Santa Clara Unified board votes to send layoff notices after heated debate over rightsizing plan

The Santa Clara Unified School District Board of Trustees voted unanimously on Feb. 28 to approve a set of resolutions that authorize staff to issue layoff notices as part of a rightsizing plan the district says is needed to close a projected next‑year deficit of more than $30,000,000. Trustees cast the votes after a multi-hour meeting that included presentations from district staff, questions from trustees and extended public comment from parents, teachers and union leaders.

Superintendent Damon Wright opened the board discussion by framing the action as a step ‘‘from dialogue to decision’’ to protect the district’s long-term stability while noting the human cost of staffing changes. Wright said the revised proposal would aim to reduce roughly 13% of administrators, about 10% of certificated staff and around 4% of classified staff, and identify roughly $3,000,000 in supplies and services savings. He also apologized to staff for communication gaps: "We missed this one," he said, acknowledging the district had not personally contacted some employees before listing positions on layoff notices.

Why it matters: The resolutions put the district on the statutory timeline for layoffs. Staff and trustees repeatedly reminded the public that issuing notices in March is an interim, legally required step and that final employment decisions are scheduled for May under California Education Code timelines. The board also reported closed‑session action to issue non‑reelection notices earlier in the evening to five probationary teachers and two psychologists under Education Code §44921(b).

Trustees and staff emphasized legal and process constraints. Assistant Superintendent Jose Gonzales reviewed the mandatory notice and hearing timeline and the seniority-based mechanics that govern layoffs, including bumping rights. Gonzales told the board that layoffs are districtwide and follow Education Code and negotiated labor agreements; he also noted that resignations or retirements could rescind individual notices.

Union leaders and staff urged alternatives. Margie Wysocki, speaking for classified staff, urged the board to ‘‘slow the layoff process’’ and said the district has already seen a surge in retirements (49 classified employees had taken an early-retirement incentive), arguing attrition could achieve savings without rapid staff displacement. Wysocki closed her remarks with a direct appeal to the board: “Choose students over savings. Choose people over pace.” UTSC representatives, teachers and many parents similarly urged a hiring freeze, voluntary early‑retirement incentives (SERP) or a multiyear glide path instead of immediate cuts.

Public comment centered on program stability. Dozens of parents and teachers focused on the potential impact to the district’s Dual Language Immersion (DLI) programs, particularly at Scott Lane, where speakers said proposed reductions could remove as many as 40% of site teachers. Parents and students described the DLI program as foundational to school identity and community cohesion; one parent, Lawrence Ziske, said the program “embodies” the district’s mission of equitable, global preparation and asked trustees to protect its teachers.

Board votes and next steps. The board approved consent items and then passed the resolutions authorizing the issuance of layoff notices and reductions (roll-call votes recorded as 7–0 on the resolutions considered in items J2–J4). Trustees and staff reiterated that March notices set a maximum number of potential layoffs and that final decisions will be made on the statutory schedule in May, subject to resignations, retirements, hearings and any rescissions ordered by administrative law judges.

What was not decided. The actions approved authorize notices and follow statutory process; they do not by themselves remove employees from payroll. Trustees said they would bring additional staffing and enrollment data to the board’s April meeting so members can review proposed staffing allocations before May's final determinations.

The meeting closed after the presentations and a midyear LCAP update; staff said the rightsizing actions will lead to material changes in next LCAP annual updates and funding allocations to be presented publicly on May 28.

Notes: The board also reported in closed session that it issued notices under Education Code §44921(b) to five probationary teachers and two psychologists effective at the end of the 2025–26 school year; the roll‑call for that closed‑session action was recorded as ayes 7, noes 0. The district reported projected reserves declining from roughly 57% of the general fund in 2019–20 to approximately 24% in the current interim report, which staff cited as part of the rationale for measured reductions.