MARIE A. NAKAMURA
Attorney at Law
mnakamura@DWKesq.com

Sacramento

August 18, 2020
VIA EMAIL1
Stockton Education Equity Coalition
c/o Linnea Nelson
Education Equity Staff Attorney
ACLU Foundation of Northern California
Email: lnelson@aclunc.org
Re:

Stockton Unified School District Report of Decision
UCP Complaint Re: District 2019-2020 Local Control and Accountability Plan
and Misallocated Supplemental and Concentration Funds Dated June 12, 2020
Complaint Number 19-135

Dear Ms. Nelson:
This letter constitutes the report of decision of the Stockton Unified School District
(“District”) in response to the Uniform Complaint Procedure (“UCP”) Complaint
number 19-135 submitted on or around June 12, 2020, on behalf of the Stockton
Educational Equity Coalition (collectively, “Complainants”) regarding allegations of
misallocated supplemental and concentration funds. The undersigned in consultation
with Executive Director Constituent Services Dee Alimbini reviewed the complaint
and related evidence. A summary of the complaint, all pertinent related facts and
findings are set forth below.
I.

SYNOPSIS JUNE 12, 2020 UNIFORM COMPLAINT

On June 12, 2020, the District received the above-referenced uniform complaint filed
by the Stockton Educational Equity Coalition.2 Therein Complainants allege the
District violated the California Education Code and Code of Regulations (5 CCR §
15496(b)(1)(B)) by not specifically articulating how approximately $6.7 million in
supplemental and concentration grant funding from 2018-2019 was allocated in the
2019-2020 Local Control Accountability Plan (“LCAP”). As authority for its complaint,
The District provides this Report of Decision electronically at this time. If
Complainants would like a mailed hard-copy of this document, please email
ccoates@dwkesq.com or mnakamura@dwkesq.com, and a hard copy will be printed
and mailed.
2
The Coalition is comprised of the following four entities: American Civil Liberties
Union Foundation Northern California; Fathers and Families of San Joaquin; California
Rural Legal Assistance and the Gathering for Justice.
1

DWK DMS 3592554v1

 Stockton Education Equity Coalition
Education Equity Staff Attorney
August 18, 2020
Page 2
Complainant refers to a January 2019 PowerPoint presentation and conversations between
then Superintendent John Deasy and Jasmine Dellafosse, a SEEC member, as well as a
telephone conversation between a legal representative of the District and Complainants.
The uniform complaint addresses approximately three years of communications between
members of SEEC and the District over various LCAP expenditures. For example,
Complainants refer to a written agreement between the parties related to the 2016-2017 and
2018-2019 LCAPS. The complaint provides, “Under the terms of the Settlement Agreement,
among other things, the District agreed to allocate $6,323,916 in ‘designated reserve of
unspent S&C funding from 2016-2017 that will be principally expended for services directed
towards unduplicated pupils consistent with the 2018-2019 LCAP.’” (See, Exhibit 2 to June 12,
2020 complaint.)
The uniform complaint further explains that in the 2018-2019 school year, the ACLU raised
concerns about the use of supplemental and concentration grant funds for allegedly base
actions or services. In response to those concerns, the District moved approximately $6.7
million in spending from supplemental and concentration funding to base grant funding for the
2018-2019 school year. Complainants assert that the $6.7 million in supplemental and
concentration funding from 2018-2019 should have been specifically identified and carried over
to specific actions to increase or improve services for legally designated high-need students.
Complainants provide that in “January 2019, Mr. Bray (former District lawyer) told Ms. Nelson
(member of SEEC and ACLU lawyer) during a telephone conversation that the District would
roll the $6,717,886 in unspent S&C funds from the 2018-19 LCAP year into the 2019-20 LCAP,
to be spent during the 2019-20 year.” Complainants explain that SEEC member Jasmine
Dellafosse spoke with former superintendent John Deasy in December 2019 and was told the
$6.7 million was spent on “general operations,” and at a later date he explained the money
was spent on “professional development.”
The uniform complaint refers to the California Code of Regulations which provides in pertinent
part:
(b) This subdivision identifies the conditions under which an LEA may use funds
apportioned on the basis of the number and concentration of unduplicated pupils for
districtwide, schoolwide, countywide, or charterwide purposes: Pursuant to Education
Code section 42238.07(a)(2), an LEA may demonstrate it has increased or improved
services for unduplicated pupils under subdivision (a) of this section by using funds to
upgrade the entire educational program of a school site, a school district, a charter
school, or a county office of education as follows:
(1) A school district that has an enrollment of unduplicated pupils of 55
percent or more of the district's total enrollment in the fiscal year for which an
LCAP is adopted or in the prior year may expend supplemental and
concentration grant funds on a districtwide basis. A school district expending
funds on a districtwide basis shall do all of the following:
...
(B) Describe in the LCAP how such services are principally directed towards,
and are effective in, meeting the district's goals for its unduplicated pupils in

