Teachers, parents and school psychologists used the board’s June 26 public comment period to urge the district to halt proposed cuts to special-education staff and classroom assistants, saying reductions would endanger students and force legal and educational consequences.

"This is a safety issue," Theresa Powers, a cluster teacher, told trustees, describing classrooms of students with autism who require close supervision and the continuous presence of support staff to de-escalate behavior and implement individualized supports.

Parents described how classroom aides respond to medical emergencies, regulate behavior and communicate with nursing staff. "When my son's blood sugar drops to dangerously low levels, it is his CICA who communicates with the nurse," Theresa Nuestro said, urging the board not to reduce aides who facilitate access to classroom instruction.

School specialists warned of legal exposure under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act if supports in students’ IEPs are not provided. "Cutting special education funding puts that right and our students at risk," school psychologist Alma Rosario said.

Speakers cited concrete school-level impacts: at George Washington High School, a teacher said the school faces "cuts up to three special education teachers and two [support staff]," and several Corliss case managers reported reassignment and concerns about contract protections for case managers.

Discussion vs. action: The comments were made during public participation; the board did not record a vote on special-education staffing at this meeting. Unions and school leaders raised the issue during the meeting’s earlier labor remarks and asked the interim CEO and board to prioritize stability and staffing in the budget process.

What’s next: Parents and educators asked the board to adopt budget and staffing decisions that maintain legally required services for students with disabilities, and several urged oversight and transparency about any proposed reductions.

Reporting note: Statements about proposed cuts and specific staffing numbers were made by public speakers during comment; the board did not adopt related motion or budget vote during this session.