So, anybody have any questions on that or just just talk to people about it. Let them know it's it's a good thing. I think it's a really good thing to have happen. So, Okay, with that I'll entertain a motion to adjourn. So moved. Second. Second. All those in favor?
So that was my >> Yeah, that mean like that was my impression when we said the two-hour model. Um, and also as a way to encourage more teachers to do the two-hour model because the kids acquiring English has really down. >> So, let's just talk about this partic because I want you to be thinking if this option moves forward, this sort of specificity is going to be needed in your agreement language. So, just think about that's for anything. But just since this is coming up, uh, Amber, no. Is it Amber, then Arya? No. Katie, then Ivonne. >> Okay. My concern with this is that um TCA doesn't use the two-hour model specifically because we're a DLI school and but they still are very much responsible for teaching within their model and it and it impacts them as well. So I don't want to eliminate those teachers who are teaching that from this.
>> Okay. So Ivon Then Daniel >> I understood this option as everybody who was teaching multilingual learners that will get this. >> so let's So there's clearly confusion around the option. So we're going to need more specificity. I think there several folks believed it to be one way. Now we're hearing some differences. So let's make sure that we've got specific specificity in the option and we may need to re-evaluate it as a result of what's happening right now. Daniel, >> so to explain I I think the language is clear. So there's the way the school district uh has set up and I think this is a state thing is there's several different models of English language development that students can take. Um, the pull out model, which I think you also called the one-out model or the one-hour model, is where there is an ELD teacher who pulls kids out of the classroom and that is their entire maybe not their entire job, but that is their job is to they they're paid solely to do EL and that's why they're excluded from this group is because they they don't have any other responsibilities other than teaching EL.
The dual language model like uh TCA uses is where students are learning English and Spanish um simultaneously and dual language teachers are on a separate salary schedule and already receive an additional $1,000 which is >> teach in Spanish. But what about the teachers who teach in English and they're responsible for the SEI kids and the SEI model? >> Well then those are those kids doing two hours or they doing dual language >> two hours because of the minutes for dual language but they're still doing SEI. They're only doing one hour of SEI though, right? >> Well, yeah. So, they basically have to get all the information into these kids and get them to pass a Zella in less time. >> That's fair. And then the the twohour model is where you have a home room teacher who has to teach who's their English teacher usually or the elementary home room teacher who has to do all of the SEI two hours of SEI um without any add any additional trainings and additional certification sometimes without any additional compensation.
So they don't get the dual language pay and they have all of the additional responsibilities of a home room teacher on top of doing EL which is was the intention of this option is my understanding is to compensate those people for the extra work that they're doing on top of already being a gened home room teacher. Okay. >> All right. Let's just evaluate this on the fiscally responsible sustainable standard and then if need be we need to re-examine it. Uh it sounds like there was more understanding about being for the 2hour than anything else. I understand Katie's got concern about folks not necessarily, but as presented, it was intended for those in that two-hour pull out. Well, when it was costed out, there's a number 58 next to it. So, whoever costed it out would know exactly what we were doing because who were they counting in that 58, right?
So, that would clarify what the option is because there is a number of teachers next to it. So, >> okay. >> All right. Let's evaluate this on the fiscally responsible and sustainable st standard. I'm looking for scores between one and four. Is this fiscally responsible and sustainable? I'm looking for scores. Two, six, Katie, >> just a fiscally responsible part. 41. Okay. Option 13 is tiered raises for employee groups. So 2% for classified, 1% for certified, and half a percent for administrators. Is this fiscally responsible and sustainable? I'm looking for one through four, please. Katie >> tiered increases. I need everybody engaged, please. Got to keep your scores up till we get them all accounted for. >> Are all over the board. 32. 32. Option 14. 1% or higher. We didn't specify what for hourly classified employees. Is this fiscally responsible and sustainable? Just for classified 1% could be higher.
>> Yeah, I just meant like whatever's money left over. Whatever is left over will go to this. >> Okay. I'm looking for one through four. How much is the average classified paid right now? >> 20 236 >> 35 >> Ariel, what's yours? >> I have a question. >> Compare just want you to evaluate just this option and then I'll let you ask >> is fally responsible and sustainable. My answer is based off this one question. What is the compared to the districts around us? What's the average hourly rate of classified employees? >> That's so hard to say. >> You've got 16. What's your minimum? 16 pay. >> I think our minimum is 1658 currently. >> 1650 are paying like 20, right? Well, I got one paying even less than 16. They're just right at the minimum. >> So, it is >> teachers are much higher.
