REGULAR BOARD MEETING
Santa Rosa City Schools
August 12, 2026
Hybrid: Santa Rosa City Hall Council Chambers
4:00 p.m. – Closed Session
5:00 p.m. – Study Session
6:30 p.m. – Open Session
Hybrid: Zoom / Santa Rosa City Hall
*** streamed ***
Video Board Meetings through a link on this district webpage. (It is often changed right before the meeting.)
Please take time to review the following abbreviated version of the agenda. Click here to see the entire agenda. It has live links on many items with more information. If you want to comment to the board about any upcoming items, email agendacomments@srcs.k12.ca.us. Please CC wearesrta@gmail.com on your email.
Members attending online are encouraged to add SRTA to the front of their Zoom client name.
Closed Session Items:
A.1. Public Comment On Closed Session Agenda Items To comment, email Melanie Martin at mmartinsrcs.k12.ca.us.
This is an opportunity for members of the public to speak to the board on Closed Session items only.
Without specifics on closed session agenda items, it is impossible for the public to know when to provide insights for items being reviewed.
B.1. Public Employee Discipline/Dismissal/Release
B.2. Conference With Legal Counsel – Anticipated Litigation (Number of potential cases: 1)
B.3. Student Readmissions (Case Nos: 2025/26-01, 2025/26-04, 2025/26-06, 2025/26-16 )
B.4. Public Employee Performance Evaluation (Title of employee being reviewed: Superintendent, Associate Superintendent, Assistant Superintendent, Principals, Vice Principals, Assistant Principals, Directors, Coordinators)
In response to a board inquiry, there was expectation of a robust communication campaign to prepare students and families for the new expectations around student phones on campus. There was only one parent square that went home about a week ago.
C. STUDY SESSION: (5:00 p.m.)
C. RECONVENE TO OPEN STUDY SESSION (5:00 P.M.)
Public Comments are expected to be allowed on the Study Session Calendar
Parents were frustrated at being unaware that enrollment in “regular” courses were not college prep, and their students didn’t qualify to go straight to a four year college. In response, SRCS went A-G for all. Now, it would be fair for parents to be just as upset that their students are graduating in this new system and don’t qualify to go straight to a four year college. There was a communication problem that was not mended. Unless students have a C or better average, they do not qualify to go straight to a four year school.
C.1. (Discussion) Current Graduation Requirement and Updates
Staff continues to work toward a formal recommendation that will:
- Maintain high academic standards and readiness expectations.
- Incorporate feedback from teachers and instructional leaders regarding course sequencing, student workload, and instructional capacity.
- Identify policy adjustments and support structures necessary to improve access, persistence, and graduation outcomes for all students.
Summary of Major Perceptions from the HS Graduation Requirement Committee
- Teacher Training: Teachers need more training and ongoing professional development to effectively support students in higher-level A–G courses.
- Tracking and Course Changes: The district did not view its course structure as tracking, but the rapid elimination of regular/survey and RSP classes removed important supports without a transition plan, leaving students and teachers in a difficult position.
- Student Preparation and Support: Students need stronger academic preparation beginning in elementary school to be successful in A–G coursework.
- Student Concerns: Some students have given up because they do not see a clear path to graduation or college readiness. The district has not adequately tracked students who successfully moved from non-A–G courses into A–G pathways or recognized those successes.
- Lack of Effective Off-Ramps and On-Ramps: Promised alternatives for students struggling with A–G requirements were not consistently provided. Waivers and alternative pathways often require students to fail first, rather than providing meaningful alternatives. Students also need clear “on-ramps” to return to the A–G pathway.
- Lessons for Future Changes: Major instructional and curricular changes need a better implementation process, including:
- Meaningful opportunities for teachers and staff to review and process changes.
- Genuine consideration of staff concerns and feedback.
- Ongoing, relevant professional development.
- A clear transition plan that anticipates how changes will affect students and educators.
Overall: The committee identified a central lesson: raising A–G expectations without providing adequate preparation, supports, pathways, and professional development can create barriers rather than increase student success.