DWK DMS 3592554v1

 Stockton Education Equity Coalition
Education Equity Staff Attorney
August 18, 2020
Page 3
the state and any local priority areas. (5 CCR § 15496(b)(1)(B).) (Bold added
for emphasis.)
...
Complainants assert that the District failed to articulate how the unspent $6.7 million of
supplemental and concentration funds from 2018-2019 were specifically designated to increase
and improve services in 2019-2020, and thus the District failed to meet the requirements of
the above referenced regulation.
In the June 12, 2020 uniform complaint, Complainants strongly recommend the District use
the $6.7 million in supplemental and concentration funds from the 2018-2019 school year to
“expand and improve the District’s restorative justice program by, among other things, hiring
restorative justice coordinators, hiring community outreach and violence interrupter workers,
implementing a diversion programs (sic), and expanding ethnic studies.”
II.

SUMMARY OF INTERVIEWS, POLICIES & LAW
A.

Lists of Participants and Documentary Evidence

During the course of this investigation the undersigned met via video or telephone with the
following individuals:








Representatives of SEEC
Interim Chief Business Official Susanne Montoya
Director Connor Sloan
SEEC member Jasmine Dellafosse
Former Superintendent John Deasy
Trustee Lange Luntao
Attorney Keith Bray

The investigation also included a review of documentary evidence and correspondence. These
documents included:













The June 12, 2020 complaint and attachments (Not attached as an Exhibit.)
January 8, 2019 LCAP presentation audio file (Exhibit A.)
January 8, 2019 Presentation to the Board (Exhibit B.)
2019-2020 LCAP Budget Overview for Parents
(https://go.boarddocs.com/ca/susd/Board.nsf/files/BDG38J054B39/$file/SUSD%20201
9-2020%20LCAP%20and%20Annual%20Update%20(English).pdf.) (Not attached – link
is referenced as Exhibit C.)
June 2019, 2019-2020 LCAP Update and Presentation to the Board (Exhibit D.)
Email provided by Ms. Dellafosse (Exhibit E.)
August 5, 2020 email to Complainant (Exhibit F.)
District Board Policy/Administrative Regulation 1312.3 – Uniform Complaint Process;
(Exhibit G.)
District Board Policy/Administrative Regulation 0460 – Local Control and Accountability
Plan (Exhibit H.)
Assembly Bill 1835 (Weber/Quirk-Silva, Exhibit I.)
Various California Education Code and Code of Regulations (Not attached as an Exhibit.)

DWK DMS 3592554v1

 Stockton Education Equity Coalition
Education Equity Staff Attorney
August 18, 2020
Page 4

B.

Summary of Participant Statements

Several individuals contributed to this investigation. There are few disputed facts. All of the
participants were equally credible and forthcoming.
1.

