Parents, students and community members raised concerns about transparency, financial impact and student well-being during a Pasadena Unified School District town hall Tuesday on potential school consolidations.

District officials and consultants stressed declining enrollment and financial pressures as key drivers behind the discussion, while repeatedly acknowledging the emotional weight of possible school closures.

“This is an extremely difficult topic to talk about,” consultant Joseph Pandolfo told attendees, noting that schools are deeply tied to community identity and history.

Pandolfo said enrollment across the state has dropped significantly, with Pasadena Unified School District losing roughly 23% of its students over the past decade, a trend mirrored across Los Angeles County. The decline, he said, has left districts with more school capacity than students, forcing difficult decisions about how to allocate resources.

“If closures were the solution, why are we still here? Again,” said Shana Villalobos. “The district’s own survey reflects nearly a third of respondents do not believe consolidation will deliver the promised benefits. That is not a clear mandate. That is a lack of trust.”

District officials framed consolidation as a potential way to stabilize finances and preserve academic programs, arguing that fewer campuses could allow for stronger offerings and better use of limited funds.

“Closures are often considered to maintain financial stability and protect educational programs,” Pandolfo said, adding that resources saved could be reinvested into student services and facilities.

But many speakers pushed back, questioning whether past closures have delivered the promised benefits and warning that additional consolidation could further erode trust and enrollment.

“There’s no clarity in how this consolidation represents the overall budget needs,” said Jenny Collins. “We’re not saying how many schools should be consolidated to fill a certain gap, right? We have $30 million, and the numbers that we’re seeing about consolidation is just a tiny piece, and it doesn’t really address that big problem.”

District representatives said no final decisions have been made and stressed that the school board will ultimately determine whether any closures occur.

Officials also highlighted efforts to gather public input, including surveys, committee meetings and town halls, and said community feedback will be incorporated into a forthcoming equity impact analysis required under state guidelines.

However, parents and local residents criticized the pace of the process and the quality of information being provided, with one speaker calling the effort “flawed and ineffective” and alleging that community members have been asked to evaluate incomplete or inaccurate data.

Several parents also raised concerns about the potential impact on students, including overcrowding at receiving schools, loss of programs and disruptions to academic progress and social connections.

“The board is considering one size fits all, squeezing these kids into educational experiences that are not optimal for them, will not set them up for success, and that does upset me because PUSD’s superpower is choice,” said Emma Green.

The district is expected to release a draft report outlining potential consolidation scenarios in late May, followed by additional public input before the school board makes a final decision later this summer.

Environmental samples collected from both floors of the fire-adjacent school; lab results for lead and other metals expected as early as this week

The classrooms at 743 East Calaveras Street have been empty for more than 16 months. Last week, environmental testers worked through both floors of Altadena Arts Magnet for the first time, collecting samples from walls and air for laboratory analysis.

According to a district communication sent Tuesday, the Pasadena Unified School District has completed indoor environmental sampling at the school’s Calaveras Street campus — wipe samples and air samples collected from both floors, now in a laboratory.

Initial results for metals including lead are expected as early as this week, according to the district. When all analyses are complete, PUSD said, a full detailed report will be shared with the school community, and those findings will guide any next steps — including what happens to soft goods and porous materials like carpet, blinds, and acoustic tiles.

The district included the two maps for the first and second floors, showing all locations where indoor wipe and co-located air sampling were conducted:

• Indoor Sampling Locations – Map 1
• Indoor Sampling Locations – Map 2

The Eaton Fire, which ignited January 7, 2025, and burned more than 14,000 acres across Altadena and surrounding communities, did not directly damage the school. But it destroyed more than 9,400 structures region-wide, according to PUSD’s Board Report 1933-F, and approximately 75 of those structures were within 250 yards of the Calaveras Street campus, the report states. That proximity — along with burned commercial properties nearby, including laundromats and grocery stores — drove community demands for indoor testing.

In May 2025, more than 300 Altadena residents signed a petition calling on PUSD to conduct comprehensive indoor environmental testing at the school. Petitioners noted that the campus, built in 1953, is a Title I school where 63 percent of students are socioeconomically disadvantaged, and that the community deserved the same level of post-fire scrutiny being applied at other schools, the petition stated. By that point, PUSD’s own exterior soil testing had found elevated levels of fire-related toxins at the Calaveras Street site.

The PUSD Board of Education voted 7-0 on March 26 to approve a contract with Verdantas Inc., a state-licensed environmental consulting firm, along with its teaming partner Vista Environmental Inc., to carry out the indoor testing. The not-to-exceed contract totaled $33,226, including a base amount of $28,226 and a $5,000 contingency allowance, according to the board report. Costs are being covered through the district’s General Fund under a wildfire recovery budget code, with potential reimbursement from insurance recovery proceeds, FEMA disaster assistance, or other disaster recovery sources, the report states.

The testing covered surface wipe sampling at a minimum of 24 locations and co-located air sampling, following methodology established by the American Industrial Hygiene Association’s Technical Guide for Wildfire Impact Assessments, according to PUSD. Samples were analyzed for Title 22 metals, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, and asbestos. No state or federal agency currently requires indoor environmental testing after urban wildfires, according to Board Report 1933-F — the district was taking the step voluntarily.

“Our top priority is the safety and well-being of our students, employees and school communities,” Superintendent Dr. Elizabeth Blanco said in a statement on PUSD’s fire recovery page. In Tuesday’s community communication, Blanco and Michael Dunning, the district’s Director of Facilities, Maintenance, Operations and Transportation, said the district is “grateful for your continued engagement and for the trust you place in us to protect our students.”

