SCUSD board rejects judge’s decision to reverse dozens of layoffs

Sacramento City Unified School District approved the layoffs of over 90 more employees Thursday night despite a decision from an administrative law judge that these employees should be reinstated for the 2026-27 school year. These layoffs are part  of the district’s effort to dig itself out of an over $100 million deficit.

The judge wrote in a non-binding decision that the “District failed to prove it gave classified employees the notices and right to a hearing as provided in Education Code section 45117.” The district was required by law to issue layoff notices by March 15 and to ensure notices were received by employees by April 1. 

The judge claimed that not enough evidence was submitted to prove that notices were given by the district’s Interim Director of Employee Relations, Jake Hansen, in a timely manner.

“Mr. Hansen testified that on March 13, 2026, his staff mailed a notice to each impacted classified employee. Mr. Hansen did not personally serve the Notices,” the decision reads. “The District did not produce any proofs of service showing who served the Notices, on what date, and in which manner.”

Scott Donald, the board’s advising counsel, said at the board meeting Thursday night that the issue lies with Hansen not having firsthand knowledge of notices being issued.

“This was contradicted by the testimony of the deponent or the witness himself, who testified that he personally was involved in the process of providing notice,” Donald said. “It was corroborated by … 93 people asking for a hearing in a timely manner.”

The total number of employees laid off came in at over 500, the majority of which were finalized at the May 7 board meeting after many employees either waived their right to a hearing or missed the deadline to appeal their termination. 

Gretchen Viglione, a training specialist for parent-teacher home visits at the district, gave public comment at Thursday night’s meeting stating that she saw errors in the district’s claim that notices were issued in compliance with law, and that some layoff packets sent out by the district were received on April 5, not April 1.

“District staff then backtracked to say, ‘Well, almost everyone received a packet by April 1,”  Viglione said. “When the judge asked which employees may not have received their packets, district staff responded that they could not recall.”

The judge’s decision states that the district is responsible for proving that every employee received their layoff notice on the timeline laid out. Donald said that the judge required a level of evidence outside the usual scope for an administrative hearing.

“In an administrative hearing, the issue of admissible evidence is much different than it is in a court of law. It’s far more relaxed,” Donald said. “She applied what appeared to be more of a court evidentiary standard than what should have been applied in an administrative hearing. So on that basis, it was really an unsupported decision.”

Sacramento City Unified’s board president Tara Jeane in the board’s chambers during the school board meeting on May 21, 2026.Ruth Finch/CapRadio

Board President Tara Jeane said that she struggled with the decision about layoffs and in making the hard decisions the board has made to make its way back to solvency. When she asked district staff for the budgetary savings that would be made from layoffs, Chief Business Officer Lisa Grant-Dawson gave a range of $12 to $15 million. Jeane expressed frustration with staff not giving the board firm numbers on the impact of their decisions. She ultimately voted against the layoffs.

According to the district's fiscal solvency plan, since they’ve implemented the plan they’ve identified $96 million in savings, but they need to find another $75 million to fully eliminate the current budget deficit.

“It’s been a really long five months. The board keeps saying we’re here to make the hard decisions,” Jeane said. “It’s really hard when we keep getting incomplete information because that doesn’t lead to good decision making … I’m really tired of having to make decisions that are harder than they should be.”

The board voted four to two to approve the layoffs, with board member April Ybarra not present for the vote, and with Jeane and board member Michael Benjamin dissenting.

At the May 7 board meeting, California’s Fiscal Crisis and Management Team warned the board of the need to enter receivership soon before the legislative window to start the process closes. Jeane said that they’ve made changes that are not represented in the budget projections used by CFCMAT, and that whatever changes a state-appointed administrator would make the board can make itself.

If SCUSD entered a state receivership, the board would be relegated to an advisory position, and an appointed state administrator would make the decisions the board would normally make in order to get the school district back on track.

At Thursday’s meeting, one public commenter urged the board to reconsider state receivership. Vice President Taylor Kayatta reaffirmed that they would not take the district down that route unless absolutely necessary. 

“We need to be appropriately aggressive with our projections to ensure that if we need to take out a loan from the state, we do, but we should do that at the last possible minute,” Kayatta said. “Recievership is definitely going to be a worse option for us.”

The next regularly scheduled board meeting will take place June 8.