By Dianne Anderson

Big questions remain about what comes next following the Santa Ana Unified School District Board of Education’s 4–1 vote to approve layoffs for 262 certificated employees — including 198 teachers, 39 counselors, and other key support staff who work directly with students.

District leaders say the cuts are driven by declining enrollment and the expiration of one-time COVID relief funds that had temporarily kept staffing and programs running during the pandemic.

But now that the federal funding has dried up, teachers’ union and community members worry the impact of the budget gap will soon show up in classrooms and counseling offices.

Newly appointed Superintendent Dr. Lorraine Perez is tasked with getting the district through the crisis while maintaining student outcomes.

Fermin Leal, spokesperson for SAUSD, said the reductions were designed to right-size staffing levels following several consecutive years of declining enrollment. He said class size ratios will remain below the maximums outlined in employee union contracts, and counselor-to-student ratios are still lower than pre-COVID levels.

“Over the past 10 years, enrollment has dropped by 28%. Even after not backfilling vacant positions, offering early retirement incentives, and making other staffing changes not related to layoffs, our staffing levels remained above what our enrollment and budget could sustain,” Leal said in an email.

Even so, community and staff are pushing back, warning that students will take a hit. They question whether the district could have done more to prevent the layoffs.

Sonta Garner Marcelo, president of the Santa Ana Educators Association (SAEA), said the cuts were unnecessary. At a May 19 school board meeting, she urged the board to rescind the Reduction in Force (RIF) notices that, at the time, threatened 276 educators.

She stressed that the jobs of 276 educators cost approximately $35.5 million, and 262 jobs cost about $32.7 million.

“For perspective, 1% of our district’s budget equals roughly $4 million. Where is the comprehensive plan? We’re still waiting. The district is certified for three years and has $70 million in unrestricted funds,” she said at the meeting. “These are not one-time funds, they’re not ESSER (Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief) monies, and they’re not COVID monies. They’re monies that you can spend to save 276 educator positions.”

In public statements and union meetings, she called for fast action and accountability.

Last week, Garner Marcelo said SAUSD’s decision to lay off 262 certificated employees, including teachers, counselors, instructional coaches, and TOSAs (Teacher on Special Assignment), is deeply troubling and profoundly disruptive.

“These cuts represent more than numbers, they are the loss of trusted educators, mentors, and support systems that students rely on daily. The emotional toll on staff and families is immeasurable,” she said.

SAEA had put forward alternatives like phased retirements, reserve spending, and cutting administrative overhead, but none were seriously considered, she said. Now, their union is focused on trying to support laid-off members, pressure for rehiring wherever possible, and push for more transparent, educator-informed budgeting.

The layoffs are devastating with destabilizing impacts on student learning, counseling access, and overall school climate, she added, and said that rising student-teacher ratios will create uncertainty for both educators and students.

While she acknowledges the impact of declining enrollment and dried-up pandemic funds, she said that leadership failed to prioritize equity and long-term solutions. Serious concerns about the district’s handling of its $187 million deficit remain.

She said that she supported Superintendent Dr. Lorraine Perez in her new post, but will continue advocating for reinstating laid-off educators.

Meanwhile, SAEA assists laid-off members by providing reference letters, unemployment support, and advocacy with labor and local officials.

“The deficit is not solely the result of declining enrollment, it also reflects years of poor fiscal planning and unsustainable spending practices,” she said. “The decision to lay off hundreds of educators was made without fully exploring alternatives that could have preserved staffing and minimized disruption to student learning.”

Besides the local district cuts, there are more cuts on top of cuts statewide.

California Superintendent Tony Thurmond and fellow education leaders are demanding an immediate release of federal education funds they say were unlawfully withheld just as the 2025–26 school year begins.

Just one day before the annual July 1 disbursement, the Trump administration informed the state it would block billions in funding already approved by Congress, including Title I-C, II-A, III-A, IV-A, and IV-B programs.

California alone was slated to get more than $810 million to support critical services such as after-school programs, English language support, and teacher training.

Thurmond condemned the move as “an egregious federal overreach,” in a recent statement, emphasizing the funds were appropriated by Congress, not the President, and that it should not be withheld for political reasons.

“The President is completely disregarding the democratic process by impounding dollars already budgeted, rather than trying to make his case for cuts to elected representatives sent to Congress by the American people to make these decisions,” Thurmond said.

No legal justification was provided for the action, he added, and the Administration is punishing children because states refuse to cater to Trump’s political ideology.

“The Administration is withholding funds that employ vital school staff who provide critical resources and supports for learning for all students,” he said. “Every child will feel the impact of this disruption delivered shortly before the start of the school year, when our students, educators, and families should be anticipating the year ahead and making plans to support our children’s learning and growth.”