Graduation Pathways
| Graduation Requirements | |||||||
| UC/CSU Entrance | State of California | Santa Rosa City Schools | Santa Rosa City Schools | Santa Rosa City Schools | Santa Rosa City Schools | Santa Rosa City Schools | |
| Name | A-G Requirements | Diploma Requirements | A-G for All | 220 Alternative | 180 Alternative | 130 Alternative | Industry Concentration/CTE |
| Number Credits | 220 Credits | 130 Credits | 220 Credits | 220 Credits | 180 Credits | 130 Credits | 220 Credits |
| Stipulations | with grade of C or Better | D or Better | D or Better | D or Better | D or Better | D or Better | D or Better |
| Who can do this? | All Students | All Students | All Students | RHS/Grace @ PHS | RHS | Sped, Homeless or Foster Youth | ??? |
| Requirements | Requirements | Requirements | Requirements | Requirements | Requirements | Requirements | Requirements |
| A: Social Studies | 2 years | 3 years | 3 years | 3 years | 3 years | 3 years | 3 years |
| B: English | 4 years | 3 years | 4 years | 4 years | 4 years | 3 years | 4 years |
| C: Mathematics | 3 years, Math 1-3, rec 4 | 2 years, Math 1 | 3 years, Math 1 and beyond | 2 years, Math 1 and beyond | 2 years | 2 years, Math 1 | 2 years, Math 1 and beyond |
| D: Science | 2 years, rec 3 | 2 years | 2 years | 2 years | 2 years | 2 years | 2 years |
| E: World Language (Foreign Language) | 2 years, rec 3 | 1 year WOLA, VAPA or CTE | 2 years | 1 year WOLA, VAPA or CTE | 1 year WOLA, VAPA or CTE | 1 year WOLA, VAPA or CTE | 1 year |
| F: Visual & Performing Arts (VAPA) | 1 year | 1 year | 1 year | ||||
| Physical Education | none required | 2 years | 2 years | 2 years | 2 years | 2 years | 2 years |
| G: Electives | 1 year | none required | 5 years | 8 years | 4 years | none required | 2 years CTE including capstone and 5 years electives |
| SRCS 2026 Graduate Data | ||||||
| Site | Number of Graduates | Grad Rate | A-G Diploma | Math Waiver | No F’s | Average Sem Repeat |
| EAHS | 230 | 91.30% | 77.0% | 11.7% | 36.30% | 9.6 |
| MCHS | 393 | 97% | 87.3% | 8.1% | 70.40% | 4.2 |
| MHS | 297 | 94.90% | 85.2% | 12.8% | 68.90% | 4.1 |
| PHS | 347 | 98% | 74.1% | 11.2% | 56.90% | 6.9 |
| SRHS | 371 | 95.40% | 57.4% | 29.6% | 66.20% | 5.3 |
| RHS | 120 | 80% | 80.0% | 0.8% | 10.80% | 17.2 |
| SRCS Total | 1758 | 94% | 76% | 14.0% | 58.10% | 6.5 |
A-G Graduation Requirements Study Session Presentation
Sonoma County Graduation Requirements Review
Sonoma County Math Requirements Review
SRTA Member Survey A-G Summary (Mar 2026)
SRTA Graduation Requirements Resolution, Adopted Dec 5, 2023
Graduation Requirement Committee
SRTA supports a thoughtful review of graduation requirements and welcomed the Board’s direction to conduct a collaborative process that meaningfully includes educators. We are therefore deeply concerned that the District Office appears to have reached its conclusion before that process has occurred. The agenda states that differences between sites suggest “site- and department-specific instructional and support needs, rather than a need for changes to the district-level graduation policy itself,” and identifies DO’s emerging recommendation as maintaining current requirements.
This is not a recommendation of the Graduation Requirements Committee. The committee has met only once, has not completed its analysis, and much of the data members have asked to examine is absent from this presentation. Instead of neutrally presenting the questions still to be answered, the presentation appears structured to support DO’s already emerging recommendation.
The data presented raise important questions, but they do not establish that graduation policy is not contributing to student outcomes. A 94% graduation rate alone does not tell us how many students graduate fully A-G eligible, why students require waivers, what prevented non-graduates from earning diplomas, or how outcomes differ for students with disabilities, multilingual learners, dually identified students and other subgroups. Other districts are asking these same questions and reconsidering one-size-fits-all approaches. San Diego Unified—long viewed by SRCS as a model for A-G for All—recently adopted an alternative graduation sequence for qualifying students while maintaining rigorous college- and career-readiness expectations. SRCS should allow its own committee to fully examine the evidence and alternatives before declaring that policy change is unnecessary.
SRTA is particularly troubled by the proposal to “rework” the existing committee into a working group focused on implementing DO initiatives. Educators have been asked time and again to serve on committees, invest their time and expertise, and trust collaborative processes, only to see their recommendations disregarded or decisions made elsewhere. The current committee was mutually selected by SRTA and District Admin specifically to complete the review requested by the Board. At the same time SRCS is asking educators to trust and participate in the educator-led CAPS process, it cannot unilaterally substitute a District Office recommendation for the collaborative work the Board explicitly requested. Trust requires that the existing committee be allowed to complete its charge and make its own recommendations before its membership, purpose, or work is changed.
Finally, SRTA rejects the false choice between high expectations and multiple pathways. SRCS raised graduation expectations while reducing many of the supports students need to reach them, including intervention, smaller class sizes, and other systems of support; we still do not have a comprehensive MTSS system. If universal A-G readiness is the goal, that investment must begin in elementary school—not after students arrive in high school already years behind. At the same time, we must support the students sitting in our classrooms today and broaden our definition of success. College, community college, CTE, apprenticeships, skilled trades and the workforce are all valuable outcomes.
D. RECONVENE TO OPEN SESSION (6:30 p.m.)
D.7. Student Board Members Loyalty Oath of Office
Welcome to Zaira Alvarado, a senior at Montgomery High School, and Mallix Way, a senior at Piner High School .
E. REPORTS (Bargaining Units, Sup, and Board)
F. Public Comment on Non Agenda and Consent Items
SRTA members are invited to complete ‘blue cards’ at the board meeting in order to make public comments. Online comments have been suspended. Comments will be limited to 60 seconds. Only items NOT on the agenda are addressed at this time, with the exception of consent items (See section G.)
Comments are requested at the board meeting to bring a member’s perspective and share real experiences of the impact of district policies and practices on students and staff.
Speakers are limited to just those in person (unless a board member attends online without prior notice.)
Comments are most impactful when they are well spoken, composed and reasonable.
G. CONSENT ITEMS
All consent items are enacted by the Board in one motion, unless a Board member requests that an item be removed and discussed separately.
G.2. Approval of Personnel Transactions
EdJoin shows a total of ninety-eight current postings for two hundred forty-six jobs in SRCS. There are thirty-six certificated opening postings (fifteen more than the last meeting). There are sixty-one current classified postings for two hundred seven job openings (twenty-nine more than the last meeting.) There are three certificated and no classified management positions posted.
Certificated changes include the reinstatement of Adam Derum (SRHS), Lara Costanzo (EDSERV),
Jessica Fruiht (ELAL), Ketsia Cabaz Raufaste (FACS), Julie Montgomery (MHS), Jennifer Evans (HVES), and Andrew Ravani (SRCSA). Welcome back to Theresa Batchelder (MHS). There are seven resignations as Carolyn Smith (CCLA), Deborah Kantor (ALES), Aileen Cormack (HSMS), Carolyn Smith (CCLA) , Jereme Anglin (SRHS), Jason Pedri (SRHS) and Audrey Mosquera (ALES) leave after a combined sixty-nine years of services to our students. We bid a fond farewell to the retiring Tracy Hahn (MHS) and Colette Scafani (FACS). We wish you all the best in your future endeavors.
This brings this year’s certificated resignation totals to seventy-eight folks who amazingly gave over three-hundred eighty-five years of service to the students and families of SRCS before they resigned. The gap they leave will be noticed.
A total of thirty-three certificated folks amazingly gave over seven hundred thirty-three years of service to the students and families of SRCS as they retired this year.
Changes to classified staff includes ten hires, eight resignations and four retirements. They leave taking with them nearly ninety-three years of knowledge and service to our staff and students. You will be missed!
SRCS bids a fond farewell to Tamra Oser who is retiring from HR after thirty-four years. Her knowledge and kindness were deeply appreciated.
SRTA members are especially distraught witnessing talented staff choosing to leave SRCS for better working conditions.
There is one supervisory retirement and one resignation after twenty-two and a half years with SRCS.
