the July meeting. “Going forward, authentic shared governance — it’s hard— but it’s crucial if we are to emerge from austerity measures with trust and strategic vitality.”
Take Sonoma State as another example.
The school has weathered enrollment declines with serious cost-cutting. To manage a budget shortfall, spokesperson Jeffery Keating said in a statement, Sonoma State has trimmed $21.4 million from its base budget since 2020-21 and plans an additional $7.5 million cut in 2024-25.
Some of those savings have come from reducing the number of faculty and staff, including through attrition and early retirement programs. Keating said faculty and staff headcount fell 22% between 2019 and 2023.
The aim has been “to protect student services and academic programs,” according to the statement, and the school doesn’t plan to scale back areas like financial aid, health services or career counseling.
He said the school sees some positive signs on the horizon: It projects that net student headcount will rise in 2024-25.
Across the system, CSU anticipates a $218 million shortfall this school year, according to a budget presentation. Making up the difference in funds likely will require tapping into reserves and “aggressively pursuing new students and working to retain current students,” said Ryan Storm, the system’s assistant vice chancellor for budget.
The budget presentation was not the first time Cal State has flashed financial warning signs.
The cost of educating CSU students far outstrips the money the system actually has to educate them, a 2023 report by CSU leaders found. Trustee Diego Arambula reminded colleagues last week that the gap between what the system estimated it should spend to meet student needs and what it does spend was $1.5 billion, and could grow as campuses trim their budgets.
The search for savings
The search for cost savings starts with the central office, Chancellor Mildred García said.
The Chancellor’s Office is reviewing each of its divisions in pursuit of “not efficiency for its own sake or purely for cost savings, but for mission-driven efficiency,” she said in a report to the trustees. In that vein, the office will split the division of academic and student affairs into two, a reorganization García said was estimated to save at least $500,000.
The July meeting also highlighted CSU’s smallest university — Cal Maritime — as both a cautionary tale and a possible inspiration for how the system’s campuses might share costs and academic programs in the future.
The board considered a proposal to merge the maritime academy into Cal Poly San Luis Obispo in a bid to save the Vallejo-based maritime school following a steep drop in enrollment and rising overhead costs. The board will resume those discussions in September and make a final decision in November.
Cal Maritime interim President Michael J. Dumont told the board the school has “taken a chainsaw to every expense on our campus” in pursuit of financial sustainability. Trustees praised the proposal to integrate the maritime academy into Cal Poly San Luis Obispo as an “elegant solution” that would save costs as the campuses consolidate administrative services and other operations.
CSU officials have left the door open for future campus mergers but say no additional integrations are immediately planned.
A document announcing the integration proposal said it’s in keeping with CSU’s goal to look for cost savings “from consolidation of certain administrative functions and from inter-campus cooperation and collaboration in the offering of programs and services.”
In response to questions about whether future campus mergers are likely, a CSU spokesperson cited a document that says CSU “must remain open to considering all options in the future to ensure the financial health of the system and its universities.”
That includes ongoing initiatives to save money short of full mergers, such as negotiating systemwide contracts with vendors and purchasing electricity for multiple campuses on the wholesale energy market.
“There are a lot of tools in the toolkit in addition to an integration like this,” CFO Relyea told trustees last week.
And Relyea noted that the $1 billion budget gap forecast for the 2025-26 school year is an estimate based on assumptions that could prove flawed. A shortfall could be avoided by making permanent cuts this school year, pausing new investments, bridging the gap with reserves and successfully lobbying the state for additional money, he added.
Some campuses might try to streamline their budgets in ways students won’t notice.
That’s the goal at Cal State Northridge, where administrators said that measures like cutting nonessential staff travel or delaying plans to replace older technology and equipment were among the ways they hope to save money.
“Everything that’s related to student success, we’re trying to shield that as much as we can,” said Edith Winterhalter, who leads the university’s budget department. “It’s really on the administrative side that we’re doing a lot of strategies to reduce our costs as much as we can.”
‘A painful year’
A wild card in CSU’s finances is its reliance on the California Legislature, which has funded roughly 60%of the school system’s operating costs in recent years. That can expose the university system to swings in state revenue.
CSU dodged the worst in this year’s budget. Early budget drafts proposed pushing a 5% funding hike that had been promised for 2024-25 into the following year. The final budget landed on a compromise: a one-time cut of $75 million, offset by an ongoing increase of $240 million. Staff attributed the improvement to an energetic lobbying campaign on behalf of the universities.
The budget outlook going forward is less rosy. Anticipating more lean years ahead, state legislators envision an 8% cut to CSU’s ongoing state funding in 2025-26, according to a CSU budget presentation. On top of that, state legislators have proposed that CSU front $252 million in the 2025-26 school year, which the state would subsequently reimburse in 2026-27. A similar spend-and-reimburse maneuver would occur in the 2026-27 school year.
Such an arrangement could prove risky for Cal State, Storm observed.
“If we spend, in advance, hundreds of millions of dollars and the state does not reimburse us, it would significantly deplete our one-time balances and reserves, and we could be left with new ongoing commitments and no new funding to support them,” he said.
That reality has compelled Cal State to look to grow other funding sources, including what students pay to attend its universities. Trustee Christopher Steinhauser defended the board’s previous decision to increase tuition by 6% annually starting this fall, saying the additional revenue will allow the system to save hundreds of jobs.
“We heard earlier in the spring we have to do less with less,” Steinhauser said. “This is going to be a painful year. … If we didn’t pass that tuition, we would be in a whole big mess, much bigger than we’re in now.”
CSU leaders have also pointed to other possible sources of funding, including operating campuses year round and pursuing more public-private partnerships. Trustee Larry L. Adamson urged university presidents to think creatively about raising money from philanthropic sources as one additional revenue stream.
