District contract vote looms

On Friday — after the School Board is expected to vote on new teacher and administrator contracts that include 4 percent cost-of-living increases — a special session of the Legislature called by Gov. Jim Gibbons will meet on how lawmakers can make up a state budget shortfall of $250 million or more.

The potential cuts before legislators include $130 million earmarked as cost-of-living increases for state employees, university staff and public school teachers.

The district share of that is about $62 million, which would provide raises for teachers, administrators, support staff and school police. The pay raises are scheduled to go into effect Tuesday.

Clark County School Board member Terri Janison plans to support the contracts, even without the guarantee of state funding.

Because there have been so many cuts to education already, educators “are going to be hurting,” she said. “I don’t want them to hurt anymore.”

Janison said she is banking on legislators’ lack of support for killing the cost-of-living increases.

Other School Board members did not want to commit themselves or did not return calls about the upcoming contract approvals.

Some district officials acknowledged off the record that School Board members are under pressure.

At least one state lawmaker has called and asked them not to approve the cost-of-living increases, they said

However uncertain the funding, the School Board has reason to go ahead with the contracts for teachers and administrators, district leaders have said.

The contracts were negotiated in good faith with assurances from the state about funding for the salary increases.

Because a complicated health care package also is part of the teacher contract, district officials are not eager to renegotiate. Plus, the School Board already has approved a support staff contract that includes the 4 percent salary increase.

“How do you approve one contract and not the other?” School Board member Carolyn Edwards asked, adding that the district is “in a dilemma one way or the other.”

John Jasonek, executive director of the Clark County Education Association, which represents teachers, warned that the consequences of not approving the contracts “would be inviting major labor strife.”

Most school districts in Nevada have approved cost-of-living increases, Jasonek said. For lawmakers to single out Clark County teacher raises as a way to fill a hole in the state budget is unfair, he said.

“It’s absurd, immoral and just plain wrong,” he said.

School Board member Ruth Johnson said the employee contracts already would have been approved if action had not postponed so that school officials could attend high school graduation ceremonies earlier this month.

Johnson said she understands the problems the state government faces but found the timing of the special session odd, as if the district were being made the scapegoat for the state’s fiscal crisis.

“I think it’s interesting to see how the governor has chosen to arrange things the way he did,” Johnson said. “I would hope he didn’t postpone the session to point fingers.”

Jasonek said he and other union officials would be attending Thursday’s meeting, but he is not worried about the approval.

“I’m certain the School Board will do the right thing,” he said.

Contact reporter James Haug at jhaug@reviewjournal.com or 702-383-4686.