Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Personnel topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

SCHERTZ-CIBOLO-U CITY ISD board votes 6-0 not to renew employee Claudia Moreno’s term contract

SCHERTZ-CIBOLO-U CITY ISD Board of Trustees · June 18, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The Schertz-Cibolo-U City ISD board voted 6-0 to not renew the term contract of employee Claudia Moreno and authorized the superintendent or designee to deliver notice; the action followed a closed session held under Texas Government Code §551.074 and no public comments were recorded.

The Schertz-Cibolo-U City ISD Board of Trustees voted unanimously, 6-0, to not renew the term contract of Claudia Moreno and authorized the superintendent or a designee to deliver the board’s notice of nonrenewal.

The board considered the matter following a closed session the meeting cited under the Texas Open Meetings Act, Texas Government Code section 551.074, which covers personnel matters and consultation with legal counsel. At 7:31 PM the presiding speaker introduced “consideration of possible action regarding proposed nonrenewal of Claudia Moreno term contract,” and an unnamed board member moved that the district not renew Moreno’s term contract “effective at the end of 2425 contract term for the reason set forth in notice of proposed non renewal,” adding a second motion authorizing the superintendent or designate to deliver the notice. An unnamed member seconded the motion. The presiding speaker recorded the vote as 6 in favor, 0 opposed.

No members of the public spoke during the meeting; the presiding speaker stated there were no public comments. The meeting opened at 3:00 PM, with one board member, Leticia Seaver, noted as absent during roll call. The board adjourned after the vote.

The board did not state the specific grounds for nonrenewal on the public record during the open session beyond the motion’s reference to the “notice of proposed nonrenewal.” The transcript records the effective date of the contract nonrenewal as “at the end of 2425 contract term”; the precise calendar year or further timing details were not clarified in the transcript.