Original post made
by anne, Heritage Valley,
on Mar 1, 2009
Although our children are out of school, I am more than willing to pay a parcel tax to maintain excellence in our schools. Valuable programs were cut this past week. This tax is one of the few options to "find" the cash to prevent deeper budget cuts.
Posted by raven
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Mar 2, 2009 at 5:31 pm
The following is state mandated:
The state mandates that any 504, IEPs need to updated every year and any 504 and IEP not reviewed within the 3 month time frame of school start date,the plan becomes out of compliance by the state. There are heavy penalties, if the district is found out of compliance. Also, when a child is placed on a 504 or IEP the child's teacher is required by the district to know this to make the appropriate adjustments for the child within the 3 months. Most appropriately before progress reports go out.
Page 5, of the Proposed Cuts document under Elementary Assistant Principals 7th bullet- and Middle School Assistant Principals 7th bullet, Slower scheduling of students study teams, 504, IEP.
A qualified district person (whatever the title is) to oversee the IEP compliance. IEP training is mandatory.
Policies in place by the district
Policy by the PUSD states that the administration,including counselors, at the schools have a 48 hr return phone call policy.
Page 4, Counseling Assistants- High Schools 4th bullet,longer response time for parent call and concerns.
Page 10, Office Assistants - High Schools. 3rd Bullet, Response time to students, parents, teachers, administrators will be increased.
(of course they can change policies as they see fit if these cuts are made). However, then someone at the district must change the policy under the direction of the school board, it must be reviewed, revised and submitted for acceptance by the board. More time, no staff.
PUSD policy states that one administrator must be at a school site at all times. Whether that is a VP or principal.
Page 5, Elimination of Assistant Principals, Elememtary, Middle schools.
Safety Concerns,Pge 9 Campus Monitors and Noon Supervisors,2nd bullet, safety and emergency provisions will be comprimised.
Eliminating or drastically reducing the campus monitors, and noon supervisors, puts the burden back on the VP.
But if the 3 VP are eliminated, then WHO is watching the students? At the high schools, it is NOT the responsibility of the SRO to become a campus monitor.
And where is the responsibility of the principals in all these reductions? Not mentioned in the document.
I am very saddened that this document even had to be published. Loss of jobs is always devastating, especially in a school district. My opinion stands however, that the wording in this document should have been more professional.
Another example: Community Day School-Eliminate Program,1st bullet 30 of our most at risk students. Understandable. However then the 5th bullet, Students will be out in the community more. What does that mean? Should the community be afraid of these students? Are they a danger to our community? Truancy law states that all children must be school during a school day. What recourse are the parents going to be given if any?
These are my observations of this document, and after working in the district for so many years and knowing that the district works on a crisis management platform, I was hoping that it would be handled better because the stakes are so high.
If someone asked me to give $5.00 dollars to a fund to save a counseling job or campus monitor job, and everyone in Pleasanton (roughly)60,000 residents, did the same, that might save at least 2 badly needed jobs.