Deadline: May 20

Increases K-12 spending by $2.5 billion

Association of California School Administrators “rejects the Administration’s proposal”

California School Boards Association President, California Teachers Association President not satisfied

By John Fensterwald – This story was originally published by EdSource.org (republished with permission)

Top Takeaways

• The governor included $1.7 billion in his allocation to K-12 and community colleges, but is keeping $3.9 billion until next year.
• Newsom would raise the statutory minimum COLA from 2.87% to 4.31%.
• The revised budget reduces the cost-of-living adjustment for the California State Preschool Program to 2.01% from the January proposal of 2.41%.

With one contentious exception, school districts can check off most items on their wish list for 2026-27 with the release on Thursday of Gov. Gavin Newsom’s revised state budget.

Newsom is proposing to target unexpected billions of dollars from surging state revenues to the priorities that school district leaders had prized, including a higher cost-of-living adjustment, billions of dollars more annually for special education, and a one-time, much larger discretionary block grant.

Also, all employees of community colleges and TK-12 schools will be entitled to up to 14 weeks of paid pregnancy disability leave beginning in 2026-27, which the higher COLA will pay for.

But there remains a major point of contention: Newsom is still withholding $3.9 billion in Proposition 98 funding that school organizations say should go to schools and community colleges now.

School districts had complained loudly that their base funding hadn’t kept up with rising expenses, particularly special education and declining enrollment. Amid overall record state funding, Newsom prioritized new initiatives, including the addition of transitional kindergarten, the creation of community schools and expanded learning after school and during the summer.

“People were looking for base money in their pocket,” said Sen. John Laird, D-Santa Cruz, who chairs the Senate Budget Committee. “The attention to a higher COLA and special education is welcome news.”

Ted Lempert, president of the nonprofit advocacy organization Children Now, said, “Big picture, the May revision puts $8.1 billion more than the January budget into education. While it’s not perfect, we really appreciate it. The governor and Legislature have done a better job in the last couple of years of protecting funding. That said, kids are still way behind.”

Tempering praise for the higher COLA and special education funding, California School Boards Association President Debra Schade said in a statement, “Unfortunately, the Governor’s May Revise masks the underfunding of the Proposition 98 school funding guarantee and the prolific use of one-time money to inflate funding levels in the short term without providing the stability and predictability schools need to plan effectively for student support. “

In his January budget, Newsom said he would withhold $5.6 billion from schools and community colleges until he was certain, early in 2027, that state revenue had actually come through. Schools objected, and the California Teachers Association and the school boards association have threatened to sue on the principle that the Prop. 98 allocations are a voter-approved constitutional guarantee.

In the May revision, Newsom included $1.7 billion in his allocation, but is still keeping $3.9 billion until early next year, when the next governor can reassess. This continues to frustrate school organizations.

“ACSA rejects the Administration’s proposal, as these funds belong in classrooms supporting students,” said Edgar Zazueta, executive director of the Association of California School Administrators. “As budget negotiations move forward, ACSA will continue advocating for a final budget that fully honors the state’s constitutional commitment to public education.” 

CTA President David Goldberg said withholding the funds “causes serious harm to public schools. This means overcrowded, under-resourced, destabilized classrooms.” This week, he said, “more than 2,000 educators will find out if their layoff notice is permanent heading into the next school year … and their future is in jeopardy with threats to withhold vital funds from our local school districts.”  

Asked about the issue during a state budget presentation Thursday, Newsom said education advocates should take a wider view.

“We made some accommodation to that concern, and I would just have them look at the entire balance sheet and be hard-pressed to find an administration over a seven-year period that’s invested more in transforming our TK — a brand new grade — to 12 education system,” Newsom told reporters “(We’ve made) unprecedented, historic investments per pupil, investments that are the envy of many other states.”

The revised funding estimate for Proposition 98, the 40% of the state general fund that must go to TK-12 and community colleges, would be a record $127.1 billion in 2026-27. Per student funding would increase to a record $21,013 per pupil. Funding per pupil from federal and other sources would be $28,282.

That overall revenue estimate, however, would appear at least several billion dollars less than the Senate and the independent Legislative Analyst’s Office had forecast. The May revision marks the starting line for a final dash toward the Legislature’s June 15 deadline, followed by negotiations between Newsom and legislative leaders, with final passage by the July 1 start of the fiscal year.

