By Ken Epstein

After 20 years under state control, the Oakland Unified School District (OUSD) will regain local authority over its budget and day-to-day decision-making, emerging from an era of austerity when the district was forced by state-appointed overseers to close more than 40 mostly flatland schools, eliminate educational programs, and cut millions of dollars in services for students and classrooms.

After making its final payment on a $100 million state loan at the end of June, the district in July will again be under the authority of the local school board, like other districts statewide.

The decades of direct intervention by state officials, Alameda County education officials and a powerful, state-funded regulatory agency, the Fiscal Crisis Management and Assistance Team (FCMAT), will finally come to an end in July, according to the office of State Superintendent of Schools Tony Thurmond.

The official narrative of the state takeover is a simple one: the district overspent its budget, and the state altruistically stepped in to rescue it.

But the truth behind the takeover is far different. It’s a story of raw power, greed, and racism.

When the state declared the district insolvent in 2003, OUSD had a $39 million deficit, and funds in a reserve account sufficient to loan itself funds to cover the deficit, a practice that was common in other districts. However, the state would not allow Oakland to use its own money to cover the shortfall.

Trending

Chauvin Sentence? Did You Hear What Vincent Chin’s Killer Got?

The state stepped in, fired Supt. Dennis Chaconas, eliminated the authority of the Board of Education, forced the district to take a $100 million loan that it neither needed nor requested, and appointed a receiver, Randolph Ward, who reported to the state schools’ superintendent, making all the decisions related to the operation of OUSD, including how to spend the $100 million loan.

Not only did the district have to repay the loan, it had to pay the salaries of the various overseers it was required to hire.

Involved in the drive to take control of the district and sell school properties was Oakland’s then powerful State Senator Don Perata, who had been pushing for several years to take control of the district, unsuccessfully attempting to sell the district’s Second Avenue headquarters to real estate developers.

Other local business and political leaders, including State Supt. of Schools Bill Honig, were determined to eliminate the power of the Black majority school board, which was seen as an impediment to the agenda for business as usual.

Among recent interventions by Oakland’s outside overseers was in 2021, when the district, with broad community support, was about to adopt a resolution for “Reparations for Black Students.” The outside trustee spoke at a school board meeting to block the passage of the measure until the board removed wording that would have protected predominantly Black schools from being closed.

In 2024, during district negotiations with administrators, the trustee did not allow the board to approve more money unless it agreed to guidelines to close and merge schools.

In a letter to the district, Alameda County Superintendent of Schools Alysse Castro agreed that the district has done what is necessary to regain local control but that challenges remain.

“These improvements co-exist with ongoing concerns that OUSD must still confront its structural deficit and address the long-standing overinvestment in small schools,” she wrote.

“However, these are challenges of local policy and the domain of a locally elected board of education, not of mismanagement or financial misconduct,” Castro wrote.

“Continuing to require a trustee to backstop them risks continued delay in local ownership and accountability and reinforces a counterproductive narrative that feeds resistance and undermines the board’s willingness to engage their community in making necessary tradeoffs.”

Going forward, the district still faces financial difficulties. According to reports, the board must make $73 million in cuts to the 2025-2026 budget and an additional $17 million from the 2026-2027 budget.

Oakland Post

Posts by Oakland Post

By Joe W. Bowers Jr
California Black Media 

California education leaders are pushing back against the Trump administration’s directive to dismantle diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs in its K-12 public schools — despite threats to take away billions in federal funding.

The conflict began on Feb. 14, when Craig Trainor, acting assistant secretary for civil rights at the U.S. Department of Education (DOE), issued a “Dear Colleague” letter warning that DEI-related programs in public schools could violate federal civil rights law. The letter, which cited Title VI of the Civil Rights Act and the 2023 Supreme Court ruling in Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard, which ended race-conscious admissions, ordered schools to eliminate race-based considerations in areas such as admissions, scholarships, hiring, discipline, and student programming.

According to Trainor, “DEI programs discriminate against one group of Americans to favor another.”

On April 3, the DOE escalated the pressure, sending a follow-up letter to states demanding that every local educational agency (LEA) certify — within 10 business days — that they were not using federal funds to support “illegal DEI.” The certification requirement, tied to continued federal aid, raised the stakes for California, which receives more than $16 billion annually in federal education funding.

So far, California has refused to comply with the DOE order.

“There is nothing in state or federal law that outlaws the broad concepts of ‘diversity,’ ‘equity,’ or ‘inclusion,’” wrote David Schapira, California’s Chief Deputy Superintendent of Public Instruction, in an April 4 letter to superintendents and charter school administrators. Schapira noted that all of California’s more than 1,000 traditional public school districts submit Title VI compliance assurances annually and are subject to regular oversight by the state and the federal government.

In a formal response to the DOE on April 11, the California Department of Education, the State Board of Education, and State Superintendent of Public Instruction Tony Thurmond collectively rejected the certification demand, calling it vague, legally unsupported, and procedurally improper.

“California and its nearly 2,000 LEAs (including traditional public schools and charter schools) have already provided the requisite guarantee that its programs and services are, and will be, in compliance with Title VI and its implementing regulation,” the letter says.

Thurmond added in a statement, “Today, California affirmed existing and continued compliance with federal laws while we stay the course to move the needle for all students. As our responses to the United States Department of Education state and as the plain text of state and federal laws affirm, there is nothing unlawful about broad core values such as diversity, equity and inclusion. I am proud of our students, educators and school communities who continue to focus on teaching and learning, despite federal actions intended to distract and disrupt.”

California officials say that the federal government cannot change existing civil rights enforcement standards without going through formal rule-making procedures, which require public notice and comment.

Other states are taking a similar approach. In a letter to the DOE, Daniel Morton-Bentley, deputy commissioner and counsel for the New York State Education Department, wrote, “We understand that the current administration seeks to censor anything it deems ‘diversity, equity & inclusion.’ But there are no federal or State laws prohibiting the principles of DEI.”

Oakland Post

Posts by Oakland Post

By Bo Tefu
California Black Media

As California’s housing crisis continues to impact students, new legislation, Assembly Bill (AB) 90, promises to allow college students without stable housing to sleep in their cars on campus, offering a stark but practical solution aimed at immediate relief.

Assemblymember Corey Jackson (D-Moreno Valley), a member of the California Legislative Black Caucus (CLBC), is the author of AB 90, which would require community colleges and California State University campuses to create overnight parking programs where students can sleep safely in their vehicles. With one in four community college students in California experiencing homelessness in the past year, Jackson says the state must act urgently.

“This just deals with the harsh realities that we find ourselves in,” he said at a recent hearing.

The bill passed its first committee vote and is gaining attention as housing affordability remains a top concern across the state. California rents are more than 30% above the national average, and long waitlists for student housing have left thousands in limbo. CSU reported more than 4,000 students on its housing waitlist last year.

Supporters stress that the bill is not a long-term solution, but a humane step toward helping students who have no other place to go. A successful pilot program at Long Beach City College has already shown that safe, supervised overnight parking can work, giving students access to restrooms, Wi-Fi, and a secure environment.

Trending

Jonathan Bryant – Tech Innovator and Black Business Founder

However, the CSU and community college systems oppose the bill, citing funding concerns. Critics also worry about safety and oversight. But Jackson and student advocates argue the crisis demands bold action.

“If we know students are already sleeping in their cars, why not help them do it safely?” said Ivan Hernandez, president of the Student Senate for California Community Colleges.

Oakland Post

Posts by Oakland Post