The Santa Barbara Unified School District Board of Education voted on February 24, 2026, to issue preliminary reduction-in-force (RIF) notices as officials work to address a structural deficit driven by a more than 9% decline in student enrollment since the 2019-20 school year.
In total, 66 positions are included in the preliminary reduction-in-force actions approved by the board.
The resolutions passed in 4-1 votes, with board member Celeste Kafri dissenting on both the classified and certificated staff reductions.
Classified and Certificated Positions Affected
Under the classified staff reductions, approximately 40 support staff positions, including paraeducators and other campus-based roles, received preliminary notices.
Officials said that while 13 classified positions are slated for reduction, only five to seven employees may ultimately receive final layoff notices. Additionally, 23 classified employees accepted a retirement incentive, creating vacancies that could offset further cuts.
For certificated staff, public commenters cited estimates that 26 teaching and counseling positions could be affected. District officials said current projections indicate a need for 13 fewer full-time certificated teachers.
The plan also includes closing approximately 10 elementary classrooms and about 60 high school course sections.
Enrollment Declines
Officials said the reductions are necessary as enrollment declined from 13,228 students in 2019-20 to 11,873 this year. Despite the drop, the district employs 1,599 active staff members, which is a figure higher than pre-pandemic levels.
To maintain the required 5% reserve, officials project at least $2 million in reductions next year and $4 million the following year. Without those adjustments, reserves could decline from about 8.5% to near the 5% threshold over two years.
Officials noted that attrition among teachers and counselors is typically higher than projected reductions, meaning resignations and retirements could eliminate the need for final teacher layoffs.
Financial data presented at the meeting showed that general administration spending increased from $10.8 million to $16.2 million over several years, even though enrollment declined by nearly 10%.
Moreover, a preliminary review of overhead costs identified potential annual savings ranging from $2.3 million to $4.3 million.
At the same time, the district plans to invest approximately $1.7 million to add a seventh-period day at junior high schools to expand elective access, mostly for students in Special Education programs and Emergent Multilingual Learners.
Next Steps Before Final Decisions in May
Preliminary notices must be issued by March 15 under state law, with final layoff decisions due by May 15.
During that period, the district will review seniority lists and bumping rights, track attrition and retirements, evaluate credential areas, consider site council funding decisions, place qualified employees into vacant roles, and account for restructuring savings.
Notices could be rescinded before May 15 if conditions improve.
Also Read
- A Fiery Return From the Moon Is Turning the World’s Attention to California
- 40-Acre Richards Ranch Annexation Stalled After Santa Barbara County Supervisors Reject Tax Proposal
- Karpeles Manuscript Library Museum Permanently Closes Its Santa Barbara Location
- 7 Most Influential Governors in California History
- Santa Barbara Planning Commission Narrowly Backs Oil Drilling Ban After Heated Debate
yeah, cut excess employees. More should go but its a start
Translation: We don’t want an educated populace, since they wouldn’t vote for republithugs.
But maybe not paraeducators and teachers. That seems like a really bad idea. But staff making $200k+ a year, sure.
Sending out RIFF notices and putting it on the consent agenda without any discussion basically leaves the community and students with no meaningful input. Cuts need to be made at the top not the bottom. One year and half ago teachers negotiated a 10% raise and a 5% raise the following year. The Superintendent & cabinet quietly got the same 15% raise despite many making well over a quarter of a million annually with perks. Ventura Unified has less admin and more students so it does seem SBUSD is quite top heavy. What is sad about this is that students needs are at the bottom of the pecking order despite painfully low scores for over 60%.. Tuesday’s student outcome report indicated only 5% of the 9-12 th graders are proficient in math. That is not a typo.. 5%. This should be the headline and not normalized. Also on Tuesday the board except for Trustee Kafri voted to wait 2 years before getting 7th period to all junior highs which allows them to take electives. Tuesday was another sad day for student needs which are rarely the priority.
Lots of parents are fed up with public schools’ watered down curricula and poor results in teaching the basics of reading, writing, math, history, etc. Home schooling and private schools will continue to grow as long as the public schools in SB and CA in general continue to be mediocre (bottom third nationally), at best.
Home schooling is largely the domain of people who have invisible friends, and outputs people with no critical thinking skills.
Do you have statistics that show that? I know a number of people who have homeschooled their children. Sure, there’s the occasional whack-a-doodle, or religious nut. However, a number of them home schooled because (1) the local schools could not keep their children engaged, (2) local schools were not challenging (3) schools were dangerous (4) children were neuro-divergent (5) children had high levels of anxiety, or had to put up with bullying at school.
I’m intensely annoyed that the district keeps pushing off the 7 period day for junior high, and removed a bunch of electives from high school for 11th and 12th grade. They cut their schedules from 8 classes to 6. What the what?? Sure, I can get my kid to summer classes at CC to make up for it, but not all families can do that.
Also: I don’t know when you last stepped into a classroom, but as a parent of children in SBUSD (for 15 years and counting), I can say emphatically that the curricula is not watered down. Except maybe sixth grade for one of my kids, when the teachers were just phoning it in. (They were about to go on strike.)