Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Budget Reduction topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
San Ramon Valley Unified board approves revised budget‑reduction plan authorizing up to $26 million; community urges protection for counselors and student‑care
Summary
After hours of public testimony urging protection of counselors and social workers, the San Ramon Valley Unified School District board approved a revised budget‑reduction plan (option two) that authorizes up to $26 million in reductions while preserving some counseling FTE and prioritizing K–3 class sizes.
The San Ramon Valley Unified School District Board of Education on Jan. 14 approved a revised budget‑reduction plan (option two) that authorizes staff to pursue reductions totaling up to $26 million to meet county directives and legal timelines for layoff notifications.
Superintendent CJ Kamik told the board staff was asking for a $26 million authorization to provide a negotiating variance and to meet statutory deadlines for notices to employees: "That's why staff is recommending today that we authorize up to $26 million," he said. Kamik described the choice as painful and said he did not "defend these as...good for kids," but called the steps necessary to preserve local fiscal control.
Staff presented two alternative scenarios. Scenario one retained more counseling and student‑support staff (including 11.0 elementary counselors funded by one‑time grant dollars for one more year) and produced roughly $26.6 million in reductions; scenario two sought a more distributed set of cuts that reduced elementary counselor FTE but maintained additional high‑school support and other student‑support positions, yielding a plan that staff said would reach the $26 million target while saving additional ongoing staffing where possible.
The meeting drew extended public comment. Dozens of district counselors, social workers, librarians, special‑education staff, students and parents urged the board to avoid cuts to mental‑health providers and school libraries. "Eliminating support counselors and social workers will truly be to the detriment of our students," said one high‑school support counselor, Robin Blackburn, describing crisis interventions and safety plans the staff provides. Speakers gave multiple concrete examples of students helped by counseling and social‑work interventions.
Board members debated tradeoffs between protecting counseling FTE and keeping K–3 class sizes small. Trustees said they faced a stark choice with limited options to raise revenue quickly; several members urged continued statewide advocacy for increased school funding.
Board member Herd moved to approve option two; the motion was seconded and carried on a roll‑call vote. Staff said the approved list will be the basis for labor negotiations and for the notices that, if needed, must be issued under Education Code timelines (initial notices by March 15). The district will return to the board with negotiated outcomes and any needed adjustments.
The vote does not by itself finalize personnel actions: several items on the reduction list are negotiable with bargaining units and subject to collective‑bargaining processes before any layoffs could be implemented.
