Teachers decry 1.5% offer, urge board to reject waiver and fund meaningful raises

Teachers, paraeducators and union members used the public comment period to press the board for higher pay and to oppose the district’s requested waiver from the 60% required expenditure on classroom salaries. Jennifer Smith, speaking for district educators, said the district’s 1.5% proposal falls far short of the 6% raise the union seeks and called the smaller offer “a message that the district does not value the people who make our schools function.” She told trustees the district ended the year with large reserves and questioned priorities: “These are dollars that should be supporting the people who support the students every day,” Smith said.

Multiple speakers amplified that view and gave figures cited in testimony: commenters referenced an unrestricted balance in the district’s accounts (speakers cited figures of roughly $27.2 million and a projected $20 million) and alleged the district had not met the 60% threshold in recent audits (testimony claimed 51% was spent on teacher salaries in a prior year). District staff (Jason) responded in the waiver discussion that the statutory form (Form CA) does not capture expenditures for contracted services and certain positions and that, after accounting adjustments, the district’s salaries-and-benefits ratio would rise above 60% (staff presented an adjusted ratio of about 65.69%). Public speakers said that raises are necessary to retain staff amid Bay Area living costs.