Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Teacher Compensation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board approves 2025–26 compensation plan as district wrestles with $15M preliminary shortfall
Summary
Trustees adopted a revised compensation plan that applies the state's teacher retention allotment and a 2.5% local increase after debating a 3% alternative; trustees and staff also reviewed a preliminary 2025–26 budget that shows an approximate $15 million shortfall and a plan to pursue bond and structural options.
The Eagle Mountain Saginaw ISD Board of Trustees on July 28 approved the district’s 2025–26 compensation plan after a lengthy discussion of market position and budget constraints.
What trustees approved: Trustees adopted a compensation framework that applies the state’s Teacher Retention Allotment to eligible teachers and provides additional local compensation: teachers with five or more years’ experience will receive the state-funded $5,000 retention payment; teachers with three to four years’ experience will receive the state-funded $2,500; and the district will provide an additional local payment for teachers in the 0–2 year group. After discussion, trustees substituted a 2.5% district‑funded general increase in place of the originally proposed 2% local increase. The motion to substitute 2.5% passed 6–0.
Why it matters: District staff told trustees that the 2025 legislative session produced specific new allotments for teacher retention but left a sizable gap in basic funding. Rob Welch and the finance team outlined an earlier model that began with an estimated deficit of roughly $13 million but, after legislative outcomes and staff adjustments, showed a projected general-fund deficit near $15 million in the district’s preliminary forecast.
Budget overview presented: Finance staff summarized post-session impacts including a modest increase to the basic allotment (about $55 per ADA), a support‑staff allotment that generated roughly a 1.6% increase for certain employees, and a school-safety allotment that the district estimated at about $775,000. Staff also described the teacher retention allotment funding and presented a model that included a 2% placeholder; that model projected general‑fund expenditures of about $285.5 million and a deficit in the mid‑teens (millions).
Board debate and compromise: Trustees debated a 3% option and various equity adjustments for hard-to-fill job categories (instructional aides, special education aides, custodians and other classified staff). Administration said a 3% across‑the‑board change would add roughly $1.7 million–$2.0 million to the projected deficit, plus further market/equity adjustments in selected job groups that the board asked staff to model for August. After discussion the board adopted the 2.5% substitution and directed administration to return with precise dollar amounts for targeted equity adjustments.
Supplemental compensation: Trustees also approved the district’s supplemental compensation plan (stipends) with several updates the administration recommended, including replacing some AVID stipends with CCMR coordinator stipends at high school level and adding trainer stipends for in‑district special‑program trainers; that supplemental compensation package passed 6–0.
Next steps and risks: Staff said the district still faces a multi‑million‑dollar shortfall and will finalize the budget after August public hearings. Trustees directed staff to return in August with more refined cost figures for the compensation plan, targeted market adjustments, and budget options. Staff also noted the district's fund balance and multi-year implications; trustees and staff discussed how bond issuance and other revenue decisions interact with compensation choices.
Ending: Trustees approved the compensation plan and the updated supplemental compensation schedule; staff will present final budget options, targeted market adjustments and implementation details at the August meeting.
