I have a I'm sorry, Daniel. I'm so sorry. I have a cost question. So, for the psychologist recommendation, they allocated how much it would cost to give all of our currently employed psychologists that raise, not including vacancies. Normally in this committee, when we calculate cost, we assume that all of the vacancies have been filled. Mhm. So that we don't run out our budget. In the past, we've had a few instances where it's like, oh, it's not a lot of money. God forbid we fill all those positions. We dip a couple grand into carry forward. It's not a big deal. But were all of these compression costs done based on current employees and not vacancies? That's a good question. Well, I think never mind. I think if Vanessa sent us the numbers, it should be fine. Well, on the psychologist, it says that 15,000 is not enough.
It's actually a bullet point. So, if we were fully staffed, there are nine allocated psychologists. So, if it was five, it would if it was 5,000 per psychologist, that would be 45. So they're basically counting on the cost savings of not having a fully stuffed. Yeah, I think it's just in whatever population. Yeah, if we replace contractors, I guess it would be costly. Totally. If we replace the contractors, then we're saving that money, so it evens up to vote on the bus driver. Okay, read it one more time so everyone can hear it. $1 an hour increase for bus drivers, including transportation staff who also drive. Okay. Are we in agreement with that? Okay. So, we are formally at but we're going to line it here. Hooray. I know. Darn it. Okay. Okay. Are we ready for the next one, which would be number 23?
This is related to nurses. There's a little bit of more information on this one. So, I'm just going to say, yeah. any increase potential. Well, this one is a weird one because it says potential cost and there's a cost there, but it says when we factor in longevity surrounding districts, we are in alignment actually. So, there's not really a recommendation for this one. Yeah, it just says the committee will need to manually collect data for LPNs. These stuff are included on the ESP salary schedule and will need to be put onto their own category to address compression. So maybe that's the recommendation is that we move uh LPN's onto the ESP salary schedule. I don't know. It says potential cost approximately. Maybe to do that move it would increase some of their rates, I guess. Is that what that means, Dorothy? That sounds right. Lisa, does that sound right to you?
remember the grouping that's why that didn't really show the schedule you can't just fix you can't just fix there's all these different people in that category right so that's where Vanessa was asking that we need more time to go through there and see how we would adjust each one each one yeah I got the impression that Sorry, I got the impression that Vanessa wasn't necessarily asking for a meet and confer recommendation for this that it was internal work that she could do. And since we're trying to, you know, narrow um to some extent the number of recommendations, I don't want to waste one. That's not a good word. I don't want to utilize one on something that could be done as internal work. Well, it sounds like there's more. Does that sound like what you recall as well? Okay. So, you don't think there's even a recommendation here for to include LPN's in the ESP salary schedule?
Okay. Okay. So, I move I move that we table this one and put it on that other list and then we'll be able to talk to Vanessa about the potential cost or where that comes from. So, there was a money figure next to that. It says potential cost, but as Lisa said, we'd have to go individual by individual. So I'm guessing she just kind of estimated what that might be. Okay. So again, do we agree take a consensus to table the nurses because I guess we need more information. Are you okay? Okay. Yes. Uhhuh. I'll still type I'll still type it out though. Next year. Um okay. For the next one, we're on slide nine now. Eve, on the compensation presentation, uh it says, "Recommend fixing the current salary schedule, adding $5,000 to each level to attract applicants." We're talking about psychologists specifically. Um, so she has an example here.
Somebody would move from 65,000 to 70,000. Again, adding $5,000. I'm not presenting. It's I mean uh so the recommendation is to add $5,000 to each level to attract applicants of psychologists. How is it only 24,000? I think they're accounting they're accounting for who's actually here and then thinking about the cost savings from contracted psyches. Um it also people who are uh prorated for full-time. So like if you have a psych working 1.2 two or something or if you have people working a point eight would you have something to say because you're our expert right so I know it was about um what I had shared earlier is that for me what I would like to see because I know we do have an issue with Sykes but we've also had a major issue with other positions in sped um in terms of like uh CC teachers and also um self-contained Um, and so I would like to maybe change that option and have it go towards those positions because we just got the 15 stipen which I know we're still below and stuff, but also we've had a few like strive classrooms that have not had teachers this year.