Laird said that including the withheld $3.9 billion for schools and community colleges will be one of the items. Additional revenue projections, based on May tax receipts, will be a factor.

Here are some budget specifics:

COLA: Newsom would raise the statutory minimum COLA of 2.87%, determined by a federal formula that does not consider the price of housing, to 4.31%. The effect would raise COLA for districts’ operating expenses, through the Local Control Funding Formula, from $3.1 billion proposed in January to $4 billion. Other programs, including special education, would get the statutory COLA of 2.87%

The 4.31% would become the new base for determining COLA calculations in future years.

SPECIAL EDUCATION: State and federal special education fall well short of districts’ obligations for students with disabilities. Additional state funding for special education offsets districts’ base expenses. Newsom would add $1.8 billion to the extra $509 million increase he proposed in January for a total of $2.4 billion — 43% more than a year ago.

Newsom characterized it as “the largest investment in special education in California’s history … maybe in American history.”

“It’s an area that has continued to be anxiety-inducing because you meet with parents, and they’re demanding more, and we’ve heard that call,” he said.

BLOCK GRANT: In January, Newsom proposed a one-time $2.8 billion grant; he has raised it to $5 billion. He calls it the Student Support and Professional Development Block Grant, and implies it should be used for teacher training for math, reading and literacy support for English learners, along with career pathways and expanding dual enrollment. But districts will have wide latitude to spend the money as they choose.

RAINY DAY FUND: Newsom would raise the Proposition 98 reserve to $10.3 billion, approaching the statutory maximum, as a cushion in the event of a recession or if the spigot of projected revenues from tax receipts from AI startups runs dry.

John Affeldt, managing attorney for Public Advocates, a public interest law firm, warned that the state should plan for that to happen. “Our state cannot continue to rely on temporary AI stock market bubbles,” he said. “To build a budget that will enable our residents to thrive, California needs more robust permanent revenue streams to support our schools and healthy communities. We cannot ask teachers to transform students’ lives while those same teachers are being priced out of the communities they serve.”

COMMUNITY SCHOOLS: Newsom would add $1 billion to the $4.1 billion previously invested in creating 2,500 community schools, which provide community partnerships involving wellness, mental health and career opportunities. His May revision would also repurpose nearly $500 million in extension grants to add more community schools.

“We lead and dominate the nation in community schools,” Newsom said Thursday.

LITERACY AND MATH INSTRUCTION: Since 2019, the state has funded $715 million to hire and train reading specialists and coaches in high-poverty schools — a key element in the state’s comprehensive early literacy plan. But that money, in one-time grants, will expire over the next three years. Newsom proposes $440 million to extend the grants through 2031.

He would also add $60 million to the $30 million funded last year for the Mathematics Professional Learning Partnership, which is creating a statewide network to train coaches and math specialists in the 2023 math framework. Still missing: funding for elementary schools to hire coaches.

Newsom is also encouraging districts to use some of the $5 billion in the discretionary block grant for literacy and math instruction. 

Early education and care

In his presentation, the governor largely overlooked early education and child care. The proposal allocates $15 million toward training to help with the implementation of programs such as Transitional Kindergarten and $5 million in ongoing funding to support the use of the Multitudes dyslexia screener at no cost to districts. 

But the revised budget reduces the cost-of-living adjustment for the California State Preschool Program to 2.01% from the January proposal of 2.41%. The governor also did not address calls from early education advocates to help support pre-K programs that have been struggling after losing large numbers of children to the new TK programs offered by the state’s public schools. 

Patricia Lozano, executive director of Early Edge California, a nonprofit organization that advocates for accessible, high-quality early learning, said the reduction to the cost-of-living adjustment sends a troubling signal to providers who are already operating on the margins.

“Access to affordable child care isn’t just an early learning issue, it’s essential to families’ economic well-being,” she said. “The governor has been a strong champion for children during his years in office, and we’ll be urging the Administration and the Legislature to fulfill the promise of funding additional child care slots and restoring COLA before the budget is finalized.”

In particular, the governor’s plan to significantly increase the cost-of-living allowance for TK-12 schools while cutting it for preschools drew fire. 

“He decided to backstop health premiums and local schools, while punting on aiding families who desperately search for affordable child care,” said Bruce Fuller, who co-authored a new report from the UC Berkeley Equity and Excellence in Early Childhood alliance on the dire outlook many pre-K programs are facing. 

