Liberty board debates liquidated-damages language in teacher contracts, tables decision

The Liberty Elementary District Board of Education debated whether to keep, reduce or remove liquidated-damages language in teacher contracts for school year 2025–26 and on a 4-0 vote tabled the item for further drafting and review.

Board members focused on the $2,500 figure that appears in the current contract language and whether to (1) reduce the amount, (2) prorate the amount by time worked, or (3) remove liquidated damages entirely. Dr. Mahorn introduced the item and asked the board to provide direction on liquidated damages versus a version of the contract without them.

Board member Kenyon noted that most peer districts use a $2,500 liquidated-damages amount and asked whether any districts use a higher figure. Dr. Mahorn said he had not encountered anything above $2,500 and that two districts used $1,500. Board member Schmidt said she is "not in favor of liquidated damages" as written, questioned their effectiveness in preventing turnover and proposed prorating the amount by time served in the contract. She said, "If a teacher leaves on September 1 and they pay $2,500 or they leave on May 1, they still have to pay $2,500 but they've fulfilled most of their contract at that point." Kenyon and other members said they would support a prorated approach if the board keeps liquidated damages at all.

Several board members raised other financial and procedural concerns. Board members and staff clarified how the district’s performance-pay schedule interacts with resignations: performance pay is distributed in installments (board members discussed 20% in December, 40% in June and a final 40% in August) and teachers who leave before fulfilling their contract may forfeit performance pay already issued or be required to repay portions. Dr. Mahorn and district staff said the common historical signing-bonus amount for current employees had been $500 (previously discussed as $500 within five business days) and that a budget estimate for a full signing-bonus program was roughly $80,000; administration said specifics would need budget review.

Board members repeatedly said they did not want the board to be the first-line decision-maker on applying liquidated damages in individual cases. Multiple trustees recommended giving Human Resources authority to determine whether liquidated damages should be applied, with HR providing a recommendation or decision and the district legal counsel reviewing any broader changes. Board member Cenciani urged clear, written criteria and suggested moving determinations to HR, and Vice President Zimmerman and others asked whether proposed changes should be reviewed by legal counsel before any new contract language is issued.

After discussion, the board directed staff to draft revised contract and policy language that would (a) consider lowering the flat amount (a number proposed by some was $1,500), (b) include a prorating method—several trustees favored prorating by days worked during the school year—and (c) move the decision on waiving liquidated damages to HR under written criteria. Board members asked administration to return with revised language, proposed written criteria, and any required legal review. Trustee Kenyon made a motion to table item 8.3; the motion passed 4-0 (Kenyon, Schmidt, Cenciani, Vice President Zimmerman recorded as ayes).

The board and administration also discussed sequencing: trustees said they did not want to delay issuance of teacher contracts unnecessarily but asked that contract language be finalized and, where policy changes are required, that those policy edits be brought back for approval before contracts are issued.

What’s next: Administration will draft amended contract and policy language implementing the board’s directions—lowered or prorated liquidated damages and clearer criteria for exceptions—and will coordinate any legal review prior to returning the item for board action.