Santa Rosa board approves preliminary layoffs and service discontinuances as community voices object

The Santa Rosa City Schools Board of Directors on Feb. 25 approved a pair of resolutions projecting staff reductions and the discontinuance of certain services tied to the district's fiscal stabilization plan, prompting extended public comment from teachers, parents and students who warned of harm to special education, counseling and arts programs.

The board voted to approve a resolution to reduce the classified workforce and a separate resolution to discontinue particular kinds of service for 2026-27 that together establish a ceiling of potential reductions. Dr. Vicky Zanes, presenting the human resources calendar, said the proposal would eliminate about $2,300,000 in unrestricted funds and $746,000 in restricted funds and identified a preliminary projection of "120.5 full time equivalent employees." Trustee Kirby moved the reduction resolution and Trustee Jenkins seconded it; the measure passed with one dissent on the roll call.

Public commenters urged the board to reconsider the cuts. "The proposed cut cut to MTSS counselor Joanna Perdomo's position is an attack on our marginalized youth," said Paulina Lopez Havalos, a Pioneer High School teacher who testified during the closed-session public-comment period. Jason Andrews, president of CSEA Chapter 75, warned staff face "the anxiety of layoff notices that are only weeks away." Teachers and parents at the microphone described possible school closures, elimination of restorative specialists and losses of counselors.

Several speakers cited legal or operational constraints. Emily Turk, a Steel Lane teacher, referenced federal special-education rules, saying the IDEA and implementing regulations "clearly state that districts may not make sped decisions based on fiscal situations," and argued that blanket removal of mild-to-moderate SDC placements would be improper. Tyson Ressler, speaking as a Carrillo teacher, told the board: "If you approve these cuts, you are now knowingly taking the district further out of compliance with the law." Board members and staff reiterated that the resolutions set a maximum ceiling required by Ed. Code timelines and that actual reductions may be fewer once enrollment and bargaining outcomes are known.

President Casten acknowledged the difficulty of the actions and the consequences for students and staff, while Superintendent August said some reductions reflected legal timelines rather than program decisions and pledged to bargain implementation impacts with labor partners. Trustees asked for additional data, asked staff to explore options to lessen impacts, and discussed advancing enrollment and wait-list decisions to reduce uncertainty for families.

The board's action sets in motion negotiation and implementation steps required by law; staff said some reductions have historically been rescinded when enrollment or funding improves. The district indicated it will provide follow-up information on enrollment projections, contract impacts and site-level implementation plans as negotiations and additional data unfold.