Lempert, of Children Now, said he hoped the cuts to the early education COLA would be reversed by the Legislature in the final budget.

the STATE BUDGET PROCESS

Governor’s initial budget proposal:

• Must be released by Jan. 10.
• Assumes an estimate of revenues the state will collect over the next 18 months (by June 30, 2027). Actual revenues often differ significantly due to economic conditions, federal policy and unforeseen events, such as the destructive fires in Los Angeles.

MAY 14 revision:

Governor issues May budget with revised general fund revenues, including its impact on Proposition 98.

LATE MAY to EARLY JUNE:

Legislature’s budget subcommittees report to the full budget committees.

JUNE 15:

Constitutional deadline for the Legislature to pass the budget bill.

MID-JUNE TO LATE JUNE:

Negotiations between the Assembly speaker and the Senate president pro tempore with the governor; the Legislature passes the final budget, and the governor signs it before the fiscal year starts on July 1.

Legislature’s response: 

The Assembly and Senate have until June 15 to hold hearings and respond with their own version.

Negotiation: 

Behind closed doors, legislative leaders and the governor settle differences. Lawmakers sign off, and the governor signs the final version.

Governors have increasingly used the budget to rewrite statutes outside the legislative process. That’s why it’s important to read the fine print in massive “budget trailer bills” written after the budget is passed.

About 40% of the state’s general fund will go to schools and community colleges. The bulk goes to keeping schools running, but in some years, new money is spent on new programs, such as transitional kindergarten and community schools.

Budget summaries

You can find the full budget by areas here.

• TK-12
• Higher Education

Over 16 positions saved at request of three trustees, but no teachers

Board first heard from state’s Fiscal Crisis & Management Assistance Team CEO

By Allen D. Payton

During another long meeting, the Antioch School Board, on Wednesday night, May 13, 2026, on split votes cut the District budget, and laid off 159 employees including 48 teachers and 30 other Certificated staff. Area 3 Trustee Dee Brown voted to abstain on all three votes. But the Board voted unanimously to accept the offer of one-day furloughs by Superintendent Dr. Darnise Williams and administrative staff, including principals. That will save the District about $117,000.

The meeting and votes followed split votes the previous Wednesday when the Board majority opposed the budget and staff cuts. The Board again met at 7:00 p.m. in the Deer Valley High School Theater with the expectation of a greater turnout than the District’s Board Room could accommodate. But that, once again, proved to be unnecessary as very few teachers, staff and members of the public attended the meeting.

The District was facing a $31.5 million budget deficit and the proposed budget cuts totaled $18.7 million. But how much was actually cut wasn’t clear due to the over 16 Classified staff positions that were saved. Also saved, was the District from a potential takeover by the State and County Offices of Education, known as receivership.

The Board faced two deadlines requiring them to vote to make the cuts that night. First, the District had to give final layoff notices to employees by Thursday, May 14th as well as submit their financial plan to the County Office of Education by Friday, May 15th.

The trustees heard from District staff, including Bob Carson, president of the Antioch Education Association, the local teachers’ union, who supported the cuts to avoid the takeover and from residents who opposed them.

Then the Board was provided a presentation Regarding Projected Cash Flow by Mike Fine, the Chief Executive Officer of the California Fiscal Crisis & Management Assistance Team (FCMAT), which, “assists and provides guidance to local educational agencies in the areas of business and financial management practices.” He described his organization as “the guardian of the receivership process” but stressed to the trustees that FCMAT’s efforts were to work with financially challenged districts to avoid it.

“The majority of our work is absolutely avoiding receivership,” he added, which he estimated to be 80% of FCMAT’s work.

Fine also informed the Board and District leadership that the expected May Revised Budget from Governor Newsom on Thursday would change the financial figures being discussed and that it would be positive for the District. That turned out to possibly be true as the governor’s 2026-27 budget proposal increases spending on K-12 by $2.5 billion. (See related article)

Trustee Requests & Board Votes

Following several responses to questions by District staff and requests by individual trustees to save certain jobs, including school psychiatrists and Reading Intervention Teachers by Area 5 Trustee Mary Rocha and Paraeducators by Area 3 Trustee Dee Brown, who was also unsatisfied with requests for information from District staff not being provided, the Board took three split votes.

Area 4 Trustee Olga Cobos-Smith was satisfied that the District didn’t need one psychiatrist per school because best practices only required one for every 500 to 700 students. That was enough for her to change her “no” vote on the budget from last week. After Rocha was satisfied with the explanation from District staff that they had a plan to handle the loss of the Reading Intervention Teachers, she joined the other three trustees in voting in favor of cutting the Classified staff positions.

