Abstract
The purpose of this study was to present the story of the 1990 reorganization of the Val Verde Unified School District in Riverside County, California, and to look at the factors that influenced decision makers. This study also sought to discern the impact of this event on the California reorganization process and the interrelationships of the participants at the local, county, and state levels. History is created by people. In this study, the people involved in all sides of the unification told their story. They told how the historical events of the unification impacted their lives. They shared their learnings and offered advice to others who may become involved in a school district reorganization. In this historical research, the theories and techniques of historiography and oral history were used. Archival searches of district, county, and state documents and newspaper articles gleaned important topics in four categories: (1) motivating conditions existing before the movement to reorganize; (2) strategies used and the reasons for their use; (3) results and repercussions of the strategies and the district's unification; and (4) participants' learnings and advice. Twenty-five participants were interviewed, using both structured and open-ended questions. The key findings of the study uncovered four factors that influenced Val Verde decision makers, and the impact of the unification on California Education Code. The factors were population and economic growth in Val Verde, desire of residents for local control, perceived racial and political prejudice against Val Verde School District, and increase in territory transfer petitions which were seen as encroachment of district boundaries. The Val Verde unification is historically significant because it effected a change in the California Education Code. The State Board of Education took unprecedented action when it granted an unusual waiver proposed by Val Verde leaders to eliminate the Riverside County Committee from its unification process. Val Verde proponents charged that the County Committee did not follow the Education Code timelines because the Committee was racially and politically biased against the small school district. After the unification, the Education Code was changed to clarify reorganization timelines, define the responsibilities of County Committees, and provide an appeal process for territory transfer petitions.