Durham school board pushes classified staff salary discussion until next Thursday

School leaders were hoping to resolve the issues surrounding the protest at a school board meeting Friday. However, it was voted 4-3 to postpone their discussion of classified staff salaries. The Board will revisit the issue next Thursday.

Q&A: What is going on with Durham Public Schools?

Before the vote to postpone, board member Natalie Beyer proposed option 2, which board chair Bettina Umstead seconded. However, the motion failed with a 5-2 vote.

"I just want to be expressly clear with our Board that people have to plan their lives. we have to-I bettina am saying- we have to make a decision next week so people can plan their lives," Bettina Umstead, Durham public school board chair said.

For some employees, no decision *was* a good decision because they didn't like either option on the table.

"This is not your kingdom; it's my children's. denying the people I entrust with them every single day the autonomy over who can sit by their side during a financial crisis of your creation, and now that it's exposed, it stops today." one speaker said.

"Reexamine your budget, and do not tell us the wages you promised in October are outside your budget. Find the money," another speaker said.

The board is weighing the following two options to solve the pay problems:

Some staff benefit more from Option 1.

Those are staff that got big raises from the salary study, especially people who had been with the district for a long time. We spoke with one woman who got a 25-30% raise from the salary study, but if they go with option 2, that falls down to 11%.

Staff who have years of outside experience (specifically outside the state or in private sector, because state experience still counts!) do not like this option.

Other staff benefit from Option 2. They get their years of service back, and the salary study is thrown out the window. Concerns about option 2 are that (a) this salary study that cost $ is just gone, and (b) the raises that were included in the salary study are gone too. (There is still an 11% raise on the table with this option.)

The gist of what employees want is what they were paid in October. They want the raises from the salary study, but also to keep their steps.

Discussion about the how behind the pay discrepancy - from who knew, to when, was also a hot topic.

Beyer spoke about why she was not in favor of going to the county and asking for more money.

"As we've started to investigate, we've had more concerns. we want to investigate those fully, transparency, and accountably." Natalie Beyer, Durham school board member.

Heidi Jo Hetland is one of the physical therapists who lost years of experience under the current plan, dropping from step 33 to step 1. She has concerns about both options.

Chief financial officer of Durham Public Schools steps down following staff salary error

"It seems like a step in the right direction, but still it's pitting staff against other staff," she said. "Some people are gonna benefit from option A, and some are gonna benefit from option B."

She and other members of the Durham Association of Educators (DAE) say they should have more input.

"These decisions are being made without anybody that's on the classified staff. Without any educators present," she said. "It's being made by board members, and there's no transparency on what's gotten us to this point. If the DAE had had a seat at the table at the very start, we definitely would not be in this place."

The board unanimously voted to hire a finance comptroller to look into the issues.

As part of that vote, they also agreed to terminate any existing contracts with HIL Group (the firm that did the study) when they are up.

Chief financial officer of Durham Public Schools steps down following staff salary error

The board meeting was surrounded by alot of discussions about the ongoing investigation into budget discrepancies.

Board member Alexandra Valladares proposed three motions, all of which failed to gain support.

Her proposals aimed to make public the personnel file of former CFO Paul LeSieur, hoping to reveal the timelines of when key figures, including Superintendent Pascal Mubenga and board members themselves, became aware of the issues.

Later, board member Jovonia Lewis successfully introduced a motion requesting explicit confirmation that the promised investigative report would address these specific questions.

Despite the board attorney's insistence that the information was already included, the motion passed unanimously, reflecting ongoing concerns about transparency and accountability.