Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Personnel And Procurement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents and supervisors press school staff on delayed bus purchases and withheld bonus pay
Summary
Public commenters and supervisors argued delayed bus purchases increased costs and said some substitute drivers appear not to have received state retention/recruitment bonuses; the school said funds were held intentionally pending ADM and the board directed staff to audit payroll and confirm payment dates.
Public commenters and several supervisors pressed the school division on two related personnel- and procurement-related issues: (1) why buses that were quoted in an earlier order were not purchased in the fall and whether the price rise should be borne by the division, and (2) why some substitute bus drivers did not receive state-designated retention/recruitment bonuses while regular drivers did.
One attendee said rejected bus purchases led to an avoidable $16,000--$19,000 price increase. "It—s gonna cost you about $19,000 more by not purchasing the bus," the commenter said. The school presentation explained the division elected not to purchase buses in the fall while monitoring ADM and told the board one bus has been purchased and a letter of intent exists to purchase a second by April 15.
On bonuses, a speaker asserted the division had reclaimed $1,000 state recruitment funds from some employees and questioned whether that money was refunded if the division later determined the employee could not continue driving for health reasons. Doctor Reisman responded that the original bonus funding was a state initiative specifically earmarked for recruitment and retention and that some divisions held payments until employees signed a contract; he said the bonus language in the proposed local budget is different and would not include the same reclaim provisions.
The board asked the county or school finance staff to verify exact dates and payroll records so that any missed payments could be identified and corrected. "Mister Carter, could you check on that sometime for us and see that?" one supervisor asked, and county/school staff agreed to look up the date the $100/day sub pay was implemented and to audit payroll accordingly.
Why it matters: substitute drivers and bus procurement affect daily operations, safety and recruitment. Board members signaled they view timely resolution and accurate payroll as a priority and requested a report back with dates and payroll reconciliation.
What—s next: staff will determine the payroll effective date for the sub-pay, reconcile any missed payments, and return to the board with the findings so the board can decide whether reimbursements or other corrective steps are necessary.