>> But I want you to think about just this standard or just this just this standard for this option. So, 1% higher increase where we just need your score. Yep. >> 43. >> Oh, you got your score. >> Oh, I had a lot less. >> 47. she said. All right. Option 15 is to develop a model for exemplar teachers. So this is work that would have to be done moving forward. I guess this is a cost neutral. We have a TBD there because we don't have any models in place for exemplar teachers. Is it fiscally responsible to develop this model? I'm looking for scores. This is costneutral. You're not doing anything. You're Sounds like a task force. One through four. I'm looking for scores. >> Oh, 54 50. >> Let's keep your keep your scores up. >> 49. >> Okay. 49. I'm taking your word.
increase the market demand for special ed resource teacher to $10,000. Is this fiscally responsible and sustainable? I know we need to evaluate all of them. I'm just going to stick to fiscal right now, >> but it's TBD. >> It's TBD because we don't know what Well, it's supposed to remain costneutral. >> Oh, that's right. Because it would offset the >> contract weird. Let's say, >> right, if it's less than I'm just want to throw this hypothetical. Let's say if it was $9,000 because right to off to be cost neutral to the million, it would be 9,000 and whatever. >> That's that's my concern because I don't know that you've run all the has already evaluated. >> Is it cost neutral forever or just for the upcoming year? That's what I'm >> Vanessa. cost neutral for this year or >> every year? >> It's always going to be cost neutral.
>> Is it fiscally responsible and sustainable year after year? Is it cost neutral beyond this first year? >> Yes. >> Yet yes, it is neutral or yes, we don't there's going to be >> it's cost neutral year after year. Um, I think we would have to look at it each year to see if it's if it's pulling in and doing what we want it to do. Um, >> it's like all the market demands, right? We're supposed to be revaluating those every year. >> Yeah. I mean, I just I think the deficit of the available staff tells the p the story, right? So any >> Okay. >> Yeah. >> I I don't know that it's cost neutral of forever, but we can look at it each year and bring data back that shows if we're on track. So think about responsible and sustainable. >> But right now we are hemorrhaging money with contractors.
>> Correct. >> All right. I'm looking for one through four on this option, please. >> Can I just say >> say something real quick while you're counting? I'm sorry. Um I just did a quick calculation with 27 current resource contractor. If we replaced them with all of them, it'd be what? 12121,000, which is way less than a million dollars, right? >> Wait, is with salary? >> Yeah. So, if we if we hired 27 teachers out of um Oh, that was 45. I'm sorry. Let me back up. >> It' be $270,000 essentially, right? >> Instead of a million. Right. >> And that's never been >> that that's not that's not including the self-contained or the uh if you're going to do something with market demand for Sykes. >> Okay. >> 54. Thank you. How about for the second market demand stipen for special ed self-contained at the 15,000?
Is it fiscally responsible and sustainable? I'm looking for one through four scores. >> 54 and the psychologist a base increase or stipen? I thought it was a stipen maybe, but I could have misunderstood. because we were talking the base increase. >> Okay. Go ahead. We were I think last year there was a proposal for a meet and confer uh increase to the base for psychologists to appear on their salary schedule which is what >> they're going to look at when they look for a job or do we uh I think what I just heard today was the possibility of a stipen but I think >> as far as uh you know when people ask us what the salary is they look at the base then they look to see if there's market demand and if it's nowhere near what other districts are doing, then they're going to move on.
>> So, this would be to the base. >> Well, I I put that, but I you know, I guess it's really up to you all. >> Are we okay with the option as is 5,000 increase to the base at a cost of $10,000? Can >> I just say one thing? >> Yes. >> I I think that's what we talked about, Joel, because we moved last year. We moved money from a stipen to the base and we saw really no improvement in our ability to recruit psychologists because we didn't actually increase the base. We just moved from that to the base. So this would be an increase hopefully would attract. We literally only have two employees that are are psychologists. So it's >> even more dire than teachers. >> Okay. All right. So, let's evaluate this through the fiscal responsible standard. Uh, I'm looking for scores one through four, please.
>> 54. >> Okay. All right. Now, there are a couple that we need to evaluate the other standards and then we're going to take a break >> and we need to add Justin to the first three. Yes. Okay. So, let's uh Are you okay if we stay on the bottom here? So, let's evaluate the psych base increase to uh by 5,000. Same same thing. Scores one through four. Is this aligned to student outcome focused governance? I'm looking for one through four. Increasing the base salary for Sykes by five grand scores. >> We're starting at the bottom and going back. Yep. >> Trying to confuse us. >> Yes. Let's see. >> Is it aligned to student outcome focused governance to do this? >> Kelly, what do you >> 54. Thank you. Is this legal to increase the base by 5,000 for psychologists looking for scores one through four?
