Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Outdoor Education topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Staffers, parents and students press Board over Outdoor Education staffing, benefits cut concerns
Summary
Multiple current and former Outdoor Education staff and students raised concerns that recent staffing changes reduced hours and removed medical benefits; the Board requested a staff memo and legal review to clarify what happened and whether program funding or operations were affected.
Multiple current and former Outdoor Education staff, interns and students addressed the San Mateo County Board of Education on Aug. 20, raising concerns about recent staffing changes that they said reduced hours and cost some employees employer‑provided medical benefits.
Board Member Mike O’Neill asked for an explanation, noting the potential financial and ethical impact if staff were hired under an assumption of full‑time status and then hours were reduced within weeks. Superintendent Nancy Magee said she was “unsure whether the staffing change described was accurate” and emphasized that “there was no intent to remove benefits; the shift was related to changes in state law.” The Board asked Magee to work with Deputy County Attorney Lisa Cho to prepare a detailed memo explaining the staffing changes and legal basis.
Public comment on Outdoor Education included a substantial written record (Superintendent Magee said 45 pages of written comments were submitted) and a number of live speakers who identified themselves as current or former staff, interns, teachers and students. Board members said they want clearer information about the program’s budget and sustainability; Board Member Chelsea Bonini specifically requested a cost and funding breakdown for the program so the Board can evaluate programmatic impacts.
The Board did not take formal disciplinary or budget action at the meeting. Instead, after public comment and discussion, members requested follow‑up reporting: a joint memo from Superintendent Magee and Deputy County Attorney Cho that will explain whether staff were mis‑classified, how state law affected staffing decisions, and any operational impacts to the Outdoor Education program. The Board also asked staff to include potential alternatives and a cost comparison as part of that follow‑up. Next procedural steps: the Board will receive the memo and may agendize further action if the responses indicate programmatic or fiscal concerns.
