Education

OUSD May Receive Millions in State Aid – But the Money Comes with Strings

Published

8 years ago

September 14, 2018

Parents and teachers protest last school year against cuts to programs and layoffs at school sites. Photo by Ken Epstein.

The State of California is set to approve a law that would relieve the Oakland Unified School District’s ongoing financial distress, but the grant comes with strings—which in the worst case could mean the state and its affiliated agencies could require OUSD to close dozens of schools, sell or lease surplus property and lay off hundreds of teachers, nurses, cafeteria workers and custodians.

The trailer bill (AB-1840 Education Finance) has already passed the State Legislature and is now awaiting Gov. Jerry Brown’s signature. Brown, who was reportedly involved in crafting the legislation, is said to be likely to sign the bill.

Under terms of the bill, Oakland and Inglewood (which is in the same boat as Oakland) would receive aid from the state through 2022, (a total for Oakland of about $34.7 million), which would pay 75 percent of the district’s projected operating deficit in 2019-20, up to 50 percent of the projected operating deficit in 2020-21 and as much as 25 percent of the operating deficit the following year.

The bill also includes mandated “benchmarks,” which the district must meet in order to receive the state grant.

“OUSD will be required to partner more closely with county and state officials, adopt multi-year financial projections that would eliminate its deficit, and produce a plan to right size the district,” by closing or consolidating schools, according to the district’s explanation of the bill.

“We appreciate the partnership with (the agencies) and our legislative delegates for working with us to address our pressing financial situation. We know the benchmarks outlining accountability and sound fiscal practices will help guide us as we continue building a solid and sustainable foundation for the district using the policies set forth by our own Board of Education,” said Superintendent Kyla Johnson-Trammell.

“We must act with urgency,” she said, speaking at a recent district committee meeting. “We’ve simply run out of time.”

Many Oakland educators and parents are encouraged by the prospect of financial relief to the public schools. But many expressed concern about the agenda of the agencies that would have the final say-so about whether the annual cuts the district is proposing meet official mandates.

These agencies, the Alameda County Office of Education and the Fiscal Crisis and Management Assistance Team (FCMAT), a state-funded nonprofit that advises districts on financial matters, have a long record in Oakland of advocating austerity, school closings and layoffs.

Both agencies played a large role in pushing OUSD into receivership (2003-2009) and forcing the district to take a $100 million state loan, which it did not ask for and had no control over spending.

Despite their influence over district policy for the six years of state receivership, neither agency has taken any responsibility for saddling OUSD with debt, their failure to balance the district’s budget or to institutionalize adequate financial controls.

“The state support provides relief in the near term, giving us the opportunity to implement longer term strategies to create a sustainable, quality school district for years to come,” said district spokeswoman Valerie Goode, quoted in EdSource. “The truth is, even with this support, we will need to continue making hard decisions to reduce our budget, right-size the district and continue improving our financial practices.”

According to district sources, OUSD must cut $30 million by June of 2019, which includes $20 million to eliminate a structural deficit and $10 million in reserves. It is still unclear how the district will pay raises for teachers, who have been working for a year without a contract.

Because the state grant would be one-time money, it would not eliminate the district’s structural deficit. But the grant would allow OUSD to slow down the cuts, spreading them over a several-year period, said School Board President Aimee Eng.

Oakland has its own financial problems, said Eng, but like other districts throughout the state, such as Los Angeles and Sacramento, “We’re in a place with flat revenue and dramatically increasing expenditures.”

The Alameda County Office of Education recently rejected OUSD’s three-year budget plan, saying it did not adequately address needed budget reductions. The school board has created a special committee to recommend the $30 million in budget cuts to avoid future deficits.

In a letter to community supporters of public education, Oakland Education Association President Keith Brown was positive about the state grant and told the community that the bill had broad support in the legislature and was unstoppable. “We will have opportunities later to weigh in on the requirements,” if the agencies push the district to consolidate schools or sell surplus property, he said.

One parent who has been following the progress of the state bill closely is Nilofer Ahsan, a member of Equity Allies for OUSD, an all-volunteer organization of Oakland parents and community members.

“There is a multi-million-dollar question facing all of Oakland,” she said. “It is true the district is in fiscal crisis and needs to fix those issues. But the question is: How are we going to be sure the changes are going to be good for students and families in the long run?”

“What will FCMAT and the County Office consider to be an adequate plan?” Ahsan asked. “The fear is that these (requirements) will be tied to deep austerity measures: School closures and losing school staff.”
“There’s no denying tough decisions will need to be made. As a community, we’re going to feel every single cut.”

Realistically, not all of the cuts can come from central office staff, she said “The cuts will be felt at the schools.”

Parent activist Anne Swinburn has also been closely following the state bill.

OUSD is in financial distress “for a bunch of reasons,” including many that are at least partly the responsibility of the state and the Legislature: state receivership and the expansion of charter schools to almost one-third of schools and students in Oakland.

“The district clearly needs financial relief. It’s important that we remember the situation we are in is because of actions that happened at the state level, not just locally.”

