Modesto trustees give themselves 292% stipend increase in two-year tiered system
The Modesto City Schools Board of Education approved the second reading of a bylaw allowing a 292% increase in trustees’ monthly stipend, from $765 to $3,000.
Trustees amended the bylaw to say that for one year after the state allows a stipend increase, they would receive 50% of the maximum amount. During the second year, the stipend would increase by another 50% to meet the maximum compensation allowed by state law. The starting date for the first-year bump will be July 1.
The action passed 6-1, with Trustee Cindy Marks dissenting. “I’m just going to state that I will not take the increase,” she said.
The pay raise follows state legislation allowing those who sit on a board of education to see a raise for the first time in 40 years. However, because the 292% raise comes amid the district’s negotiations with the Modesto Teachers Association, the decision has been controversial.
Marks and Trustee Adolfo Lopez opposed the first reading of the new bylaw during the June 8 meeting. During that meeting, the board agreed to retroactively apply the raise to January of this year. However, after community outcry, many trustees rescinded their position during the June 22 meeting. They unanimously filed a motion to not move forward with a retroactive increase.
“It is about understanding how decisions will be perceived by the people you serve,” MCS employee and parent Armando Arviso said before the board at Monday night’s meeting. “I would ask the board to consider what message this proposal sends to its employees who are negotiating wages, to parents who expect resources to remain focused on students, and to taxpayers who expect careful stewardship of public funds. If compensation needs to be updated, then pursue an increase that is gradual, transparent, and easier for the public to understand.”
Many MCS teachers spoke during public comment, asking how the trustees could vote for the increase when teachers are also struggling with affordability issues.
During her regular update to the board, MTA President Jennifer McGrath said the district’s choice to raise pay for the trustees to the maximum amount as dictated by AB 1390 was not the right decision. “As a union boss, I do not begrudge anyone a raise. I have spent most of my public service fighting for fair pay,” McGrath said. “With that said, just because you can raise something to the max does not mean you should.”
She also criticized the trustees for arguing that the increase recognizes the value of their time and work. The district didn’t listen to teachers and staff who made similar arguments during negotiations, McGrath said.
“It’s an attempt to give yourselves the max that we disagree with. Not a raise, but the max,” she said. “It is the idea that you profess to work 24/7, which somehow devalues every single thing that the teachers do. That’s how they took that comment. It didn’t go over well.”
Trustee Jolene Daly pointed out that trustees accrue expenses while running campaigns, for example. “Public service should be accessible to people from a wide range of economic backgrounds. If it costs $1,000 for a candidate statement, how many people in our district, in our area, are actually going to be able to afford that to just hand $1,000 over? Like that’s the reality of the bill itself,” Daly said.
As trustees gave their updates, some came with a prepared statement regarding the pay increase. While Trustee Abel Maestas still agreed with the large increase, citing the inflation rates since 1980, he changed his mind about trustees receiving retroactive stipends.
“I do hear you about the retro and I understand your comments and your views. And so I do believe that starting July 1 and not doing retro in January is appropriate and makes sense, and that’s what I believe now. So thank you for that feedback cuz that does go with the spirit of the bill,” Maestas said.
Trustee John Ervin III concurred with Maestas. “[Some neighbors] approached me and said, ‘John, why? Why right now? Why?’ We had a discussion about why, going back and forth and looking at our situation and things like that,” Ervin said. “And they convinced me before we came to this meeting that retroactivity was not in our best interest. It was not in the district’s best interest.”
Lopez ultimately voted for the increase after the board put forward a tiered approach to the raise, while Marks remained the only dissenter.
