Top Takeaways At issue is whether districts with more property wealth per student receive a greater share of matching funds for school renovations. Plaintiffs worry that funding from a voter-passed state bond will run dry by the time a verdict is reached; the state argues the plaintiffs failed to justify an injunction. Judge Patrick McKinney said the facilities lawsuit could win on merits, but he’s concerned about halting funds for school modernization before the trial. Attorneys pitched their arguments this week to an Alameda County Superior Court judge who acknowledged he was torn about whether to temporarily stop billions of dollars of school construction grants that plaintiffs charge discriminate against low-wealth districts. “I’m almost right down the middle on this right now,” Judge Patrick McKinney said Wednesday during a 90-minute hearing. “We’ll see which way this goes today.” McKinney issued no decision and didn’t say when he would rule on the motion to halt the $4 billion state program to modernize schools. In October, 14 students, parents and teachers from low property-wealth districts, plus three local nonprofit organizations, filed Rodriguez v. the State of California and the state agencies that oversee school facilities operations. Related ReadingCalifornia sued over bond program that sends more money to fix facilities in wealthy school districtsOctober 24, 2025 Their lawsuit alleges that the state’s school facilities modernization program favors property-wealthy school districts. It said their bigger tax bases enable them to issue larger construction bonds, often at lower tax rates, setting them up for the lion’s…
