OAKLAND, Calif. (KRON) -- Students and teachers are accusing the Oakland Unified School District of taking away millions of dollars in funds meant for college prep. However, the school district says the transfer is legal and still supports their students.
Oakland students, teachers and commissioners rallied outside OUSD headquarters on Wednesday, demanding the district return $3.5 million in voter-approved funds from college and career readiness programs to general operations to cover a $95 million budget deficit.
“Our education should not be treated as an opportunity to cover budget gaps. We deserve the resources that were promised to us. OUSD has some of the smartest and most hardworking students that you will ever meet in your life. And you are seriously missing out on an opportunity,” said Oakland High School Student Body President, Anara Shafi.
“When you are a young person of color growing up without an abundance of resources in your opportunities, these programs, courses and support systems and stated by such a fund like measures and in age can make a complete, utter difference in the direction of someone's entire life,” said Oakland High School student, Jonas Jones, “We're asking you to do what is right, what is fair.”
The funds were approved by Measures N and H to pay for college prep classes, career training, job shadowing, and internships.
“We’ve never seen a system like this in Oakland, maybe not even in the country. It's a system that works. This system is additive to the general fund. It is not meant to replace it. And that was made clear to the voters,” said Measure H and N Commissioner, James Harris.
An OUSD spokesperson said the specific positions and amounts were presented publicly to the commission in June 2026. They note an independent review found that the money directly benefits pathway teachers and case managers serving students in their high schools.
The district responded to concerns saying in a statement in part:
“Neither measure lays out a separate approval step for reserve or contingency spending. We take seriously the commission's view that it should have had a formal vote on these allocations. We look forward to working with the commission and the board on a clearer approval process going forward.”