Representatives of Stockton Educational Equity Coalition (SEEC)

On July 14, 2020, the undersigned, representatives of the SEEC, and representative of the
District, met via video conference to clarify the scope of the complaint and discuss the
complaint. Therein Complainants expressed their ongoing historical concerns regarding the
District’s allocation of supplemental and concentration funds. With regard to the current
uniform complaint, Complainants reiterated the assertion that the $6.7 million in supplemental
and concentration funding from 2018-2019 should have been specifically identified and carried
over to specific actions or services to increase or improve services for legally designated highneed students in the 2019-2020 LCAP. Complainants requested additional information
regarding how the $6.7 million in 2018-2019 supplemental and concentration grant funding
was spent in 2019-2020.
On August 5, 2020 the undersigned provided Complainants two documents via email. The first
was a synopsis of the 2018-2019 Local Control Accountability Plan actions/services that were
shifted from supplemental and concentration funds to the local control funding formula base
funds in response to concerns brought by the ACLU in November of 2018. The second
document represented the new and/or increased LCAP actions or services funded in the 20192020 LCAP. The email further explained there was is no specific accounting of how the
$6.7million 2018-2019 was spent in the 2019-2020 school year, but the District budgeted
close to $3 million more than received in supplemental/concentration grant funding in the
2019-2020 school year. (Exhibit F.)
2.

Director LCAP & Charter Oversight Connor Sloan

Connor Sloan is the Director of the LCAP and Charter Oversight for the District. He has held
this position since September 2018. On June 25, July 14 and July 30, 2020, Dr. Sloan provided
insight into the District’s 2018-2019 and 2019-2020 LCAP process. He explained that in
response to the ACLU’s concerns in the Fall of 2018, he and former superintendent John Deasy
worked to reallocate approximately $6.7 million in actions or services from supplemental and
concentration grant funds to base funding in late 2018. He reported the shift from
supplemental and concentration to base funding to the San Joaquin County Office of Education
and informed the requisite parent groups and the Board of the modification to the 2018-2019
LCAP spending plan. Because there were no changes in the LCAP services rendered, a formal
amendment to the 2018-2019 LCAP was unnecessary. On January 8, 2019, Dr. Sloan shared a
PowerPoint presentation with the Board of Education demonstrating the shift in funding from
supplemental and concentration to base funding for $6.7 million of actions/services. (Exhibit
B.) During that meeting Dr. Sloan explained which actions from the 2018-2019 LCAP were
shifted. (Exhibit A.)
For the 2019-2020 LCAP, Dr. Sloan and the District held approximately fifty-four (54)
presentations and meetings to gather input from various constituent groups. The actions or
services that were shifted from supplemental and concentration to the base in 2018-2019

DWK DMS 3592554v1

 Stockton Education Equity Coalition
Education Equity Staff Attorney
August 18, 2020
Page 5
remained funded by the base in the 2019-2020 LCAP. On June 25, 2019, the Board of
Education approved the 2019-2020 LCAP. (Exhibit D.)
3.

Interim Chief Business Official Susanne Montoya

Susanne Montoya is currently the District’s Interim Chief Business Official. During the creation
of both the 2018-2019 and 2019-2020 LCAPs, Ms. Montoya was the Executive Director of
Business Services for the District. She has worked in the District’s Business Services
Department since October 1996 and has been primarily responsible for constructing the
District’s budget for years. On July 30, 2020, Ms. Montoya explained that the $6.7 million in
supplemental and concentration funds from 2018-2019 that was shifted to the base was not
required to be accounted for as supplemental and concentration funds when carried over to the
2019-2020 school year. She explained there was no agreement to carry over the $6.7 million
in supplemental and concentration funds into 2019-2020. Ms. Montoya recalled that in a
previous year the District entered a written agreement to allocate specific unspent
supplemental and concentration funds into a subsequent year.
Ms. Montoya explained, in the absence of a written agreement, the $6.7 million was moved to
the District’s undesignated ending fund balance at the end of 2018-2019. Ms. Montoya further
explained that in the 2019-2020 budget $82,931,117 of the $375,587,298 in Local Control
Funding Formula (LCFF) funding, was generated based on the enrollment of high needs
students (foster youth, English learner, and low-income students). (Exhibit C, Page 1/394.)
Although $82,931,117 was generated by the enrollment of high needs students, the District
allocated $85,828,991 (an extra amount of $2,897,874, close to an additional $3 million) to
actions and service principally directed towards meeting the District’s goals for unduplicated
students. (Exhibit C.)
4.

