A Breakdown of Governance in OUSD
In just one board meeting, we witnessed a breakdown of nearly every governance best practice our community should be able to count on. In a moment when Oakland needs clarity, courage, and consistency, we got the opposite.
A Meeting Called Without Key Voices
On Wednesday, May 21, the Board held a special meeting with just over 48 hours notice, despite advance notice from Directors Hutchinson, Thompson, and Berry that they would be unavailable. This decision, pushed forward by Board President Jennifer Brouhard, contradicted her public commitment the prior week not to call a special meeting.
Student Director Simmons wasn’t even notified. His statement, read aloud by Director Hutchinson, said, “I was not emailed or told about this meeting… I pray that our board can come to an understanding as one and work together as a team to do what best serves our community, and not us.”
Major Amendments, No Vetting, No Transparency
Minutes into the meeting, Brouhard introduced a sweeping amendment that stripped the original repeal and replaced it with the following:
- Delaying cuts to contracts, travel, and conferences until 2026–27
- Restoring site-based services like after-school programs
- Requiring that the Chief Business Officer report to the board before implementing any further budget changes
The version presented in the room was not the one posted online. No proper fiscal analysis had been conducted. Chief Business Officer Lisa Grant-Dawson was frank:
“The language in this resolution as amended does not reflect what we discussed… We would have conferred, and I would have seen this before 30 minutes before the meeting.” Director Hutchinson also pointed out that the proposal lacked the required fiscal impact analysis, violating board bylaws.
Grant-Dawson emphasized that the process was rushed and deeply flawed. Her concerns included:
- Statutory budget deadlines are imminent
- The amended resolution does not solve the core funding problem
- No changes take effect until July 1 — there is still time for thoughtful, responsible action
Amendments were edited live during the meeting. Director Latta’s “friendly” amendment to Brouhard’s amendment, kicked off a chaotic, improvised editing process that left staff, board members, and the public unclear about what was actually being voted on. Grant-Dawson noted: “This is another reason, right? We’re talking about which version… I don’t know what is in the room”
Staff had to intervene, warning board members again not to discuss personnel matters publicly. Multiple times throughout the meeting, there was open disagreement over when members could speak, unclear handling of motions, and shifting language that undermined the board’s own decision-making.
Director Hutchinson also raised a point of order during board comments: “We were in board comments at that time… I was waiting for my comments, and now we’re on to a whole nother thing. So we’ve lost again the process of how we’re doing this.”
Editing the Record to Avoid Accountability
Director Hutchinson and Thompson’s resolution included factual “whereas” clauses that documented the history of how the March resolution was passed, naming who placed it on the agenda, who voted for it, and when.
Brouhard and Latta objected, calling these facts “personal attacks.” Director Hutchinson responded plainly: “If we can’t name what actually happened, how are we supposed to change course?”
The board ultimately removed the names but kept the timeline, a symbolic move that reflected a broader discomfort with owning the record.
What’s Next
The district is in a financial crisis, but that is not new. We’ve been here before. And the only path forward is one led by courageous, competent, and transparent leadership. That is what our students, families, and educators deserve.
True leadership means resisting the pull of chaos and staying rooted in process and principle. And as we saw last night, what leaders choose not to do, who they exclude, which voices they silence, what process they undermine, becomes part of their legacy.
The California School Boards Association’s Professional Governance Standards outline what ethical, professional governance looks like. This meeting was a case study in what it doesn’t.
Stay tuned for a full report tracing the road from March’s rushed budget to last night’s breakdown.