G.5. Approval of Contracts
The total cost of contracts is $2,983,427.70.
| # | Provider | Cost | Description |
| District | |||
| 1 | California School Board Association (CSBA) | $26,760.00 | Dues and Educational Legal Alliance (ELA) |
| 2 | California School Board Association (CSBA) / GAMUT Online | $18,475.00 | Manual Maintenance Plus and GAMUT Platform |
| 5 | Integrated Security Controls | $50,000.00 | Cameras Maintenance |
| 6 | Pitney Bowes | $22,171.20 | 5 year Lease of a postage meter/mailing system |
| 8 | LunchAssist | $25,000.00 | professional services for CNS Admin Review |
| 10 | Amplify | $33,563.00 | Platform for Dibels K—8 reading skill assessment |
| 11 | Amergis | $2,000,000.00 | behavior technicians, SLP aides, health aides and other support staff as needed |
| 12 | Pearson Clinical Assessments | $59,017.70 | platform for diagnosing, treating, and monitoring psychological, behavioral, and development conditions |
| Elementary | |||
| 9 | All City Management Services | $662,734.80 | Crossing guard services, at an increase of $83,000 for 3.5 hours of daily service to 28 sites, prior contract was for 25 sites, with decrease to campuses. |
| Secondary | |||
| 7 | Magnolia Global Academy for Leaders, DBA Magnolia Project | $39,000.00 | PD and secure 3-day industry mentorships for Career Exploration Program phases all MS students and 30 RHS students |
| Charter | |||
| 3 | Joe Culpepper | $20,808.00 | Magic and Juggling in French |
| 4 | NatureBridge | $25,898.00 | SRACS Outdoor Ed |
SRTA has questions about two contracts. All City Management Services are increasing the number of sites for crossing guards while SRCS is decreasing the number of campuses.
At the June 24 board meeting, the $4,200,000 contract for Sunburst Workforce was presented as an MSP for managing contract vendors who provide staff to districts for unfilled positions, including instructional aides, Speech Language Pathologists, Occupational Therapists, and Behaviorists. The Amergis contract for $2,000,000 seems like a contract that would be under Sunburst. Will Sunburst subcontract to 360, Emerald, and Inspire?
G.6. Approval of Contracts – Bond
| # | Provider | Site | Description | Cost | Total Cost |
| Secondary | |||||
| 2 | Quattrocchi Kwok Architects | PHS | Additional Design for AV in theater | $8,250 | $1,300,000 |
| 9 | Ghilotti Construction Company | MHS | Reconnect Water Supply | $16,000 | $16,000 |
| District | |||||
| 1 | Arkance | – | Software Subscription | $660 | $660 |
| 3 | Integrated Security Controls | DO | Remove Cameras | $290 | $78,000,000 |
| 8 | PBK | DO | CNS Kettle Replacement design services | $255,250 | $2,000,000 |
| Elementary | |||||
| 4 | Crawford & Associates, Inc. | HLES | Amendment for testing and observation due to soil conditions | $25,000 | $18,000,000 |
| 5 | Integrated Security Controls | JMES | Remove Cameras | $290 | $14,500,000 |
| 6 | Crawford & Associates, Inc. | JMES | Amendment for testing and observation due to soil conditions | $25,000 | $14,500,000 |
| 7 | F & G Design/Drafting Services | ALES | Inspection Services for fencing | $13,500 | $110,000 |
The total cost of contracts by measure:
Measure C = $218,962.00
Measure G = $125,278.00
Total = $344,240.00
SRTA members wonder why special CNS funding isn’t covering the kettle replacement.
G.7. Approval of the CNS School Nutrition Program Micro-Purchase Self-Certification
Program operators may now self-certify for a micro-purchase threshold, up to $50,000, on an annual basis.
G.8. Approval of the Use of Piggyback Bids/Contracts (CMAS, NASPO, Co-Ops) for the 2026-27 School Year
Authorizes staff to use available pre-negotiated contracts for the procurement of eligible items to save cost and time.
G.9. Notice and Approval of the Removal/Recycling of Unusable, Outdated, and/or Damaged Instructional Materials and Textbooks
Materials List Catalog of library/textbook items by site.