And if we're really looking at like student, yes, Sykes do a lot of things and I know Sykes are probably going to be super upset at me, but the fact that we have students that haven't had a teacher for a good part of the year is not okay. And so that's where I was pitching like I think we need to look at really what is happening and we can see when we have a self-contained that's not covered what it does to campus and the psych. It's our most vulnerable and it's our most it's our most vulnerable kids. Lordis, are you saying that instead of allocating this additional 5,000 to psychologist for it to go to crosscut teachers? I'd like us to have that discussion. I mean, how how many CC teaching positions are there? I don't have that information. Are we are we adding options?
So, are we are we said But he wasn't allowed to add it. Yeah. I just I I don't know. I mean, I appreciate what you're saying, but two things that are going through my mind. I don't know how the committee that spent time doing all this work would feel about us making a change to their suggestions. And then secondly, again, it doesn't that never came up while we were in our teams. So, um, that's what I'm saying. But I mean, I appreciate your thinking for that. I just I don't I don't think I feel comfortable with that. Just the wording of them. We're changing the wording from psychologist. Yeah, but that's we don't even have the money for that. So, getting back to what the committee recommended. So, the recommendation was to add $5,000 to each level to attract applicants for psychologists. Okay. Can let's take a vote for that.
We're not changing the wording on that. Well, this is to pass. This is Mhm. We're voting on it. Yes. Okay. We have a thumbs down. Okay. So, um did you want to add anything else and will this for psychologist? I there was an option on this one because I know I worked on writing it is but I don't see it on here and so I guess I'm a little bit confused and it wasn't one we crossed off. And so it says psychologists will receive a base salary increase of 15,000 in lie of a 15,000 market demand stipend and psychologists will not be grouped with other certified staff for the person um purpose of negotiated raises. I don't see that on this option though which is why I'm confused. Um because honestly this is going to make a bigger impact when we start talking about raises should we ever get funds to be able to give raises or significant raises.
moving that that's going to make a bigger change for our psychologists because we're going to be able to add raises to their base salary, which would be ideally higher. So, I just don't see that on these options. Yeah, I have them on my notes that I sent to Maria at some point. Yeah. So, I guess I'm confused on that. It literally just got didn't get printed on this hand. I mean, I know I helped write that one. That's why I was like, where is that? The work from home option is also not on here. and the SP case manager options. And the sped case manager options. Those three. Yeah, there's three on there that we have to add. Yeah. Oh my gosh. Now we're up to who knows how many options. So, we're up to 29. They're going to be at the end. So, we will add them as number 25.
26. 26. Okay. 26 is the riff one. Yeah. So, which one was 27? The one that Amy just read. Yeah. Can you read sped case man? That one Amy, right? No, the the case manager one is on there. This is the psychologist. Yeah, totally. No, it's not. Yeah. Yeah. How did they get off? There's three the on under option seven. There's three that aren't on there. We'll have to add them, Maria. Okay. Hopefully that's it. Do you think in that committee um I'm just wondering if there was a discussion they I wonder if they are aware about the psychologists receiving a base salary increase that that's one of our options. It's not a recommendation yet, but so so let's bring their counsel. There were a list of groups that were sent to them to specifically talk about compression and that's the recommendation they brought forward.
It wasn't about ongoing salary or change. It was about compression. Wait, how does that address compression? Um because it adds $5,000 to the salary schedule and it changes. I don't have to But that was I wasn't there for that part of the conversation, but that was the goal. So wait, what is the what is the compression that psychologists are experiencing? I thought it wasn't about compression, but retention. Yeah, it says it says retention on there. Oh, the longevity. Speaking of compression, longevity is also missing from this list. So I think we should take a minute and figure out what's missing. One of the longevity recommendations is I can do another reprint if we need to. Okay. But it seems like we're missing a few. I think the 15 moving their 15,000 to their babes. And then also when we talk about raises this year is a bigger bang for your buck than that 5,000.
That's Yeah, that was my whole point. Like let's do that. Before we do anything else now, we need to get all the options on there because there are options. Oh, no. I'm not criticizing you. I know. I'm worried that we're we're just kind of trying to remember off the top of our head ones that were brought up and we're gonna miss some like you just brought up too that I Oh yeah, that's right. Oh yeah, that's right. Where' they go? Let's go through these ones and make sure that they're but they're not even on this. Some of the options for that Lord just brought in aren't even on. Yeah, I don't know what So there's there's four from my groups that are missing. The last four I I believe all the rest of them are on there. just which ones aren't. You just mentioned longevity that are not on here.
