District leaders cite enrollment decline and expiring one-time funds as the board approves reductions affecting up to 138 positions.
The school board will consider resolutions authorizing teacher and staff layoffs, review its financial audit and take up several policy changes Jan. 27
Redlands News Weekly | Jan. 22, 2026
District leaders cite enrollment decline and expiring one-time funds as the board approves reductions affecting up to 138 positions.
REDLANDS, Calif. — The Redlands Unified School District Board of Trustees on Tuesday approved resolutions authorizing the elimination of up to 138 positions for the 2026–27 school year, a move that drew sharp criticism from parents, educators and community members who warned the cuts would fall hardest on students.
All but three of the positions under consideration are based at school sites and provide direct student support, including counseling, health services, library access, physical education and special education assistance.
District leaders emphasized that the decisions reflect long-term structural challenges rather than a short-term budget shortfall, a distinction that remained a point of contention throughout the meeting.
Board President Michele Rendler and board members Candy Olson and Jeanette Wilson voted to approve the resolutions. Board Vice President Patty Holohan and board member Melissa Ayala-Quintero voted no.
While the votes do not automatically trigger layoffs, they allow the district to begin the formal reduction-in-force process as officials work to close a projected $17 million deficit. (A full list of positions appears at the end of this article.)
District officials said they are not yet able to confirm how many preliminary layoff notices will be issued, noting that required analyses are still underway and will be reviewed by the board on March 10.
Under state law, districts must issue preliminary layoff notices by March 15, with final determinations due by May 15.
District leaders said Redlands Unified’s current budget crisis is the result of several intersecting, long-term pressures, many of which trace back to the disruption of the COVID-19 pandemic.
Declining enrollment and high chronic absenteeism: Enrollment and attendance both declined sharply during pandemic-era school closures, and district officials said those trends never fully reversed. Some students did not return to the district at all, while others developed attendance patterns that proved difficult to break once campuses reopened. The district's rate of chronic absenteeism has remained stubbornly high since 2022.
Because state funding is tied to average daily attendance, the impact has been ongoing. With fewer students enrolled and attending school consistently, Redlands Unified has faced shrinking ongoing revenue, even as many operational costs remain fixed.
Pandemic Era Funding: During the pandemic and immediate recovery period, districts received significant one-time federal and state funding intended to help schools respond to learning loss, student mental health needs and the demands of remote and hybrid instruction. Deputy Superintendent Jason Hill said Redlands Unified, like many districts, used those temporary funds to expand staffing and services to meet unprecedented needs.
“We added positions across the district with one-time money,” Hill said.
Some of that funding was also used in 2021 to approve salary increases totaling roughly 13–14%, including stipends and retroactive cost-of-living adjustments. Several trustees acknowledged Tuesday that while those raises were not sustainable long-term, they reflected the extraordinary demands placed on educators during the pandemic and were intended to help the district remain competitive.
New office of compliance: Another significant and largely unanticipated expense has been the expansion of the district’s compliance office, created in response to federal oversight and legal requirements following past sexual abuse cases. Hill said the district was mandated to establish the office and did not anticipate the volume of work it would generate.
The compliance department now includes seven staff members and a director. Hill emphasized that more than 90% of compliance cases involve student-to-student incidents, not student-to-staff misconduct, and that the work is focused on investigation, reporting and ensuring student safety.
“This was not something we planned for at this scale,” Hill said. “But compliance work is not optional.”
While some compliance staff were reassigned from other departments rather than newly hired, Hill said the office represents an ongoing cost that the district must now carry alongside declining enrollment and attendance.
Taken together — pandemic-driven enrollment loss, persistently low attendance, the expiration of one-time funding, salary commitments made during COVID and the growth of legally mandated compliance work — district officials said the gap between revenue and expenditures has widened to the point where structural reductions are now unavoidable.
More than 35 parents, educators, nurses, students and community members addressed the board, many expressing anger, fear and frustration over the scope of the proposed layoffs and the potential impact on student safety, health and academic success.
Speakers repeatedly warned that reductions to counseling, nursing, library services and special education support would undermine the district’s ability to serve students still recovering from pandemic-related learning loss and chronic absenteeism.
Concerns about student health and safety were raised repeatedly, particularly regarding proposed reductions to school nurses and health technicians. Lead district nurse Jessica Marrone detailed the scope of daily medical care provided on campuses.
“Currently, our district serves 53 students with diabetes, 70 students requiring daily medication, 25 G-tube feeds and nine catheterizations every single day,” Marrone said. “These are not occasional needs. This is ongoing medical care.”
One parent shared the story of her child’s recent allergic reaction at school, explaining that immediate access to a nurse or health technician could be the difference between life and death if medication is delayed while waiting for emergency responders.
