Board grants retroactive 4 percent raises to 253

3 percent raise package was tabled in August

POTTSTOWN » With a unanimous vote Feb. 15, the new Pottstown School Board did what the previous board had delayed doing and then some — providing 4-percent raises to 253 employees who are not in the teachers union.

It was in August when strident objections by former board member Polly Weand sent what was then a 3-percent raise package back to the personnel and finance committee.

At the time, she said the district could not afford it, but predicted that the raises would be simply brought back for passage after her term ended in December. It turns out Weand was right.

At the time, the Federation of Pottstown teachers spoke up in support of the increases for the support staff and other hourly wage workers.

“The support staff, along with the teachers, have sacrificed a great deal for this district,” former middle school teacher Michael Di Donato told the board in August. He has since resigned for a job at another district.

However, Di Donato said last summer that raises for administrators who are already highly paid is a difficult pill for the teachers to swallow given that many have gone a year or two with no raises at all.

In August 2016, the board and teachers union agreed to a three-year contract, which did not provide any percentage increase in all rates of pay, but which rearranged the salary steps to more equitably distribute higher salaries to newer teachers.

Those increases in the annual steps will nevertheless cost taxpayers more than $1.3 million by the end of 2019 as a result of teachers lower on the steps — of which there are many more than higher-paid teachers — receiving step increases each year.

A recent analysis showed that the average Pottstown teacher salary is the lowest in Montgomery County.

According to the salary sheet put together by Business Manager Maureen Jampo, the 4-percent raises to the 37 employees who are mid-level administrators will add a cumulative $110,933 to the district’s payroll.

The pay hikes are retroactive to the start of the fiscal year on July 1, said Superintendent Stephen Rodriguez.

Of those 37, the biggest salary jump went to Human Resources Manager Deena Cellini, who — will see a $4,600 increase in her pay, bringing her annual salary to $119,600. The lowest increase of those 37 employees, $1,200, went to Amanda Fratterman, