Paramount Unified board approves staff reductions after heated public comments

The Paramount Unified School District Board of Education voted 3-2 on March 11 to approve Resolution 25-66, authorizing the reduction or discontinuance of certain pupil and personnel services. The decision followed more than an hour of public comment from parents, students, union representatives and teachers who urged the board to reject cuts to classroom and student-support staff.

Teachers Association representative Audelia Aldridge urged the board to reconsider the proposed layoffs and to use existing reserve funds as an alternative, saying, "The district is holding more than $9,800,000 above the legal minimum" and arguing the board "has the legal authority to draw down reserves to the 3% minimum" rather than make permanent cuts. Aldridge also pointed to roughly $33.3 million in discretionary committed funds and urged the board to exhaust those options before approving permanent reductions.

Students and parents framed the issue in personal terms. Jessica Emerson, a student who called counselors and social workers "more than just educators," said removing these staff would "affect real students with real stories just like mine." Odyssey STEM Academy students read a letter signed by 215 students warning that cuts would erode the advisory and mentorship model that supports internships and exhibitions.

Several classroom teachers and classified staff emphasized lost instructional time and higher workloads. Michelle Lewis, who identified herself as a teacher, said adding 27 minutes to the school day would "significantly reduce our daily prep time," calculating that "27 minutes a day is equal to 135 minutes a week and about 4,000 minutes a year." Workers'group leaders also called for scrutiny of district consulting and discretionary spending as alternatives to layoffs.

Board discussion before the vote repeatedly returned to data and transparency. Board members said they were concerned about the accuracy and completeness of reports on tiered supports and student counts that factor into staffing decisions; one member said the board must be "data driven" when approving reductions. During deliberations some members reassured the public that students are a top priority, but the motion to adopt Resolution 25-66 moved forward and passed by a 3-2 tally.

After the vote, the board paused business for a brief recess amid audible protest from the public gallery. The superintendent and board said staff would follow-up on specific public inquiries when contact information had been provided. The resolution adopted was listed on the agenda as "Pupil and Personnel Services Resolution 25-66: reduction or discontinuance of particular kinds of services." The board scheduled no additional public vote on the same motion during the meeting; next procedural steps for implementation and timelines were not specified during the session.

The board also approved the district's second interim report later in the meeting (see separate article). The hearing record shows strong community opposition to staffing cuts and repeated requests from speakers and board members for additional financial detail and alternatives prior to implementation.