Glendale board approves revised facility-use fee schedule after debate over union access

The Glendale Elementary School District governing board on Aug. 14 approved a revised facility-use fee schedule and agreement after a lengthy discussion over whether the Glendale Education Association (GEA) should be listed among organizations eligible for uncompensated use of district facilities.

The proposal that the board approved keeps the updated classifications and insurance requirements recommended by legal counsel, and the board voted 3-2 to adopt the agreement as presented. Two separate attempts to amend the policy to explicitly guarantee uncompensated use for employee organizations (including GEA) failed.

The debate centered on statutory risk, the appropriate classification for events hosted by the teachers’ union, and whether naming GEA specifically in the policy was necessary or advisable. Superintendent Segata Jones told the board the revised schedule follows state law and that district counsel reviewed the changes. “The classifications reflected statutory requirements,” she said, noting the administration’s recommendation was made “in collaboration with legal counsel to mitigate any risk to you.”

GEA leaders and supporters addressed the board during public comment. Jessica Peck, president of Glendale Education Association, said the association’s removal from the class 1 list would limit the union’s ability to meet staff without fees. “I am asking you to vote no on the proposal as it is written tonight, in the hopes that there can be transparent discussion and a revision that makes it clear that we have a right to meet for free on campus,” Peck said. Vice President Amber Johnson asked the board to adopt “policies built on trust” that let the association deliver welcome materials, host informal gatherings and connect with staff during contract hours.

Legal counsel and district staff explained the district’s obligations under state law and the practical protections the revised agreement is meant to provide. A district speaker summarizing legal research cited specific Arizona statutes related to facilities, elections and political activity and said that the statute “gives board discretion to allow uncompensated use if the activity promotes an educational function,” while also noting the district must require proof of liability insurance for facility use. The district’s legal explanation framed the proposed language as preserving board discretion while reducing exposure to alleged “gift of public funds” claims.

Board members split on approach. Board Member Jaramillo urged language that would protect uncompensated access when an organization’s activities “support staff development, collaboration, or advocacy for student learning conditions,” and moved to add specific wording referring to employee organizations including GEA — a motion that did not move forward. A later motion to add broader language extending uncompensated access to “any education association” also failed on a 3-2 vote. After those failed amendments, the board approved the facility-use agreement as presented: Board President Martinez, Board Member Wilson and Board Member Bartels voted yes; Board Members Jaramillo and Pimentel voted no.

During the discussion board members repeatedly emphasized that classification should be determined by the nature of an event rather than solely by who is using a facility. “It’s not about the who, it’s about the what,” said a district representative arguing for the policy language recommended by counsel, pointing to custodial and security costs that can arise when events fall outside normal hours.

The approved agreement retains the district’s right to require liability insurance and to classify facility uses case by case; district staff said that certain activities promoting an “educational function” can nonetheless be exempted, but the final text places the decision and the insurance requirement under district oversight.

Votes at a glance

- Agenda adoption — Approved unanimously (Board Member Jaramillo: Aye; Wilson: Aye; Pimentel: Aye; Bartels: Aye; Chair Martinez: Aye). - Consent agenda — Approved unanimously (same roll call Ayes). - ASBA delegate and alternate (primary: Martinez; alternate: Monica) — Approved unanimously. - Political agenda direction to ASBA — Approved unanimously. - Policy manual, second reading, Section C (superintendent qualifications, staff relations) — Approved (roll call: all Aye). - Policy manual, second reading, Section D (fiscal management) — Approved (all Aye). - Policy JLF (child abuse reporting), second reading — Approved (all Aye). - First readings of five policies (EB, GCQF, JLC, JLCD, JR) — Approved; Board Member Jaramillo recorded a Nay on procedural grounds related to priorities for student supports; motion passed with majority (Jaramillo: Nay; others: Aye). - Facility use fee schedule and agreement (Action Item 6g) — Final approval of the agreement as presented passed 3-2 (Martinez, Wilson, Bartels: Aye; Jaramillo, Pimentel: Nay). Two proposed amendments that would have explicitly guaranteed uncompensated use to employee organizations or to any education association failed. - Employment of coordinator for district communications (Carlos Rene Castro) — Approved unanimously (all Aye).

What the board said and what happens next

Board members who supported the counsel-recommended language said the change protects the district from potential legal exposure and clarifies insurance requirements that must accompany facility use. Board members and GEA leaders who opposed the final version said the deletion of GEA from the class 1 list would make it harder for the union to run professional-development and staff-support activities without fees and insurance hurdles.

The board’s motion leaves discretion with administrators to classify specific events and to require liability insurance. District staff and legal counsel said they will apply the updated schedule and process when organizations request use of district property.

The board did not set a specific follow-up item to reopen the question; several board members asked administrators and counsel to draft clarifying language or guidance the next time the fee schedule is reviewed.

Ending

The vote completes the board’s annual approval of a fee schedule required by Arizona law; the revised agreement takes effect as the district implements the classification and insurance processes described in the policy. The issue drew public comment from union leaders and community members and generated one of the longest debates of the meeting, signaling a continuing tension between the district’s legal exposure and the union’s access to staff and facilities.