Board hears Bellflower visit lessons: more adults on campus, different scheduling and targeted Title I use

Santa Rosa City Schools trustees heard a multi‑hour reportback on a recent staff visit to Bellflower Middle‑High School and discussed how elements of that site’s model might inform the district’s expanding 7–12 secondary redesign.

Director Pastor (district staff) and visiting site leaders framed the Bellflower trip as one of several case studies the district is considering as part of phase‑two redesign work. "The visit to Bellflower...provided our staff an opportunity to observe a district that had been doing this successfully for some time," a presenter said, noting the goal was to identify practices that could inform Santa Rosa’s implementation.

Ashley Bell, a history teacher at Santa Rosa High who prepared the slide presentation, said Bellflower’s schedule (an eight‑period day with built‑in staff collaboration) allowed the site to offer more electives to both middle and high school students and to embed daily prep and meeting time for teachers. "Adding periods gives more access to electives and other things for our English language learners and for our special education students," Bell said.

The visiting team repeatedly contrasted staffing and counseling ratios. Presenters cited Bellflower as having a 300:1 counselor ratio and multiple on‑site classified staff and security personnel; several speakers noted Santa Rosa sites report counselor ratios closer to 400:1 and predicted some sites would face ratios approaching 700:1 under current configurations. Presenters said many of the Bellflower figures were self‑reported and not verified by the visiting team.

Bellflower’s administrators reportedly use Title I funds to staff campus positions; one presenter said a Bellflower site cited roughly $1 million in Title I site allocations and used that money for on‑site staff and student supports. "We were shocked — we were blown away," a teacher on the visit said, adding the contrast highlighted how different funding priorities can change campus conditions.

Board members asked several practical questions: whether Bellflower’s model is transferable given differences in district size and feeder patterns; whether merged sites would be operated as single schools or two separate programs on one campus; how athletics and transportation would be handled under a combined 7–12 model; and whether Santa Rosa has budgeted the release time and staffing to replicate Bellflower’s level of on‑site adult support.

Trustees and presenters agreed on two themes: Bellflower’s apparent strengths stem from prioritizing site staffing and building time for collaboration into the day, and Santa Rosa will need explicit, site‑level intentionality and a multi‑year plan to adopt elements of the model without undermining current programs.

Next steps include continued staff analysis, requests for more detailed budget and Title I allocation data, and follow‑up presentations next year as the district refines how 7–12 structures will be organized and resourced.