Stockton Educational Equity Coalition Member Jasmine Dellafosse

Jasmine Dellafosse is a member of the SEEC, and a Senior Regional Organizer for The
Gathering for Justice. In the June 12, 2020 uniform complaint, Complainants explain as
follows:
When SEEC member Jasmine Dellafosse asked then-Superintendent Deasy in
December 2019 how this $6.7 million in S&C funder was spent, Superintendent
Deasy told her that the money was earmarked for “general operations.” At a
later date, he told Ms. Dellafosse that the money was spent on “professional
development.”
Ms. Dellafosse participated in the aforementioned meeting with the District and SEEC on July
14, 2020, and spoke with the undersigned via telephone on July 21, 2020. In addition to the
general description of her conversations with Dr. Deasy contained in the June 12 uniform
complaint, Ms. Dellafosse provided additional detail. Ms. Dellafosse explained that she reached
out to former superintendent Deasy and Trustee Luntao on at least two occasions during the
2019-2020 school year to ascertain what happened with the $6.7 million in supplemental and
concentration funds not spent in 2018-2019. On February 3, 2020, Ms. Dellafosse emailed
Dr. Deasy and Trustee Luntao asking to meet to discuss “where those funds are now and
wondering if there can be a conversation about how we can ensure those dollars don’t go
unaccounted for.” (Exhibit E.) In response to this request to meet, Ms. Dellafosse met with
Dr. Deasy on or about February 12, 2020, and Dr. Deasy explained that the $6.7 million was

DWK DMS 3592554v1

 Stockton Education Equity Coalition
Education Equity Staff Attorney
August 18, 2020
Page 6
spent on professional development. (He did not articulate whether he meant it was spent in
2018-2019 or 2019-2020.) At a previous meeting Dr. Deasy told Ms. Dellafosse that the
money had been rolled over to general operating funds. Ms. Dellafosse did not speak directly
to Trustee Luntao about this issue.
5.

FORMER SUPERINTENDENT JOHN DEASY

John Deasy was the superintendent of the District from May 2018 to June 2020. On August 10,
2020, Dr. Deasy recalled the shift of expenditures in the 2018-2019 school year from
supplemental and concentration grant funds to base funding. Dr. Deasy explained that
Dr. Sloan worked with the San Joaquin County Office of Education to ensure the shift of
expenditures in the 2018-2019 school year was done according to state law. He expressed
faith in Dr. Sloan’s management of the LCAP process. Dr. Deasy recalls speaking with Ms.
Dellafosse in the 2019-2020 school year. However, he does not recall telling her that the $6.7
million was spent on professional development or general operating funds.
6.

BOARD OF EDUCATION TRUSTEE LANGE LUNTAO

Lange Luntao is an elected Trustee on the District’s Board of Education. Trustee Luntao was
elected in November 2016. On August 10, 2020, Trustee Luntao recalled Ms. Dellafosse
requesting information in 2019-2020 about the shift of expenditures in the 2018-2019 school
year. Pursuant to Board protocols, Trustee Luntao referred Ms. Dellafosse to Dr. Deasy and
Dr. Sloan.
7.

FORMER ATTORNEY FOR DISTRICT KEITH BRAY

Keith Bray is currently the Chief of Staff/General Counsel for the California School Boards
Association. He previously worked for the law firm of Dannis Woliver Kelley. On August 15,
2020, Mr. Bray recalled working with the District and ACLU attorney Linnea Nelson to address
concerns regarding the 2018-2019 LCAP. He recalls working on a resolution that resulted in the
shifting of the funding of services from supplemental and concentration funds to base funds.
Mr. Bray explained that he spoke with Ms. Nelson in late 2018 or early 2019 about the
supplemental and concentration funds being carried over into 2019-2020, but does not recall
any specific promise as to how the $6.7 million would be spent in the 2019-2020 LCAP.
Mr. Bray does recall that in a previous year, the District and the ACLU reached a specific
written agreement to allocate specific unspent supplemental and concentration funds into a
subsequent year.
C.

