In Brief...
The SAUSD School Board is expected to vote on laying off 546 certificated stafff, including 340 teachers and 94 counselors, amid a $187 million deficit.
These layoffs come after several combining factors led to the District having to make this decision. Due to years of declining enrollment, variability in LCFF funds, and the end of COVID-19 funds, there is no money to pay for extra staff hired during the pandemic.
Funds used to pay extra staff came from phases of COVID money and now that all funds have been spent, the District has to cut personnel in order to avoid a fiscal collapse and takeover from the Orange County Board of Education.
The Santa Ana Unified School District Board of Education will vote Tuesday on a proposal to lay off 546 full-time employees, driven by a $187 million budget deficit identified last year by district accounting and budget staff, with multiple contributing factors.
What is causing the layoffs?
The district’s decision to lay off staff is driven by three main factors: declining enrollment, fluctuations in Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF) revenue, and the depletion of one-time COVID-19 relief funds used to pay for additional staff.
For over 20 years, SAUSD has experienced an average annual enrollment decline of 5%, a trend that sharply accelerated in 2021 and was further exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic in 2022 and 2023.
Since 2015, Santa Ana's population has steadily declined, with many residents relocating to desert cities even before the pandemic. When COVID-19 struck, low-interest rates provided an additional incentive for Santaneros to move out of the city, unenrolling students out of the District.
According to World Population Review, Santa Ana's population was estimated at 330,900 in 2019, but dropped to 311,200 in 2020. Since then, the city has lost an average of 800-900 residents annually.
Another significant factor adding to the exodus was the rising cost of living in California, including increasing rents and other expenses, which were further exacerbated by inflation.
Adding to the losses, an additional 5% of LCFF funds were cut mid-fiscal year (interim) due to stagnant absenteeism, as announced during a budget webinar in late December.
What are LCFF funds and where do they come from?
LCFF funding comes from local property taxes and state aid via the California State School Fund and Education Protection Account.
SAUSD's portion of LCFF funding is based on state assessments (e.g., CAASPP), demographics (e.g., English learners, low-income students, foster youth), average daily attendance (ADA), and local revenue.
Essentially, the more high-need students a district has, the more funding it receives per student compared to a district with fewer high-need students.
The Santanero inquired about the District’s plans to improve attendance while supporting school staff in engaging parents and guardians about their child’s attendance. However, Chief Communications and Community Relations Officer Fermin Leal, did not provide a direct response to this question.
In addition to the LCFF challenges, SAUSD’s test scores lag two years behind the 2019 national average, one year behind the California state average, and rank the lowest among surrounding Orange County school districts. Nationally, however, SAUSD is not alone, as over half of districts nationwide remain below the 2019 national average based on 2023 test scores.
When asked by The Santanero about plans to improve test scores, Leal responded: "We continue to work annually to improve standardized test scores. This involves several factors, including staffing decisions and utilizing other programs and initiatives to support the whole child’s needs. For example, we provide free meals for every student in our district without requiring parents to disclose their income information."
"We also provide free afterschool and summer programs to support families where childcare costs beyond the school day might otherwise be a concern. Our Family and Community Engagement [FACE] Liaisons at every school also work with families to secure community resources that extend beyond how we serve students in the classroom. These district priorities continue to remain intact even as we navigate financial challenges."
In the spirit of transparency, this response did not directly address the question or clarify how these efforts connect to improving test scores.
During the pandemic, the District utilized one-time emergency funds to hire additional staff, including teachers, counselors, mental health specialists, and classified employees, aimed at helping students overcome the challenges of COVID-19 and reengage with in-person learning when schools reopened in 2022.
The funds came initially from the federal government, given to the states to divide up, and then forwarded to the local entities such as school districts. The funds used by SAUSD were called Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief (ESSER) funds.
| ESSER Fund | Federal Act | Amount Received |
|---|---|---|
| ESSER I | CARES Act (2020) | $14,508,488 |
| ESSER II | CRRSA Act (2020) | $59,956,147 |
| ESSER III | American Rescue Plan (2021) | $134,777,891 |
Santa Ana Unified received $209,242,526 in California ESSER funds through three federal acts: $14.5 million from ESSER I (CARES Act 2020), $60 million under ESSER II (CRRSA Act 2020), and $134.8 million through ESSER III (American Rescue Plan 2021).
ESSER III funding expired on Jan. 1, 2025, by which districts were required to have spent the remaining funds.
This prompted district budget staff to warn that no additional funds were available to sustain the extra staff hired, especially amid declining enrollment. According to Jerry Almendarez, the District has initiated conversations with parents regarding budget futures through their LCAP meetings for "three years."
Chief Business Officer and Associate Superintendent Ron Hacker stated during a podcast released Saturday that with the additional staff hired and ongoing expenditures from previous school board decisions, the District has reserves of approximately $336 million.
However, he emphasized that the deficit stands at $187 million and reserves are intended for emergencies when all other options are exhausted. A district's financial reputation is critical for securing bonds, especially when seeking voter approval for bond measures, as its financial history determines its 'credit' rating.
According to an agendized budget presentation, 80% of the District's $992 million overall budget are spent on salaries and benefits. With fiscal futures looking bleak, Hacker said the cuts had to come from there.
As reported, and stated by Hacker, the District is opting to not fill open management positions at this time.
The Santanero asked whether budget staff had considered issuing pay cuts to SAUSD's top-paid employees or reducing staff at the District headquarters. Leal did not respond to this question.
Who is being laid off?