G.10. Approval of Resolution 2026/27-12 for the Declaration of Obsolete Items/Equipment and Authorization to Sell, Dispose, and/or Donate
Materials List Seven vehicles from SRHS Auto program
G.11. Approval of Correction to the Amendment of the Left Coast Scanning Proposal
2/28/24 Board approved contract for $540,998
12/17/25 Board approved contract for $21,980 for Invoice #12340
6/27/26 Board approved amendment for an additional $11,270.
Two previously incurred invoices totaling $22,663.49 were inadvertently omitted from the amendment request.
Total Revised Not-to-Exceed Amount: $49,518.49 including $563 in late charges.
Document Imaging Proposal 2026
SRTA appreciates the caution of accounts payable to ensure expenses are approved by existing contracts.
G.12. Approval of School District Nomination to the Sonoma County School Attendance Review Board (SARB)
Nomination of Stacy Desideri, Executive Director, Wellness and Engagement.
H. DISCUSSION / ACTION ITEMS
1. Finance Calendar
a. Public Comment on the Finance Calendar
b. (Action) Approval of 2026-27 45 Day Budget Update
The unaudited actuals report is due by September 15th, and actual student enrollments for 2026–27 will be known after school has opened, and the staffing assignments are completed. The next current fiscal year financial report, the 2026-27 First Interim in December will take all of this into consideration.
Summary:
- SRCS’s projected unrestricted reserve improves significantly, from $8.65 million (3.65%) at budget adoption to approximately $14.0 million (5.88%) after the 45-day adjustments.
- The largest positive changes are:
- $2.44 million increase from the 1.44% LCFF add-on.
- $4.6 million increase from the Special Education base funding rate.
- The report estimates SRCS’s theoretical share of the $3.9 billion Proposition 98 settle-up at $7.2–$7.5 million, but this money is not budgeted because the state is delaying allocation.
Significant New/Restored Funding
- $10.43 million Student Support & Professional Development Discretionary Block Grant — one-time funding.
- $1.36 million restored Learning Recovery Emergency Block Grant funding.
- $3.21 million annually in ongoing Community Schools funding, with SRCS sites receiving approximately $3.095 million based on eligibility.
- $450,000 for Abraham Lincoln Elementary for literacy coaches/reading specialists.
- $45,224 for K–2 reading-difficulties screening.
The report strongly emphasizes that one-time funds should not be used to create permanent expenses. The $10.43 million professional development/student support grant is one-time, while the LCFF and Special Education increases are ongoing.
Several expenditures reduce the benefit of the additional revenue:
- Paid pregnancy disability leave: approximately $428,750 in 2026–27, rising to $857,500 annually in future years. There is ample additional income from the state to cover this.
- CSEA layoff MOU: $178,036.
- SRTA MOU/TA: $428,319.
- Reinstated calendar work days for admin: $135,000.
- Special Services restructure/SELPA preparation: $250,000.
- Board stipend increase $122,973
- Other board/bylaw and technology-related costs also add expenditures.
Despite the improved reserve, SRCS continues to have a significant cash-flow problem.
In 2025–26, Fund 01 cash fell to approximately: -$7.23 million in August, -$20.05 million in September, -$25.34 million in October and -$38.71 million in November.
Property-tax payments in December and April temporarily restored cash.
The report estimates that SRCS would have needed approximately $38.7 million of additional liquidity to avoid going negative under the same cash-flow pattern. Even a 10% reserve would not have been enough to cover that cash trough.
The 45-day update is financially more positive than the adopted budget, but it does not mean SRCS suddenly has $14 million available to spend.
The improved reserve reflects several new revenue sources, but:
- some money is restricted;
- much of the new funding is one-time;
- ongoing costs are increasing even though there have been no improvements to staff salaries.
- declining enrollment remains a concern; and
- The District still faces a substantial cash-flow/liquidity problem.
The report itself recommends monthly cash forecasting and cautions that reserve percentage alone does not demonstrate that sufficient cash will be available throughout the year. Lines of credit with the county will need to be utilized.
Bottom Line
SRCS enters 2026–27 in a stronger budget position than anticipated, with roughly $5.4 million more projected unrestricted reserves. However, much of the new funding is restricted or one-time, while the District continues to face structural cost pressures, declining enrollment, and a significant cash-flow gap.