“We really need for the state loan (a $40 million debt still outstanding) to be cancelled, and we need the Legislature to change the charter laws, so Oakland can decide locally what schools are opened and where they are located.”

“This bill gives the county superintendent and FCMAT the power to require OUSD to close schools, which we already know they want OUSD to do,” she said.

School board members can follow two different paths—they can try to find cuts that do not involve closing neighborhood schools, or they can decide to let the state and FCMAT have their way, Swinburn said.

People should understand that closing schools does not save money, she said. “The big cost of operating a school is teacher salaries,” which are not reduced by closing a school and moving students to other locations.

However, closing schools could lead to a loss of students who leave the district for charters or private schools and cause “incredible hardship in Oakland,” she said, noting that the national research does not indicate that districts save money when they close schools.

“Kids in Oakland schools are already facing high levels of trauma and school instability in their lives,” she said. “This is not the kind of instability we owe to Oakland kids.”

Oakland Post

Posts by Oakland Post

Education

As Progressive Democrats Celebrate ‘Blue Tsunami,’ Oakland Counts Victories

As national Democrats celebrate a significant shift in the midterm elections, local leaders in Oakland are tracking early results from the Alameda County Registrar of Voters. While Mayor Barbara Lee and several City Council incumbents have secured decisive victories, attention remains fixed on high-stakes school board contests. Progressive candidates currently face strong challenges from opponents backed by corporate funding and local political organizations. With many ballots still uncounted, the final composition of the board and several regional transit measures remain in the balance. Read more.

Published

14 hours ago

November 6, 2026

Post News Group

By Ken Epstein

Concerns remain over school board races as ‘moderates’ lead progressives

The Alameda County Registrar of Voters has released the first round of election results, though many ballots remain uncounted and results are still incomplete.

Nationally, Democrats, liberals and progressives celebrated Tuesday evening as President Donald Trump was dealt a devastating blow in the midterm election. The Republican Party lost control of the Senate and the House as “Maga” candidates were swept away not just by a ‘blue wave,’ but a ‘blue tsunami.’

In Oakland, incumbent Mayor Barbara Lee, who served two years and ran for a full four-year term, won decisively.

A proposal backed by Lee, Measure EE, also won. The Charter amendment will create a strong mayor system of government while providing the City Council with new checks and balances on mayoral power.

District 2 Councilmember Charlene Wang is leading with 65.62% of the vote. Opponent Nate Adams trails with 34.38%.

District 4 Councilmember Janani Ramachandran, ran unopposed for reelection, receiving 14,029 votes.

District 6 Councilmember Kevin Jenkins bested opponent Nancy Sidebotham and District 2’s Charlene Wang also won reelection.

City Auditor Michael Houston is running unopposed for reelection and won 60,773 votes.

Progressive school board members, Jennifer Brouhard (D2) and Valarie Bachelor (D6), supported by teachers and school activists, face serious challenges from candidates backed by pro-corporate funders and the political organization, Empower Oakland.

Arielle Fleisher leads Brouhard 53.49% to 46.51%.

In District 6 with three contending candidates, Alexandra Williams leads with 38.06% of the vote. Incumbent Bachelor has 36.89%, and Leana Powell is trailing with 25.04%.

In District 4, incumbent Mike Hutchinson is narrowly leading a field of three candidates. He received 40.87% of the vote, while Kathryn Camp has 39.92%, and Sylvia Pfeiffer Williams has 19.21%.

In the races for AC Transit Board, Director Joel Young (Ward 3) leads with 53.11% of the vote, Sarah Syed (Ward 4) is ahead with 78.37% of the vote, and Murphy McCalley (Ward 5) leads with 63.07%.

Regional Transit Measure RTM, which would increase sales taxes in five Bay Area counties to shore up BART and other regional transit, was leading in five counties by a combined 62% of the vote.

Post News Group

Posts by Post News Group

Commentary

COMMENTARY: Oakland’s Black Students Have Gained Ground: We Shouldn’t Stop Now

New state data reveals that Black students in the Oakland Unified School District are making academic gains in reading and math at rates significantly faster than their peers statewide. These improvements follow a 2023 decision by board leadership to cancel school closures and instead invest in the Black Thriving Community Schools program. While the district continues to address budget challenges, proponents argue that maintaining these targeted resources is essential to narrowing long-standing achievement gaps. Read more about the specific policies driving these results.

Published

4 days ago

November 3, 2026

Post News Group

By Walter Riley

Oakland’s Black students are making faster gains in reading and math than Black students statewide, according to state data released Oct. 15.

Those gains followed decisions by school board President Jennifer Brouhard and Vice President Valarie Bachelor to keep schools open, invest in Black students and support teachers.

Since 2023, Black students in Oakland Unified School District have gained about 31 points in English and math on the California School Dashboard — roughly three times the statewide English gain and more than twice the math gain. Our students still trail their statewide peers, but they have narrowed that gap by about a third.

In 2022, the previous board voted to close or reduce grades at 11 schools, mostly serving Black and Brown families. A state civil rights investigation later found the plan would have unlawfully discriminated against Black, low-income and disabled students. Brouhard and Bachelor opposed those closures and, after winning election, voted to cancel remaining plans in January 2023.

