Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Administration Staffing topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Scottsdale board debates administrator staffing rubric as budget shortfall raises prospect of assistant principal reductions
Summary
The Scottsdale Unified School District governing board spent extended time discussing a negotiated administrator employment agreement that includes staffing ratios that could reduce assistant principal (AP) allocations at five schools as part of deficit-mitigation planning; no final board action was taken on the agreement.
The Scottsdale Unified School District governing board discussed a proposed administrator employment agreement and a staffing rubric that district negotiators say would use enrollment-based ratios to allocate assistant principals, a change administrators say responds to declining enrollment and budget pressure.
The conversation, which the board began in an item titled “administrators employment agreement for the 2024–25 school year,” centered on a rubric tied to 40th-day attendance counts and a provision that would present staffing changes “as an option for discussion and consensus with the IBN team” in the event of fiscal reductions. Board President Donna Lewis and multiple board members pressed staff and association representatives on how the ratio would work in practice and which schools would be affected.
Board member Amy Carney said the board needs full input before site staff are reduced. “If retaining staff and improving climate culture and increasing enrollment are really goals for us, then we should not be cutting these vital positions from any of our schools,” Carney said.
Superintendent Dr. Menzel and district staff described a multiyear interest-based negotiation (IBN) process that produced the recommended ratios. District representatives said the ratio framework is intended to apportion administrative support proportionate to student enrollment and program intensity, adding that some larger schools that previously funded extra teacher-on-assignment (TOA) positions from site budgets would see those positions funded by the district under the new rubric.
Administrators and Scottsdale Administrators Association (SAA) representatives acknowledged the proposal’s difficulty. SAA leaders said the association had focused the negotiations on salary, benefits and working conditions and that conversations about district-level reductions were separate from the IBN work on site staffing. Principals and assistant principals described operational duties that fall heavily on APs, including discipline management, testing coordination and day-to-day operations; principals warned that splitting an AP between sites changes evaluation and coverage responsibilities.
Board members asked how many campuses would be affected. District staff said five schools would lose some AP FTE under the current proposal (three elementary, one middle school and one K–8), while other campuses could gain district-funded TOAs. Staff also said the plan includes special-education and Title I exceptions for certain staffing thresholds.
No final vote was taken on the administrator agreement at the meeting. Board members asked staff to provide clarifying data, including an updated list of impacted sites and the financial effects, and to make that information available publicly. Board member Kearney also requested a public presentation of any growth/consolidation site plans for 2025–26.
Board members used the discussion to press for alternatives to site cuts, urging the administration to continue looking at district-level savings — for example, legal services, marketing contracts and other central-office expenses — before reducing site-based instructional staff.
The board moved on to later agenda items without approving changes to the administrator employment agreement; staff said typical contract approvals happen in June and that the board would have additional opportunities to weigh in before agreements are finalized.