The next major checkpoint will be the December 2026 First Interim Report, which will incorporate actual enrollment, staffing, and updated financial data.
How do other districts manage their cashflow without loans?
What is the progress on FCMAT recommendations?
How much have closures and consolidation actually saved the district? How can we move forward without knowing the financial impact of these moves?
SRTA is concerned the cuts being implemented this year will harm students. There is a need to restructure budgeting by priorities. Dedicated staff can not remain employed in the district without increases to compensation as the cost of living continues to increase dramatically.
2. Educational Services Calendar
a. Public Comment on the Student Services Calendar
b. (Discussion) Comprehensive School Site Safety Plans
Review of the development of the annual Comprehensive Site Safety Plans and the annual work timeline for schools in the Santa Rosa City School District. Each School Site Council or Safety Committee’s responsibilities include:
- Approving the plan
- Recommending it to the local governing board for approval
- Monitoring its implementation, and
- Evaluating the effectiveness of the planned activities at least annually.
Q 1: July, August, September ● Update Incident Command ● Build Safety Committee ● Identify Article 8 representatives ● Schedule Safety Drills ● Train Staff, Students, Parents and Community
Q 2: October, November December ● Analyze safety data ○ Panorama ○ Youth Truth ○ Discipline ● Review Metrics from prior year with teams ○ ELAC ○ School Site Council ○ Safety Committee ● Identify new goals and Metrics
Quarter 3: January, February, March ● Collaborate and Revise ● Add new goals ● Revise in Document Tracking System ● Share Updates with Site Teams ○ ELAC ○ School Site Council ○ Safety Committee ● Share revised with SRFD and SRPD ● Bring for Board Approval in Early March
Quarter 4: April, May, June ● Update Incident Command ● Train Staff, Students, Parents and Community
Site Safety plans must be accessible to the public upon request (*tactical responses shall be kept confidential)
The First Draft of the District Safety Plan was pulled from the September 2024 board agenda. It still has not been shared at a board meeting.
SRCS/SRTA Contract Article 8 Safety (Summarized at the end.)
The contract specifies a District Safety Committee that includes teacher representatives appointed by the Association.
The committee helps develop and review major safety plans, including:
- Comprehensive School Safety Plans (CSSP)
- Injury and Illness Prevention Program (IIPP)
- Emergency Operations Plan (EOP)
- Workplace Violence Prevention Plan (WVPP)
The committee meets at least six times per year and analyzes safety data.
SRTA members will be glad to see a plan for sites to attack their safety plans. The district Safety Committee and District Admin provide much of the specified content for site plans. Site Councils need support by being provided the data they are to review and suggestions for changing the plan when the data calls for it.
The District Safety Committee has not been effectively utilized to develop and review major plans. SRTA negotiated in good faith for this committee.
c. (Discussion) Career Technical Education (CTE) Update
Presentation on CTE pathways designed to meet regional workforce needs while providing students with engaging, relevant learning experiences that support college, career, and lifelong success.
CTE participation consistently hovers around 23% of SRCS high school students. The rate of completers, students finishing a two year pathway or a capstone consistently hovers around 4% of CTE students.
CTE Update Presentation 8.12.26
12 Elements of a High-Quality Program
Description of Work-Based Learning Experiences
SRTA appreciates the efforts of our CTE staff. The data is very thin on this item. There is no transparency with reductions to CTE staffing and sections due to the significant cuts to sites. The new brochures are noteworthy. How are CTE programs being messaged to students and families? What is the plan to increase Work-Based Learning Experiences for students?
d. (Action) Approval of Agricultural Career Technical Education Incentive Grants
Santa Rosa City Schools is applying for $49,716 in grant funding for the Elsie Allen and Santa Rosa High School Agriculture programs. There is a 1:1 matching funds requirement.
2026-27 Elsie Allen High School Agricultural CTE Incentive Grant Application $16,715
2026-27 Santa Rosa High School Agricultural CTE Incentive Grant Application $33,001
e. (Discussion / Action) Update on Current Prop 28 and Approval of the Annual Report
For LEAs with an enrollment of 500 or more students, 80 percent of the funds are to be expended to employ certificated or classified staff to provide instruction, and the remaining 20 percent of funds are to be expended on training, supplies and materials, and educational partner programs. No more than 1 percent of the LEA’s allocation can be used for administrative costs, including indirect costs.This item is to meet the annual compliance audit.