The board then expanded support through Black Thriving Community Schools, providing additional resources where Black enrollment exceeds 40%, and funded teachers dedicated to Black students and families. Its reparations policy requires schools to develop plans for Black student achievement.

Meanwhile, the district reduced a $100 million budget shortfall to about $30 million without closing schools, cut central office positions and approved its first balanced budget in 22 years. More than 99% of teaching positions were filled when this school year began.

These investments must grow. Black Thriving Community Schools still reach only some students who need them. Every Oakland child deserves a safe, racially just neighborhood school staffed by qualified teachers who can afford to stay.

The opposing slate argues closures should remain an option to address budget pressures. But a Stanford study found closures do not improve district finances because departing families take student funding with them. Other research links closures to lower college attendance and adult earnings. Majority-Black schools nationally are more than three times as likely to close.

Oakland knows the consequences. There is another path. Brouhard and Bachelor have begun moving Oakland in that direction, protecting classroom investments while confronting financial pressures.

Progress deserves continued public support. We cannot afford to reverse course.

About the Author

Walter Riley is a civil rights attorney and longtime community organizer in Oakland.

Post News Group

Posts by Post News Group

Commentary

OPINION: OUSD Kids Are Eager to Learn. Our Board Is Holding Them Back

Oakland Unified School District students are facing a literacy crisis, with fewer than one in three reading at grade level. Despite receiving significant per-pupil funding, the district is struggling with what county officials describe as a decision-making problem rather than a lack of revenue. Oakland Parents for Quality Education and the local NAACP are now sounding the alarm over fiscal instability, alleging that board leadership has failed to identify necessary budget cuts while ignoring warnings from school principals. To understand how these leadership decisions are impacting campus resources and student equity, read more.

Published

4 days ago

November 3, 2026

Post News Group

Oakland Parents for Quality Education joined the NAACP Oakland Branch at a press conference outside MetWest High School in August calling for greater accountability and transparency in OUSD Board leadership, improved school safety, and responsible fiscal oversight. Courtesy photo.

By Edmond Chun Special to The Post

Oakland Unified students are falling behind: fewer than 1 in 3 read at grade level, and the numbers are worse for Black and Latino students. This is happening in a district that has received more per student than even the highest-funded states. As Alameda County Superintendent of Schools Alysse Castro has said, “OUSD’s biggest problem isn’t a revenue problem. It’s a decision-making problem.”

That is why Grace Park-Bradbury and I, two OUSD parents, started Oakland Parents for Quality Education, the ParentPAC. We believe our kids deserve a school board that faces hard decisions honestly. This board has not.

The county has warned them repeatedly. Earlier this year Castro said the new teachers’ contract “endangers” the district’s fiscal stability. That wasn’t because of the raises, but because the district was counting on cuts it had not identified.

Days later the board passed a budget that assumed $30 million in still-unnamed reductions. Board President Jennifer Brouhard and Vice President Valarie Bachelor voted yes. Director Mike Hutchinson voted no. The plan to name those cuts isn’t scheduled until mid-December, after the election.

The Oakland NAACP called for public forums and honest answers about the management of public funds. This fall Castro approved the budget only conditionally, noting that “a budget can be balanced but not be good for kids.”

Principals have spoken out as well. In January, 30 school leaders wrote that asking schools to do more with less “erodes the dignity of our profession” and “unconscionably compromises the quality of education our students receive.”

In April, 60 principals raised concerns that “have diminished our confidence in our current leadership,” warning that district decisions had produced “a structural deficit and cash-strapped schools.”

In June, all 15 high school principals objected to using voter-approved Measure N and H reserves for expenses already in the budget. The district did it anyway. The measures’ citizen oversight commission has demanded the money back. Auditors found the board had the legal authority, but as Castro observed, legality does not settle whether it was what voters thought they were approving.

Opponents claim we want to close schools. Our candidates do not all agree on consolidation. Hutchinson has fought closures for years, yet he also wrote the 3Rs proposal examining how many schools the district should operate.

What our candidates share is a willingness to weigh every option openly. This board told the superintendent not to even consider consolidation, and every school is being cut instead. As principals representing two-thirds of OUSD schools wrote, “the gradual starvation of our schools is also an equity issue.” Closures disrupt families, especially in Black and Brown neighborhoods. So does starving every campus.

You may have seen ads calling us a front for out-of-town billionaires. Every contribution is publicly reported, and 140 Oakland families have given. The people sounding the alarm are principals, citizen commissioners, the county superintendent, and the NAACP. None of them are billionaires. They are the people who see our schools up close.

Oakland schools are staffed by excellent principals and teachers. Our kids are like kids everywhere: eager to learn if given a real chance. They are being held back by a board that will not make hard choices.

In District 2, vote for Arielle Fleisher. In District 4, rank Kathryn Camp and Mike Hutchinson first and second. In District 6, rank Alexandra Williams and LeAna Powell first and second. Leave your third choice blank.

Vote like our children’s future depends on it. Because it does.

Edmund Chun co-founded Oakland Parents for Quality Education and is an OUSD parent.