RSU 23 support staff urge board to reopen contract for cost-of-living raise; motion fails

At the Oct. 20 RSU 23 school board meeting in Old Orchard Beach, multiple support staff asked the board to reopen the district’s support-staff contract to consider a cost-of-living raise. A motion to open the contract, moved by Donna Moutsatsos, was not seconded and therefore did not move.

Erin Dupee, identified in the minutes as a special education ed tech in the intensive-needs program, told the board she has worked in the district for 23 years and “makes $23/hour,” adding that “it is becoming increasingly harder to stay afloat with the cost of everything rising.” Jocelyn Lachance, who said she has been an ed tech for six years, said many colleagues were not at the meeting because “they are working their second jobs.” Karolina Pierko described being a single mother of six and said it is “hard to find permanent housing” and “to be able to sustain her bills is impossible.” Other support staff who spoke included Shauna Tolley, Lisa St. Louis, Karen MacWilliam and Beth Willey, each urging the board to reconsider wages.

Board members responded but declined to reopen the settled contract on short notice. Board member Craig Evans acknowledged the economic pressures faced by staff but said that reopening the recently settled agreement “would be precedent setting and to do that it does take a very compelling argument.” Peter Flaherty said the district will begin negotiating a new contract within the next year. Donna Moutsatsos, who made the motion to open the contract, questioned whether the item should have been placed on the agenda and said the evening’s public session had turned into a “spectacle.” Finance committee member Dave said he was troubled by the testimony and agreed action is needed but that “for right now opening the contract is not something we can do.”

The motion to open the support-staff contract was recorded in the minutes as not seconded and therefore did not move; the minutes show no subsequent formal action on wages at the meeting. The discussion highlighted staffing strain, reported by employees who said they hold second jobs and face housing and cost-of-living pressures. The board members noted the need to weigh pay against benefits and district budget constraints, and pointed to an upcoming contract negotiation cycle as the next formal venue for wage changes.

What happens next: the board did not take formal action to reopen the contract at the Oct. 20 meeting; board members said contract negotiations are due to begin in the coming year.