Parents at the March 26 board meeting had urged that sampling focus on surfaces within six feet of exterior openings and HVAC ducting, and that all results be made fully public. Verdantas representatives told the board a walkthrough would occur the following week and that a detailed sampling protocol could be shared with the community shortly after. The email sent Tuesday includes maps showing sampling locations on both floors.

PUSD had previously completed exterior pressure washing, professional interior cleaning, HVAC system and duct cleaning, and exterior soil testing at the campus, according to the board report. The indoor sampling now completed is a required step before AAM’s students are anticipated to return to Calaveras Street in August, according to Board Report 1933-F.

The test results, pending in the lab, will also figure into a broader legislative moment. AB 1642, the Wildfire Environmental Safety and Testing Act authored by Assemblymember John Harabedian (D-Pasadena), passed its first Assembly policy committee in March and is now before the Assembly Appropriations Committee. If enacted, the bill would require California to establish statewide science-based standards for indoor and soil contamination testing after wildfires by July 1, 2027 — filling a regulatory gap that currently leaves schools like AAM without a mandatory framework to follow.

The district said results will be shared with the school community once all analyses are complete — a moment 16 months of waiting has been building toward.

Parents at a Pasadena Unified School District town hall Tuesday sharply criticized the district’s school-closure process, arguing that ‘flawed data,’ a rushed timeline and the absence of the full school board have eroded trust as the district moves toward a June 25 vote.

During nearly an hour of public comment at Pasadena High School, speakers challenged the credibility of the School Consolidation Advisory Committee, the outside consultant guiding the work, and the board members who will decide whether to close schools. 

Parent Kate Nixa asked from the floor, “Board here? Is anyone from the board here?” noting the lack of the full board while thanking those who did attend.

Several parents targeted Total School Solutions and its representative, Joseph Pandolfo. TJ Teams, an 18-year PUSD parent, said he emailed Pandolfo about errors in public data and never received a response. Teams called the survey that launched the process “biased and irresponsibly written” and said committee members were given faulty data and only minutes to review it before voting. He also said one board member continued attending committee meetings despite repeated requests not to.

Parents also questioned the district’s pace. Nixa pointed to the board’s recent approval of $128 million to rebuild San Rafael Elementary, saying the project “skipped the queue” and highlighted inequities. She noted the funding comes from Measures O and R, not Proposition 2.

Other speakers said projected savings of “roughly five to $700,000” per elementary school would not meaningfully address the district’s roughly $30 million budget gap. Jenny Collins said district documents show closures alone “provide minimal savings” without revenue plans for closed sites.

Pandolfo defended the process as “100% committed to transparency,” citing enrollment declines and saying closures typically save several hundred thousand dollars per small school. He said any approved closures would take effect not next school year but the year after.

The advisory committee is expected to finalize recommendations before public hearings May 28 and June 11, ahead of the June 25 board vote.

As a member of the Superintendent’s School Consolidation Advisory Committee and a parent in Pasadena Unified, I have spent the past several months reviewing data and participating in conversations about school closures. What has become clear is that we are being asked to make high-stakes decisions based on large volumes of raw information, much of it only recently analyzed, and on a compressed timeline. What we need instead is a true visioning process.

A visioning process brings together students, families, educators, and community members to define what we want for our schools and our children over the long term. It asks: What should a PUSD graduate know and be able to do? What kinds of schools do we want in our neighborhoods? How do we align resources to those goals? Districts like San Francisco and Long Beach have taken this approach—engaging their communities over time to build shared visions that then guide difficult decisions, which sometimes includes consolidation. Vision comes first. Decisions follow.

Pasadena Unified has already closed 11 schools, with more now under consideration. This approach—closing schools one by one without a clear long-term plan—is not sustainable, and it is not what our community deserves. It also pits schools–and school communities–against each other.

This matters even more given the moment our community is in. Families are navigating the aftermath of the Eaton Canyon fires, ongoing immigration enforcement, and economic strain. Asking them to weigh in on school closures in a rushed process risks leaving out those most affected. If we want decisions that are thoughtful, equitable, and lasting, we must slow down and do this right. Pasadena Unified does not just need a closure plan—it needs a vision.

Liliana Coronado is a PUSD Parent

With 14 campuses still under review and a $30 million budget gap, Tuesday’s session at Pasadena High offers the public its last scheduled chance to weigh in before the advisory committee delivers its recommendation

On Tuesday, the Pasadena Unified School District will hold its second and final scheduled town hall on the school consolidation process, this time in person at Pasadena High School from 6:30 to 8:30 p.m.

The session comes one day after the Superintendent’s School Consolidation Advisory Committee meets for its sixth session — with only one meeting remaining before it is expected to deliver a recommendation to the Board of Education in May, according to the PUSD website.

PUSD is projecting a budget shortfall of $30 million to $35 million for the 2026-27 fiscal year. Enrollment has fallen roughly 23 percent over the past decade, from 17,267 students in 2014-15 to 13,228 in the current school year, according to district financial reports. Fourteen campuses across Pasadena, Altadena, and Sierra Madre remain under review for possible closure or consolidation, a figure that has not changed since the advisory committee voted in March to remove nine schools from the original list.

The town hall will be livestreamed in English and Spanish at pusd.us/townhall. Spanish translation and childcare for school-aged children will be available at the venue. The deadline for submitting questions in advance was 5 p.m. on April 24; public comment will be available at the event itself, according to the district’s announcement.

The consolidation process is being guided by a 33-member advisory committee appointed by Superintendent Elizabeth Blanco, Ed.D., from 167 applicants. The committee includes parents, staff members, community members, and two high school students, according to the PUSD website. It is working with Total School Solutions, an educational consulting firm retained under a contract not to exceed $233,300, with Dr. Joseph Pandolfo serving as lead facilitator, according to Pasadena Now.

