What did the State Auditor review?

The California State Auditor reviewed the Riverside Unified School District’s (RUSD) long-term oversight and management of the proposed STEM Education Center project. The evaluation focused on historical project planning, inter-agency communication, governance processes, the utilization of Measure O bond funds, and coordination with the University of California, Riverside (UCR).

Did the audit find any misuse of Measure O bond funds?

No. The audit verified that all reviewed Measure O expenditures complied with the specific purposes approved by voters. The State Auditor did not identify any misuse, fraud, or illegal spending of bond funds.

Did the audit find that the Board of Education violated any laws?

No. The audit concluded that the Board adhered to legal governance frameworks including public meeting (Brown Act), public participation, and open-session voting requirements throughout its decision-making processes for the project.

To maximize historical transparency and clear up any clerical gaps identified by the auditor, the district has digitized and published associated historical meeting minutes directly on its website.

Did the audit find wrongdoing by the Superintendent or the current administration?

No. The report does not identify any wrongdoing, misconduct, or policy violations by the current Superintendent or district administration.

Did the District deliver fewer projects than it promised voters?

No. What voters approved in November 2016 was a bond measure authorizing the District to issue $392 million to repair, upgrade, construct, and acquire school facilities. The ballot language did not include a fixed project list with a specific number of promised completions. There was no list communicated to voters as a commitment.

The District's Long Range Facilities Master Plan, developed prior to the election, was a comprehensive inventory of every identified facility needs across the District, not a project completion guarantee. It was designed to capture the full scope of need so that priorities could be assessed over time, in order, and in response to real conditions including enrollment, safety, equity, and available funding. It was never intended or communicated that every identified need could be addressed in a single bond cycle.

After Measure O passed, the Board conducted a series of public workshops in 2017 to prioritize projects based on documented criteria: urgent systems upgrades, statutory requirements, school capacity, and funding availability. Those priorities were established transparently, in public meetings, and adjusted over time, also in public meetings, as conditions changed.

Among those conditions: construction costs in California rose at historic rates, averaging 13.4% annually in 2021 and 7% annually from 2022 through 2024, compared to a 3% average in the years prior. These were not District decisions. They were pandemic-era economic realities that affected every public construction project in the state. Even so, the District completed significant projects across the community, from early childhood centers built in the 1940s to high school campuses, delivering modernized classrooms, new buildings, replaced portables, renovated athletic and performing arts facilities, upgraded safety infrastructure, and two brand new neighborhood schools serving communities that had long needed them.

It is also important to note that the sequencing of projects benefited students. Projects that were completed early, before construction costs skyrocketed, were able to move forward precisely because the STEM Center project remained in the planning phase. Those completed projects served a broader pool of students and communities across the District. Had resources been concentrated on the STEM Center first, many of those improvements would have been delayed or priced out entirely.

The Board has also maintained an ongoing commitment to deferred maintenance and continuous site improvements throughout the life of Measure O, and has actively pursued state reimbursement funds to expand the overall pool of resources available for facilities work,  stretching every voter-approved dollar further.

Why was the STEM Education Center not ultimately built on the UCR campus?

The STEM Education Center was a highly complex, multi-agency initiative dependent on sequential external approvals, extensive environmental reviews, and long-term lease packaging. Over its ten-year planning history, the project faced shifting regional site requirements and escalating construction costs.

Following strategic leadership transitions at both RUSD and UCR July 2025, both institutions evaluated the project’s timeline alongside their respective institutional priorities. After careful, collaborative consideration, RUSD and UCR jointly determined that a distributed, district-wide approach to STEM opportunities would better serve the community than continuing to pursue a single-site campus model.

Did Riverside Unified and UCR stop communicating?

No. Far from halting communication, executive leadership teams established direct, regular, and collaborative sessions immediately following significant leadership transitions in July 2025. 

Dr. Sonia Llamas began her tenure as Superintendent of RUSD on July 14, 2025, and Dr. S. Jack Hu began his tenure as Chancellor of UCR on July 15, 2025. The project was treated as an immediate priority by both leaders, who dedicated necessary time to fully brief themselves on its complex history before taking action.

Leadership meetings used to realign the strategic partnership:

• August 12, 2025: Initial leadership meeting between Superintendent Dr. Llamas and Chancellor Dr. Hu; introduction to discuss institutional alignment.
• December 1, 2025
• January 28, 2026
• April 2026 

On May 22, 2026, both institutions issued their joint public statement reflecting their shared consensus on the project's direction.

The district also published information about the announcement and frequently asked questions on the website.

Why were these specific leadership meeting dates not detailed in the State Auditor's final report?

The State Auditor's mandate was primarily historical, focusing on a decade-long review of formalized, public board votes, published meeting minutes, and historic bond account ledgers dating back to 2013. The technical fieldwork for the audit concluded prior to the finalization of RUSD and UCR's joint strategic realignment. While the auditor's report captures public milestones, the continuous, direct meetings between the current Superintendent and Chancellor starting in August 2025 represent the collaborative work of the current administration to actively guide the project to an effective resolution.

What happens to STEM education in Riverside Unified now?

RUSD's commitment to STEM education remains unwavering. The transition away from a single, centralized facility allows the district to evolve from a facility-centered strategy to an expansive, student-centered STEM model. RUSD and UCR are convening a multidisciplinary working group to expand advanced STEM programming, career pathways, and college readiness resources directly across all existing RUSD campuses, reaching a significantly larger number of students.

What exactly will the new RUSD and UCR Working Group do?

