During a recent school board meeting, members engaged in a detailed discussion regarding the severance terms for the chief auditor, Mr. Rhodes, in comparison to those of the superintendent, Dr. Hepburn. The primary focus was on the termination clauses in their respective contracts, particularly the provision for severance pay in the event of termination without cause.

Board member Dr. Hollins raised questions about the differences in severance arrangements, highlighting that Dr. Hepburn's contract stipulates a severance accrual starting after six months of employment, ultimately reaching a maximum of 20 weeks. In contrast, the current terms for Mr. Rhodes did not include similar provisions, prompting a motion to amend his contract to mirror those of the superintendent.

The proposed amendment aimed to grant Mr. Rhodes credit for the six months he has already served, allowing him to begin accruing severance pay at a rate of 3.33 weeks per month after the initial six months, similar to Dr. Hepburn's terms. However, this motion faced opposition from several board members who argued that the original terms of Mr. Rhodes' contract were negotiated fairly and should remain unchanged.

Despite the rationale for parity between the two contracts, the motion to amend Mr. Rhodes' severance terms ultimately failed in a 4-4 vote. Board members expressed concerns about the implications of providing substantial severance packages, particularly in light of community sentiment regarding executive compensation.

The meeting underscored the complexities of contract negotiations within the school board, as members navigated the balance between fairness to employees and accountability to the public. The discussion highlighted the ongoing challenges in aligning compensation structures while addressing community expectations and fiscal responsibility.