Parents, nurses and specialists urge Riverside Unified to reduce class sizes and boost special-education staffing

Public commenters and district staff pressed Riverside Unified's board on Tuesday to treat staffing and health supports as central priorities in the district's five-year strategic plan.

At the start of the meeting, several parents and staff used the public-comment period to describe classroom pressures and health staffing gaps. "If you're adding 30 [students] without a teacher, it's just gonna create a domino effect," said Erica Fodder, who urged that principals retain local discretion on transfer decisions to prevent class-size "combo" placements. Renee Kuzicki, a RUSD middle-school teacher and parent, said smaller class sizes and more district nurses would help students with IEPs, trauma histories and language needs, and warned that nurse retirements could worsen already-high nurse-to-student ratios.

Stephanie McMasters, a district nurse for 14 years, told the board that guidance from the California Department of Education and the California School Nurses Organization makes clear that access to school nurses is "essential, not optional" for student safety and attendance. Representatives for speech and language pathologists urged the board to adopt guaranteed SLP support, implement weighted caseloads and cap initial assessments to sustain service delivery.

During the study-session presentation that followed, special-education staff summarized legal and procedural standards under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act and Section 504, explained the continuum of placements from "least restrictive environment" to nonpublic schools and residential treatment centers, and reviewed RUSD data. Staff said about 14.9% of Riverside Unified students are eligible for special education, consistent with statewide trends, and noted that federal funding for special education remains far below early promises: an interim report listed roughly $9.22 million in federal special-education funds (about 6.7% of the 40% figure sometimes cited historically).

Board members asked for clarity about how the district balances timeliness and thorough assessments (the presenter described 15/60-day assessment timelines and said the district sometimes funds independent educational evaluations or files to defend its assessments). The superintendent's team described supports available while students await assessments, including Student Success Teams, student-assistance programs and classified staff who provide short-term interventions.

Staff also described targeted instructional models and personnel: inclusion specialists, inclusive-practices coaches, Instructional Assistants (Special Education I/II), Intensive Behavior Intervention Assistants (IVIAs) and special-day-class placements. A provider invited by the district, Debbie Jane, described coaching teachers and working directly with staff at multiple sites to implement accommodations and evidence-based practices.

Board members asked whether co-teaching and push-in models could be scaled. Staff said a smaller pilot (initially in math) showed promising results, with higher mastery rates where credentialed content teachers co-taught with special-education staff; district leaders said they will evaluate pilot outcomes before expanding and noted expansion would carry additional staffing costs.

The session closed with requests for more disaggregated achievement data for students with disabilities and continued board oversight as staff craft recommendations for the strategic plan. No agenda items were acted on at the meeting's close.

Next steps: staff said they will continue evaluating co-teaching pilots, track CTE participation data for students with IEPs, and propose concrete staffing and service recommendations as the strategic-plan process progresses.