Board holds first reading of proposed local SELPA plan as parents and CAC flag fiscal and oversight concerns

The Santa Rosa City Schools Board on March 25 held a first reading of a proposed local Special Education Local Plan Area (SELPA) that would restructure special‑education governance and budgets currently administered through the Sonoma County SELPA.

Director John Fisher introduced the draft local plan, describing its governance, annual budget plan and annual service plan components as the California Department of Education template requires. The director said the plan is intended to give the district clearer local control over revenues and expenditures and to align special‑education resources with district priorities.

Speakers representing the Sonoma County SELPA (SCO) and the district’s community advisory committee (CAC) urged caution. Elizabeth Englekin, executive director of the Sonoma County SELPA, emphasized the complexity of spin‑out work and the need for a student‑centered, equity‑focused continuum of services across any governance model. “It will be absolutely imperative that we engage in a student‑centered, radically equitable…continuum of service,” Englekin said.

CAC members and a parent with lived experience in the district’s special education system told the board the draft lacked operational and fiscal detail and warned the plan could be a red flag to county and state reviewers unless CAC input and oversight are strengthened. CAC member Renee Blair said the plan, as drafted for the board, could appear “haphazard” and “not fiscally responsible” to outside reviewers.

Board members asked staff for a short list of remaining information needs and requested that staff provide additional materials before the April 8 board decision. Trustees requested a clear, year‑by‑year implementation timeline (Year 1/Year 2/Year 3), a side‑by‑side comparison of alternative SELPA structures used in other districts, a risk‑and‑mitigation analysis (including dispute‑resolution and continuity of services such as deaf/hard‑of‑hearing and visual‑impairment itinerant services), and a fiscal sensitivity analysis that shows the consequence of worst‑case assumptions.

Why it matters Moving to a local SELPA alters how special‑education revenues are pooled and distributed, and carries operational responsibilities (program delivery, compliance oversight, dispute resolution). The board and public highlighted the need for robust transition plans to preserve services.

What’s next Staff agreed to return with a phased implementation plan, a detailed fiscal analysis, comparisons with other SELPA models and a response to CAC recommendations ahead of the April 8 vote.

Speakers quoted in this article are on the meeting record and spoke during the SELPA first reading and public‑comment period.