The committee began meeting on February 23, 2026. At its March 9 session, members voted to remove nine campuses from consideration, including John Muir High School, Pasadena High School, Octavia E. Butler Magnet, and Sierra Madre Middle School. That left 14 schools still under review. At the March 23 meeting, committee members asked for more time before removing additional schools, according to meeting notes published by the Pasadena Education Network, an independent parent-advocacy organization. At the March 31 session, the committee voted to have the consultants present their own consolidation scenarios rather than proceeding with another member vote, the organization reported.

Among the campuses still under review, Altadena Arts Magnet Elementary is the only Altadena school on the list — a point of concern in a community still recovering from the January 2025 Eaton Fire, which destroyed or severely damaged five PUSD campuses in the Altadena area, according to district records. The fire’s aftermath has compounded the district’s financial strain and added complexity to the consolidation discussion, with displaced students and families operating at temporary school locations more than a year later.

“It is important to note that no school is slated to be closed or consolidated at this point in time,” Superintendent Blanco wrote in a community message on March 11, “and that it is possible that the Committee may not recommend any schools for closure.”

The district’s financial pressures extend beyond the consolidation discussion. In November 2025, the Board approved $24.5 million in budget cuts. In February 2026, it authorized the elimination of 161.35 full-time equivalent certificated positions and additional classified staff reductions, according to Pasadena Now’s reporting on the Board meeting. Without one-time Eaton Fire insurance revenue, the district is running a $16.9 million structural deficit in the current year, according to district financial reports.

The formal process leading to potential closures began on December 11, 2025, when the Board passed Resolution 2852, setting minimum enrollment thresholds for schools to be considered sustainable: 300 students for elementary schools, 400 for middle schools, and 900 for high schools, according to Pasadena Weekly’s reporting on the meeting. In January 2026, the Board voted 5-2 to approve the contract with Total School Solutions and passed Resolution 2857, establishing nine equity metrics for the committee’s analysis as required by state law AB 1912, according to Pasadena Now.

Community opposition to potential closures has been visible. More than 300 people rallied at Pasadena City Hall on February 7, according to Pasadena Now. At the March 26 Board of Education meeting, 56 speakers — parents, students, teachers, and staff — addressed the Board in opposition to closures, according to the same outlet. On March 31, more than 50 parents and students protested outside PUSD headquarters before the fourth committee meeting, according to Pasadena Today.

The first town hall on March 31 was a virtual session from 9:30 to 11 a.m. Questions were submitted in advance and read aloud by the moderator; the format did not include live public comment, according to Pasadena Now’s coverage of the event. Tuesday’s in-person session at Pasadena High School offers a different format. The venue is at 2925 E. Sierra Madre Blvd. in Pasadena.

The committee’s remaining schedule calls for a seventh and final meeting on May 11, when it is expected to deliver its recommendation. Public hearings are set for the May 28 and June 11 Board meetings, with a vote on any closures scheduled for June 25, according to the PUSD website. Any approved closures would take effect in the 2027-28 school year.

The SCAC meets Monday evening at 5 p.m. at the District Education Center, 351 S. Hudson Ave., Room 151, in Pasadena. Information about the committee and its work is available at pusd.us/scac. The town hall livestream and recording will be available at pusd.us/townhall.

Pasadena High School, the site of Tuesday’s town hall, is one of the nine campuses the committee has already removed from its closure list. The 14 that remain have no such assurance.

Martin Dorado said his name is on the proposed layoffs list

The Pasadena Unified School District’s current Teacher of the Year told the Board of Education on Thursday that he is among approximately 160 educators issued Reduction in Force notices this budget cycle, a disclosure that crystallized a night of escalating community emotions over proposed school consolidations, teacher layoffs and a zero Cost of Living Adjustment offer in ongoing contract negotiations with United Teachers of Pasadena.

Martin Dorado, a fifth-grade teacher at Madison Elementary School and a member of United Teachers of Pasadena, said he has taught in Pasadena Unified School District since 2016. Addressing trustees during public comment, Dorado said the district’s repeated invocation of “sustainability” rings hollow inside classrooms facing 36 students and biennial layoff cycles.

“Whenever the budget is referenced, the conversation is always centered around sustainability, but what does sustainability look like inside a classroom? 36 students in a room, teachers doing the jobs of three or more people, or perhaps teachers facing … Layoffs every other year,” Dorado told the board. “Is this the stability that we’re referencing? Does that sound sustainable for public education?”

He then disclosed his own status: he’s on the layoff list.

“Yes, I am this year’s Pasadena Unified Teacher of the Year, and yes, I am one of those teachers facing a layoff this year,” Dorado said. “But what’s baffling to me is not that you’re laying me off the teacher of the year, but that you’re laying off teachers with 36 students in the classroom.”

The 160 figure

The count of 160 Reduction in Force notices was cited by Katherine Mickelson, a nine-year district teacher who said she has been on the layoff list for six of those years. Michelson tied the notices directly to the zero Cost of Living Adjustment offer United Teachers of Pasadena says the district is holding firm on after eight bargaining sessions.

“Only 33% of our students are proficient in math, only 45% in reading. And your response to that crisis is a zero COLA and 160 RIF notices,” Mickelson said. “That is not a budgetary strategy. That is a betrayal of every child in this district.”

Mickelson said the district ranks 717th out of 1,543 California districts and dropped again this year. “Yet after eight bargaining sessions, there is zero improvement on salary and zero improvement on class size. Meanwhile, 95 central office positions go unexamined and $30 million in contracts go unscrutinized,” she told trustees.

Union pushes alternative savings

A representative of United Teachers of Pasadena, speaking during the labor partner comment period, told the board the district is laying off roughly 100 more teachers than necessary — a figure the representative said may now be closer to 80 — and argued that savings exist elsewhere in the budget.

