First published Jan. 31, 2025 – 8:28 PM | Last Editied Feb. 1, 2025 – 4:00 PM
SANTA ANA, Calif. — The Santa Ana Unified School District Board of Education voted 4-1 (Lebsack in opposition) to approve the layoffs of around 280 educators, including teachers, counselors, and social workers, along with cuts to supplies and services to help manage a $187 million deficit.
Why Are the Layoffs Happening?
Since the early 2000s, Santa Ana Unified has been losing students little by little every year. Even with the decline, it was still the largest district in the area for a long time. But by the late 2010s, the drop in enrollment became much sharper, about 5% a school year (about 2,000 students). Then COVID-19 hit, and even more Santanero families moved out, making the situation worse.

The population in Santa Ana has also been shrinking for years, and so has the rest of Orange County. During the pandemic, many of families took advantage of cheaper home prices and low-interest rates or found lower rent in nearby counties, speeding up the decline in students. According to World Population Review, Santa Ana's population was estimated at 330,900 in 2019, but dropped to 311,200 in 2020. Since then, the city has lost an average of 800-900 residents annually.
Another significant factor adding to the exodus was the rising cost of living in California, including increasing rents and other expenses, which were further exacerbated by inflation. Adding to the losses, an additional 5% of LCFF funds were cut mid-fiscal year (interim) due to stagnant absenteeism, as announced during a budget webinar in late December.
Another possible reason for lower enrollment is how the District responds and handles student safety such as sexual assault and basic education, specifically in math and English.

Locally, SAUSD ranks the lowest when compared to surrounding school districts.

Nationally however, Santa Ana Unified isn't alone. More than half of districts nationwide are behind the 2019 national average based on 2023 test scores.

Districtwide, students are about two years behind the 2019 national average in those subjects. Meanwhile, Irvine Unified actually saw a surge in enrollment during the pandemic and test scores.
Board Member Brenda Lebsack pointed this out when before she voted against the layoffs. Vice President Katelyn Brazer-Aceves had also suggested a different way to handle things using attrition.
What Were the Alternatives?
One idea was to reduce staff through natural attrition instead of direct layoffs.
Natural attrition is when staff retire or resign on their own, usually the most senior employees. In the past, the District has offered incentives like the Supplemental Employee Retirement Plan (SERP) right after asking people to leave through attrition.
When the SERP window closed in November, 116 employees took the deal. Then, the Board voted unanimously Tuesday to extend the SERP window until mid-March. The more people who take the offer, the fewer layoffs might be needed—but that also depends on how many employees are left who can fill priority positions like special education.
Another alternative that the Santa Ana Educators Association (SAEA) questioned was why the District didn’t hire pandemic-era staff on temporary contracts. Essentially, telling new hires upfront that their jobs were funded by one-time money and not permanent. That way, when the funding ran out, the District wouldn’t have to lay people off unexpectedly.
But this might not have been allowed because of California’s rule during the pandemic that banned school layoffs and also told districts to hire more staff to help with distance learning and reopening schools.
Overstaffing & Federal COVID Funds
According to CBO and Associate Superintendent Ron Hacker, the District was already overstaffed even before the pandemic. In 2018, layoffs were on the table, but the Board voted against it, keeping extra staff. Another round of layoffs was considered right when COVID hit, but then the State of California stepped in and said: No layoffs. Keep all staff. Also, hire more.

The federal government and the state gave school districts one-time money to do this. Santa Ana Unified got $209,242,526 million in ESSER funds, split into three federal relief packages:
- ESSER I (CARES Act 2020): $14,508,488
- ESSER II (CRRSA Act 2020): $59,956,147
- ESSER III (American Rescue Plan 2021): $134,777,891
ESSER III funding expired on Jan. 1, 2025, by which districts were required to have spent the remaining funds. These one-time funds have been exhausted and some suggest the District misspent it despite strict rules on what to use them for.
SAUSD received an additional $192,829,170 for COVID relief grants. The Santanero has inquired about these funds and waiting for sources from the District.

