District outlines staffing plan, reductions and June 1 finalization date amid enrollment decline

Executive Director Golden presented a detailed staffing update and timeline, describing the district’s multi‑month process for allocating FTE, the budget context and a June 1 deadline to finalize teacher positions.

"I wanna emphasize that the data that I am gonna share tonight is a very specific point in time, it's not final. I recognize that this is probably the first time that you have seen this and I would call it like a behind the curtain key at the staffing process. This is May 5 and where we're at in the staffing process," Executive Director Golden said.

Golden walked the board through the district’s staffing workflow: initial staffing requests beginning in January, a February 1 enrollment snapshot and FTE allocations provided to principals, school‑level assignment meetings in March and cost‑out of positions in April. The presentation showed that the district balances class‑size formulas and budget constraints when assigning sections and FTE. Golden said principals may make building‑level adjustments within an allowed range and that the district tries to be equitable when sharing resources across schools.

The presentation included an example (Locust Lane elementary) illustrating how a February 7 snapshot produced recommended teacher allocations for each grade and warned that numbers fluctuate between the February and March runs. Golden said the May presentation is a point‑in‑time view and that June 1 is the district’s deadline for final teacher staffing and assignments.

Staff explained that not all reductions are layoffs; many reductions reported at the time reflect unfilled EduStaff LTE positions and retirements. Golden said the largest appearance of cuts at the elementary level was driven largely by pulled LTE and late hires: "Some of those positions were pulled back — they were hired through EduStaff because they were late hires — so it looks like [elementary] is taking a huge hit. Those positions are being pulled back, not necessarily eliminated permanently," she said.

Board members asked how the district supports staff affected by reductions. Golden described internal placement efforts first (principals can offer building assignments, then the district may offer positions at other schools) and said most transfers have been handled through placement rather than formal reductions in force. Commissioners asked about class sizes, the decision matrix used to prioritize positions, and whether additional supports (paraprofessionals or hourly staff) could be added in classrooms with large enrollments; staff said the district monitors those high‑size classrooms and will evaluate support options under budget constraints.

Golden noted that some federal and state funds (title and categorical grants) can be targeted to higher‑need schools but that those streams are competitive and not fully stable year‑to‑year. The presentation emphasized the tension between investing staff time in direct services for students and devoting staff time to data collection.

No formal vote was taken; district staff will continue enrollment monitoring and cost‑out work and will finalize teacher FTE and placement decisions by the June 1 staffing deadline.