January 8, 2019 Open Session Board Meeting Item 6.1

On January 8, 2019, the Board of Education held a Board meeting. Item 6.1 of that meeting
was a presentation by Dr. Sloan with the assistance of then superintendent Dr. Deasy
regarding the shift in funding from supplemental and concentration to base funding for $6.7
million of actions/services. Neither Dr. Sloan nor Dr. Deasy stated the $6.7 million in unspent
supplemental and concentration funds would be specifically designated as such in the
2019-2020 LCAP. Instead Dr. Deasy explained the Board would have the opportunity to “have
a little extra” for “one time pieces” moving forward. (Exhibits A and B.)

DWK DMS 3592554v1

 Stockton Education Equity Coalition
Education Equity Staff Attorney
August 18, 2020
Page 7

D.

Applicable Board Policies and Administrative Regulations

The District’s Board of Education is the governing body for the Stockton Unified School District.
The Board adopts written policies during open session meetings to effectuate its legal
mandates and policy strategies.
1.

Board Policy and Administrative Regulation – 0460

Board Policy and Administrative Regulation 0460 – Local Control and Accountability Plan,
addresses the requisite legal process contained in Education Code sections 5209.5 et seq.
(Exhibit G.) Board Policy 0460 specifically requires the following:
The Board shall adopt a districtwide local control and accountability plan (LCAP),
based on the template adopted by the State Board of Education, that addresses
the state priorities in Education Code 52060 and any local priorities adopted by
the Board. The LCAP shall be updated on or before July 1 of each year and, like
the district budget, shall cover the next fiscal year and subsequent two fiscal
years. (Education code 52060, 52064; 5 CCR 15494-15497.) (Please note the
citations that appear in the District’s Board Policies and Administrative
Regulations do not follow any accepted legal citation style.)
Board Policy 0460 sets the annual process for LCAP development including, but not limited to,
consultation with school staff, bargaining units, parents and students, as well as review and
comment by specific parent advisory groups. (Ed. Code, §§ 52060-52063; 5 CCR 15495.) The
Board must adopt the LCAP at the same public meeting in which they adopt the District’s
budget. Board Policy 0460 further provides that “any complaint that the district has not
complied with legal requirements pertaining to the LCAP may be filed pursuant to AR 1312.3 –
Uniform Complaint Procedures. (Ed. Code, § 52075.)”
Administrative Regulation 0460 addresses the specific issue raised by Complainants. It
provides:
The LCAP shall demonstrate how the district will increase or improve services for
unduplicated students at least in proportion to the increase in funds appropriated
on the basis of the number and concentration of unduplicated students. (5 CCR
15494-15496.)
When the district expends supplemental and/or concentration grant funds on a
districtwide or schoolwide bases during the year for which the LCAP is adopted,
the district’s LCAP shall:
...
2. Describe how services are principally directed towards, and are effective in,
meeting the district’s goals for unduplicated students in the state priority areas
and any local priority areas.

DWK DMS 3592554v1

 Stockton Education Equity Coalition
Education Equity Staff Attorney
August 18, 2020
Page 8

2.

Board Policy and Administrative Regulation 1312.3

Board Policy and Administrative Regulation 1312.3 – Uniform Complaint Procedures sets forth
the complaint/investigation process to be used by the District to review allegations of a legal
non-compliance with several specific state and federal laws. (Exhibit H.) Board Policy 1312.3
specifically provides:
Any complaint alleging district noncompliance with applicable requirements of
the Education Code 52060-52077 related to the implementation of the local
control and accountability plan, including the development of the local control
funding formula budget overview for parents/guardians. (Education Code section
52075.)
In addition, Administrative Regulation 1312.3 provides any complaint filed related to the
District’s LCAP shall be filed no later than one year from the date the alleged violation
occurred. (Ed. Code, § 52075; 5 CCR 4630.) This investigation was conducted pursuant to
Administrative Regulation 1312.3 – Uniform Complaint Procedures, which sets forth the
procedure for filing, investigation, and resolving complaints alleging violations of state and
federal law, including but not limited to complaints involving alleged violations of the Education
Code and Code of California Regulations related to the annual Local Control Accountability Plan.
E.

