Orange County School Board keeps 1-mill ballot language after debate over teacher raises and program cuts

The Orange County School Board voted 5-3 on May 19 to maintain the current ballot language for resolution 17.07, a referendum to extend the district——s 1-mill special operating millage for four years, after extended debate about whether the wording should explicitly require annual raises for teachers.

The superintendent, Dr. Vasquez, and staff warned that adding a mandatory "increase" clause would bind future boards to raise salaries even if revenues fall, forcing cuts to school-based positions such as deans, resource teachers and arts and music instructors. "If we put down that we are going to raise salaries and we don't have more money, we will not be able to uphold our commitment," Dr. Vasquez said, arguing that the district——s model preserves positions other districts cut during the recession.

The debate opened after staff briefed the board on the millage——s history and budget impact. Scott Howitt summarized that the 1-mill was first approved by voters in 2010 and has been renewed several times; Doreen Concolino said the mill is expected to generate about $242,000,000 this year, with roughly $170,000,000 directed to school staffing (more than 1,100 instructional positions). Concolino said $42,000,000 of those dollars has supported recurring salary increases in recent years, $7,000,000 funds supplements (stipends tied to arts and athletics) and $3,000,000 covers field trips; charter schools are projected to receive just over $20,000,000 of the revenues.

Board members split over whether to change the ballot sentence so it would explicitly require salary increases. Supporters of the status quo, including Member Salamanca and Member Felder, said inserting "increase" would handcuff future boards and risk hollowing out arts and student supports if revenues drop. "You cannot promise that we are going to increase teacher salaries no matter what, because that may require cutting hundreds of positions," Salamanca said, citing stress tests that project possible revenue losses from property-value declines.

Members who favored adding language to prioritize teacher pay argued that teachers are struggling to make ends meet and the board needs accountability. Member Gallo urged the board to add "increase" or "improve" to the ballot language and to pursue audits and oversight to ensure dollars are used efficiently. "Our teachers are living paycheck to paycheck," Gallo said, arguing the voters strongly favor increasing teacher pay.

Procedurally, the board first moved to take item 17.07 off the table; Member Ferrant moved that motion and Member Byrd seconded, and it passed by voice vote. Later, after a call for the question, the chair moved to keep the superintendent——proposed language and Member Ferrant seconded. The motion to maintain the language passed with five yes votes and three no votes.

General counsel Palmerini told the board he has reviewed the applicable statute and relevant case law and believes the continuation of the May 12 meeting and the action taken is lawful, but said he will double-check and inform the board; if necessary the board could ratify the action at its June 16 meeting.

The board——s vote preserves the current ballot wording for the 1-mill extension. Staff said they will provide follow-up materials on which specific school-based positions the mill currently supports and said they will prepare options if the board directs staff to reallocate funds to prioritize teacher pay.

The resolution (item 17.07) will go forward for placement on the ballot as written. The board adjourned after counsel——s remarks.