So the longevity one, yeah, there's one longevity one on there, but not the other one, which is to address compression, longevity stipens will increase by 10%. I would go through and look, but you know, there's like six handouts with all the options on it. So So that was just option seven. No, it's a different one. Um Oh, yeah. Yeah. Yeah. On this on on this on this silly typed one, everything from option seven down is not on the new print out, right? And that's what's missing. No, not the whole page. Just the last option seven. No, option seven and 8 n 10 that aren't labeled for some reason. Yeah. Yeah. I don't I just I worry. Are we back to adding the um Yeah. Just Yes. And just real quick for like the public that is watching, we just needed to get all of our options from all of our notes and posters onto one complete document, which we have now done.
So with the finances as well. So we are in alignment. Before we move forward though, can we make sure nobody else can remember any other option that we have not now captured? Like I had forgotten about a bunch of those. I think okay everybody nobody else is like wait a minute what about right everybody else is good. Okay we have to do something about self. I haven't had a teacher in what, three years, but not today. Give it a keep the same tiers and increase the amount at each tier by 20% and a dollar amount. That's for the 20%. Yeah. Okay. Then there's one right below it now that wasn't there before. Um, so the self [Music] um, wait, hold on. The 10% one is not for three-year teachers. Unless I'm What? Sorry. What docu What is that document title? Is that on our folder?
Because I'm looking at that. Yeah. Is it in the folder? That would be nice. Yeah, put that in the chat so I can just look directly so I can All right, I got you. Okay, Eve has put the latest document with all of our options in the chat. So, please go there so that everybody can be on the same page. Okay, so if we can have everyone's attention, we are ready to go. I am um locked in on getting you math numbers the cost of option. Wait a minute, Daniel, please. Okay. So, if you want to go ahead and um can Kelly, we'll be able to can you print this again for us? Okay. So, um you'll get a hard copy here, but just for if you'd like a hard copy just for paper one, two, I would definitely four five. That's it. Anybody else for a hard copy?
Going once, going twice. Okay, thank you. Okay. Um, we're going to go ahead and try to add money to these options and see what we have. Okay, Eve, I'll let you direct that since you have the computer. Eve, option seven. I'm going to call it 7B to address compression. The number is 127 932.90. Um, looking down, I'm going to find I don't have numbers for option eight. I don't have numbers for option nine. Option 11, let me look at my spreadsheet. Option 11, the cost is 35456.31. 3545. Yep. Um, option 12. Um, let me get you that number. Wait. So, uh, that doesn't actually have a hard number. It says I'll just do I'll do 21.5 then. 21.5. Option 11, that is 497102 or sorry, uh, option 12. Yes. 497102. Um, Yep. That is 656 489. Yep. Um 15. I do not have numbers for um 19 would cost you go back to option 12.
Yeah. 656489. The one above it. Oh, wait. Sorry. What? Oh. Oh, wait. Oh, 12. Sorry. 497. Um, 21. Yeah. 497102. Okay. 13 is good. I'm moving down to 19. Option 19, the cost is 454378. Um, I don't we did 20 already. And then you guys have the costs in the spreadsheet or in the presentation for those. RIFF is none. All right, that's all I got. Okay. ask a clarifying question. Yes. For the money that is set for compression that has to be spent on compression. It doesn't have to be. So if we don't go, we could do less. So yes. Um last year we approved a recommendation allocating basically the first recommendation we approved was that the school district should allocate money every year toward compression for the purpose of resolving the compression until you know the compression issues in the district have been resolved.
Last year we earmarked $200,000 for that compression. We did recommend this committee recommended it for compression. If this committee decide like that money has not been spent already. So if this committee decides to repurpose it, we could do that. Um however like we already in the past recommended it be used for compression. Um so our options can be longevity our options can be the recommendations that were given to us. The psych one that's actually not directed at compression that's compensation. We are not obligated to use any of the $200,000 on that if you know because it's not related to compression. Um same with I think the bus I think the bus drivers one was also not a compression issue. um facilities was a compression issue, but they said they didn't they just needed 20 grand for next year. Longevity would be the primary thing. We spend most of our compression.
20 grand again. I know. You should have listened during the presentation. No, but we didn't even thumbs that up. Well, right. I'm just saying but that's No, because we're um Okay. So, what do you think about this idea? Because we don't have the funds for everything. Um, what I'd like to do is again change up. Um, can we look at the options that require no funding and determine if we want to make recommendations for those nonfunded options? I I apologize, but I'm going to disagree here because contracts are due for teachers in a few days. And I think people would like to know whether or not they're getting a raise next year before they sign their contract or at least whether or not this committee is recommending a raise. Looking at all of our financial options, at least the ones with costs right now, there are only two that are in conflict.