Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Budget Staffing topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
LAUSD board authorizes preliminary notices for possible staff reductions as district confronts budget shortfall
Summary
The Los Angeles Unified School District board on Feb. 17 authorized sending preliminary reduction‑in‑force notices for central‑office and centrally funded positions, part of a fiscal stabilization plan staff says is needed amid declining enrollment and one‑time funding losses. The move prompted sharp criticism from labor unions, parents and students.
Get email alerts on the Budget Staffing topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Los Angeles Unified School District board on Feb. 17 voted to authorize preliminary notices for potential reductions in force affecting central office and centrally funded positions, part of a fiscal stabilization plan that district staff says is must be implemented to avoid deeper cuts later.
Superintendent Alberto Carvalho framed the authorization as a preliminary step required by state law, telling the board the district faces a “breaking point” after years of declining enrollment and the end of one‑time pandemic funding. Carvalho said the plan aims to protect school sites and classroom services "to the greatest extent possible" while realizing savings the district says are necessary to stabilize multiyear finances.
"We are there," Carvalho said in his introductory remarks, arguing the district had hired thousands of positions on one‑time funds during the pandemic and now faces statutory timelines that require preliminary notices by March 15. He said staff is seeking authorization for a narrower set of central‑office reductions now and will return in May/June for final action, when rescissions or placements can be considered.
The board report identified a net of about 657 filled central‑office position closures and 74 positions with reduced hours or basis as the set of positions for which staff sought permission to issue initial notices. Staff described the approach as a calculated risk that relies on projected attrition and vacancy patterns to avoid many final layoffs; notices issued March 15 would be preliminary and could be rescinded if funding or placements are found before June 30.
Labor leaders and community members pressed the board during public comment to avoid layoffs, particularly for frontline classified staff and student‑support roles. Max Arias of SEIU told the board: "You manipulate — you can make it say what you want, but you're sitting on $5,000,000,000," and urged officials to prioritize workers over outsourcing. United Teachers Los Angeles President Cecily Myer Cruz said the union shared "a lot of our frustration" and called for revenue advocacy and greater transparency. Teamsters Local 2010 President Maria Nichols warned that cuts to specialists would destabilize schools and urged a different approach.
Student and parent speakers at the public‑comment period urged the board to protect psychiatric social workers, campus aides, Dream Centers, the Black Student Achievement Plan (BSAP) and other supports. Several student organizers told the board they want district dollars shifted from school policing to mental‑health and community‑based supports.
Board members pressed staff on assumptions in the multiyear projection — including expected state revenue, offers already made in labor negotiations and the district’s use of reserves — and asked for additional transparency on non‑labor contracts and the equity impacts of the plan. Staff said some one‑time reserves and carryovers have already been repurposed to shore up balances and that a mixture of actions (releasing a previously planned OPEB contribution, transferring fund balances and the RIF authorization) underlies the updated projection.
The motion to authorize sending the preliminary notices passed 4‑3. Board members voting yes said the action is procedural and gives the district room to pursue other remedies in the coming months; those voting no said they opposed statutory notices at this scale without a public equity‑impact analysis and more exhaustive review of alternatives.
Next steps: if authorized notices are mailed by March 15, they are preliminary; staff will continue advocacy for state funding, evaluate attrition and search for vacant assignments to place affected employees. The board will consider final action on any remaining notices in May or June; employees who retain no placement by June 30 could be placed on reemployment lists.

