Teacher and union leaders tell Carpinteria trustees students are falling behind and criticize district's legal spending

A middle-school teacher and union representatives used public comment at the Carpinteria Unified School District board meeting on June 9 to press trustees for concrete steps to reverse falling academic performance and to criticize the district's legal expenses.

Kelly Verge, who identified herself as a middle‑school science teacher, told the board she has "observed a steady decline in students' reading, writing, listening, and speaking skills" and said reductions in intervention classes, summer school opportunities and instructional aide support have left many students unable to apply higher‑order thinking. "It's essential that district leadership and board members engage directly with classroom teachers to address how we can improve student outcomes in reading, writing, listening, and speaking," she said.

The meeting also featured extended remarks from the district's elected employee representative (identified in the transcript as Jay H. Hot. Hchner), who accused the district of repeated unlawful actions in labor disputes and said courts and administrative bodies have ruled against the district on multiple occasions. He told trustees that the district has "misappropriated four to 5 million of our taxpayers' money" on litigation and called on the board to stop spending on legal efforts and focus instead on programs that support classroom teaching.

Why this matters: Board members are preparing a local control and accountability plan (LCAP) and a proposed 2026-27 budget that trustees will approve later this month; both documents guide staffing, interventions and program funding. Speakers tied the district's resource priorities to student outcomes, arguing the current balance favors legal defense and administrative growth over classroom supports.

Trustees and staff response: During the superintendent's report and subsequent questions, district leaders referenced programs intended to support literacy (before‑school reading interventions, small group instruction, targeted tutoring and professional development) and noted that much of the performance data presented at the meeting are from the 2024-25 reporting year because of state/county reporting rules. The district said it has expanded some interventions and is monitoring progress, but staff also cautioned that some reported measures are a year behind.

What was not decided: The remarks were part of the public‑comment period; the board took no immediate, formal action in response during the meeting. The board did approve routine consent items and will consider the LCAP and the 2026-27 budget at the June 16 meeting.

Context and sources: Comments by Kelly Verge and the union representative were delivered during the public comment portion of the June 9 board meeting. The district's slides and oral reports on LCAP strategies and budget assumptions were presented later in the meeting by Superintendent Rigby and Assistant Superintendent for Business Services Jason CF.

Ending: The public criticisms add pressure on trustees as they review the LCAP and finalize the 2026-27 budget at the June 16 meeting, where community members will have another formal opportunity to seek changes or clarifications.