Evergreen Public Schools officials met virtually Sept. 9 after the board said it shifted the regular meeting online because of safety concerns; during a lengthy public-comment period, dozens of paraeducators, teachers, parents and community members urged the board and bargaining team to settle an ongoing strike and restore school operations.

The meeting opened with the board president explaining the change: the board moved the meeting to a virtual setting “due to safety concerns,” saying staff had been subjected to threatening and harassing language and that some employees had reported intimidation and personal information posted online. Later in the meeting a board member said the board met daily and believed district negotiators were bargaining in good faith.

Speakers described the strike as a last resort by classified staff and paraeducators after months of bargaining they say has produced inadequate offers. “I am exhausted, frustrated, and livid,” said Whitney Van Volkenberg, who identified herself as a special-education paraeducator at Ellsworth, summarizing a frequent theme in public comment: low pay and heavy workloads. “Give us a fair contract now,” she told the board.

Why it matters: Evergreen serves more than 22,000 students, and public commenters said the strike has delayed the start of the school year and is harming families and students who rely on services and special-education supports. Speakers pressed the board to prioritize classroom-facing staff over administrative pay and outside legal spending, and called for clearer, more transparent bargaining.

Public comments and claims made at the meeting

- Paraeducators repeatedly said their average annual pay is low; one speaker said the district’s paraeducator pay “averaged $28,000 a year.” Several paraeducators and long-time staff described unpaid minutes (for example, escorting students to buses) and daily unpaid overtime.

- Multiple speakers criticized district spending on legal fees and supplemental administrative payments. A parent said the district incurred “nearly $500,000 in legal fees in six months, and $105,000 in February alone.” Another commenter cited “supplemental contracts of $31,000 to individuals during the teacher strike of 2023.” Commenters called those payments counterproductive to bargaining trust.

- Several speakers warned of enrollment losses if the disruptions continue. One commenter said Evergreen is the county’s largest district and that families were considering transferring their children to other districts.

- Parents and staff raised specific operational and equity concerns: unpaid off-clock work, service disruptions to students with IEPs (Individualized Education Programs), and staff safety. A parent and former staff member noted that when a student has an IEP, the school must provide the services listed in the IEP; several paraeducators said they were providing those services without being paid for all time involved.

- Some speakers asked elected board members to take concrete governance steps: freeze nonessential hiring or discretionary compensation until after the fall election, make bargaining more transparent, or replace certain administrators. One speaker who identified himself as a candidate for the board asked the board to “put a freeze on hiring and adjusting any other compensation nondiscretionary outside of these negotiations until after the elections.”

Board and staff responses at the meeting

- The board formally adopted the evening’s agenda and consent items; those procedural motions passed by voice vote before the public-comment period. Board members repeatedly said they value classified staff and want students back in school, and several described continuing daily oversight of bargaining.

- On the decision to shift to a virtual meeting, a board member explained the change as made to avoid creating an environment that could place staff or attendees at risk. “My fear was that we would be creating … an environment that created harm to people in the room,” the director said.

- The board said it believes district negotiators are bargaining in good faith and expressed a commitment to repairing relationships after any tentative agreement and ratification.

What was not decided

No binding action on the contract, arbitration, injunctions, or other legal steps was adopted at the Sept. 9 meeting. The board took no vote that directed the bargaining team to adopt or reject specific economic terms during the meeting; public comment is not a binding bargaining action.

Context and specific numbers cited in testimony

- Evergreen district enrollment: “over 22,000 students” (commenter).
- Paraeducator pay: “averaged $28,000 a year” (Whitney Van Volkenberg).
- Legal fees and related spending: a commenter said nearly $500,000 in legal fees over six months and $105,000 in one month; another cited a $31,000 supplemental contract figure from 2023.
- Budget history cited by a parent: speakers referenced $60 million in budget reductions over the last three years, elimination of over 400 staff positions, a projection of $26 million in additional reductions over the next three years and an $11 million shortfall for the 2026–27 school year; those are the figures read into the record by a public commenter.

Speakers frequently urged two complementary outcomes: a rapid tentative agreement to reopen schools and greater transparency about bargaining proposals and district spending. Several speakers also urged the board to prioritize classroom-facing staff in budget choices and to cease practices they said eroded trust (supplemental contracts, perceived administrative bonuses or outsized legal spending).

Closing and next steps noted by the board

Board members said they are meeting daily to monitor bargaining and that their stated priorities are students and staff safety. The board did not announce a timetable for a vote on a tentative agreement at the meeting and made no formal changes to bargaining authority during the session.

Ending note: The Sept. 9 public-comment session ran more than an hour and featured speakers across the district — paraeducators, classroom teachers, special-education staff, parents and community members — who framed the dispute as both a contract fight and a governance challenge. Many urged immediate compromise to restore classrooms and services; board members said they continue to pursue a resolution while emphasizing safety and the need to rebuild trust after protracted negotiations.