What’s going on behind closed doors over at the Huntley School District?
I thought everything was supposed to be kept as secret as the McHenry County College Board discussions about leasing land to John Maguire for a radio broadcasting tower, but here comes a press release from the District 158 school board aimed directly at the Huntley Education Association.
Negotiations must not be going as the teachers’ union desired. Isn’t the board agreeing to the 22% pay hike request? No recession yet. The economy was still growing by 6/10 of one percent during the last quarter, right?
Of something.
Here is an interesting comment found in the press releases last paragraph:
“…the proposal presented by the HEA would bankrupt the District within two years. All Board members present at the session stated to the HEA they would not approve any contract which included annual deficit spending.”
Here’s the press release:
Consolidated School District #158 Board Press Release
Re: Board of Education Negotiation Update
The HEA (Huntley Education Association) and the Board (Board of Education of Consolidated School District #158) presented their initial proposals on April 7, 2008. Two negotiation sessions were subsequently held. To date no items have been tentatively agreed to between the parties.
The first session was primarily spent on questions and challenges the Board had with the accuracy of some of the statements made in the rationale sections of the HEA proposal. Additionally, the Board addressed the overall financial position of the District and asked if the HEA needed clarification or assistance with understanding the Board’s proposal.
The second session started with the HEA addressing some of the Board’s questions from the previous session. Changes to the Job Sharing language were discussed. The Board and Administration expressed concerns with providing benefits to part-time employees, who are Job Sharing, which would be in conflict with current District policy. Both sides agreed to come to the next session with additional information on the matter.
The Board addressed its salary schedule portion of the proposal. The Board reiterated from its original proposal presentation that every member would receive a minimum 2% salary schedule increase for every year in the contract proposal if they were “off schedule.” Also, the Board stated the vast majority of the members would be “on schedule” and receive the 4.25% salary schedule increase in the first year. Additionally, the Board stated there are no annual salary schedule decreases for any member in any year in the Board’s proposal.
The Board provided their understanding of the overall additional increase to the compensation cost contained in the HEA proposal. The Board stated that the proposal presented by the HEA would bankrupt the District within two years. All Board members present at the session stated to the HEA they would not approve any contract which included annual deficit spending. Teacher Evaluations was placed on the agenda for discussion at the next negotiation session.
5.2.08