At the heart of the debate was Article 11.2I of the teachers’ contract. This provision historically allowed the union president a one-year leave, renewable at the superintendent’s discretion, to focus on union duties while maintaining employment status and benefits. The special magistrate had recommended keeping the existing language, emphasizing its role in fostering stable employer-employee relations.

However, the superintendent and some board members raised concerns about the potential legal and administrative challenges of this provision. They argued that designating the union president as a school board employee while performing union duties could create complex scenarios, possibly leading to legal complications. Furthermore, they cited the administrative burden of managing payroll and benefits for an employee on leave as a resource strain.

The superintendent proposed an alternative leave option available to all bargaining unit members under Article 11.2G, allowing the union president to take leave but without the full-time employment benefits the presidential leave language offered. This suggestion did not satisfy the MCEA, which viewed it as a reduction in the rights and protections previously afforded to the union president.

Board members expressed differing views during the discussion. One member emphasized the importance of consistent treatment for all employees, arguing against what was perceived as special treatment for the union president. The decision to reject the magistrate’s recommendation and remove the presidential leave language from the contract was ultimately unanimous, with board members agreeing on the necessity of addressing the administrative and legal complexities involved.

In other developments, the board reviewed the district’s strategic plan and scorecard, which are designed to guide the district’s direction based on stakeholder input. Presentations highlighted the plan’s mission to educate all students for success and its vision of a dynamic educational system. The strategic plan sets out five-year objectives aligned with annual measures and defines strategic themes focusing on community, work environment, future readiness, resource use, and stakeholder engagement.

The importance of aligning departmental and school-level goals with the district’s overarching objectives was emphasized, with the scorecard providing a mechanism for tracking progress and ensuring accountability. The board discussed specific examples of measurable objectives, such as improving the district services survey score, and highlighted the scorecard’s role in facilitating data-driven decision-making.

Another notable topic during the meeting was the evaluation process for the superintendent. The board debated the criteria for renewing the superintendent’s contract, specifically whether a highly effective rating should automatically result in a contract extension. The board agreed that the rating would be based on a collective evaluation. This approach was seen as a way to maintain collaborative decision-making and ensure that all board members’ perspectives are considered.

In a related discussion, the board addressed the importance of ongoing communication with the superintendent to prevent surprises during evaluations. They stressed the need for regular discussions to address specific performance issues and ensure that any concerns are incorporated into future evaluations.

The meeting also included a public hearing focused on resolving an impasse between the superintendent and the MCEA regarding the 2024-2025 collective bargaining agreement. The impasse arose after the superintendent rejected a special magistrate’s recommendation concerning unpaid presidential leave. The MCEA argued for retaining the leave provision, highlighting its historical context and the protections it offers union representatives. Despite these arguments, the board ultimately decided to remove the language from the contract, citing administrative and legal concerns.

Additionally, the board discussed budgetary matters, approving the final budget amendments and the Annual Financial Report for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2025. A public hearing was held to discuss the final millage rates and budget for fiscal year 2025-2026, with the proposed millage rate set at 5.177 mills, representing a decrease from the previous year. The board approved resolutions concerning the final millage rates and budget, acknowledging the challenges of managing the district’s finances amid budget cuts.