CURRENT AND POTENTIAL APPLICABLE LAW

California’s system of public schools is funded in part pursuant to the Local Control Funding
Formula (LCFF) implemented in the 2014-2015 school year. The above cited uniform complaint
alleges a misallocation of funds under the formula in the 2019-2020 school year.
1.

California Education Code

Several sections of the California Education Code are of import here.
First, Education Code section 42238.07 directs the State Board of Education to adopt
regulations regarding the expenditures of funds under the LCFF. It also requires school districts
to increase and improve services for unduplicated pupils and provides in pertinent part:
(a) On or before January 31, 2014, the state board shall adopt regulations that
govern the expenditure of funds apportioned on the basis of the number and
concentration of unduplicated pupils pursuant to Sections 2574, 2575, 42238.02,
and 42238.03. The regulations shall include, but are not limited to, provisions
that do all of the following:
(1) Require a school district, county office of education, or charter school to
increase or improve services for unduplicated pupils in proportion to the increase
in funds apportioned on the basis of the number and concentration of
unduplicated pupils in the school district, county office of education, or charter
school.
Second, Education Code section 52060 addresses timing content for the yearly Local Control
Accountability Plan, and sets forth the State’s priorities.

DWK DMS 3592554v1

 Stockton Education Equity Coalition
Education Equity Staff Attorney
August 18, 2020
Page 9
Third, Education Code section 52062 sets forth the conditions precedent to the consideration of
a Local Control Accountability Plan, as well as actions required by district superintendents and
board. Education Code section 52062 provides in full:
(a) Before the governing board of a school district considers the adoption of a
local control and accountability plan or an annual update to the local control and
accountability plan, all of the following shall occur:
(1) The superintendent of the school district shall present the local control and
accountability plan or annual update to the local control and accountability plan
to the parent advisory committee established pursuant to Section 52063 for
review and comment. The superintendent of the school district shall respond, in
writing, to comments received from the parent advisory committee.
(2) The superintendent of the school district shall present the local control and
accountability plan or annual update to the local control and accountability plan
to the English learner parent advisory committee established pursuant to Section
52063, if applicable, for review and comment. The superintendent of the school
district shall respond, in writing, to comments received from the English learner
parent advisory committee.
(3) The superintendent of the school district shall notify members of the public
of the opportunity to submit written comments regarding the specific actions and
expenditures proposed to be included in the local control and accountability plan
or annual update to the local control and accountability plan, using the most
efficient method of notification possible. This paragraph shall not require a
school district to produce printed notices or to send notices by mail. The
superintendent of the school district shall ensure that all written notifications
related to the local control and accountability plan or annual update to the local
control and accountability plan are provided consistent with Section 48985.
(4) The superintendent of the school district shall review school plans submitted
pursuant to Section 64001 for schools within the school district and ensure that
the specific actions included in the local control and accountability plan or annual
update to the local control and accountability plan are consistent with strategies
included in the school plans submitted pursuant to Section 64001.
(5) The superintendent of the school district shall consult with its special
education local plan area administrator or administrators to determine that
specific actions for individuals with exceptional needs are included in the local
control and accountability plan or annual update to the local control and
accountability plan, and are consistent with strategies included in the annual
assurances support plan for the education of individuals with exceptional needs.
(b) (1) A governing board of a school district shall hold at least one public
hearing to solicit the recommendations and comments of members of the public
regarding the specific actions and expenditures proposed to be included in the
local control and accountability plan or annual update to the local control and
accountability plan. The agenda for the public hearing shall be posted at least