At 11:34 PM, on a vote of 3-1-1 with Rocha voting “no” and Brown voting to abstain, the Trustees approved the Budget Reduction Plan including the concessions that saved several specific jobs.

The Board the voted 3-1-1, again, on final layoffs of 78 Certificated employees which, were mainly teachers. 

After Rocha was able to get the other board members to agree to saving the jobs of the Behavior Support Specialists (3 FTE), Board Certified Behavior Analyst (1 FTE) and Instructional Assistants – Bilingual (12.4275 FTE), the Trustees voted 4-0-1 on final layoffs of a little over 81 Full-Time Equivalent Classified Services employees. Brown again, voted to abstain.

The Board also voted to accept the superficial gesture of one-day furlough by the superintendent and administrative staff including principals. It means those staff members won’t be paid but also don’t have to show up for work that day. After Rocha asked about increasing it to three days, Dr. Williams said that would have to be taken to the Personnel Commission, first. The motion on the matter then passed 5-0, saving the District approximately $117,437.

The Board’s work on the budget is not over as they still face another deadline in October, Dr. Williams shared. But by then, with additional state funds, assuming the governor’s budget proposals are approved by the legislature, the Antioch trustees job may get easier.

Watch the Board Meeting video on the District’s YouTube Channel.

Antioch High golf team member helps two at Lone Tree Golf Course

By Antioch Unified School Districtx

A Dozier-Libbey Medical High student recently jumped into action – twice! – on the same day.

Salvator Beas, a member of the Antioch High golf team, was at the Lone Tree Golf Course when a fellow student was inadvertently struck in the eye requiring immediate attention. Salvator administered first aid and assisted with the injured individual.

A bit later, a member of the public was struck in the head, which began bleeding.

Again, the junior quickly performed first-responder duties until fire and ambulance crews arrived.

Said John Luis, AHS coach: “These acts of kindness and medical skills made us proud. My sincere thanks and much gratitude for the actions of Salvator.”

Dozier-Libbey principal Blair Wilkins honored the young hero and two of his teachers – Gretchen Medel and Kim O’Leary.

“We are proud to recognize Salvator for his quick, compassionate actions and the outstanding example he sets for our school,” Wilkins said. “Using the skills he learned at DLMHS showcases the strong learning community established at our school.”

“It would be unconscionable that we would be taking away livelihoods without readjusting pay scales, first.” – Board Vice President Olga Cobos-Smith

No public comments allowed before failed vote on budget cuts, but allowed before staff cut votes

 “It is painful to make cuts. But it is more painful when local control is lost and folks who think we’ve saved their jobs, they’re actually not saved, now.” – Board President Dr. Jag Lathan

“Please do not solve this deficit on the backs of students with disabilities, families and the staff who serve them.” – Antioch resident

By Allen D. Payton

In spite of the Antioch Unified School District facing a $32 million deficit, during a long meeting, sparsely attended by the public, Wednesday night, May 6, 2026, the Board of Trustees on split votes, opposed the proposed $18.7 million in budget cuts and staff cuts of 175 positions. Only Board President and Area 2 Trustee Dr. Jag Lathan and Area 1 Trustee Antonio Hernandez voted for the cuts. Board Vice President and Area 4 Trustee Olga Cobos-Smith, Area 3 Trustee Dee Brown and Area 5 Trustee Mary Rocha voted against.

The meeting was held in the Deer Valley High School Theater with the expectation of greater attendance than the District’s Board Room could accommodate. But that turned out to not be necessary.

Vote #1 – Budget Cuts

For agenda item 6.A., Resolution 2025-2026-61 entitled, “Adoption of Proposed Budget Reductions for the 2026-27 Fiscal Year”. That resolution read: “NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, the District is recommending that the Board of Education adopt the proposed 2026-27 budget reductions of $18,759,069 for the 2026-27 budget in support of its fiscal solvency goals and the restoration and retention of the mandatory 3.0% Reserve for Economic Uncertainties required under California Education Code 33128.3.”

Hernandez moved approval of the resolution under item 6.A., seconded by Lathan. Without public comment on the agenda item, or discussion or comments by the board members, and Lathan ignoring a call of a point of order from the member of the public, the trustees voted on the motion to adopt and it failed on a 2-3 vote.