“In three years, if you actually followed through with laying off those hundred extra teachers and the savings that have already happened this year from other things, we would have a hundred million dollars in reserves built up on the backs of our teachers, staff, and lost student experiences,” the union representative said. “Remember that you’ve laid off art, music, and PE teachers who are currently not planned to be brought back.”

The representative identified two specific pools of potential savings. “There are 95 central admin positions. That’s double what we need. Right sizing central office would save $10 million yearly because each of those positions cost at least $200,000,” the representative told the board. The labor speaker added that 20% of the unrestricted and non-fire budget is going to outside contractors, amounting to $30 million: “If you cut that in half, which is more normal for a district our size, you would save $15 million a year. That’s 25 already right there that we have not examined.”

The representative also warned of enrollment consequences. “We lose people that our students know and love, and when we lose them, families leave as well,” the speaker said.

Union leader strikes conciliatory note

A second labor representative adopted a more measured tone, describing continuing meetings between union teams and district Human Resources leadership under Superintendent Dr. Blanco and Human Resources chief Dr. Sergio Canal.

“Teams met again with HR today to review the list and to discuss some alternatives,” he told the board. “Although many of my members feel it is a done deal, I’ve explained that we will continue to work with the district to explore every possible avenue or opportunity so we can come to an agreement that will meet both parties’ needs.”

“Neither side wanted these cuts to happen. Everyone knows the negative impact it will have on the district. Again, I am confident we will come to a mutual agreement before June 30, before my members are scheduled to be separated from the district.”

Campus-level impact

The layoffs landed with particular force at specific campuses.

Emily Rosario, a parent at Altadena and Elliot Arts Magnets who identified herself as a neuroscientist, told the board the Reduction in Force would cut “nearly one third of Elliot’s teaching staff, along with our librarian coaches and other site staff.” She noted that Elliot is in the final year of its arts magnet grant.

“A year that is for sustainability planning, not dismantling,” Rosario said. “After four years of training these educators in integrated arts instruction, laying these teachers off raises serious concerns about the program continuity, grant deliverables, and non-compliance.”

Sarah Rager, an Eaton Fire survivor and former Pasadena Unified School District student who now teaches in the district, told trustees she left a job “in seniority” at another district two years ago when she was offered a position at Altadena Arts, only to be handed a temporary contract during onboarding two weeks later. She said the temporary contract has since been used to transfer her between school sites, including to Allendale and then Madison.

“We are slated to lose the best of the best. Our teachers, our custodial staff, our community support staff,” Rager said. “These are the people who keep our schools running.”

Consolidation backdrop

The layoffs unfolded against a contentious school consolidation process still working its way through a Superintendent’s School Consolidation Advisory Committee. Student Board Member Rivera, relaying the assessment of two student representatives on that committee, told the board members “generally agree that closing schools will not save as much money as we hope,” citing an estimated $600,000 in savings if elementary schools were consolidated.

Dozens of public speakers pleaded with trustees to spare schools including Don Benito, Blair, Madison, Marshall, San Rafael, Altadena and Elliot. Because of the volume of cards submitted, speakers were limited to one minute each.

One Don Benito parent told trustees: “A student should not have to worry whether their school will be open again next year or not. … A student should not have to stand up and bravely and eloquently argue in front of you that their school should exist so that they have a right to learn.”

A representative of parents at Thurgood Marshall Secondary School noted that 59% of Marshall students are classified as low income and warned: “Closures impact low income and minority students. You have a legal and moral obligation to fairly serve this marginalized community.”

What happens next

No action on the Reduction in Force list itself was taken at the April 23 meeting. Separation of affected employees is scheduled for June 30, 2026, according to the uinion. Labor negotiations between the district and United Teachers of Pasadena are continuing.

The Board of Education’s next scheduled decision point relevant to school consolidation was referenced during debate as a potential June 25 vote, with a public hearing on June 11.

Trustees reject motion to delay project until school consolidation decision

[UPDATED] The Pasadena Unified School District Board of Education voted Thursday night to approve the full demolition and rebuild of San Rafael Elementary School, rejecting a motion to delay the project until after the district’s pending school consolidation decision.

The approval comes after trustees acknowledged that the project’s total cost has risen to roughly three times its original allocation in the five?year bond plan, and that the additional amount above existing Measure O funding and expected state match will have to be covered from Measure R before the new facilities master plan is complete.

Trustee Kimberly Kenne moved to table Board Report 1941-F, which authorized the rebuild, arguing the board should wait until the school consolidation process concludes. Trustee Scott Harden seconded the motion.

“I think this would bring clarity to how San Rafael will be used in that plan, as well as may identify other facility needs that will need to be funded,” Kenne said. She noted that one current consolidation scenario would close the neighborhood school zoned for the San Rafael area.

The motion to table failed. Trustee Yarma Velázquez and Board President Tina Fredericks spoke against the delay. Student Trustee Rivera abstained.

A subsequent motion to approve the rebuild then passed. Rivera again abstained.

Cost escalation and funding sources

The rebuild will draw primarily from two voter-approved bond measures — Measure O and Measure R. The original five-year bond plan had assumed $125 million in state matching funds to offset Measure O costs, but trustees were divided on when — or whether — that money would arrive.

Michael Dunning, Pasadena Unified’s Director of Facilities, Maintenance, Operations & Transportation, in presenting the bond program to the board told trustees that construction cost inflation is running at approximately 6% per year and is expected to rise to 8% in 2027. Trustee Patrice Marshall McKenzie said she is seeing cost escalations closer to 20% in her professional work, and cautioned her colleagues about “the time clock ticking” on the value of district dollars.

