Committee inventories special programs and examines portability, Prop. 28 funding and costs ahead of closure decisions

District staff gave a districtwide inventory of special programs, reviewed how categorical and site-based funding works, and flagged practical limits the committee should consider if it recommends closing and relocating programs.

Greg Bis and special-education and program staff listed programs by site: early-intervention centers and jump-start preschool classrooms at some elementary campuses, Special Day Class (SDC) models ranging from mild–moderate to extensive needs, two-way dual-language immersion programs that continue through Anekappa middle and Ventura High, AVID and PBIS implementations, career-technical pathways (for example, design tech and bioscience at Foothill Tech), and districtwide offerings such as Salinas Ranch field experiences and middle-school wrestling storage at Data. Neil Verani, executive director of special education, was present for SDC questions.

Staff said most programs can be moved if space and staffing allow, but emphasized several caveats: site-allocated funds such as Proposition 28 arts dollars are distributed to principals and tied to local community planning; some partner-run afterschool and leased-campus arrangements (for example, El Camino on Ventura College property) have contractual terms; and moving a program can require reconvening site councils and reassigning personnel. "Proposition 28 monies are allocated to the sites not to the district," a staffer said, and principals develop three-year site plans that guide use of those funds.

Staff also named specific cost figures discussed in the meeting: Foothill Tech's athletics expenses were cited at approximately $288,939 annually, and the El Camino lease payment to Ventura College was reported as $24,252 per year.

Committee members asked whether programs funded or run by community partners (after-school providers, Prop. 28-funded electives) might resist relocation; staff replied such decisions require community engagement and sometimes cannot be moved without losing the local relationship. Staff reiterated that, while many programs are portable in principle, credentialing, specialized equipment, contract terms and community ties can limit practical portability.

Next steps: staff will include program inventories and a relocatability assessment in the committee packet and will address fiscal implications in the upcoming fiscal-impact meeting.