“Find the money elsewhere,” she told trustees. “My kid’s life depends on it.”
Academic Case Carrier program: Several speakers focused on the proposed reductions to the district’s Academic Case Carrier (ACC) program, which serves students facing barriers such as foster care placement and homelessness.
About 6% of the student population falls into the categories of either foster youth or homeless according to California School Dashboard data.
One speaker warned that eliminating ACC positions would worsen, rather than solve, the district’s financial challenges.
“If you think the district has budget problems now,” the speaker said, “this will only make them worse.”
Speakers argued that reductions to ACC staffing would likely increase chronic absenteeism, reduce average daily attendance funding and shift additional responsibilities onto principals, counselors and nurses — many of whom are also proposed for cuts.
Calls for alternatives and accountability: In addition to concerns about specific programs, many speakers urged the board to explore alternative cost-saving measures before approving layoffs. Suggestions included reducing administrative positions, pursuing additional grants, selling surplus property or using reserves to buy time while the district develops a longer-term solution.
Several speakers also criticized the board’s Dec. 9 vote to increase the members’ monthly stipends by $1,489.26, raising board compensation to $2,000 a month.
After public comment, district administrators and trustees addressed concerns raised by speakers, including questions about reserves and administrative staffing.
Hill clarified that while Redlands Unified’s total fund balance is approximately $74 million, about $55 million is restricted and legally earmarked for specific purposes such as arts education and expanded learning programs. After accounting for required reserve levels, Hill said roughly $8 million remains in flexible funds.
“When we talk about reserves, we’re really talking about unrestricted dollars,” Hill said, noting that using those funds to avoid cuts would only delay the problem. Even with the proposed reductions, he said the district is projected to run a negative fund balance next year, stabilizing only in the third year of its multiyear forecast.
Hill also addressed questions about administrative staffing, saying a reported 35% increase in central office positions is largely attributable to the compliance office. He added that the district currently has seven vacant district-level management positions.
Trustees broadly agreed that reductions are necessary but differed on timing and impact.
“When the one-time money runs out, that’s when it catches up — and now it’s caught up to us,” board member Candy Olson said.
Vice President Patty Holohan urged staff to continue exploring alternatives that could reduce student-facing cuts, citing her experience during the district’s 2008 budget crisis.
“Our counselors, carriers, paras and librarians are the backbone of our students,” Holohan said.
Debate over the district’s financial decisions during the pandemic surfaced sharply during board discussion, particularly around salary increases approved in 2021.
“The biggest contributing factor to the situation we’re in right now is the 13 to 14% raises given in 2021 based on one-time monies,” Olson stated. “And now we have to do the responsible thing and balance the budget.”
Board member Melissa Ayala-Quintero, who was on the board when the raises were approved, acknowledged the long-term impact but defended the decision in context.
“It was probably not the most fiscally responsible decision,” Ayala-Quintero said. “However, at the time, we had our teachers doing above and beyond during a global pandemic. So it was warranted.”
Ayala-Quintero pushed back against framing the raises as the sole cause of the current budget crisis, citing declining birth rates, attendance challenges and broader shifts in education.
Superintendent Juan Cabral also rejected suggestions that the board acted irresponsibly in approving the raises, noting that the decision followed recommendations from district administration and the same governance process now being used to propose reductions.
“The same thing is happening today,” Cabral said. “There was careful thought in 2021, just as there is careful thought now.”
Cabral added that the raises helped the district remain competitive.
Speaking to the current budget proposal Cabral said: “I acknowledge that it is horrible, and it is not good for our kids,” Cabral said. “But I also acknowledge that there is no choice. We need to reduce.”
Board members said they remained hopeful that improved attendance, enrollment stabilization or additional state budget funding could ultimately reduce the number of positions affected.
Ayala-Quintero noted that improving the district’s average daily attendance by 4.5 percentage points could eliminate the need for the proposed cuts.
Staff will continue refining the budget, with final decisions expected in March. District officials said the final number of preliminary layoff notices may be lower than the number of positions authorized, depending on vacancies, retirements and required staffing analyses.
Positions ultimately eliminated would remain eligible for rehire for up to 39 months, with laid-off employees receiving priority if funding or enrollment improves.
The district has also directed the public to its financial transparency portal, which includes budget documents, labor agreements and administrative contracts. Additional disclosures, including information on Proposition 28 funding and board compensation, are expected later this year.
Resolution 2025–26–14 authorized a reduction of 91 certificated services:
Resolution 2025–26–15 authorized the reduction 47 classified positions:
District office positions are indicated in bold.
Sign up for our weekly newsletter
