In a victory for Los Angeles charter schools, a judge has struck down a sweeping Los Angeles Unified policy that would have prevented charters — the school of choice for 1 in 5 L.A. public-school students — from using classroom space at nearly 350 campuses.
The policy, set to go into effect when the new school year opens in three weeks, had effectively barred charter schools from moving onto campuses with certain designations — including those with a special program for Black students, low-performing “priority” schools, and community schools, which have wrap-around services to address the needs of students and families inside and outside the classroom.
Altogether, some 346 campuses — out of about 1,000 — would have been off limits to charters, which are privately managed public schools.
The ruling invalidated key elements of a high-profile school district policy that was supported by a board majority —but was strenuously fought by charters who said it denied them state-permitted access to space in public school facilities.
“This is a victory for all public school families and a critical affirmation of the rights of charter public school students across Los Angeles,” said Myrna Castrejón, president and chief executive of California Charter Schools Assn., which filed the litigation against Los Angeles Unified and its Board of Education.
“We’re grateful the court recognized that LAUSD’s blatant attempt to exclude charter public school students from learning alongside traditional district school students in the communities they share violates California law,” Castrejón said.
There are 235 charters in L.A. Unified, more than any other school system in the nation.
L.A. County Superior Court Judge Stephen I. Goorvitch upheld portions of the district policy, a point the school system focused on in a statement. L.A. Unified still will be able to restrict the location of charters based on safety or capacity issues.
“We are very pleased with most aspects of the court’s ruling,” the statement said. The charter association “significantly mischaracterizes the plain language of both the policy and last month’s ruling. We remain firmly committed to serving the best interests of all students in our school communities while continuing to meet our legal obligations.”
The school district has not decided whether to challenge the ruling.
The battle over access to schools is decades long — with a trail of lawsuits. Yet in the 1990s, before that legal acrimony, charter schools offered L.A. Unified an escape valve for overcrowded traditional public schools. But charters met with union and other political opposition when they exercised their legal right to make use of these crowded public-school campuses. Charters are mostly non-union and receive the per-pupil public funding like traditional California public school students.
Charter growth, housing affordability, lower birth rates and immigration decline have pushed down L.A. Unified enrollment, which has decreased by about 50% from its peak. Theoretically, classroom space should be available for all, but the competition for a smaller number of students remains intense.
And, supporters of traditional schools say their campuses need more space to operate an expanded array of programs that help students succeed. They say the old formula for determining what can be handed over to charters is unfair and undermines their work — especially the important efforts of the Black Student Achievement Plan, the priority schools and community schools.
But many charter schools also are state-designated community schools and L.A. Unified took no action to protect their special status and mission.
While enrollment has declined faster in district-run schools, charters, too, have closed or consolidated with fewer students to go around.
The ruling arrived at an especially challenging time for both charters and district-operated campuses.
The Trump administration — although it is pro-charter — has scrambled the equation. L.A. charter schools and the school district have linked arms in defense of immigrant students and their families. And federal budget cuts are affecting all public schools.
“You’re watching federal funding … likely being disrupted, which impacts some of our highest-need kids,” said Amy Held, executive director of Larchmont Charter School. And federal immigration enforcement has “impacted attendance. It’s impacted graduation ceremonies. There’s just a palpable fear, I think, that is not healthy for anyone.”
In this shared crisis, said charter association vice president Keith Dell’Aquila. “the district has been a good partner to our schools and our families … whether it’s helping to share and amplify resources, [or] being willing to take calls and consult.”
What the law says
California law gives charter schools the right to public-school facilities that are “reasonably equivalent” to those available to other public-school students. The law also sets up a process through which charter schools can request space and pay rent to school districts.
The L.A. Unified policy, which the Board of Education approved 4 to 3 in 2024, “prioritizes District schools over charter schools and is too vague,” Goorvitch concluded in a June 27 ruling. “To the maximum extent practicable, the needs of the charter school must be given the same consideration as those of the district-run schools.”
Charters leaders have been worried that, with so many restrictions, they would be pushed out of communities and forced to operate their schools out out of two or more district-run campuses, rather than keep their student body in one place.
A school-district staff analysis validated some of these concerns.
“This could significantly limit the number of TK-12 school sites that could potentially be matched to fulfill the District’s legal obligations,” the analysis stated. “It is likely that there will be more multi-site offers… This may also lead to increased costs associated with renovation work to make sites ready for co-location, and would likely make it more challenging for the District when making ‘reasonable efforts’ to locate the charter school ‘near’ where it wishes to locate.”
Charter critics object to the legal obligation imposed on public school districts to share campus space, which was established by voter-approved Proposition 39 in 2000. They note that mandatory campus sharing was a little-noticed provision of Proposition 39, which was touted mainly for lowering the threshold to pass voter-approved school-construction bonds.
Under Proposition 39, charters cannot be barred from campuses or simply offered leftover over campus space.
The sharing process is cumbersome and must be restarted every year. Over time, most charter schools have made other arrangements. A few have negotiated multi-year sharing deals with L.A. Unified.
For the 2015–16 school year, L.A. Unified received 101 requests. For the soon-to-begin 2025–26 school year, the district received 38 requests — a huge drop-off but still a number representing more than 9,300 students. Six of these charters will have to operate out of more than one district site.
