Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Paraprofessional Pay topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Public commenter accuses Solon Springs of paraprofessional pay inequity; board debates raises and tables action
Summary
A public commenter accused the Solon Springs School District of pay inequity for paraprofessionals and urged a $2-an-hour raise; the board discussed options, heard budget estimates and did not second a motion for a $1 raise, opting to table the matter for June and request detailed cost figures.
Tammy, speaking during the meeting’s public-comment period, told the Solon Springs School District Board that 11 of 12 paraprofessionals in the district are women who perform the same duties as a single male paraprofessional who is receiving higher pay. “This is discrimination,” Tammy said, urging the board to correct what she called an inequity and to provide transparency around pay and contracts. She said staff had circulated petitions and requested a $2-per-hour raise for paraprofessionals, and warned the district that low pay makes it difficult to recruit qualified candidates.
The complaint prompted a lengthy board discussion of support-staff salary schedules, lane structures and the projected budget impact of raises. Board members and staff reviewed documents showing salary lanes, the district’s current 3% adjustment baked into next year’s schedule, and estimates for retirement and payroll-related costs. According to the district’s projections discussed at the meeting, a $1-per-hour across-the-board raise for paraprofessionals would add about $23,000 to the district’s budget; a 75-cent raise would add an estimated $17,000–$20,000 once employer retirement and FICA-like costs are included. Board members described those figures as estimates and asked staff for a detailed cost breakdown before taking action.
One board member made a motion to increase paraprofessional pay by $1.00 per hour across all lanes (in addition to the 3% increase already included in the schedule). The motion was not seconded and, by procedure, did not proceed. Board members then agreed to table the topic for the June meeting and asked staff to provide clearer dollar figures for alternative raise scenarios and long-term budget projections.
Tammy’s remarks highlighted both equity claims and recruitment concerns: she said paraprofessionals were earning “less than $17 an hour” and that pay differentials discouraged applicants. She urged the board to consider the future quality of student support if staffing cannot be sustained. The board did not take a final vote on a pay increase at the May meeting; the item was placed on the June agenda for further consideration.
The board also requested that staff prepare a clear cost comparison of targeted raises (by lane), across-the-board increases, and the longer-term fiscal impact on subsequent budgets. The board’s decision to table the issue means no pay change was approved at this meeting.