Vote #2 – Teachers & Other Certificated Staff Cuts

The final person to speak during 29 minutes of public comments on agenda items 6.B. and C., said, “Please do not solve this deficit on the backs of students with disabilities, families and the staff who serve them.”

The board then took up item 6.B. and Hernandez spoke first saying, “For today, I have to do what I believe is fiscally prudent…to put our district in the best light,” before the vote on Resolution No. 2025-2026-58. It was entitled “Adopting the Administrative Law Judge Decision and Authorizing Final Layoff of Certificated Employees Due to Reduction or Discontinuance of Particular Kinds of Services.”

Brown said she wanted information on “what the fall start was going to look like” so she and Cobos-Smith could present it to the community, first. “I didn’t get that information. I’m still waiting for that information,” Brown continued. “I don’t want to make a vote on something rushed, for me. I cannot make haste decisions. That’s just who I am and this is a huge decision. So, I will be voting ‘no’,” she concluded.

Rocha, who presented her fellow trustees and District staff with her opposition to the cuts which was provided to and published by the Herald, yesterday, simply said, “I will be voting ‘no’. So, go ahead.” (See related article)

Lathan responded saying, “I’m really concerned. I’ve seen this play out. Although, in the end…it is painful to make cuts. But it is more painful when local control is lost and folks who think we’ve saved their jobs, they’re actually not saved, now.”

The motion to adopt the resolution to cut 78 teachers and other Certificated employee positions was made by Hernandez and seconded by Lathan. It read in part, “BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the employment of the affected certificated employees listed on Exhibit Ais hereby terminated effective upon the close of the current school year, i.e., the end of each affected employee’s last working day prior to July 1, 2026.” The motion also failed on a 2-3 vote with the same split of trustees.

Vote #3 –  Classified Staff Cuts

Hernandez moved approval of item 6.C., Resolution No. 2025-2026-60, entitled, “Reduction or Discontinuance of Classified Services in Accordance with Administrative Law Judge Decision” with Lathan seconding the motion.

Before the vote, Hernandez said, “Again, I hope that we have more time. But, you know, I have to vote yes and move this forward. Because at least with all the information I have now, this is our only financial decision moving forward.”

Cobos-Smith responded by saying, “And I’ll also reiterate my point. It would be unconscionable that we would be taking away livelihoods without readjusting pay scales, first.”

The resolution to cut 97.4964 Full Time Equivalent Classified employee positions “for lack of work or lack of funds” included, “BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the employment of the affected classified employees listed on Exhibit Ais hereby terminated effective upon the close of the current school year, i.e., the end of each affected employee’s last working day prior to July 1, 2026.” The motion to adopt was also moved by Hernandez and seconded by Lathan and it failed on a 2-3 vote, with the same two trustees voting in favor and three voting against.

(See related article on the District budget)

The Board then did not vote to cancel the May 13th regular school board meeting as the motion by Rocha did not receive a second.

“If we’re going to do any kind of reductions in staffing it has to be done by May 15th. So, that will be our last opportunity to do that,” Hernandez said. Lathan confirmed his information. Rocha then withdrew her motion.

Watch the Board meeting video on the District’s YouTube channel. See the votes beginning at the 2:13:20 and 2:50:19 marks.

“to address the District’s structural deficit” of $32 million

Meeting in Deer Valley High Theater

Rocha issues statement challenging cuts

By Allen D. Payton

During their meeting tonight, Wednesday, May 6, 2026, the Antioch School Board will vote on over $18.7 million in cuts for the 2026-27 School Year budget which will include eliminating 48 teaching and 30 other Certificated employee positions and over 97 other staff positions in the Antioch Unified School District.

To accommodate what is expected to be an attendance larger than the Board Room can hold, the meeting will be held beginning at 7:00 p.m. in the Deer Valley High School Theater at 4700 Lone Tree Way.

The regular meeting will follow a Closed Session at 6:00 p.m. in which the Board will hold labor negotiations with various employee groups including the Antioch Education Association representing the District’s teachers; California School Employees Association, Chapter 85 which consists of what are referred to as the Classified employees; Antioch Management Association and Senior Management.

