Public Advocates, with pro bono counsel Goodwin Procter LLP—and impacted students, families, residents, and grassroots community organizations—have sent a demand letter to the California governor and various state officials and agencies, urging them to end grossly unequal and unconstitutional disparities in the state’s school facility funding program.

Summary:

California has long promised every child an equal education—but the buildings where that education happens tell a different story. Students in low-wealth communities attend schools plagued by toxic mold, failing ventilation, leaking roofs, and classrooms that reach 85 degrees, while wealthier districts build state-of-the-art facilities.

At the root of this inequality is a funding formula that requires districts to raise local dollars before accessing state school modernization funds—a system that rewards property wealth and punishes poverty.

In February 2024, when AB 247 had just been introduced in the Legislature, Public Advocates and Goodwin Procter sent a demand letter to state officials warning that the bill’s matching formula would deepen—not close—these inequities. Though we did not oppose Proposition 2 at the ballot because schools desperately need the funding and the political window for a statewide facilities measure is rare, we made clear that the underlying system was broken.

After voters approved the measure and $4 billion in modernization funds began flowing under the same discriminatory formula, Public Advocates and Morrison Foerster filed a lawsuit, Miliani Rodriguez v. The State of California, on behalf of students, families, educators, and community organizations from some of California’s lowest-wealth districts—demanding a system that finally puts the greatest need first.