Dishonest, immoral, discriminatory and dangerous. For thousands impacted by potential San Jose Unified elementary school closures, these adjectives have been throughlines for the entire operation. District Superintendent Nancy Albarrán and CBO Seth Reddy have facilitated a faux process heavy on smoke screens and gaslighting to manufacture an issue. Showing up in droves, flooding inboxes, researching and fact checking, San Jose communities have fought back to expose the deception.
District leadership claims enrollment issues, knowing it could resonate based on historical funding. However, SJUSD has been a basic aid district for five years, meaning funded publicly through property taxes, not receiving money per day of attendance. Yet district leadership continues this facade, insisting enrollment numbers require closures. It was not until a public Board “study session” this past Saturday [March 21], when shuttering architect Reddy inadvertently admitted what parents knew, stating “When we transitioned to a basic aid district, you really don’t have an incentive to seek students from outside your boundary areas because every additional student does not come with additional funding.” Their premise is schools must close because enrollment is down, yet they actively avoid increasing enrollment.
For months, community members have spoken in public comment sessions about costs of the projected closures. Some have presented alternate options that would improve outcomes based on the district’s own metrics, while reducing closures. The district has adopted no outside feedback. In a particularly appalling moment during Saturday’s session, Assistant Superintendent Jodi Lax said she was unaware of any impact of this process on children. This despite parents repeatedly detailing the harm it has had, including multiple parents speaking about children with autism having speech regression, leaving them non-verbal at present. These comments were given in front of Ms. Lax, a committee member. A sickening moment highlighting district leadership shrugging off these devastating realities to the point of forgetting they even heard them.
Forty years after a landmark court case against SJUSD forced desegregation, each of the projected closures is a Title 1 school, meaning schools serving students from high poverty areas. These schools are supposed to be better resourced to ensure students receive a high-quality education in a district with historical discriminatory practices. Instead, the district seeks to close them. And by claiming these closures are due to “enrollment” issues, the district dodges equity audits mandated upon them if the projected closures were for financial reasons.
The proposed school closures would drastically increase distances from home to school. Many would need to walk kindergarteners a mile and a half. Busing would only be provided for one year. And children that walk or bike would be forced to cross Almaden Expressway, navigate poorly maintained sidewalks, or even cross a 101 onramp during rush hour. Parents have brought up these safety concerns repeatedly. Saturday, Albarrán and Reddy made clear they had not even explored these routes, revolting indifference to the safety of our children.
Each of the above was enough to stop this. But Albarrán (focal point of a 2023-2024 Grand Jury report highlighting broken leadership) is hellbent on maximizing closures, while taking $90k in raises since the pandemic.
Most San Jose Unified parents now work a second full-time job, policing this embarrassment. In its final days, it’s down to a vote from a Board with their own unacceptable judgment (President Jose Magaña has major ties to charter schools, Vice President Brian Wheatley sang a song glorifying guns at elementary schools). Yes votes end the careers of Magaña and Wheatley come November, and prompt recall processes for the remaining trustees. The question is whether these elected leaders have the courage to protect our children.