DWK DMS 3592554v1

 Stockton Education Equity Coalition
Education Equity Staff Attorney
August 18, 2020
Page 10
72 hours before the public hearing and shall include the location where the local
control and accountability plan or annual update to the local control and
accountability plan will be available for public inspection. The public hearing shall
be held at the same meeting as the public hearing required by paragraph (1) of
subdivision (a) of Section 42127.
(2) A governing board of a school district shall adopt a local control and
accountability plan or annual update to the local control and accountability plan
in a public meeting. This meeting shall be held after, but not on the same day
as, the public hearing held pursuant to paragraph (1). This meeting shall be the
same meeting as that during which the governing board of the school district
adopts a budget pursuant to paragraph (2) of subdivision (a) of Section 42127.
(c) A governing board of a school district may adopt revisions to a local control
and accountability plan during the period the local control and accountability
plan is in effect. A governing board of a school district may only adopt a revision
to a local control and accountability plan if it follows the process to adopt a local
control and accountability plan pursuant to this section and the revisions are
adopted in a public meeting.
2.

California Code of Regulations

Pursuant to Education Code section 42238.07(a)(1) the State Board of Education adopted
regulations to effectuate the LCFF related Education Code sections. Complainants specifically
refer to California Code of Regulations Title 5, section 15496 in support of the uniform
complaint which provides in pertinent part:
(a) An LEA shall provide evidence in its LCAP to demonstrate how funding
apportioned on the basis of the number and concentration of unduplicated
pupils, pursuant to Education Code sections 2574, 2575, 42238.02, and
42238.03 is used to support such pupils. This funding shall be used to increase
or improve services for unduplicated pupils as compared to the services provided
to all pupils in proportion to the increase in funds apportioned on the basis of the
number and concentration of unduplicated pupils as required by Education Code
section 42238.07(a)(1). An LEA shall include in its LCAP an explanation of how
expenditures of such funding meet the LEA's goals for its unduplicated pupils in
the state priority areas. An LEA shall determine the percentage by which
services for unduplicated pupils must be increased or improved above services
provided to all pupils in the fiscal year as follows:
...
(b) This subdivision identifies the conditions under which an LEA may use funds
apportioned on the basis of the number and concentration of unduplicated pupils
for districtwide, schoolwide, countywide, or charterwide purposes: Pursuant to
Education Code section 42238.07(a)(2), an LEA may demonstrate it has
increased or improved services for unduplicated pupils under subdivision (a) of
this section by using funds to upgrade the entire educational program of a school
site, a school district, a charter school, or a county office of education as follows:

DWK DMS 3592554v1

 Stockton Education Equity Coalition
Education Equity Staff Attorney
August 18, 2020
Page 11
(1) A school district that has an enrollment of unduplicated pupils of 55 percent
or more of the district's total enrollment in the fiscal year for which an LCAP is
adopted or in the prior year may expend supplemental and concentration grant
funds on a districtwide basis. A school district expending funds on a districtwide
basis shall do all of the following:
(A) Identify in the LCAP those services that are being funded and provided on a
districtwide basis.
(B) Describe in the LCAP how such services are principally directed
towards, and are effective in, meeting the district's goals for its
unduplicated pupils in the state and any local priority areas. (Bold added
for emphasis.)
...
3.

Assembly Bill 1835

In January 2019 an Assembly Bill 1835 was introduced to add a new section (42238.09) to the
Education Code. (Exhibit I.) According to the Legislative Counsel’s Digest:
This bill would require each school district, county office of education, and
charter school to identify unspent supplemental and concentration grant funds
by annually reconciling and reporting to the department its estimated and actual
spending of those moneys. The bill would require unspent funds identified
pursuant to these provisions to continue to be required to be expended to
increase and improve services for unduplicated pupils, and would require each
local educational agency to report the amounts of unspent funds identified in its
local control and accountability plan. By imposing additional duties on local
educational agencies, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program.
The currently proposed Education Code section 42238.09 would contain the following
requirement:
(a) Each local educational agency shall identify unspent supplemental and
concentration grant funds by annually reconciling and reporting to the
department its estimated and actual spending of those moneys.
(b) Unspent funds identified pursuant to subdivision (a) shall continue to be
required to be expended to increase and improve services for unduplicated
pupils, and each local educational agency shall report the amounts of unspent
funds identified pursuant to subdivision (a) in its local control and accountability
plan.
(c) For purposes of this section, “local educational agency” means a school
district, county office of education, or charter school.