Kenne said a one-year delay would push the earliest date that San Rafael students could move off campus from the summer of 2027 to the summer of 2028. Dunning confirmed that timeline and added that a delay would cascade into other bond projects already scheduled in the district’s five-year plan. He told trustees that even at annual inflation of 6% to 8%, the escalations compound because the district is “talking hundreds of millions” in bond spending.

“If we table this, we will guarantee that this will be more expensive than we have estimated, and it will guarantee that we will delay other projects,” Fredericks said before the tabling vote.

Kenne said she had reviewed Proposition 2, the most recent state school bond, and consulted School Services of California. She said voters approved $10 billion in Proposition 2 statewide, of which approximately $4.4 billion was designated for modernization. The new-construction portion, she said, does not apply to projects that tear down and rebuild on the same site — only to schools built where none previously existed. She said the State Allocation Board has received approximately $1.7 billion in applications beyond the bond’s authority, meaning the district’s San Rafael application will not be funded under Proposition 2 and will have to wait for a future state bond.

Dunning had earlier told the board the state match funds, which he estimated at $118 million to $125 million, would likely arrive in approximately six years and could be applied to the back of the district’s spending plan once confirmed.

Kenne said that the project’s share of Measure R — combined with previously committed Measure R spending on staff housing and solar infrastructure — would bring Measure R commitments to roughly $375 million of its $900 million total before the district has completed its new facilities master plan.

Trustee Jennifer Hall Lee, who pressed for clarification on the matching-funds situation, said she was concerned about whether the money would ultimately be there. Dunning told her that between Measure O and Measure R, the district has the funds to cover everything currently in the approved five-year plan.

Displacement and capacity

San Rafael students will be moved to Allendale Elementary School during construction, Dunning said. Longfellow Elementary students are scheduled to occupy Allendale beginning in summer 2026 for approximately one year before San Rafael takes its turn.

The rebuilt campus is currently designed for a capacity of just under 500 students, with plans to add transitional kindergarten classrooms. Several trustees, including Kenne and Harden, raised questions about whether the capacity should be increased to accommodate possible enrollment shifts from consolidation.

Dunning said the site can accommodate a larger footprint — potentially a second two-story building at the south end of the campus — if the board later directs such a change. Dr. Wong, addressing board procedure, said any such change would return first to the Facilities Committee and then to the full board as a separate action item.

Public comment and advocacy

The rebuild decision followed public comment from San Rafael parents, teachers and a Pasadena city representative.

Justin Chapman, field representative for Pasadena Councilmember Steve Madison, whose District 6 includes San Rafael Elementary, told the board Madison supports the rebuild.

Chapman said Madison was out of town and had asked him to deliver a statement on his behalf. Reading from that statement, Chapman said San Rafael is the only remaining public school in West Pasadena, and the councilmember supports the rebuild “to ensure the future of the school.”

Carla Landaverde, a fourth-grade teacher and parent at San Rafael, asked the board to vote to demolish and rebuild. She said the school piloted the district’s dual language program in 2009 and has “asked for very little to succeed.”

Sahar Uriarte, an Eaton Fire survivor and San Rafael parent, said the school community has been a source of stability after her family lost its Altadena home and urged the board to invest in the facility. Lindsay Amstutz, speaking on behalf of 104 current San Rafael parents, asked the board to approve Board Report 1941-F.

Velázquez described San Rafael as a school with the district’s largest wait list, the highest application volume and a Parent Teacher Association engagement level that she said exceeds enrollment. She characterized prior delays to the project as part of a pattern of neglect dating to 1998.

“It is very hard to understand that,” Velázquez said of continued delays. She said the only distinction between San Rafael and two other high-demand schools ranked second and third in applications is the physical structure of the San Rafael campus.

Next steps

Dunning told the board the district will return with additional clarity on funding allocations at its May 2026 meeting. The district’s facilities master plan architect is expected to deliver findings in January 2027.

The consolidation advisory process, which prompted Kenne’s motion to table, is scheduled to produce a recommendation on May 28, 2026, with a potential board vote on school closures as early as June 25, 2026.

Superintendent Elizabeth Blanco told trustees San Rafael closure was not among the scenarios the district’s consultant presented or recommended to the advisory committee, though the board retains authority to “adopt, adapt or abandon the committee’s recommendations and make their own.”

Pasadena Unified School District Board President Tina Fredericks is seen delivering the 2026 State of the Schools address on Wednesday, April 22, 2026, at Mary W. Jackson STEAM Multilingual Magnet Elementary in Altadena. [Pasadena Media screenshot]

Full text of Tina Fredericks’ address included below

Pasadena Unified School District leaders told families, educators and civic officials that the District is rebuilding after a year marked by the Eaton Fire, community concerns over U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement activity and a $30 million budget-reduction plan, during the 2026 State of the Schools ceremony held Wednesday evening — Earth Day — at Mary W. Jackson STEAM Multilingual Magnet Elementary in Altadena. The full text of Board President Tina Fredericks’ address is reproduced below.

Superintendent Elizabeth Blanco reported that the District’s graduation rate has increased to 91%, that early literacy is improving under newly adopted programs, and that Pasadena High School is ranked among the top three California public high schools for UCLA acceptance rates. Blanco said all four Pasadena Unified School District comprehensive high schools — Pasadena High School, Marshall, Muir and Blair — have exceeded projected university acceptance rates this year, and that 12 John Muir High School students will graduate with their associate in arts degrees and high school diplomas, as well as additional certificates.

Five Blair High School juniors have been named National Merit Scholars, she said, and the District’s dual enrollment partnership with PCC won a statewide exemplary award.

