Santa Cruz Valley board debates liquidated-damages language for employee contracts, asks staff to draft policy

At a recent meeting of the Santa Cruz Valley Unified School District Governing Board, trustees discussed adopting or revising policy to assess liquidated damages when employees resign before their contracts end and directed staff to draft policy language to return to the board.

The issue matters because trustees said mid-year departures impose costs on schools and principals, while some members warned a rigid policy could be applied inconsistently or prompt legal challenges. Board members debated dollar amounts, waiver criteria and whether each waiver should be discussed in executive session.

Assistant Superintendent Miss Lederville opened the discussion by saying the district has contracts coming up and that "we do not have to make any policy adopt from tonight" but needs to decide how to proceed so contract language can be finalized. She told the board she had researched other districts and found a wide range of practices: some use tiered assessments tied to timing, while others use a flat fee. Lederville cited one district's flat amount, saying, "I believe it's 1,200. 12 hundred." She recommended the board determine parameters and bring policy or procedure language back for formal consideration.

Board members pressed practical and legal questions. Mr. Guerrero asked whether assessing liquidated damages might discourage applicants: "Does this discourage anybody from coming over to our district?" Several trustees said they had not seen that be a common deterrent. Mr. Ramirez argued for a clear enforcement mechanism and consistency: "we have to have a way to hold people's feet to the fire," and urged a study session or clear procedures to avoid treating similar cases differently. Mr. Beach recommended using executive session when waiver requests involve confidential personnel matters so board members can discuss circumstances without violating privacy statutes.

Trustees discussed possible waiver categories. Suggested examples included job transfer of a spouse, verified medical needs, and promotion to a higher position; several speakers noted a single short list would not capture every possible extenuating circumstance and that an "other good cause" category could allow discussion in executive session. A board member asked staff to draft proposed policy language that would include enforcement steps; a suggested enforcement paragraph would require an invoice upon resignation, payable within 30 days, with nonpayment potentially resulting in legal action or reporting as permitted by law.

No formal policy was adopted at the meeting. Lederville said she will compile the board's feedback and draft policy language for circulation and later action; she noted contracts are scheduled to come to the board in March, which may affect the timetable for any change to contract language.

Also during the meeting the superintendent provided brief district updates that were informational only: the district has reopened its pool heater and aims for a target temperature of 78 degrees on weekends, preschool/kindergarten open enrollment opens March 1, and the district has reverted to the 2020 Title IX regulations pending further policy work. Trustees asked for a future informational item on Cartwheel, a telehealth program referenced by the superintendent.

Votes at the meeting were routine: the agenda and consent agenda were approved, the board convened and later reconvened from an executive session on county-treasurer litigation, and the meeting adjourned. The liquidated-damages discussion produced direction to staff rather than a final decision.