Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Special Education topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Parents and advocates press Natomas Unified over special-education supports at public hearing
Summary
At a public hearing on the district's local special-education plan, parents and advocates described expulsions from summer programs, gaps in paraprofessional support and missing tiered interventions; trustees pledged follow-up including a working group and discussed an outside audit; the plan sections D and E were approved 5-0.
Natomas Unified School District trustees heard multiple parents and community advocates describe what they called repeated failures to provide required supports for students with disabilities during a public hearing on the district's local special-education plan.
"My son has a 504... he was expelled by day 2 or 3 both summers," said Lindsey Mondraga, who described her child being removed from a summer program and repeated failures by outside providers to accommodate behavioral and learning needs. Parents including Jen Souza and Ray Bell told the board they saw no clear tiered interventions, inadequate paraprofessional staffing and a downturn in proficiency and graduation rates for students with IEPs.
Trustees responded with a mix of acknowledgment and proposals for follow-up. Trustee Hardin said the district should consider "an outside audit to take a look at our special education department" to ensure services and funding are aligned with legal obligations and student needs. Superintendent Castillo clarified that services listed on students' IEPs are included in the SELPA service plan and noted the district uses multiple funding sources beyond the LCAP to deliver special-education services.
Public commenters pressed for concrete changes: stronger behavioral supports, co-teaching or universal-design practices, and clearer funding for low-incidence disabilities such as deafness or blindness. Ray Bell said he reviewed the draft LCAP and found that of over $5 million in related funds "only $10,000 is explicitly allocated to special education" in one referenced line item, a point that drew trustees' attention and requests for staff follow‑up.
The board took formal action later in the meeting to approve the NUSD local plan for special education (sections D and E) by roll call (motion carried 5-0). Trustees indicated they would convene a smaller working group and asked staff to connect directly with parents who had raised concerns.
The hearing produced direct requests to staff for two types of follow-up: immediate outreach to families (the president asked staff to connect with commenters) and a short-term review—including consideration of an external audit—should the board determine current practices are not meeting legal or equity standards.