Blanco also said Thurgood Marshall hosted the District’s annual Women’s History Month and that visual and performing arts students traveled to New York City for the World Strides Music Heritage Festival, where they earned top honors for chamber choir, Soto Voce, chamber orchestra, jazz band and wind ensemble.

Blanco acknowledged the District is facing a structural deficit, rising costs, declining enrollment and funding uncertainty, and said the Superintendent’s Budget Advisory Committee was reconvened to identify $30 million in reductions and savings.

She said difficult decisions were necessary to preserve classroom instruction and signature programs, and that the District is engaged in conversations about the future use of facilities, including possible campus mergers, which she said the District will approach “with transparency and care.”

Fredericks, in the evening’s keynote address, opened by recalling that on the first day of the 2025-26 school year — Monday, Aug. 18 — she joined community volunteers taking up positions around a Northwest Pasadena elementary school to watch for U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents.

She said the District — which encompasses Pasadena, Altadena and Sierra Madre — has weathered the COVID-19 pandemic, the Eaton Fire and community concerns this year over ICE, and that students remain “safe, secure, receiving a quality education, and are stronger human beings due to what they endured.”

The Los Angeles County Office of Education issued a positive certification of the District’s second interim financial report earlier this month, Fredericks reported, and credited voter-approved Measures J, EE and R with protecting student programs and funding long-term facility investments, including solar canopies planned for three school sites by summer 2028.

The program featured student speakers Azucena Paez, a Pasadena High School senior bound for California State University, San Marcos, and Journey Everly, a seventh grader from Eliot Arts Magnet, whose Eliot Arts Middle School campus was destroyed in the Eaton Fire and whose students were welcomed onto the McKinley School campus.

Event emcee Veronica Villagrana, principal of Mary W. Jackson STEAM Multilingual Magnet Elementary, recognized leaders and partners attending the ceremony.

Following is the full text of Pasadena Unified School District Board President Tina Fredericks’ address, as delivered April 22, and transcribed from the official event recording. Every effort has been made to ensure this version is accurate.

Full Text of Pasadena Board of Education President Tina Fredericks’ 2026 State of the Schools Address

Good evening, everyone, to those who are joining us here at the esteemed Mary Jackson STEAM Multilingual Elementary Magnet in our beloved Altadena. And good evening to those who are joining us from home. I want to take the opportunity to thank each and every one of you who have dedicated yourself to supporting Pasadena Unified School District. Your time and contributions are invaluable and are deeply appreciated.

Again, I’m Tina Fredericks, a Pasadena Unified Board President. My pronouns are she, her, hers.

This has been a highly unique and eventful year to say the least. Understanding the current state of the schools warrants recognizing how the school year began. Monday morning, Aug. 18, I got ready for the day, drove to one of our elementary schools in Northwest Pasadena before the parents walked their children to school. I met up with community volunteers. We took up our designated positions around the school to watch for ICE. This was the first day of school.

Since then, nutritional programs and healthcare funding have been cut. There are ongoing and new wars, economic turmoil, protests here and abroad, family, friends, neighbors, targeted, and deported without due process.

We say at Pasadena Unified School District, every child is our child. The Pasadena Unified School District, encompassing Pasadena, Altadena and Sierra Madre, is a special community that deeply cares about each other. Crisis after crisis — first, the COVID pandemic, then the Eaton Fire, and this year, the ICE agents — our District continues to address these challenges head on with compassion and creativity. I’m proud to report our students are safe, secure, receiving a quality education, and are stronger human beings due to what they endured.

Our District is very grateful for the voters of Pasadena, Altadena, and Sierra Madre who have supported official bond and parcel tax measures that have provided stable funding for our schools.

This work must be backed by strong financial planning, and this is the best part — the financial update.

The District’s combined general fund revenues come from the state, the federal government, and local sources. The state provides these funds through the Local Control Funding Formula, or LCFF, which has two main sources of revenue: property taxes and state aid. As of the second interim report, the total LCFF entitlement for the 2025-26 fiscal year was approximately $190.7 million. These funds come to the District in two forms: base grants used for general operations, and supplemental and concentration grants, which are targeted for specific student populations such as foster youth, English learners, and students qualifying for low socioeconomic status. These supplemental and concentration grant funds must be used to supplement the general education program and ensure that all students have the resources they need to succeed.

Like many California school districts, we face serious fiscal challenges, and we had to make tough choices to identify $30 million in reductions and savings for the 2026-27 school year, including central office reductions and staffing adjustments. These were difficult decisions, but they were necessary to preserve classroom instruction, maintain reserves, and continue essential programs in literacy, math, wellness, and college and career readiness.

Earlier this month, the Los Angeles County Office of Education, or LACOE, issued a positive certification of our second interim financial report. Their recommendation affirmed the path we’re on for sustained financial stability, but we have to act cautiously to maintain our fiscal stability, even as our District’s enrollment continues to decline each year and costs continue to rise.

One of the recommendations from LACOE in order to bring long-term financial stability to the District was to, quote, “do things differently.” The Board took that seriously and directed the superintendent to hire an independent external consultant to look at the potential school consolidation that would expand educational opportunities to all students and reduce long-term facilities costs by having to maintain fewer schools.

The District has gone through school consolidation multiple times, but it’s always difficult and it’s extremely emotional. I ask all of us to treat each other with sensitivity and care throughout this process. Each of our schools have their own individual closely knit community. However, no school is an island. The destiny of all of our schools and all of our students are bound together by our shared budget.

Thanks to the passage of Measure J and Measure EE, we’ve continued to reduce our deficit and protect vital student programs. We’re committed to making every dollar count. As we move forward, we will engage our community to help guide our decisions. Our community has shown up for our schools time and time again. The passage of Measure R in 2024, which secured $900 million in local funds for school upgrades, was a clear statement. Our students deserve safe, modern, innovative learning environments, and we will deliver.

