The California Court of Appeal affirmed Riverside Unified School District's authority to spend voter-approved Measure O bond funds on new school construction in an opinion filed Sept. 23, 2025, ending a contentious lawsuit that challenged spending on four new schools.
A three-judge panel from the Fourth Appellate District, Division Three — which covers Riverside, Orange and San Diego counties — unanimously upheld a 2024 Superior Court decision that rejected claims by Riversiders Against Increased Taxes (RAIT) that the district engaged in a "bait-and-switch" scheme to deceive voters who approved the $392 million bond in 2016.
The decision clears the final legal hurdle for projects that have already transformed Riverside's educational landscape, even as the lawsuit wound through the courts. Casa Blanca Elementary opened its doors in August, while Ofelia Valdez-Yeager Eastside Elementary broke ground in September—both schools restoring neighborhood education to communities that lost their schools 60 years ago during desegregation.
"We are grateful to the Court of Appeal for recognizing the diligence that has gone into this effort," said Superintendent Sonia Llamas. "As a public institution entrusted with taxpayer funds, the district is committed to making good on its promise to invest in our students' futures."
Llamas, who inherited the controversy when she took office in July 2025, said the ruling "allows our administration to move forward with clarity and confidence" to focus on "strengthening student learning, supporting our educators, and ensuring that Riverside's schools and facilities reflect the highest standards for our community."
The Citizens' Bond Oversight Committee, which monitors all Measure O expenditures, has published regular reports on the district website throughout the bond program. Since 2016, the bond has fully funded modernization or new construction at 16 school sites, according to district records.
RAIT filed suit seeking an injunction July 14, 2023, alleging the district committed fraud by concealing plans to build new schools while campaigning on promises to repair and modernize existing facilities. The lawsuit targeted four specific projects: Casa Blanca Elementary, Eastside Elementary, Highgrove II Neighborhood School, and a STEM Education Center on UC Riverside property.
RAIT argued in court filings that district officials knew they wanted to build new schools but feared voters would reject a bond measure for that purpose, so they concealed their intentions. The organization pointed to campaign materials that emphasized fixing "deteriorating roofs, plumbing and electrical systems" at aging schools.
RAIT spokesperson April Glatzel characterized the district's approach as using bond money "for their pet projects to appease their political allies" rather than serving the broader student population through renovations of existing schools.
"Obviously, we are disappointed," Glatzel told the Gazette. "We believe the Court interpreted the ballot proposition too broadly in favor of RUSD, ignoring basic syntax and grammar rules that restrict Measure O spending to existing school sites."
When asked whether RAIT will petition the California Supreme Court for review, Glatzel said the organization "will assess all of our options, which are not limited to seeking Supreme Court review, in the very near future."
She maintained that voters were deceived: "The District sold Measure O to the public on the basis that their child's school would see some improvements from issuing these bonds, paid through an increase in their property taxes. That was the bait. The switch occurred after Measure O's passage, which added new schools to the project list and prioritized them ahead of many existing deteriorating schools."
While lawyers argued in courtrooms, construction crews broke ground. The district's decision to proceed with the contested projects even as litigation continued demonstrated confidence in their legal position—confidence affirmed by the ruling.
A trial court denied RAIT's preliminary injunction in early 2024, allowing construction to proceed during appeals.
Board President Brent Lee defended the district's approach throughout the controversy, saying the ruling represents "a strong vote of confidence in RUSD's responsible management of public funds."
"The bond language was clear, and the voters were clear in their direction. Measure O was designed to improve schools across the district and provide modern learning environments for all students," Lee said.
Lee said the district has "prevailed in two separate legal challenges, each time with rulings confirming that our practices are sound and fully aligned with voter intent."
The appellate court rejected RAIT's argument that Measure O failed to properly notify voters about new school construction. "Measure O specifically identified new school construction as a possible use for the bond proceeds. Indeed, it did so multiple times," the court stated.
The court found the ballot question clearly authorized the district to "construct, acquire, repair classrooms, sites, facilities and equipment." The ballot materials further stated bond funds could be used to "acquire land" and "construct new schools" as part of relieving overcrowding.
"Measure O's project list expressly contemplated and disclosed the use of funds for new school construction, and the school board properly certified that it considered safety, class size reduction, and information technology needs in developing the project list," the court concluded.
However, critics point to a pattern they found troubling. The Board received its first presentation on building Casa Blanca Elementary in June 2017, less than a year after voters approved Measure O, but the district wouldn't formally add the four new school projects to project lists until 2018.
The Sept. 23 legal victory doesn't end all scrutiny of RUSD's bond spending. A state legislative audit requested by Senator Sabrina Cervantes is currently examining whether the district followed transparency laws and properly managed bond funds.
The June vote by the Joint Legislative Audit Committee authorized 2,300 hours of investigation into how projects were selected, whether the board complied with state transparency requirements, and whether the UC Riverside lease agreement for the STEM school protects district interests.
Senator Cervantes, who requested the audit, has emphasized her concerns are "not about how good the school would be, but about whether the board followed the law." She has characterized some board decisions as happening "behind closed doors without public input."
A spokesperson for Senator Cervantes declined to comment on the appellate ruling.
With the legal challenges resolved, RUSD can proceed with completing its remaining Measure O projects. The district faces one remaining test: A state legislative audit expected in late 2025 or early 2026 will examine whether RUSD followed transparency laws and properly managed bond funds—a comprehensive assessment that extends beyond legal compliance to democratic accountability.
