One of the primary topics was the district’s final salary proposal, which aimed to provide a total compensation increase of 3% for employees. This package consists of a recurring 1.5% salary raise and a one-time cash payout of another 1.5%. District representatives expressed a desire to offer larger raises but highlighted the current financial limitations. The union maintained its position on seeking greater compensation adjustments, emphasizing that the proposed increases did not sufficiently address the rising costs of living and insurance premiums. The union argued that the proposed raise would not effectively enhance employees’ purchasing power, as many would see most of their increases absorbed by higher insurance costs.

The union expressed disappointment over the district’s unwillingness to consider adjustments that would not incur additional costs, such as increased preparation time for teachers or streamlined transfer processes. They argued that the proposed salary adjustments fell short of recognizing the dedication and contributions of the teachers, especially in light of the district’s high performance. The union representatives proposed negotiating a 5% salary increase, down from their initial 6% request, to find a middle ground acceptable to their members. They emphasized the importance of meaningful negotiations and adjustments that reflect the realities faced by teachers.

Discussions also centered on the proposed new salary supplements and raises for teachers. A structured plan was introduced to increase supplements over a three-year period, starting with a $500 reduction per supplement in the first year, effective from July. The plan included annual increases of $500 in subsequent years to enhance the district’s competitive position compared to other Florida school districts. The proposal also introduced a supplement for 504 coordinators, reduced to $1,250. The plan aimed to address equity among teachers and ensure competitive compensation.

The debate extended to the additional period supplement, where concerns were raised about the disparity between the compensation for extra work and the district’s cost savings. The current $30 payment for additional instructional periods was deemed insufficient and disrespectful. The district was urged to recognize the financial savings achieved by employing multiple teachers for extra periods and to adjust compensation accordingly.

The discussions were framed by the district’s financial challenges, including a $45 million anticipated revenue loss due to a 5,500 student enrollment drop. The Chief Financial Officer addressed the constraints imposed by state regulations, noting a 1.3% increase in per-student funding despite property value rises. She pointed to attrition savings as one-time occurrences that could not sustain recurring salary increases, further complicated by the pandemic’s impact on vacancy rates and unexpected enrollment declines.

The meeting also covered proposed changes to contract language and benefits. A counter proposal suggested a 50% discount for children of employees, positioned as a valuable benefit for teachers. Adjustments to the contract year structure were proposed to improve teacher preparation time without additional district costs. Testimonies, such as from Allison Meelli of Timber Trace Elementary, underscored the positive impact of increased preparation time on staff morale and readiness.

Additional proposals included an extra duty day for elementary teachers, framed as an equity issue, and a reduction of paid parental leave to four weeks, aligning with other counties. Discussions also touched on voluntary transfer periods. Furthermore, the proposals highlighted the need for flexibility in obtaining advanced degrees, with financial incentives to encourage professional development.