Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Restorative Specialists topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board votes to issue notices for eight restorative specialist positions amid ongoing negotiations
Summary
After receiving a late cease‑and‑desist from state CSEA, the Santa Rosa City Schools board approved a resolution to issue preliminary notices for eight restorative specialist positions while district and unions continue negotiations and say they hope to rescind notices if agreement is reached.
Get email alerts on the Restorative Specialists topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Santa Rosa City Schools Board of Education on March 12 approved a special‑meeting resolution to reduce or eliminate eight restorative specialist positions and to issue preliminary notices, a move district leaders said was compelled by a time‑sensitive directive from state CSEA.
Dr. Zantz, presenting the item, told the board the district had received a cessation order from state CSEA on March 10 alleging the district’s plan to move restorative specialists from site‑based to district‑based roles amounted to a new job classification and required negotiation. The order, Dr. Zantz said, was dated late Monday afternoon and was formally addressed to Superintendent Morales; the district said it had attempted to meet with state CSEA but had not secured a timely meeting before the March 15 notice deadline.
“We have full intention of negotiating the place of the restorative specialists in our system,” Dr. Zantz said, while adding the district was obliged by timing to bring forward a resolution to reduce or eliminate the remaining eight positions. He described a restructuring plan that would increase student safety advisor coverage for tier‑1 restorative work while reserving the highly trained restorative specialists for tier‑2 and tier‑3 interventions and training.
A public commenter, Angel Ortega, who identified himself as a staff member and alumni, urged the board not to cut restorative staff: “I’m confused as to why we’re cutting the people that actually make that happen,” he said. Multiple trustees urged rapid, clear communication to the affected staff and pleaded for attempts to pull notices back if negotiations succeed.
Board action and vote Trustee Casten moved the revised resolution (listed in the record as revised resolution 2024‑25‑102); Trustee Kirby seconded. The board approved the resolution by roll call: Casten, Kirby, Jenkins, De La Torre, Manieri and President McNally voted yes; Trustee Medina voted no. The motion carried.
District officials and union representatives present at the meeting said local CSEA had been cooperative in outreach to state CSEA, and they signaled ongoing bargaining. Dr. Zantz and others told the board the district hopes that if negotiations succeed and location‑of‑assignment changes are agreed, the layoffs/notices for the eight positions would be rescinded.
What the district said about services District staff presented a reorganization plan that would shift some tier‑1 restorative responsibilities to expanded student safety advisor roles and reserve specialists for higher‑level interventions, training and continuity of services. Dr. Zantz said the plan was intended to preserve restorative practice work while making staffing more “agile and responsive” during a period of fiscal constraint.
What happens next Trustees stressed empathy and timely communication to restorative staff. The district said local CSEA had attempted to schedule negotiations with state CSEA and that talks would continue; if the parties reach agreement, the eight notices would be pulled back. The board took the action after the district’s legal counsel advised the special meeting and resolution were required by the timing of the state CSEA notice.
Ending The vote resolved an urgent procedural step but left open the possibility of reversal if negotiations produce a settlement. The district and CSEA representatives said they would continue bargaining before March 15 and hoped to resolve location‑of‑assignment changes without job loss.

