Board hears details of proposed teacher contract; ratification to be placed on June 26 consent agenda

District negotiators presented a proposed negotiated agreement with certified staff that the district will seek to ratify after the teacher vote closes. Board members and negotiators described a package the district estimates will average a 4.4% increase in total salary and benefits for certified staff if ratified.

Chief human resources officer Drew Tone and Chief Financial Officer Jessica Nodden summarized key elements of the proposal: a $1,500 increase to the base salary (bringing the base to $48.05 as presented), expanded column movement increases (larger jumps when teachers advance degree columns), fringe benefits remaining at $900, and revisions to supplemental pay schedules tied to the base. The negotiators said the supplemental schedule clean-up clarifies compensation for curriculum and professional development councils and creates a new Safe Learning Advisory Council supplemental (S-3). Several special education supplementals were tiered to reflect differing workload intensity, and elementary robotics supplements and coaching classifications were revised.

Under the proposal, long-term substitutes who worked in an open district position would receive up to four years’ credit toward the salary schedule and the change would be applied retroactively for eligible substitutes who notify HR. The agreement would remove a class-size cap reference from the negotiated agreement because that cap is covered by existing board policy. The proposal also revises paid time off: certified staff would have 12 PTO days without the previous split between emergency and personal leave; employees may take up to three days without completing an application form and must submit an application on the fourth day.

To manage costs of the PTO conversion and balance accruals, negotiators described an automatic buy-down of up to 15 days per person for employees whose accrued days exceed 60 at the end of the fiscal year; the first-year cost of the new buy-down approach was projected by staff to be higher, with later years expected to be lower. Negotiators said retirement sellback calculations were simplified so retiring employees sell days at a single rate rather than tiered rates, which negotiators said in examples benefits employees in aggregate.

The proposal also revises grievance-panel selection: rather than alternating picks for the at-large panel member, the district and union will jointly select three impartial individuals both sides agree are neutral to serve on hearing panels, intended to reduce perceived bias. Reassignment language was clarified to confirm the district’s ability to transfer staff and to add paid work days (up to three) for employees required to move buildings before the start of the contract year. The teacher association may post union materials in buildings and may conduct association business during staff meetings once per semester with building principal approval.

Negotiators described the process timeline: teachers were still voting; the vote was to close on June 6 (as reported during the meeting) and, if ratified by membership, the district planned to place the ratification on the June 26 consent agenda for board action. Negotiators said they met about 10 times and described the process as collaborative.

Board members asked about the district cost for any buy-down; staff said they would provide detailed cost projections by email. No formal ratification vote by the board took place at this meeting; the board expects the item to return for action after the teacher vote and will decide on June 26. The board did not adopt the negotiated agreement at this meeting.