Humboldt City board selects option 2 for local bonus plan after debate over who is eligible for governor's $2,000 teacher payment
Summary
Board members debated whether to supplement a governor-announced $2,000 one-time teacher bonus and voted to adopt 'option 2' among local bonus distribution choices; the superintendent and board discussed using district fund balance to cover local supplements.
Board members at a Humboldt City Board of Education meeting discussed how to respond to a governor-announced one-time $2,000 bonus for teachers and selected a local option by majority vote.
Superintendent Dr. Epstein opened the discussion by saying she did not understand "the rationale behind the governor only wanting to give certain teachers the $2,000" and noted the state’s definition of eligible teachers is based on certified/licensed teachers with specified contact hours. She said the state payment will drop to districts July 1 and asked the board whether the district should supplement the governor’s payment for other employees who were not included in the state program, such as social workers, assistant principals, custodians, teacher assistants and other noncertified staff.
Dr. Epstein presented options she and neighboring districts had considered (she said some districts were planning local supplements) and suggested possible local amounts in conversation: an illustrative plan discussed in the meeting included roughly $1,000 for some certified staff and $500 for noncertified staff (she described how different per-pay or per-period calculations would translate to those lump sums). Board members debated equity, retention and budget constraints: some argued for giving all staff a bonus to recognize support roles that enable teaching, while others prioritized boosting certified teacher pay to retain instructors.
The board then took an individual preference vote on the proposed options; multiple members voiced support for "option 2" and the chair announced, "The option two's have it." The transcript does not record a formal motion text, a mover/second, nor a dollar amount tied to "option 2" at the moment the chair declared the outcome. Dr. Epstein noted the district would likely use the district fund balance if the board chose to supplement the state payment; she referenced the fund balance as about "2.9 and a little change million."
Why it matters: the governor’s payment covers only a subset of employees as defined by state guidance. The local decision affects whether noncertified staff who support daily operations (bus drivers, custodial staff, cafeteria staff, teacher aides) receive any supplemental one-time payment and whether the district will draw from fund balance to pay it.
Discussion vs. decision: the transcript records extended discussion and several suggested dollar figures. The explicit board decision recorded in the transcript is that "option 2" received a majority of board members’ spoken support; the transcript does not record the board adopting a specific supplemental dollar amount tied to that option in the same moment, nor the formal motion text or a roll-call tally. The superintendent and finance staff will need to finalize the payout amount, source of funds, and administrative mechanics before any payments are processed.
Selected direct quote from the meeting: "I don't really understand the rationale behind the governor only wanting to give certain teachers the $2,000" — Dr. Epstein.
Selected procedural quote at close of vote: "The option two's have it." — Chair (name not specified).
Next steps noted in the meeting: district staff will clarify the final local payout amount and funding source (superintendent indicated fund balance as the likely source) and prepare details for implementation if the board formally adopts a supplemental payment plan in a future action.
