Summary:

Students in California’s low-wealth communities learn in buildings with toxic mold, failing HVAC systems, leaking roofs, and classrooms that reach 85 degrees. Meanwhile, wealthier districts build state-of-the-art schools. This isn’t an accident — it’s the predictable result of a funding formula that rewards wealth and punishes poverty. Public Advocates and Morrison Foerster are in court to change it.

Fighting for Equal school facilities: Miliani Rodriguez V. The State of California

On October 23, 2025, Public Advocates and pro bono counsel Morrison & Foerster filed a landmark constitutional challenge on behalf of students, families, and educators against the State of California for operating a discriminatory school facilities funding system.

California’s School Facility Program requires districts to raise 40% of modernization costs locally before accessing a 60% state match regardless of the wealth of the district. The result: wealthy districts, who are able to raise more local funds, get more money from the state to fix their schools, and move to the front of the line. Low-wealth districts—with greater needs and less taxable property—are left behind. Rather than redressing local wealth disparities, the state’s uniform match makes them worse. The lawsuit alleges the program violates the California Constitution’s guarantee of education as a fundamental right and its prohibition on wealth-based discrimination in educational opportunity. It mirrors the landmark Serrano v. Priest case—also brought by Public Advocates—which struck down wealth-based discrimination in school operating funding 50 years ago.

Who We Represent:

True North Organizing Network, Alianza Coachella Valley, and Inland Congregations United for Change are our organizational plaintiffs, advocating on behalf of their members across the state who live in low-wealth districts and are subject to these conditions.

What we’re asking for:

• A court order halting further distribution of Prop 2 modernization funds under the current formula pending resolution of the case
• A reformed system that provides more state funding to low-wealth districts (a sliding scale inversely tied to local property wealth) An end to the first-come, first-served application process that advantages districts with more administrative capacity and resources

legal documents