Antioch Unified board fails to adopt proposed $18 million in budget cuts; layoffs unresolved

The Antioch Unified School District Board of Education met on May 6 and declined to adopt staff’s proposed budget reductions intended to address a reported $32 million structural deficit.

Director of Fiscal Services Mia Conoco presented staff’s recommended package for fiscal 2026–27, describing roughly $18.7 million in candidate reductions and identifying an $18,000,759.69 package the district placed before the board. The plan would have reduced certificated costs (about $9.7 million), classified staffing (about $7.6 million), shifted roughly $666,000 of positions to Fund 21 (bond/building funds) and trimmed about $600,000 in non‑payroll expenses. Superintendent Dr. Darnice R. Williams said the Contra Costa County Office of Education had downgraded the district first to qualified and then to a negative certification, and that state or county intervention would be possible if local solvency is not restored.

The board debated the recommendation after lengthy public comment and trustee questions about scope, impact and monitoring. Conoco and Dr. Williams told trustees the proposal covered a portion of the $32 million need and left roughly $12–14 million unidentified, meaning deficits could compound in following years. Staff described new central approvals and a freeze committee intended to reduce unmonitored contracted spending.

Trustees voted on Resolution 25‑26‑61 to adopt the proposed FY 2026‑27 reductions. During the roll call Trustee Brown voted No; Trustee Hernandez voted Yes; Trustee Rocha voted No; Vice President Cobo Smith voted No; and President Dr. Lathan voted Yes. The motion failed (2 Yes, 3 No).

Separately, staff brought two related layoff resolutions to the board. Associate Superintendent Dr. Camille Johnson presented Resolution 25‑26‑58, adopting an administrative law judge decision authorizing final certificated layoffs, and Resolution 25‑26‑60, authorizing reduction/discontinuance of classified services. Both measures were discussed after public comment from dozens of teachers, parents and behavior‑support staff. In each roll‑call vote the board recorded a similar 3‑2 outcome (Trustee Brown — No; Trustee Hernandez — Yes; Trustee Rocha — No; Vice President Cobo Smith — No; President Dr. Lathan — Yes), and the motions did not carry.

Trustees emphasized the gravity of the fiscal situation and the county’s authority to rescind local actions if the district fails to restore solvency; several trustees said they would prefer more time and additional details about fall staffing models before approving layoffs. Staff noted that notices tied to reductions must be delivered by May 15, and that the board has potential calendar opportunities (including a May 13 meeting) to revisit decisions.

Next steps: staff said the district will continue to identify further reductions through September to reach longer‑term targets and will submit required fiscal‑solvency reports to the county office; public hearings on the proposed budget remain scheduled for June. The board’s failure to adopt the recommended package leaves the district with outstanding decisions about how to close remaining gaps before state or county actions become necessary.