Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Staffing topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Teachers and campus monitors urge district to revisit staffing, seniority and class‑size projections at Monte Vista
Summary
Monte Vista staff told the board campus monitors face inequitable overtime distribution and that staffing projections for next year underestimate current enrollment, risking two displaced teachers and combined fourth/fifth grade classes of about 35 students.
During public comment, two long‑time Monte Vista staff urged the Mountain View School District Board of Education to revisit staffing decisions and ensure fairness in extra‑duty assignments.
Maria Palupe Calderon, a campus monitor with 26 years at Monte Vista Elementary, said campus monitors who perform the same jobs are being treated differently at two campus designations, are not being offered overtime and feel humiliated. “We have the same rights as they do because we have the same title,” she told trustees, asking the district to address seniority and equitable distribution of extra‑duty assignments.
Christina Villareal, a 31‑year Monte Vista teacher and active member of the teachers’ association, asked the board to reconsider staffing projections shown to teachers on Tuesday. She said district materials listed 372 students for the TK–6 grade span while the school’s current count was 383 students, and warned that the district’s proposal to combine fourth and fifth grades would create classrooms of roughly 35 students and displace two teachers. “This will force us to have only 1 fourth grade class and 1 fifth grade classroom with about 35 students each... This is not setting up our students to succeed,” Villareal said.
Superintendent Dr. Andre and trustees acknowledged the concerns and said staff would review the projections. Board members asked staff to provide additional data, and one trustee requested that the board confirm consensus before staff prepares a report on screen time and other research previously requested.
The board did not take action during public comment; staff and trustees said they would follow up and examine the staffing figures and seniority questions raised by employees and the association.
