At the May 8 Olympia School District board meeting, a paraeducator urged district negotiators to seek higher wage increases for paraprofessionals in the upcoming bargaining cycle, saying current pay levels force some aides to take second jobs and undermine continuity for students.

Vita Lusty, a paraeducator at Capital High School, spoke during public comment that a one-on-one aide serving a student with Down syndrome had taken a second job and was “deflated” because the pay was not sufficient to afford living costs. Lusty told the board that turnover among paraprofessionals can harm students who depend on consistent adult supports and asked the district to offer more than the 1% cost-of-living increase previously negotiated.

Lusty offered several quantitative details: she said one para who has worked for more than 20 years had received only a 22-cent raise over the last two years and that, over the last decade, certain long-serving paraprofessionals’ cumulative wage growth amounted to about $9.19 (as reported during public comment). Lusty also said monthly union dues of $35–$60 can be a hardship for many paraprofessionals.

She urged the district bargaining team to offer a larger adjustment, noting that the Washington Education Association reported a 5.5% cost-of-living adjustment for K–12 teachers at the state level this year. Lusty framed the request as a matter of valuing the skill and responsibility paraprofessionals bring to classroom and student supports.

There was no immediate response or board vote on the district’s bargaining position at the meeting. The comments were part of the public-comment portion of the meeting; formal bargaining proposals will be negotiated between the district and unions in the coming weeks.

Why it matters: paraprofessionals often provide direct, daily support to students with disabilities and other high needs. Turnover among aides can disrupt routines and relationships that some students rely on for learning and behavior supports. Bargaining outcomes will affect district labor costs and classroom staffing.

What comes next: the district will negotiate with union representatives during the bargaining cycle; the speaker requested that the district propose a larger cost-of-living increase than the prior 1% adjustment.