>> 55. Is it in the best interest of children to increase the base for Sykes by five? Looking for scores. >> I see two threes. >> Oh, I didn't see K's. I'm sorry. >> No problem. 54. >> Okay. So now we're going to go to >> self-contained to 15,000. Is this aligned to student outcome focused governance? Looking for one through four market demand stipen. Need to see all scores. >> 51. Is it legal to increase the market demand to 15K for self-contained? Looking for scores. 55. Good. Is it in the best interest of children to increase the stipend for self-contained? 55. >> 54. Thank you. How about the market demand for special ed resource teachers getting increased to 10,000? Is this aligned to student outcome focused governance? I'm looking for one through four. >> Is it legal? Is it in the best interest of children?
>> Okay, I think we might have Do we have one more? We can Can you scroll out? Oh, sorry. You were already doing that. >> Are there any more that we're missing? Student outcome. Oh, yeah. for the 500. Let's evaluate this one. Even though I know we're going to we came to consensus on um keeping it toward the end, but I want to evaluate it. Is a 500 minute minimum increase for all staff that bel that fall below the adjustment based on years of service. So these would be for folks that don't meet any of the fall into any of those criteria. Is that aligned to student outcome focused governance? I'm looking for scores on that option please on that standard. Is it legal? >> 47. Yes. >> 47. And then this one's 55. Is it fiscally responsible and sustainable? >> Thank you. Is it in the best interest of children?
>> Okay. Was there one other Joel? We were saying we need to adjust. >> Bless you. Okay. 10 o'clock. >> Okay. >> Oh, on fiscal. >> Okay, Justin, we just need your scores on option schedule. Doing a certified schedule repair. Is that fiscally responsible and sustainable? >> E2. We're going to add three. So, 54, >> one up. One up. >> There you go. 54. What about registered nurses, Justin? Fiscally responsible and sustainable to do a schedule repair. Three. So 55 on the one right below. And years of service for all employee. What is Oh, years of service. I forget what the C number is. >> There's some sort of adjust. Oh, >> can you scroll over? We can see the other way. Sorry, other way. So, we can see the fin. There we go. >> Okay. So, years of service adjustment for all the employees.
>> 54. Okay. >> Okay. So, now we need to divide by the number. >> So, what I'm going to do is we'll have somebody do that where it is 10 uh01. I want everybody back at 10:15, please. Okay. 10:15 and then we're gonna get to work. >> Thank you Roxanna for your help. begin to close out your conversations. Back to your I know. >> All right, it's 10:15. Let's get going. >> So, the next thing we're going to do We're gonna do some individual work around. And so what I want you to do is right now you don't need to look at anything. Think about the issue of compensation and you're going to identify what is your interest when you think about this issue. I don't want you to think about the options. trying to be matters what values might no matter what the option is.
Okay, so remember we did this previously. You're going to start you can start by writing down we value in some cases, right? We've talked about retention. We value recruitment. Whatever your value is, we value ensuring that whatever your interest is. So, this is the why behind what the issue is we're trying to solve. Okay? On your own for two minutes, I want you to write down your interest in the compensation in the issue of compensation. So, I still want you to use we because you're not just thinking about yourself. What is it that we value when you were thinking about this issue of compensation? So, I'm going to have everybody go ahead on your own and write down what it is that you value. There are guiding questions up there to help you write down. How to identify the needs. I've identified two that tend to come up.
retention and recruitment. We value retaining quality employees. We value recruiting. Maybe we value everybody getting something. I don't know. Whatever it is for you. Okay. So, interest statements for yourself. Excuse me. number. So there are paper about six minutes. coffee. exact same thing. Your voice matters. our mics. Try it again. Try it again. >> Hello. Okay. Uh, we wrote retention of quality staff. Uh we value equity and fairness for all and being fiscally responsible for now and in the future. >> Okay. I saw some circling on we value retention >> of what was your phrase quality staff. >> James did your group have retention on there of quality staff or something along >> uh yeah retaining and recruiting. Retain, recruit. Amber, how about your group? Retain and recruit. >> Yes. >> And this group also. Okay. I'm gonna put retention and recruitment because that showed up.