In total, SAUSD received $402,071,696 in coronavirus relief.
Did the District Give Enough Warning?
According to Superintendent Jerry Almendarez, the District had been warning labor groups and the union for three and a half years that layoffs were coming.
But SAEA President Sonta Garner-Marcelo says that’s not true. She argues that the budget is actually stable for the next three years and that the meetings Almendarez is referring to were just standard financial discussions. She also pointed out that most senior SAEA reps were in mediation meetings when the District supposedly gave the layoff warnings, meaning they weren’t even there to hear it.
Who Is Being Laid Off, Where Did the Money Go?
Even though the reduction item listed 546 positions, the District confirmed to The Santanero that 280 employees would actually be laid off—potentially fewer if more staff take advantage of the SERP plan extension.
However, two groups that aren't facing layoffs, which some certificated staff have questioned, is classified staff and management at the District headquarters.
“We’ve looked at everything,” Hacker said.
According to an agendized budget presentation, 80% of the District's $992 million overall budget are spent on salaries and benefits. With fiscal futures looking bleak, Hacker said the cuts had to come from there.

He reiterated that management salaries account for 4% of all expenditures, arguing that cutting them wouldn’t make a significant difference in reducing the deficit.
While classified staff salaries make up a quarter of total expenditures, Hacker pointed out that several positions are already unfilled or understaffed across the district.
He also added that since 2020, the District has not backfilled three management positions left vacant due to resignations or retirements. But the SAEA argues that’s nothing compared to the number of pending layoffs.
What about Superintendent Almendarez' raise?
There was also concern about Superintendent Almendarez’s 3% raise, which The Santanero inquired about.
Hacker confirmed that the raise proposal was pulled from the agenda and is "off the table."
How Did the Board Vote?

Right before the vote, Board President Hector Bustos said that due to past decisions made by previous board members, it was now up to the current board to make the tough choices to keep the District financially solvent and avoid a takeover by the Orange County Department of Education.
There was also a tense moment between Bustos and Santa Ana Mayor Valerie Amezcua, who sat front and centerbefore the Board. Bustos referenced past decisions made by the Board, including a time when Amezcua pushed to lower the counselor ratio to 150 students per counselor.
As for the rest of the Board, most had met with stakeholders and wanted to clear the air about when the first warnings about layoffs were given and how both sides responded.
Despite efforts to press Hacker on continuing natural attrition as an alternative, the Board ultimately voted 4-1 to approve the layoff item, with Lebsack opposing.
What Happens Now?
Crowd of educators gather to hear SAEA leadership and Mayor Amezcua after the Board voted 4-1 to approve layoffs. (Daniel Diaz/The Santanero)
The District will issue pink slips to those affected by the layoffs by March 15. From there, the District will work with its legal team and stakeholders, including the Santa Ana Educators Association (SAEA), to finalize the layoff process.
"This decision is really going to affect our students in our school district," said Selena, a high school counselor. "I think the District sees this as just a numbers game, a money game, but they don’t see the impact it’s going to have on students and our community overall."
Selena, overwhelmed by the Board’s decision, wasn’t alone. Outside the Board room, a crowd of educators huddled together—some in tears, others exchanging hugs and words of encouragement from SAEA leaders and Mayor Valerie Amezcua.
"This is not over," said SAEA President Sonta Garner-Marcelo. "They voted, and they’ve shown their colors."
Mayor Amezcua also spoke out, offering encouraging words while acknowledging her own past advocacy for lowering the counselor-to-student ratio.
"I think it was a bad decision," said Amezcua. "Our families are already dealing with immigration issues, fear, and uncertainty. And now, on top of that, they're going to hear that some of their favorite teachers and counselors are being laid off in March. How is that going to affect them?"
What’s the Budget Outlook?
The Orange County Department of Education has approved SAUSD’s budget for the next three years, as required by education code, which mandates that school districts balance their budgets three years in advance. This is different from city and state governments, which operate on a year-to-year budget cycle.
Critics say since the budget was balanced for the next three years, layoffs could occur gradually rather than suddenly, but Hacker illustrated the numbers in the budget presentation, laying out possible risks for the District if the Board did not take action.
What Are Students Saying?
The Santanero spoke with students at local bus stops, and many were shocked by the news.
Several students from local high schools had attended Tuesday’s meeting—as well as previous ones—to advocate for their teachers and counselors. They emphasized how their mental health has improved because of these educatorsand expressed concerns that cutting those resources would have serious negative effects on students struggling with personal and academic challenges.
"We’re just going to have to see how this decision affects the kids today, tomorrow, and for the rest of their lives," an educator said.