Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Personnel Pay Retro topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Former clinician tells Newman-Crows Landing board retro pay was reversed; board delays response
Summary
Julia Ginega, a former district mental-health clinician, told the Newman-Crows Landing Unified School District board that a retroactive pay deposit was reversed from her account and that several former employees were affected; the board declined to answer on an item not on the meeting agenda and said it would follow up.
Julia Ginega, a former lead mental-health clinician for Newman-Crows Landing Unified, told the school board at its Dec. 8 meeting that a retroactive pay deposit from the Stanislaus County Office of Education was reversed from her account by the district.
Ginega said the deposit reflected a tentative agreement signed by CSEA on May 8, 2025, and that multiple former employees who worked in the 2024–25 school year had the retro pay reversed. “I had a deposit to my checking account from Stanislaus County Office of Education for the retro pay of 1%. That retro pay reflected the tentative agreement that was signed by CSEA on 05/08/2025, and in the same day, was reversed from my account by NCLUSD,” she said.
Ginega named several former staff she said were affected, described them as having served the district well, and asked the board two questions: who proposed changing the contractual verbiage that she says now excludes former employees, and what was the board’s intention in passing that motion. She also asked how much money the district saved by excluding those staff from retro pay.
Board counsel and staff advised that the board cannot respond to matters not on the agenda. When Ginega asked for a public response, a board member said, “We’ll get back to you,” and legal counsel added that the board cannot answer items not on the agenda during the public-comment period.
The board did not provide an on-the-spot explanation at the meeting. Ginega said she and other former employees feel confused, targeted and upset by the reversal and asked the board to explain why the language was changed to require current employment to receive retro pay.
What happens next: The board indicated it would follow up after the meeting. The transcript records the board’s promise to “get back to you,” but does not include a timeline or a named staff member assigned to respond. The district’s formal explanation, any internal memo or the vote that changed retro-pay language were not provided during the meeting and were not included in the agenda materials discussed on Dec. 8.
Note: The board said it could not respond to non-agendized items during public comment; any formal response or public record of a policy change would need to come in a later agenda item or a direct communication from district administration.
