Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Community Schools Salaries topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

MiltonCommunity Schools proposes 2% COLA; committee asks questions on steps and role parity

AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The finance subcommittee reviewed a proposed Community Schools salary table that applies a 2% cost-of-living adjustment across steps, aligns some roles to program supervisor pay and raised questions about step spacing and director/assistant director contract treatment.

The Milton Public Schools Finance Subcommittee on June 3 reviewed a proposed Community Schools salary table that applies a cost‑of‑living adjustment to each step and keeps the program self‑sustaining through fees.

Martha, director of the community schools program, and finance staff presented the table and explained that community schools employees are not covered by the districtcollective bargaining agreements; the table is set annually and the COLA was chosen to stay consistent with recent bargaining outcomes. "We very much try to look at the rates and align them to the increases that we're seeing in the collective bargaining agreement," Katie, finance staff, said.

Committee members asked several questions about structure and parity. One concern was the insertion of an additional step between existing steps (making smaller percentage increases between steps 1–3) and whether that change would reduce anticipated pay for employees moving from step 1 to step 2. Another issue raised was the apparent pay relationship between program supervisors and directors: program supervisors(which exist at each school site) were proposed at rates similar to or higher than some director steps, prompting discussion about whether the director line should be treated as a separate contract position rather than a step on the table.

Committee members also asked about the inclusion coordinator role, a newer position charged with ensuring students with access needs can participate in community schools programs. The inclusion coordinator is a single, districtwide position that coordinates inclusion aids and family communication across sites. "The inclusion coordinator is really helping with all of that work," Martha said, describing the roleand why it was aligned near program supervisor pay.

Finance staff and committee members confirmed the proposed 2% COLA aligns with Unit A and Unit B bargaining outcomes and stressed that Community Schools is intended to remain self‑funding through fees rather than drawing from the operating budget. The committee requested clarification on several line items and asked staff to gather feedback from Martha about step spacing and director/ supervisor relationships before bringing the proposal to the full school committee for approval.

The subcommittee did not take a final vote on the salary table; next steps include collecting additional feedback and presenting a revised table to the school committee.