What is specifically unique about the Measure R bond is its intent to fund renewable and clean energy infrastructure and accessible green learning environments. Take, for example, Jackson’s playground. Thanks to the voters who supported Measure R, the District can build towards a sustainable future. Our District is actively working side by side with Pasadena Water and Power to identify school sites that are ideal to install solar panels. The City of Pasadena has committed to reaching its goal of 100% carbon-free energy by end of 2030, and our District is supporting that effort. Generating and storing our own solar-powered electricity translates into potentially millions of dollars in annual savings for the District’s general fund. Solar canopies are planned for three school sites to be completed by the summer of 2028. This is a clear example of one-time bond dollars that are strategically invested in our schools that translate to ongoing annual savings. This would not be possible without the support of our community.

To further illustrate what it means to the District to have stable funding sources of our local bonds, I would like to invite up to the stage Journey Everly, a seventh grader from Eliot Arts Middle School and former Jackson Elementary student.

When the Eaton Fire destroyed Eliot Arts Middle School, the students were moved to McKinley. The McKinley community, its students and staff, welcomed and embraced the Eliot community, made space, and shared space with them. Again, thanks to the bond dollars, the District was able to turn a baseball field into an entire set of new classrooms, administration buildings, and a dedicated secure entrance just for the Eliot Arts community at McKinley School. Our District facilities leadership understood that the Eliot Arts community needed not just space, but a space they can call their own. Now I’d like to introduce the seventh grade student from Eliot Arts Magnet, who I heard speak at an event last week. Please welcome Journee Everly.

[Journee Everly delivered remarks.]

This is our future leaders. Thank you, Journey. She was actually part of the original program, but she moved me so deeply that I had to ask her to come to speak. So thank you, Journey. Thank you, Journey, for telling your story.

This goes to show that no matter what happens, not even the second most destructive fire in California can destroy the heart and soul of Pasadena Unified School District. We take care of each other. It’s just what we do.

I’m going to be honest, this year has been really difficult with what is happening in our country, in our world, but there is a lot of good happening here at Pasadena Unified School District. There are so many people doing good — students, parents, teachers, staff, community members, educational partners, administrators. It truly takes a village.

This year, we are laying the foundation to fundamentally transform our District. We’re not just rebuilding, we’re dreaming big. And with the support of the community, the future looks bright.

Thank you.

Both sides plan to return to the table May 22 as layoffs of more than 160 certificated positions move forward

The Pasadena Unified School District and United Teachers of Pasadena met April 17 for what PUSD described as the eighth bargaining session of the 2025-2026 cycle, and in separate written statements issued afterward, both sides reported no movement on salary or class size.

UTP introduced a new proposal at the session requesting a 5% ongoing salary increase beginning with the 2026-2027 school year, according to both sides’ bargaining updates.

The negotiations are occurring as the district implements layoffs of 161.35 full-time equivalent certificated positions approved by the Board of Education on Feb. 26 to address a structural budget deficit of more than $30 million, according to prior district actions and coverage.

PUSD’s positions in this article are drawn from the district’s April 17 written bargaining update. PUSD was not interviewed for this story. UTP President Jonathan Gardner provided additional comments in a telephone interview Tuesday.

Where the Two Sides Stand

UTP’s bargaining update, issued April 17, said the union’s position for the 2025-2026 school year remains a 2.35% cost-of-living adjustment. The update characterized the district’s position as a 0% COLA for the current year.

On the 2026-2027 cycle, UTP said it proposed a 5% salary increase for that school year and proposed maintaining the current health and welfare benefits structure, with an added provision that would offer 90% benefits coverage to members retiring at age 59 until they reach age 65. UTP also said the district “has gone the entire school year failing to respond with a counter to UTP’s Health and Welfare Proposal #1.”

PUSD’s update said UTP has continued to propose ongoing salary increases “which carry financial implications for the District” and that the April 17 session included UTP’s second proposal on salary, the one requesting an additional 5% ongoing increase commencing with the 2026-2027 school year.

In its statement, PUSD referenced the Los Angeles County Office of Education’s role in the district’s finances. The district said LACOE has requested that PUSD submit an updated Fiscal Stabilization Plan as part of the 2026-2027 Adopted Budget, “signaling ongoing fiscal concerns.” PUSD said it submitted a mandatory plan to LACOE in December, that reduction-in-force resolutions were approved in February, and that “evidence of implementation” was required for its March 13 submission of its 2025-2026 Second Interim Financial Report.

Class Size

On class size, UTP said its position is to “eliminate staffing ratios and move to class size caps,” while characterizing the district’s position as “ballooning class sizes are just fine.”

PUSD, in its statement, said UTP has advocated for contract language establishing class size caps, citing concerns about widespread over-enrollment in PUSD classrooms. The district said analysis of classrooms “reveals the vast majority are not overenrolled,” and that strict class size caps could result in “the potential need to move students between classrooms to remain compliant and within prescribed limits regardless of carefully composed classrooms.”

“Maintaining stable learning environments is a priority for the District, and frequent movement of students may disrupt instructional continuity,” the PUSD statement said.

The district also said UTP’s class size language “appears to represent internal inconsistency, as it allows the District to exceed proposed caps if the teacher is provided additional compensation per student over the cap.” The district said such language “appears to shift concern away from overcrowding and the student experience toward one regarding compensation.”

Gardner, in an interview Tuesday, said the provision is meant to function as a “soft cap.”

“The option that we’re providing the mechanism for essentially a soft cap allows the district to have flexibility while discouraging them going over that cap,” Gardner said. “We of course would rather that the class sizes just be a good experience for the students and the teachers, but we wanted to make sure that we provided some flexibility and they’re turning around and throwing that flexibility back in our face, which is not really appropriate.”