Allocations must be used for additional or new arts programs and may not be used to supplant existing staff funding. Funds may be pooled between sites.
Although only programmatic information is required in this annual report, annually, beginning in October 2026, the current year plan with fiscal information will be presented.
Prop 28 25-26 School Year Elementary
- Number of full-time equivalent teachers (certificated). .5 : Abraham Lincoln Elementary – .5 FTE certificated
- Number of full-time equivalent personnel (classified). 2.5 : Proctor Terrace Elementary – .75 FTEclassified personnel, Helen Lehman Elementary – .75 FTEclassified personnel, Steele Lane Elementary – 1.0 FTE classified personnel 4.
- Number of full-time equivalent teaching aides: 0 5.
- Number of students served: 2,606
- Number of school sites providing arts education: 6
Prop 28 25-26 School year Secondary
- Number of full-time equivalent teachers (certificated) providing arts education programs with AMS funds 5.68 FTE
- Number of full-time equivalent personnel (classified) providing arts education programs with AMS funds . 75
- Number of full-time equivalent teaching aides providing arts education programs with AMS funds . 75
- Number of students served with AMS funds 787
- Number of school sites providing arts education programs with AMS funds 10
SRTA members are unclear on the decision making process for these funds on each site. This report is not transparent as to how each secondary site is utilizing this funding.
3. Charter School Calendar
a. Public Comment on the Charter School Calendar
b.- e. (Discussion / Action) Update on Current Prop 28 and Approval of the Annual Reports
CCLA Prop 28 One 0.4 FTE certificated teacher is serving 47 students.
SRACS Prop 28 One 0.2 FTE certificated teacher is serving 128 students.
SRCAS Prop 28 Number of full-time equivalent personnel (classified) providing arts education programs with AMS funds .8125 FTE serving 300 TK -5 students.
SRFACS Prop 28 ne 0.4 FTE certificated teacher is serving 92 students.
4. Human Resources Calendar
a. Public Comment on the Human Resources Calendar
b.-e. (Action) Approval of Provisional Internship Permit Application (PIP)
This is an annual process for new hires that are not fully qualified for the positions they have been placed in. The applicants must agree to complete course work to qualify for an intern program next year. PIP’s are not renewable and are issued on a one-time basis per applicant in any credential subject area.
Angelica Montalvan TK Elementary Teacher position at Cesar Chavez Language Academy (1.00 FTE)
Vanessa Ramirez Garcia SDC- ESN Teacher position at James Monroe Elementary (1.00 FTE)
Gabriella Alvarez ESN Teacher position at Early Learning Academy (1.00 FTE)
Briana Seely-Clark Mild/Mod Teacher position at Santa Rosa Jr./Sr. High School (1.00 FTE)
f.-i. The following items are all rescinding the salary reductions made last year.
- Amendment to Assistant Superintendent of Human Resources Employment Contract Total Cost $1,150.49
- Oral Recommendation and Amendment Regarding Associate Superintendent (CBO) Salary and Fringe Benefits Total Cost $1,449.41
- Approval of Revised Job Description for Executive Director of SELPA and Special Services Total Cost $1,845 (This is 2 days as opposed to the others that are restoring 1 day)
- Approval of Revised Director of Human Resources Job Description Total Cost $1,510
5. Business Services Calendar
a. Public Comment on the Business Services Calendar
b. (Action) Approval of Santa Rosa Elementary School District Resolution 2026/27-15 Authorizing The Issuance And Sale Of General Obligation Bonds, 2022 Election, 2026 Series C, In An Aggregate Principal Amount Not To Exceed $15,000,000 And Approving Related Documents And Actions
c. (Action) Approval of City of Santa Rosa High School District Resolution No. 2026/27-16 Authorizing The Issuance And Sale Of General Obligation Bonds, 2022 Election, 2026 Series C, In An Aggregate Principal Amount Not To Exceed $50,000,000 And Approving Related Documents And Actions
I. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
June 24, 2026 Minutes and Supporting Documents
July 22, 2026 Minutes and Resolution
J. BOARD MEMBER REQUESTS FOR INFORMATION
K. INFORMATION ITEMS
K.1. Future Board Discussion Items
The following are future board update items:
- Resolutions for first semester
- Resolution for Suicide Prevention Month (August 26, 2026)
- Resolution Sept Attendance Month (August 26, 2026)
- Resolution Recognizing October as LGBTQIA+ History Month (August 26, 2026)
- Approval of Resolution to Recognize September 15 to October 15 as Latinx Heritage Month (August 26, 2026)
- Resolution Proclaiming October 12, 2026, as Indigenous People’s Day (August 26, 2026)
- Resolution Recognizing the School Administrator (August 26, 2026)
- Resolution Recognizing Ruby Bridges (August 26, 2026)
- Resolution Proclaiming October as Filipino American History Month (August 26, 2026)
- Resolution: October as Coaches Appreciation Month (August 26, 2026)
- Resolution Proclaiming the Week of School Psychologist (August 26, 2026)
- Resolution of Italian Heritage Month (August 26, 2026)
- Approval of 2025/26 Unaudited Actuals (September 9, 2026)
- Resolution for District for Capacity of Interdistrict Transfers
SRTA looks to the future scheduling of the following items:
Plan for pivoting from A-G for all.