In all, 546 full-time equivalents (employees) are slated to be cut if the District votes in favor Tuesday.
| Service Areas | Number of FTE |
|---|---|
| Elementary Instruction | |
| Teacher Elementary (General/Multiple Subjects) | 186 |
| Teacher - Transitional Kindergarten | 12 |
| Secondary/Departmentalized Instruction | |
| Teacher - Math | 34 |
| Teacher - English | 63 |
| Teacher - Social Science | 35 |
| Teacher Secondary - Business | 6 |
| Teacher Secondary - French | 2 |
| Teacher Secondary - Home Economics | 1 |
| Teacher Secondary - Health | 1 |
| Non-Rostered Services | |
| Curriculum Specialist | 16 |
| Itinerant Support Teacher | 21 |
| Home and Hospital | 5 |
| Teacher on Special Assignment (TOSA) | 17 |
| Counselor – 192 days | 63 |
| Counselor – 202 days | 27 |
| Counselor Coach | 4 |
| Instructional Coach - Future Ready | 39 |
| Social Worker | 10 |
| Lead Social Worker | 4 |
Source: SAUSD Board Agenda, Res. No. 24/25-3649
From The Santanero's understanding, layoffs were determined based on the District's need to reduce specific services due to budget constraints, targeting positions like elementary teachers, secondary subject teachers, counselors, and non-rostered staff. Employees with less seniority were prioritized for layoffs unless specific credentials or skills were needed elsewhere.
Natural attrition, such as retirements and resignations, were also considered. However, according to the resolution, the 546 FTEs did not include retirees or those opting for early retirement plans.
Part of the community has expressed frustration over a lack of transparency and the previously agendized raise for Superintendent Almendarez. The District responded to the backlash on Sunday.
Response to the Santa Ana Unified Community Regarding Certificated Staff Reductions - 01/26/25
Addressing Common Concerns: True or False?
1. "The District’s plan for staff reductions is ineffective and short-sighted."
➡ False. Staffing adjustments are part of a long-term strategy to align our resources with student enrollment trends and financial realities. These decisions are made carefully to ensure long-term stability while continuing to provide high-quality education.
2. "The District is reducing certificated staff without considering the impact on students."
➡ False. Every decision is guided by our commitment to students. While reductions are challenging, the District is prioritizing core academic programs, maintaining essential student services, and exploring alternative funding sources to minimize impacts.
3. "This reduction will lead to minimal academic support for students."
➡ False. The District remains committed to maintaining academic supports, including intervention programs, before and after school services and specialized services. Adjustments will be made to ensure resources are allocated efficiently to continue supporting student success.
4. "Extracurricular programs will be eliminated."
➡ False. The District is not eliminating any extracurricular programs. The District is working to sustain extracurricular offerings by optimizing resources and funding. The District recognizes the importance of extracurricular activities in student development.
5. "The District is not considering the well-being of educators, leading to burnout."
➡ False. The well-being of all staff is a top priority for the District. While we acknowledge that transitions can bring challenges, our actions are guided by compliance with the labor agreement to ensure that educators’ rights and needs are respected. Additionally, we engage in open dialogue with staff and labor partners to address concerns and collaboratively identify solutions to create a positive and supportive workplace culture.
6. "Counseling support for students will be drastically reduced."
➡ Partially True. Counseling positions will be reduced, but services to students will not. Federal COVID-19 relief funds temporarily increased counseling positions, and those funds have now expired. As a result, there will be a reduction in the number of counselors. However, the District will still maintain a student-to-counselor ratio of 353:1, which remains well below pre-pandemic levels and below most surrounding Districts and Districts across California. Before COVID-19, the District had only 58 counselors serving high school and intermediate students. During the pandemic, over 100 additional counselors were hired to expand services to elementary schools. With the anticipated reductions, the District will implement a sustainable model in which:
- Every elementary school will have at least one counselor.
- Larger elementary and K-8 schools will have two counselors.
- Intermediate schools will have at least two counselors.
- High schools will have at least four counselors, with additional counselors allocated to schools with larger enrollments.
While we are transitioning from temporary pandemic-era staffing levels, we remain committed to ensuring every student has access to social-emotional and mental health support.
7. "Social-emotional support for students will be drastically reduced."
➡ False. As part of the District’s strategic planning, we are expanding student support services through our School-Based Mental Health Specialist 1 and 2 positions. These roles will increase student support in the following ways:
- Providing evidence-based counseling services for students and their families.
- Promoting early identification of students with social-emotional concerns and recommending appropriate interventions, supports, and services to students, parents, and school staff.
- Addressing barriers impacting academic, behavioral, attendance, and social-emotional success, ensuring that every student has the opportunity to thrive.
8. "Class sizes will increase dramatically, and combination classes will become the norm."
➡ False. The district is managing staffing adjustments carefully to minimize significant changes in class sizes. While some restructuring may occur, we are working to ensure a balanced and effective learning environment for all students. Currently, the district has 24 combination classes across all elementary schools, and though this number is anticipated to increase to 40, it will not affect all schools nor will combination classes become the norm. COVID-19 relief funding allowed our classroom averages to remain low due to additional funding. As those funds expire, allocations for teaching positions at each site have been adjusted based on an increase of 0-4 students per class, depending on the grade level for elementary, and up to 3 students per secondary classes. This ensures that class sizes remain manageable while aligning with sustainable staffing levels.
"There's this narrative that the Superintendent has taken an increase in salary, and that is just not true," Hacker said. "The Board has not a approved an increase in salary for the Superintendent, and that is not on the table."
The Board is expected to vote on the layoffs Tuesday evening at 6:00 PM at the District Headquarters.