Asked how UTP’s proposal addresses the district’s concern about moving students between classrooms, Gardner said: “We provide the flexibility of allowing one or two additional students to be there as long as that teacher is compensated. The goal of the extra of the stipend that we’re suggesting is to discourage the district from adding extra teachers, but also make sure they still have that opportunity.”

Supplemental Pay and Special Education

On supplemental pay, UTP’s update said the district has acknowledged that a $66-per-hour pay rate — not a $55-per-hour rate — applies to teachers working in the LEARNS (ELOP) program delivering instruction after school. UTP said the $55 rate “was implemented when they bypassed the negotiation process.” UTP said the district “is refusing to provide retroactive pay to affected teachers” and is attempting to tie the compensation to closure of the 2025-2026 bargaining cycle. The district’s April 17 update did not address supplemental pay.

UTP also said the Special Education Memorandum of Understanding will expire in June without an agreement and said that “securing a new agreement is critical to maintaining even the limited safeguards in place this year.” UTP said that if no agreement is reached, “those protections will expire, potentially leaving teachers and students with fewer supports next year.”

UTP’s Position on District Spending

Gardner, in the interview, said UTP believes PUSD has not adequately examined central office spending before making classroom-level cuts. He said there are at least 95 administrator positions at central office “that are going unexamined,” that UTP is confident “at least half of those could be cut,” and that PUSD currently has “three times as many administrators at central office as we have in our school sites.” Gardner said approximately $30 million — about 20% of the unrestricted budget, excluding fire-related expenses — is being spent on contracts that he said the district should scrutinize more carefully. Gardner also said his criticism was targeted at central office staff, not school-site principals and assistant principals, whose work he said supports students.

“The district has cut heavily from school sites and from the student experience at our school sites, including our teachers with the 135 layoffs,” Gardner said. “However, the central office has experienced little to no cuts.”

District’s Stated Position

The PUSD statement said both parties have begun discussing what comes next, as both “have confirmed that any further exchange of proposals on salary and class size will not result in changes to positions on these issues.”

“The District remains committed to engaging in good-faith negotiations that are fiscally responsible and centered on student stability and success,” the statement said. “All proposals must be carefully evaluated to ensure they are sustainable and do not create unintended consequences for students, staff, or the District’s long-term financial health.”

Bargaining Teams

PUSD’s bargaining team members listed in the district’s update are Dr. Sergio Canal, chief human resources officer; Dr. Helen Chan Hill, chief academic officer; Dr. Jen Alcazar, director of human resources; Lori Touloumian, principal of Thurgood Marshall; and Maricela Brambila, principal of Willard.

UTP’s team, as listed in the district’s update, is chaired by Bethel Lira of Thurgood Marshall and includes Gardner; Nate Banditelli of the California Teachers Association; teachers Stephanie Kaul of San Rafael, Maureen Noble of Jackson, Steven Cole of Blair IB, and Beverly Rodriguez of John Muir High School; special education teacher Michael To of Blair IB; and school nurse Lisa Collins of Pasadena High School.

What’s Next

UTP has called on members to attend the April 23 PUSD Board meeting in what the union described as a rally “to speak out against cuts and RIFs that threaten our schools and to support our bargaining goals.”

Asked about UTP’s strategy heading into the May 22 session, Gardner said, “We believe that there is still room for us to continue to discuss it, but we believe the community needs to know that the district is operating receivingly in a vacuum.”

The parties return to the bargaining table May 22.

Mary W. Jackson STEAM Multilingual Magnet Elementary [photo credit: PUSD]

Board President Tina Fredericks will deliver her first State of Schools address Wednesday at a fire-impacted Altadena campus as the district weighs possible closures and deep budget cuts

Board President Tina Fredericks will deliver Pasadena Unified’s State of Schools address in Altadena tonight.

The selection of Altadena as the setting reflects the extent to which the Eaton Fire has reshaped the District’s landscape. The January 2025 fire damaged or destroyed five public or charter school campuses in the District’s service area, and displaced families connected to more than 1,100 students in the District.

In the months that followed, enrollment declined further as families relocated, with approximately 500 students leaving the District following the fire. The losses compounded a longer-term trend: enrollment in Pasadena Unified, which serves Pasadena, Altadena and Sierra Madre, has fallen to fewer than 14,000 students, a decline of about 23 percent over the past decade.

Because California’s school funding model is tied to average daily attendance, the decline in enrollment has translated directly into financial strain. District officials have said the result is a structural deficit estimated between $30 million and $35 million for the coming fiscal year, as the exhaustion of pandemic-era federal funds has further narrowed the District’s fiscal maneuverability.

In response, the school Board in November approved $24.5 million in budget reductions for the 2026–27 fiscal year, followed on Feb. 26 by layoff resolutions affecting more than 160 certificated positions, along with classified positions.

At the same time, the District has begun a planning process to determine whether to close or consolidate some of its campuses. Of the District’s 23 schools, 14 are under review by the Superintendent’s School Consolidation Advisory Committee, which is expected to present its final recommendations to the Board on May 11.

The prospect of school closures has prompted concern among families and community members.

The District now faces a difficult balance: reducing its footprint to align with declining enrollment while trying to retain families and stabilize its student population.

The State of Schools address is part of an annual tradition, with last year’s presentation delivered April 15 by then-President Jennifer Hall Lee at Pasadena High School’s library. This year’s event is free and open to the public.

A regular Board meeting is scheduled for April 23. A separate in-person town hall on school consolidation is scheduled for April 28 at Pasadena High School from 6:30 p.m. to 8:30 p.m.

The annual address is scheduled for 6 p.m. Wednesday at 593 W. Woodbury Road.