“How many endowed chairs do we do every year in the CSU? And I think the answer is few to none,” he said during last week’s meeting. “We have to start doing more and more of that kind of thinking, as the UCs and privates do constantly. And instead of trying to just raise money for buildings, which we do a lot of, let’s start trying to raise money that offsets our actual ongoing expenses.”
Voters in November will decide whether to give the Los Angeles Unified School District $9 billion in bond money to upgrade and improve school facilities, the school board decided unanimously Wednesday.
The bond is the largest ever put on the ballot by Los Angeles Unified and is just shy of a statewide school bond measure for $10 billion that will also be on the November ballot. For LAUSD’s bond measure to pass, at least 55% of voters will need to vote in favor — which would lead to an uptick in property taxes by roughly $25.04 for every $100,000 of assessed value, according to a district estimate.
District officials stated that the money is critical, and its schools’ needs urgent.
“We have seen schools that are built as Taj Mahals, with the latest and greatest technology, with beautiful green spaces, with outdoor classrooms, with stunning athletic facilities,” Superintendent Alberto Carvalho said Wednesday. “Then you drive down the road one mile, and you see a completely different world that I cannot explain, and frankly, I cannot accept.”
More than 60% of LAUSD campuses are at least a half-century old, according to a board report. And schools across the district have more than $80 billion “of unfunded school facility and technology needs.”
Meanwhile, the costs of construction continue to grow — and have soared by 36% in the past four years, according to the report.
If passed, the $9 billion in bond money would help with efforts, including:
Ensuring schools have adequate safety features and are seismically sound
Modernizing campuses in-keeping with “21st century learning”
Improving disability access
Reducing discrepancies across older and newer schools
Expanding outdoor spaces, transitioning to a new food service model and improving energy efficiency
According to district materials, roughly “525 school buildings may need to be retrofitted, modernized, or replaced for earthquake safety.”
Amid widespread support at Wednesday’s meeting, Michael Hamner, the chair of LAUSD’s Bond Oversight Committee, said the district did not involve his committee enough in the bond’s development.
“While we understand the district’s infrastructure needs are greater than the pool of resources currently available to fund them, the process by which this bond measure was developed and put forward, without consultation of key stakeholders groups such as ourselves — and therefore outside public view — prevents us from providing any meaningful comment,” he said Wednesday.
In response, Carvalho stated that while the process of moving forward with this bond was condensed, the district will “not spare any opportunity” to consider the views of various stakeholders.
Amidst a declining district enrollment, some have also claimed the district should wait to move forward with a bond measure until they have a better understanding of their needs — especially as LAUSD is relying on taxpayers’ money.
Carvalho doubled down, however, on the project’s urgency.
He said that regardless of potential changes to enrollment and square footage, the district’s “critical need for facilities improvement will still be by far an excess of what we currently have and what we will have in the near future.”
According to school board member Rocio Rivas, improved facilities are associated with better academic outcomes, improved attendance and better mental health among students.
“Kids know when they have not the best — they don’t have it as good,” Board President Jackie Goldberg said Wednesday. “And they do feel, somehow or another, that maybe [they’re] just not worth as much.”
The Los Angeles Unified School District school board passed a resolution to support parent employees.
The district will gather data to help understand employees’ needs and what it will take to fulfill them.
This resolution is just the beginning — and a more detailed plan is expected in November.
The Los Angeles Unified School District’s school board unanimously approved at Tuesday’s meeting a resolution to support employees who are parents.
Currently, many LAUSD employees fail to qualify for California’s state-paid family leave, according to the resolution. During public comments at Tuesday’s meeting, several teachers and community members said they did not feel adequately supported by Los Angeles Unified when they had children.
“I’ve met countless educators, school staff members, who have had challenges with the whole parental package, with healthcare, with child care, with parental leave. And so this really, this resolution, really bore out of those stories and the opportunities to change L.A. Unified to be that employer of choice for parents,” said Ortiz Franklin, who introduced the resolution, alongside board members Karla Griego and Kelly Gonez.
“We have a big vision in this district for our kids to achieve at really high levels. And, we know that our staff needs to be well to be able to do that — and this is going to support them in their journey, to support our kids.”
The resolution — “Parental Package: LAUSD as an Equitable Employer of Choice for Thriving Families” — addresses various stages of parenthood, including family planning, pregnancy and parental leave and childcare.
It also aims to boost employee retention in a female-dominated field and make LAUSD a model for other districts across the nation.
Tuesday’s resolution is just the beginning of a longer process.
It calls for data collection on various factors, including employee demographics, the amount of time employees take off, the number of employees who have children enrolled in Los Angeles Unified’s early education programs, healthcare plan coverage and any financial impacts of providing over 12 weeks of family leave.
The district will also conduct a study to gauge employees’ interest in having children, family planning needs, access to LAUSD’s provided reproductive support, healthcare benefits, obstacles employees encounter in taking time off, information about childcare and the nature of employees’ current children’s education.
Based on their findings, the Los Angeles Unified School District will have to come up with a plan by November. And in the meantime, the district will be expected to work toward providing adequate lactation spaces, identify liaisons to support parent employees and find affordable childcare providers to consult on an as-needed basis.
“After the birth of my first daughter, I returned to the classroom happily, excited. I nursed my baby and during my unpaid lunch break, that was fine, until it wasn’t,” said Tanya Reyes, a veteran teacher with LAUSD, who created a support group within United Teachers Los Angeles, the district’s teacher’s union, to support other working moms. “After the disagreement with my administrator, I was told my daughter was a liability. My pay was docked. Not once. Not twice — but three times.”
“Mothers need paid leave — not sick time, not borrowed time. Paid leave,” Reyes added during public comment at Tuesday’s board meeting. “Families need policies that protect us, and those policies must be enforced.”
