Mountain View Whisman board OKs roughly $7.9M in reductions, spares four pupil‑services posts for now

The Mountain View Whisman School District Board of Trustees on Jan. 29 approved a package of budget reductions totaling about $7.9 million aimed at steadying district reserves, while delaying action on a reorganization that would have eliminated four pupil‑services positions.

Superintendent Dan Baird told trustees the decision was prompted by slowing assessed property valuation growth and projected multi‑year deficits: “If we don't make changes now, we don't want to end up in a fiscal crisis,” he said, framing the reductions as steps to avoid deeper cuts later.

The package the board approved contains a mix of district office and site‑level changes including reorganizing some site support FTE and reducing the number of site‑based coaches. During deliberations trustees emphasized protecting classroom instruction and services that support vulnerable students, and several urged careful monitoring of impacts on attendance and other student outcomes.

Trustee Connolly moved the final proposal that the board approve the recommended reductions except for the four pupil‑services positions (two SCF and two ARIS/BT roles); the motion passed with trustees Connolly, Reed, Vice President Lisa Henry and President Charles DeFazio voting in favor and Trustee Bill Lambert voting no. The board recorded the vote and outcome in open session.

Classified‑staff leaders and parents urged the board to preserve direct services. Miguel Meza, president of CSEA chapter 812, told the board, “Classified staff are essential to the daily functioning of our schools,” adding that cuts shift work onto teachers and imperil day‑to‑day operations.

Public commenters and several trustees described pupil‑services staff (SCFs and at‑risk intervention supervisors) as central to reducing chronic absenteeism and supporting families. Arturo Noriega, at‑risk intervention supervisor at Graham Middle School, said middle schools carry higher caseloads and urged the board to consider differing needs across school levels.

Board members who supported the package stressed the need for timely action to preserve reserves and avoid a larger structural shortfall later. Several trustees asked staff to return with scenario modeling that both includes and excludes anticipated lease revenue and other one‑time funds so the board can see the fiscal effect of the reductions already adopted.

The board also directed staff to bring back detailed monitoring metrics for implementation, including measures tied to chronic absenteeism and program outcomes, and to present updated fiscal projections once the district has clearer information about two pending funding questions: expansion of ACES/Beyond‑the‑Bell grant awards (state notification expected Feb. 15) and state ELOP/ELAP funding decisions that carry an April 15 opt‑in/opt‑out deadline.

The superintendent and staff emphasized that some elements of the recommended package were included because they appeared to have the strongest consensus among trustees; staff will use the spring to work with site leaders to plan implementation and identify tasks that can be adjusted or deferred to reduce service disruption.

The board also unanimously approved updates to three job descriptions that add flexibility for shared or traveling instructional roles and clarify work‑hour expectations for coaches, a step trustees said will help with staffing transitions under the new budget configuration.

Next steps: staff will return with refined fiscal modeling and an implementation plan this spring and trustees plan to revisit decisions about after‑school and preschool programming after the February ACES notice and before the April 15 ELOP/ELAP deadline.