DWK DMS 3592554v1

 Stockton Education Equity Coalition
Education Equity Staff Attorney
August 18, 2020
Page 12

III.

DISPOSITION, AND RATIONALE FOR DISPOSITION

Below is the disposition, and rationale for disposition of this uniform complaint. In reaching the
finding on this allegation, consideration was given to the totality of the circumstances and the
information gained through witness.
Allegation: Complainants allege the Stockton Unified School District misallocated $6,717,886
in supplemental and concentration funds to general operations in the 2019-2020 school year.
In support of this allegation, Complainants reference Education Code section 42238.07 and
California Code of Regulations Title 5, section 15496.
Disposition: Complainants’ allegation is unfounded. There is no evidence that the District
unlawfully misallocated $6,717,886 in supplemental and concentration funds to general
operations in the 2019-2020 school year.
Rational for Disposition: There are few, if any, disputed facts in this case. Complainants,
Dr. Sloan, Ms. Montoya, Mr. Bray and Dr. Deasy all agree that during the 2018-2019 school
year the District agreed to shift the paying of $6.7 million for actions or services from
supplemental and concentration funds to base funds. Further, Complainants, Ms. Montoya and
Mr. Bray acknowledge that the District and Complainants did not enter into a written
agreement, as they had done previously, to allocate the $6.7 million of unspent supplemental
and concentration funds from 2018-2019 as supplemental and concentration funds in 20192020.
In support of the uniform complaint, Complainants refer to 5 CCR § 15496(b)(1) and its
requirement that supplemental and concentration funds be principally directed in meeting
goals for the students who generate those funds. The District’s witnesses did not dispute this
requirement. However, Complainants do not assert that the District failed to direct its 20192020 supplemental and concentration funds correctly. Instead, Complainants assert the $6.7
million in unspent supplemental and concentration funds from 2018-2019 maintain its
character as supplemental and concentration funds in 2019-2020. There is no current legal
requirement that unspent supplemental and concentration funds remain as such in the
subsequent school year.3 Assembly Bill 1835, if enacted as proposed, would require a different
legal outcome. It would require that in subsequent years unspent supplemental and
concentration funds be “expended to increase and improve services for unduplicated pupils,”
and maintain its character as supplemental and concentration funds.
There is no evidence to support the allegation the District misallocated the $6.7 million at issue
here, because there was no written agreement between the District and Complainants, and no
legal requirement to identify unspent supplemental and concentration funds as such in the
subsequent year.

It should be noted that the concerns raised by Complainants are not unique to Stockton
Unified School District. For your information please see https://edsource.org/2020/californiaschool-funding-formula-has-a-spending-loophole-is-a-recession-the-time-to-fix-it/631012.
3

DWK DMS 3592554v1

 Stockton Education Equity Coalition
Education Equity Staff Attorney
August 18, 2020
Page 13
IV.

NOTICE OF RIGHT TO APPEAL TO THE CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF
EDUCATION

Complainants may appeal in writing to the California Department of Education (“CDE”). To do
so, you must file your appeal within fifteen (15) calendar days of receiving this decision and
the appeal must specify the basis for the appeal of the decision and whether the facts are
incorrect and/or the law has been misapplied. The appeal shall be accompanied by a copy of
the locally filed complaint and a copy of this decision. (See 5 CCR § 4632). Upon notification
by CDE that you have appealed the District's decision, the District Superintendent, or
designee, shall forward any requested documents to CDE. (See 5 CCR § 4633).
Thank you and, should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call.
Sincerely,
DANNIS WOLIVER KELLEY

Marie A. Nakamura
MAN:cc
Attachments: Exhibits A, B and D through I
cc:

Brian Biedermann, Interim Superintendent
Board of Education, Stockton Unified School District
Dee Alimbini, Executive Director Constituent Services

DWK DMS 3592554v1