Washoe trustees approve employment agreement to hire Tiffany McMaster after weeks of debate over pay and governance

The Washoe County School District Board of Trustees voted 5–2 on June 9 to approve a written employment agreement with Tiffany McMaster to serve as the district's next superintendent, after an hours‑long presentation and debate about compensation, performance pay and governance.

The board heard a detailed review of the draft contract from independent board counsel Anthony Hall, who described the package as "fiscally conservative" compared with recent superintendent contracts and national market averages. Hall told trustees the agreement ties cost‑of‑living adjustments to formulas already adopted in two bargaining units and establishes a performance step increase that is explicitly linked to the board's annual evaluation rating. He said the contract also narrows the district's professional‑development leave compared with earlier contracts and strengthens termination‑for‑cause language.

"We have a contract that is a significant move forward," Hall said in his remarks to the board, emphasizing provisions intended to clarify the board's governance relationship with the superintendent.

Trustees pressed staff and counsel about several elements during a long question‑and‑answer period. Several board members said they supported a contract that they characterized as less costly in real dollars than earlier agreements, while others expressed discomfort with linking automatic COLA increases for the superintendent to bargaining‑unit formulas negotiated day‑to‑day by the superintendent's own direct reports.

"There's something there that just makes me feel really uncomfortable," Trustee Smith said, referring to the automatic COLA provision and the potential for perceived conflicts when leaders negotiating on behalf of bargaining units sit inside the district's leadership structure. "I don't think that makes sense."

Trustees also discussed the timing and scope of superintendent evaluations, how later‑arriving academic metrics would be considered, and retention incentives included in the agreement. Counsel said the contract ties a specified annual performance step to board ratings and preserves the board's role in setting evaluation goals.

After extended discussion, Vice President Woodley moved to approve the agreement; Trustee Nichollet seconded. The motion passed 5–2.

What happens next: The board approved the agreement on June 9. The contract and the board's evaluation framework will govern the superintendent relationship; trustees said they expect to exercise the evaluation provisions and monitor implementation closely.

Why it matters: The superintendent is the board's chief executive for academic and operational decisions across the district. The new contract reflects tradeoffs trustees debated: balancing competitive pay and retention incentives with the board's desire for clear governance boundaries and predictable fiscal impact.

The vote: Approved 5–2. The motion was moved and seconded on the record and carried following public comment and debate.

The board adjourned its discussion of the item after approving the contract and moved to the next agenda items.