Citizen Portal
Sign In

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

Get email alerts on the Superintendent Contract topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Trustees approve two superintendent contracts, clarify severance and set 2025 salary at $200,000

2628277 · February 12, 2025
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 board approved amended contracts for Superintendent Micah Hill that add a retention incentive, raise tax-sheltered annuity contributions, increase personal days and set the 2025 salary at $200,000 after amendments removing ambiguous severance language.

The Missoula County Public Schools Board of Trustees approved amended employment contracts for Superintendent Micah Hill, including a clarification to a severance/retention clause and a negotiated salary of $200,000 for the 2025'26 year.

Trevor, a district staff member presenting the contracts, summarized changes in two documents covering 2024'27 and 2025'28 contract periods. He said the 2024'25 year included a $5,000 increase in a tax-sheltered annuity (TSA) allowance, personal days increasing from 10 to 15 and an administrative practice change consolidating cell-phone/mileage allowances into a base allowance. Trevor described a new retention incentive in section 5.j that he characterized as a severance payment intended to encourage multi-year retention: he said it would provide a $15,000 payment if the superintendent "severs with the district after 5 years." He also said the proposed 2025 salary figure in the draft contract was $197,000 (about a 3.4% nominal increase spread over two years, roughly 1.7% per year).

Board members asked clarifying questions about comp time, the meaning of "personal days," how severance eligibility would work, and how the contract compared to regional superintendent salaries. Superintendent Micah Hill addressed the board and said the severance language as discussed required fulfillment of the original three-year commitment before eligibility; he said his intent was to remain in the district and that the retention language was meant to reduce turnover.

Trustees moved two amendments to the draft contracts to remove an ambiguous "1-" notation in section 5.j (the board's stated intent was to clarify when severance becomes payable). Trustee Davies moved the first amendment to the 2024'27 contract and Trustee Davy moved the parallel change in the 2025'28 contract; both amendments were seconded and the board approved them. The board then considered the 2025 salary and, following a trustee motion and a friendly amendment accepted by negotiators, set the 2025 salary figure at an even $200,000; trustees approved the amended 2025'28 contract and the amended 2024'27 contract as presented.

Trustees also discussed the broader compensation context; district staff reminded the board that last year's bargaining and step increases produced higher average increases for many staff groups. Several trustees described the retention incentive as a modest, common practice intended to reduce turnover among superintendents.

Votes at a glance - Amendment to remove ambiguous language in section 5.j of the 2024'27 contract: moved by Trustee Davies; seconded by Trustee Hayes; outcome: approved. - Approval of 2024'27 superintendent contract as amended: outcome: approved (all trustees present). - Amendment to remove ambiguous language in section 5.j of the 2025'28 contract: moved by Trustee Davy; seconded by Trustee Mercer; outcome: approved. - Amendment to set 2025'28 salary to $200,000 (friendly amendment accepted): moved by Trustee Davy; seconded by Trustee Mercer; outcome: approved. - Final approval of 2025'28 superintendent contract as amended: outcome: approved (all trustees present).

Clarifying details provided in the meeting included the $15,000 retention/severance amount described in the draft, the TSA increase for 2024'25, and the change to 15 personal days. The board's legal review was referenced during discussion; staff indicated counsel had reviewed the language.