The school board on Wednesday voted to table a proposed contract with Syringa for student behavior support services, saying the draft would make the district solely responsible for services delivered under student individualized education programs (IEPs) without a matching indemnity for the district.

Trustees said the contract, which would allow Syringa’s registered behavior technicians (RBTs) to provide in-school services that the district can bill Medicaid for, left the district vulnerable because it requires the district to “defend, indemnify, and hold harmless” the vendor but does not say Syringa will do the same for the district.

Why it matters: the contract affects students with IEPs who receive outside behavior services and the district’s liability and budget. Trustees and staff said Syringa has provided services to families in past years and that Medicaid reimbursements for RBT services are a key part of the financial calculation.

Board discussion focused on risk allocation and cost. Kelsey Badger, "federal firearms director" in the meeting transcript, explained billing and reimbursement mechanics: the district can bill Medicaid in 15-minute increments at a stated rate of $24 per 15 minutes, and the vendor’s hourly charge on the draft was cited in the packet at roughly $54–$56 per hour. Badger said that when the district bills Medicaid at the 15-minute increment rate it expects to recover more than the vendor’s hourly charge in many cases, but trustees pressed that the contract’s indemnity language must be mutual.

Trustee Thompson moved to table the contract until a mutual indemnity clause is added and the district attorney has reviewed and provided language. Thompson said the contract as written required the district to “accept responsibility for all services provided under this agreement that are delivered pursuant to student IEPs” while offering no corresponding vendor obligation.

Trustees and staff noted an operational need: one student already is scheduled to start on Sept. 2 and would require services if the contract is not finalized. Staff said the vendor’s representative (referred to in the meeting as Serena) and district counsel could likely produce revised language quickly; trustees directed staff to seek indemnity language from the district attorney and return the contract for approval.

Ending: The motion to table carried. Staff said they would request mutual indemnity language from Syringa, seek wording from the district attorney, and present a revised agreement for board approval; no new execution date was set during the meeting.