Regular Agenda

Under agenda 6. Action Items, the Board will consider three matters:

A. Adoption of Proposed Budget Reductions and Fiscal Actions for 2026–2027 and Resolution 2025-2026-61 Adoption of Proposed Budget Reductions for the 2026-27 Fiscal Year;

B. Resolution No. 2025-2026-58, Adopting the Administrative Law Judge Decision and Authorizing Final Layoff of Certificated Employees Due to Reduction or Discontinuance of Particular Kinds of Services; and

C. Approval of Resolution No. 2025-2026-60, Reduction or Discontinuance of Classified Services in Accordance with Administrative Law Judge Decision.

According to the District staff presentation for Item 6.A., entitled “2026-27 Proposed Budget Reduction Plan”, the Board is being asked to “approve the proposed budget reductions and fiscal actions to address the District’s structural deficit of $32 million and support ongoing financial stability” with “Estimated savings of $18,759,069 beginning in 2026–2027, with ongoing multiyear impact.”

The proposals include eliminating 78 Full Time Equivalent (FTE) Certificated positions, including 15 elementary, 10 secondary and 23 other teachers, plus, three vice principals saving approximately $10,147,363.58. An additional 97.4964 FTE cuts to Classified or other staff are proposed for a total of approximately $7,454,787.84. (See Draft Resolutions here and here).

The proposed Budget Reduction Resolution also includes “approximately $24,000,000 potential reduction for Fiscal Year 2027–28 and 2028-29.”

The Proposed Budget Reductions presentation includes lists of Academic and Fiscal Pressures the District is facing:

Academic Pressures

• Ongoing need to improve student achievement and close learning gaps

• Increased demand for targeted interventions and support services

• Staffing needs to maintain reasonable class sizes and program quality

• Expanded services for special education, multilingual learners, and at-risk students

• Mental health, counseling, and student wellness supports

• Maintaining breadth of programs (CTE, arts, athletics, enrichment)

• State accountability requirements and performance expectations, and

• Recruitment and retention of qualified teachers and staff

Fiscal Pressures

• Structural budget deficit ($32 million) requiring immediate action

• Rising personnel costs (salaries, benefits, pensions)

• Declining or fluctuating enrollment impacting revenue

• Uncertainty in state funding and economic conditions

• Inflationary increases in operating costs (utilities, transportation, materials)

• Limited flexibility due to restricted funding sources

• One-time funds expiring (e.g., pandemic relief), and

• Need to maintain adequate reserves and avoid state intervention

Rocha Issues “Concerns Regarding Proposed Budget Reductions and Impact on Students”

Serving in what is expected to be her final year of her final term, Area 5 Trustee Mary Rocha will present the following letter to her fellow board members during the meeting tonight:

Dear Superintendent and Fellow Board Members,

As elected members of this Board, we were entrusted by our community to serve the best interests of our students while exercising fiscal responsibility, accountability, and sound educational judgment. Our role is not only to oversee the financial health of the district, but also to ensure that decisions made today do not compromise the educational opportunities, wellbeing, and future success of the students we were elected to serve.

After reviewing the information presented regarding the proposed reductions intended to save approximately $18 million, I believe there are significant concerns that require further clarification and thoughtful consideration before moving forward.

The proposed reductions include the removal of coordinators, teachers, paraprofessionals, wellness staff, and other essential personnel whose work directly supports students and school operations on a daily basis. These are not peripheral positions; they are integral to maintaining academic support systems, student engagement, school safety, and equitable access to learning.

Additionally, reducing the number of teachers will inevitably increase classroom sizes unless the district is anticipating a substantial decline in enrollment, of which the Board and community have not yet been fully informed. Larger class sizes limit individualized instruction, reduce teacher accessibility, and may negatively impact student achievement and classroom climate.

I am also deeply concerned about the proposed closure of wellness centers. These centers serve as critical support spaces for students experiencing emotional, behavioral, or mental health challenges during the school day. If wellness centers are eliminated, what is the district’s plan to ensure students continue receiving these supports? Will school counselors be expected to absorb these responsibilities in addition to their current academic and counseling caseloads? If so, has an analysis been conducted regarding the feasibility and impact of such expectations?

Equally important are the implications surrounding the reduction or removal of English Language Development services. English learners depend on specialized instructional support in order to acquire the language skills necessary to access curriculum across all grade levels and subject areas. If these services are reduced, who will assume responsibility for ensuring these students receive the support required for academic success and compliance with educational obligations?

Most importantly, I respectfully ask: where is the written plan demonstrating that these proposed $18 million in reductions will not negatively affect students? Before approving cuts of this magnitude, I believe the Board and the community deserve to see a comprehensive impact analysis outlining how student learning, student wellbeing, academic outcomes, and equitable access to services will be preserved for approximately 17,000 students across the district.