Medina- AP instruction data with number of years of experience of Teachers
-Clarification about board policy adoption requiring a majority of board membership versus a majority of those present/voting
– consider E-sports clubs or teams
Caston- Site funding finance report with various amounts and sources
-update 3510 policy around reducing waste as a discussion item
– Communication plan.
Prak – Info about a non voting teacher on the board.
Kirby – add an assistant wrestling coach for women?
– Copies of the panorama and youth truth surveys.
DeLaTorre- facility fee, possible reductions?
– Info on how we identify College and Career readiness.
Jenkins — projected enrollment for next year.
– marketing plan update as committed to last year.
- Approval of Joint Use MOU’s for School Site Facility Use (pulled from June 22 agenda)
- Multi-Tiered System of Support (MTSS) Update (Dec 2025)
- Panorama and Youth Truth Survey Data (August 2025)
- Restorative Practices Data (March 2025)
- Plan and timeline for implementation of Dr. Gillespie’s recommendations around Special Services (January 2025), Requesting New FCMAT Study on SRCS SpEd Program
- First Draft of the District Safety Plan (delayed from September 2024)
- Sharing the Library Master Plan with implementation expectations
- Officially Closing Learning House, Herbert Slater Middle School, Santa Rosa Middle School, Brookhill Elementary, Biella Elementary, Steele Lane, and Herbert Comstock Middle School.
- Plan for Staff Housing support program from the proceeds of Fir Ridge
Until the district makes a decision, the proceeds from the sale of the Fir Ridge property are just sitting and losing value as the cost of housing continues to rise. Getting a program started could help SRCS attract and retain CSEA staff. The potential impact of the funds continues to diminish as time passes.
- Student Voice Policy
- Long standing request for site budgets including all sources as well as enrollment and unduplicated numbers.
K.3. Board Subcommittee Meeting Dates
Board Policy Subcommittee Meeting Dates:
- Wednesday September 2, 2026 (5:00-7:00)
Board Finance Subcommittee Meeting Dates:
- Tuesday September 1, 2026 (3:30-5:30)
- Monday October 5, 2026 (3:30-5:30) Tentative
- Monday November 2, 2026 (3:30-5:30) Tentative
Board Facilities Subcommittee Meeting Dates (not subject to the Brown Act):
- Tuesday August 25, 2026 (3:00-4:30)
SRTA members are appreciative of this transparency.
K.4. 2026/27 Regular and Special Board Meeting Schedule
Wed. August 26: Study Session TBD and Regular Board Meeting
Wed. Sept. 9: Study Session ISP and Signature Programs and Regular Board Meeting
Wed. Sept 23: Regular Board Meeting
Friday Sept. 25: All Day Planning- Strategic Goal Setting (SRCS Training Center)
K.5. Williams Settlement Quarterly Report
Report 1 facility complaint was received and resolved
The report attached to the agenda is incomplete. It is missing the required complaint details and response. “Copies of the complaint and the district’s written response will be submitted along with this report.”
L. Adjournment