RSU 10 administrators urge retaining three-person special-education leadership for transition year
Loading...
Summary
Administrators and special-education staff told the RSU 10 School Board that keeping three special-education administrators for one more year would help manage student transitions after Mountain Valley Middle School’s closure; the board did not take a vote at the workshop.
Administrators and special-education staff told the RSU 10 School Board at a budget workshop that the district should keep a three-person special-education leadership team for the upcoming transition year rather than reduce the role of assistant superintendent or return to a two-person model.
The presenters said the current structure — described in the meeting as one special-education director and two assistant directors — gives school staff faster response times, more embedded program review at building level and more in-person support for students and families during major transitions such as the midyear closure of Mountain Valley Middle School.
Administrators said the district serves a large special-education population and that day‑to‑day program work, grant administration and time‑sensitive case management are labor intensive. They described the three-person model as enabling the district to split back‑office financial and compliance work from direct, in‑school services and program development. Staff called the arrangement a “rare” opportunity because the superintendent currently holds special‑education director certification and can perform both functions for an additional year if the board chooses.
Board members asked how the district would restore a dedicated special-education director when the superintendent no longer fills that role and raised concerns about staff workload if the district returned to fewer administrators. Administrators replied the three-person model was particularly helpful during the building consolidation and that a one‑year extension would buy time to build capacity and reduce turnover risks.
No formal motion or vote to change the special-education structure was taken during the workshop. Administrators said the presentation was intended to inform the board’s budget decisions and that staff would show comparative budget scenarios later in the workshop.
The discussion included considerations about hiring difficulty for experienced special-education administrators, the time required for grant and entitlement paperwork, and the need to plan transitions so students receive services on day one in their new placements.
The board continued the budget workshop and did not resolve the staffing question at the meeting. The item will be revisited in subsequent budget meetings and in the formal warrant process prior to the district’s final vote.