As Board members, we must ensure that financial decisions remain aligned with our educational mission and responsibilities to students, families, staff, and the broader community. Fiscal stewardship is essential; however, it must be balanced with our obligation to protect the instructional and support systems that students rely upon every day.

I respectfully urge that we continue these discussions transparently, collaboratively, and with a student-centered focus before final decisions are made.

Respectfully,

Mary Rocha Antioch Unified School District

Board of Trustees Member

—————

The meeting can also be viewed live on the District’s YouTube channel at Board of Education Meeting 5/6/2026.

From Antioch, Brentwood, Discovery Bay & Martinez

Coronations May 14th at the 2026 Contra Costa County Fair

2025 Queen & Princesses end their reigns

By Cheyenne Erickson, CEO, Contra Costa Fair & Event Park

The Contra Costa County Fair Scholarship Program provides young participants with valuable life and career skills while giving them the opportunity to earn education funds. Through the program, participants develop speech writing and public speaking abilities, build professional resumes, and showcase their unique talents.

They also gain confidence through interview practice, including answering impromptu questions skills that prepare them for future academic and career opportunities. The program focuses on personal growth, leadership, and community involvement, all while rewarding participants with scholarships to support their educational goals. Miss Contra Costa will receive a $1,000 scholarship and Mini Miss Contra Costa will receive $500 provided by the Contra Costa County Fair. They will serve as ambassadors of the fair throughout the year at community service events.

MISS CONTRA COSTA CONTESTANTS:

• Emelia “Eme” Brown, 17, lives in Discovery Bay and she attends Liberty High School. She is a varsity volleyball player and participates in swimming and basketball. She enjoys surfing and spending time on the water.
• Yareli Santuario, 17, lives in Antioch and attends Antioch High School. She is passionate about spreading positivity in her community and is involved with Be Exceptional and serves as an ambassador for the We Get It Foundation.
• Kaylee Rhiann Wright, 17, lives in Martinez and attends Alhambra High School. She enjoys meeting and uplifting others, loves animals and has a soft spot for dark chocolate.

MINI MISS CONTRA COSTA CONTESTANTS:

• Gianna Lynch, 11, is a fifth grader from Brentwood. She enjoys performing in plays, singing, and acting, and is an active member of Brentwood 4-H.
• Teigan Moore, 8, of Discovery Bay, loves reading and art. She enjoys spending time with family and friends and hopes to become a teacher one day.
• Chloe Pettyjohn, 11, from Brentwood, has a two-year-old Pomeranian named Peanut. She enjoys dancing, karate and crafting, and values time with her family and friends.

2025 Queen & Princesses to End Their Reigns

Aili Selvin of Martinez will end her reign as the 2025 Miss Contra Costa County Fair Pageant Queen. The County Fair Board offered their appreciation to her saying, “We are so proud of you and appreciate your contributions to your community all while carrying yourself with the upmost poise and kindness. We look forward to seeing more of your bright future!”

The 2025 Fair Princesses Jocelyn Luna of Oakley and Madilyn Davis of Antioch and Miss Congeniality Michalia Banks of Antioch will also end their reigns.

Pageant Director Danielle Ferguson said, “I am honored to serve as the new Director for the Miss Contra Costa County Scholarship Program.  I grew up in the pageant world, competing from infancy through the age of 24, and spent many years as a dedicated dancer – truly growing up on the stage.  These experiences shaped my love for performance, confidence-building and empowering young women.  I am excited to bring passion, polish and heart to this program and to create an inspiring and memorable experience for every participant.”

Meet the six contestants during the 2026 Contra Costa County Fair May 14-17 at the Contra Costa Event Park, 1201 W. 10th Street, Antioch. Join us May 14th for both competitions and come support your next Miss & Mini Miss Contra Costa! For more information visit Miss Contra Costa and www.contracostafair.com where you can purchase tickets for the fair.

Allen D. Payton contributed to this report.

For “emotional, mental, and psychological…injuries, disability, losses, and damages suffered” due to 2019 incident

By Allen D. Payton

During a special Closed Session meeting on Tuesday, April 14, 2026, the Antioch City Council will discuss a lawsuit by a former Antioch Unified School District student with a heart disorder who almost drowned in a City pool for “emotional, mental, and psychological…injuries, disability, losses, and damages suffered.” The lawsuit was filed against the City, District and Antioch Water Park by “Jayson Robinson, a minor (at the time), by and through his Guardian Ad Litem, Philana Stearne.”

