Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Education topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Parent urges Mt. Diablo Unified board to pause Bancroft phase-out as closed session on litigation is announced
Summary
A Bancroft parent told the Mt. Diablo Unified School District board May 13 to plan for all legal outcomes and pause the phase-out of Bancroft dual-immersion kindergarten while the board moved into closed session to discuss several pending and anticipated lawsuits.
The Mt. Diablo Unified School District board heard a public comment May 13 urging it to pause the planned phase-out of Bancroft’s dual-immersion kindergarten and to prepare now for every possible legal outcome.
Salman, who identified himself as a Bancroft parent, told the board that "planning ahead is not capitulation" and asked trustees to plan for staffing, classroom space, sibling applicants, Woodside enrollment and continuity of the district’s dual-immersion kindergarten program for the 2026-27 school year. "Please pause the phase out, fix the process, and work with the families you were elected to serve," he said.
The comment came just before the board moved into closed session. The presiding chair told the meeting that the board would discuss negotiations and provide direction to representatives regarding represented employees under Government Code section 54957.6, possible discipline or dismissal of public employees, and conference with legal counsel on existing litigation under Government Code section 54956.9(d)(1) and anticipated litigation under section 54956.9(d)(2). The chair read several cases that will be discussed in closed session, including litigation brought by the Bancroft Dual Immersion Family Association against the district.
Why it matters: If court rulings or negotiated outcomes change the district’s plans, families said the board should be ready to address immediate operational impacts such as classroom assignments and sibling placement. The parent framed advance operational planning as oversight, saying the elected board is accountable to district families and can both support the superintendent when appropriate and ask for corrections when processes were flawed.
No formal vote or motion was taken during the portion of the meeting on the public record. The board adjourned into closed session to discuss the listed personnel and litigation matters; closed-session outcomes were not disclosed on the public record at the meeting’s close.