The University of California, Riverside (UCR) and Riverside Unified School District (RUSD) have established this working group to:

• Reimagine and strengthen their long-standing community engagement partnership.
• Provide a coordinated, strategic framework to align P-12 and higher education efforts in service of student success, regional equity, and workforce development.
• Maintain a strong emphasis on STEM education while intentionally supporting academic and career pipelines across all disciplines including the arts, humanities, business, and social sciences—recognizing their essential role in cultivating critical thinking, creativity, and a well-rounded regional workforce.

Does this decision impact the future of the Riverside STEM Academy (RSA)?

Yes, it clarifies and accelerates our internal focus. While this announcement closes the option of a university-sited building, it solidifies RUSD’s commitment to addressing RSA's facility needs locally. The district explicitly recognizes that RSA has built an unrivaled culture of academic excellence in facilities that no longer fully support the modern needs, safety standards, or future growth of the program.

How did the district expand its community engagement and incorporate local feedback?

Far from pausing communication, the past year marked an intensive period of collaboration. Recognizing that the school community's voice must dictate its facility future, the district ran a parallel track of deep engagement over an eight-month window:

• September 2025 (Principal-Led Community Inquiry Launch): Following board direction to evaluate alternate options while technical data sets were compiled, the RSA Principal initiated regular dialogues with staff and parent groups to determine site priorities.
• November 2025 to January 2026 (Targeted Stakeholder Surveys): Extensive surveys were deployed specifically to RSA families, gathering metrics on educational priorities, structural needs, and program satisfaction.
• February 2026 (Core Findings Synthesis): Data collection verified that the school's unique grades 5–12 cohort model rather than a specific geographic campus coordinate is the structural anchor of RSA's high performance and academic success. Families overwhelmingly indicated that their priority is a modern, high-quality learning environment optimized for STEM.
   

What are the next steps for the Riverside STEM Academy campus?

RUSD is actively evaluating localized facility options to provide RSA students and staff with a permanent learning environment that matches the high quality of its program. Backed by the eight-month community inquiry confirming that families value a high-quality STEM environment and the 5-12 grade structure, the district is identifying feasible facility solutions that can be integrated into our forthcoming Long-Range Facilities Plan.

Is the partnership with UC Riverside ending for RSA students?

No. The joint announcement does not cancel or diminish the active, direct relationships between RSA teachers and UCR faculty. The existing institutional Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) remains firmly in place through June 2027. All collaborative research, student university access, and faculty mentorships will continue completely uninterrupted. The culmination of the workgroup is a new more expansive agreement.

What improvements are being made to protect the existing RSA campus in the near term?

The health, safety, and academic success of students at the existing Riverside STEM Academy remain top priorities. While the Board evaluates long-term site alternatives, the district has continued actively investing in the current campus. Recent and ongoing site enhancements include:

• The deployment and active utilization of portable eyewash stations.
• The execution of campus-wide Single Point of Entry (SPOE) security and fencing projects.
• The installation of dedicated campus shade structures and facility modernizations.

Was the communication to the RSA community sent out at the same time as the joint press release?

Yes. To ensure that RSA families, students, and staff were the very first to know about the project's new direction, a specialized briefing from Assistant Superintendent of Curriculum and Instruction was held with staff, a letter from the Superintendent was sent to families and an email was transmitted on May 22, 2026, the exact same day as the RUSD and UCR joint press release and districtwide ParentSquare communication. The district purposefully synchronized these releases so the school community would receive direct, contextualized site commitments immediately rather than reading about the news secondhand.

If Measure O funds were used during the preliminary phases, what happens to those investments now?

Every dollar spent from Measure O bond funds underwent independent citizen oversight and standard public accounting audits. The funds were used strictly for state-mandated environmental reviews (CEQA), engineering assessments, and preliminary architectural designs. While a building will not be constructed on the campus site, the technical data, structural findings, and educational criteria developed during this phase provide a valuable baseline that RUSD is utilizing as it designs its comprehensive Long-Range Facilities Plan. No construction funds were ever obligated or lost.

Why did the reported "committed" funding figures for the STEM project fluctuate in historical public documents?

This fluctuation was a technical mismatch in how data is standardly presented between separate reporting bodies:

• The Citizens’ Bond Oversight Committee (CBOC) operates under strict reporting frameworks that limit "commitments" exclusively to actual expenditures and active encumbrances.
• Audit and long-range planning documents frequently reflect high-level, preliminary budgetary allocations or historical total project estimates (such as an early structural $48 million projection) before they are ever formalized into legal purchase orders.

According to RUSD's official accounting system (Galaxy), total expended and legally encumbered funds for the UCR STEM project firmly sit at $1.9 million, proving that early footnotes in the draft audit report conflated preliminary projected budgets with direct vendor encumbrances.

Why were certain lease reviews discussed in Closed Session meetings rather than Open Sessions?

Under California’s Ralph M. Brown Act, school boards are legally permitted to review real property transactions, contract options, and lease terms in Closed Session under the protective categories of "potential litigation" or "real property/facilities acquisition" to safeguard public negotiating leverage. Because these specific briefings were informational updates and no formal, binding votes or "actions" were executed during those windows, there was no legal requirement or mechanism to report out actions to the public at those times.

What is the District’s biggest takeaway from this process?

Large-scale, multi-agency public projects require continuous administrative alignment, standardized tracking, and exceptionally clear documentation. RUSD appreciates the constructive recommendations provided by the State Auditor. The district continues to pair robust fiscal transparency with its core mission: preparing all students for successful futures.

The full report can be found here, on the website of the Auditor of the State of California.