According to the lawsuit, after being transported by bus to the water park during a school sponsored activity, Robinson was allowed to go swimming even though Stearne had provided written notice that he could not swim and was not allowed to swim during the excursion. After an unknown amount of time Robinson was found at the bottom of the pool unconscious. He was extracted from the pool and found to be “pulseless and apneic”. Lifeguards performed four rounds of CPR to revive Robinson who was then airlifted and rushed to UCSF Children’s Hospital in Oakland.

According to the lawsuit documents, “From approximately 2012-2020, PLAINTIFF (Robinson) was a student at Jack London Elementary School…Dolores Williams was the principal… On or about May 28, 2018, PLAINTIFF was in the fifth-grade and assigned as a student in Shelly Travers class.

According to the First Amended Complaint for Damages demanding a jury trial filed Nov. 23, 2021, “PLAINTIFF is a fifth-grade student with Wolff-Parkinson White Syndrome and a learning disability. PLAINTIFF is enrolled in special education instruction classes which entail his removal from class 10 times a week for help with academics and to be provided extra educational resources.”

The lawsuit also reads, “On May 28, 2019, PLAINTIFF attended school sponsored activity with his class to Antioch Water Park located at 4701 Lone Tree Way, Antioch, CA 94531. While at the water park, PLAINTIFF was concurrently under the direct supervision of Defendants employed by Defendant ANTIOCH UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT, and employees of Defendant ANTIOCH WATER PARK. Students were transported via bus from the school to Antioch Water Park. PLAINTIFF’S Guardian Ad Litem, PHILANA STEARNE, provided written notice to Defendants that PLAINTIFF could not swim, and was not to be allowed to swim on the excursion. Defendants ignored the written notice of PLAINTIFF’S Guardian Ad Litem, PHILANA STEARNE, and through failed supervision, PLAINTIFF entered the pool. Due to lack of supervision, PLAINTIFF was found at the bottom of the pool unconscious after an unknown amount of time. PLAINTIFF was extracted from the pool and found to be pulseless and apneic. Lifeguards performed 4 rounds of CPR and PLAINTIFF finally awoke. Robinson was then airlifted and rushed to UCSF Children’s Hospital in Oakland.”

According to the Mayo Clinic, “Wolff-Parkinson-White (WPW) syndrome is a heart condition present at birth. That means it’s a congenital heart defect. People with WPW syndrome have an extra pathway for signals to travel between the heart’s upper and lower chambers. This causes a fast heartbeat. Changes in the heartbeat can make it harder for the heart to work as it should.

“WPW syndrome is fairly rare. Another name for it is preexcitation syndrome.

“The episodes of fast heartbeats seen in Wolff-Parkinson-White syndrome usually aren’t life-threatening. But serious heart problems can occur. Rarely, the syndrome may lead to sudden cardiac death in children and young adults.”

The lawsuit documents also read, “On or about November 5, 2019, PLAINTIFF presented to ANTIOCH UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT, by mailing to ANTIOCH UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT, a written claim for the injuries, disability, losses, and damages suffered and incurred by him by reason of the acts and omissions described” and that Robinson “was harmed and suffered extreme physical, emotional, psychological and economic damages.”

The lawsuit seeks the following relief:

“a. For damages for past and future medical, psychotherapy and related expenses according to proof at the time of trial;

b. For general damages for physical and mental pain and suffering, and severe and extreme emotional distress in a sum to be proven at the time of trial;

c. For damages for future lost wages and a loss of earning capacity according to proof at the time of trial;

d. For damages for past and future education costs according to proof at the time of trial;

e. For attorney’s fees;

f. Any appropriate statutory damages;

g. For prejudgment interest pursuant to statute;

h. For the costs of suit herein; and,

i. For such other and further relief as the Court deems proper.”

Meeting Details

The Council’s Closed Session meeting begins at 5:30 p.m. inside the Council Chambers located at 200 H Street in Antioch’s historic, downtown Rivertown. It will be followed by the regular meeting beginning at 7:00 p.m. The beginning of the Closed Session and entire regular meeting can be viewed via livestream on the City’s website or on Comcast cable TV channel 24 or AT&T U-verse channel 99.