Santa Clara Unified trustees get data on enrollment decline and budget shortfall as staff seeks direction on ‘rightsizing’

Superintendent Wright opened the Santa Clara Unified Board of Trustees’ Sept. 30 special study session by saying district staff would present enrollment data, budget analyses and proposed guiding principles for a rightsizing process intended to align staffing and programs with current enrollment.

"Rightsizing is strategically aligning our staffing, program and resources with student enrollment and district needs," Superintendent Wright said, urging trustees to use the principles as a decision lens.

The presentations, led by Student Services Director Brenda Carrillo, Enrollment Center Manager Joanna Gonzalez and Deputy Superintendent/Chief Business Officer Mr. Scheel, showed a recent enrollment peak during 2024–25 followed by a fall this year and multiple budget pressure points. Staff presented a multi‑year financial picture that includes a large one‑time deficit figure on the current projection and a separate projected shortfall for the coming year; Superintendent Wright told the board, "It is our recommendation to try to address it as much as possible now. All $30,000,000 in the first year would be our recommendation."

Why it matters

Santa Clara Unified is a basic‑aid district whose primary revenues come from local property taxes. Staff told trustees the district has experienced declining kindergarten‑through‑12th‑grade enrollment over several years, and that a recent expansion of transitional kindergarten (TK) masked some of the decline. The budget presentation showed district expenditures and staffing levels that staff say are not aligned with the smaller student population, creating a structural gap that the district must address to avoid deeper reserve erosion.

Key facts and figures from the presentation

- Enrollment: Staff showed a five‑year trend with a high point of 14,467 in 2024–25 and a September 15, 2025 snapshot of 14,303 — a net decline of about 164 students from last year. Staff emphasized that TK expansion added roughly 450 students since 2021–22 and that, excluding TK, K–5 general‑education enrollment fell by about 147 students year to year. (Joanna Gonzalez, Enrollment Center Manager)

- Class size and combo classes: K–3 average class size rose to about 24:1 for 2025–26 and grades 4–5 to about 29:1, while districtwide ‘‘combo’’ (combined‑grade) classes increased after a temporary dip; staff noted smaller grade cohorts are more likely to produce sustained combo classes at a site. (presentation slides)

- Open enrollment: The district’s choice programs draw substantial numbers of students from neighborhood attendance areas. Scott Lane neighborhood program, for example, showed a negative open‑enrollment net difference of about 233 boundary students leaving, largely into the Scott Lane dual‑language immersion program. Don Callejon’s art and design program showed a net positive inflow. (Joanna Gonzalez)

- Special education and other program trends: Staff showed gradual increases in mild‑moderate and extensive support needs placements. They also highlighted that some department‑coded positions (special education, TOSAs, wellness staff) are budgeted at the department level while functioning in schools, complicating site‑by‑site FTE comparisons. (presentation slides)

- Budget and staffing: Over roughly the last eight years the district’s total FTE (full‑time equivalent staff) grew while enrollment declined. Staff presented that total district FTEs increased roughly 34% over the period that enrollment fell about 7%. Purchased services, utilities and insurance costs have also risen. The presentation included a multi‑year projection showing an estimated fiscal gap (staff cited a current large projected deficit and a separate $30 million projected shortfall for the coming year); staff recommended addressing the coming‑year $30 million gap within one year. (Deputy Superintendent/Chief Business Officer Scheel; Superintendent Wright)

Board discussion, concerns and direction

Trustees asked repeated questions about transparency and public access to the slide decks; several trustees and members of the public said the presentation materials were not posted with the agenda before the meeting, and staff reported the slide deck had been finalized shortly before the session and was posted to the agenda during a brief recess. Trustees also emphasized equity concerns: multiple trustees warned that open enrollment into choice programs can erode neighborhood schools that serve higher‑need students, and asked staff to prioritize analyses of program effectiveness and return on investment (ROI) for district initiatives.

Trustee Fairchild said the lack of advance posting “doesn’t feel transparent,” and Trustee Muirhead repeated concerns that declining neighborhood enrollment can strip Title‑I schools of services they provide to families. Trustee Rotterman and others urged caution because some staffing and spending decisions are difficult to reverse and urged proposals that preserve options to respond if enrollment rebounds.

Staff requested guidance on draft guiding principles. Trustees generally endorsed staff’s four proposed principles — students first/equity, whole‑child wellness and safety, transparency/process integrity, and financial/operational efficiency — and asked staff to add an explicit ROI/impact evaluation component. Trustees signaled support for staff to continue the rightsizing process and bring back concrete recommendations aligned to those principles.

Formal actions taken during the meeting

Before the study session, the board amended the published agenda. Trustee Fairchild moved to remove items C, D and E from the agenda; Trustee Rotterman seconded and the board approved the motion 7–0.

The meeting closed by voice vote; a motion and second to conclude the session carried 7–0. (Clerk’s minutes provided at board adjournment.)

What’s next / outlook

Staff said they will synthesize guiding‑principle input from today, input gathered earlier from cabinet/LAMPS/principals and the community survey the district plans to open, and build recommendations for board action under those principles. Staff also noted the County Office of Education asked the district to address reliance on one‑time funding and told trustees that if sufficient progress is not made the county may require a formal fiscal stabilization plan as part of a future budget approval process.

The board requested that staff return with detailed, program‑level ROI and site‑level staffing data (including special education and TOSA allocations, and per‑school class/combination‑class pictures) to support decisions. Trustees repeatedly stressed the need to prioritize protecting services for high‑need, neighborhood students while ensuring any reductions are reversible where possible.

Ending

The board directed staff to continue the rightsizing study and development of recommendations, using the guiding principles with an added ROI lens, and to return with proposals and fuller data in upcoming study sessions and budget materials. Trustee concerns about equity, transparency and the timing of negotiations were recorded during public discussion as priorities staff must address in the coming weeks.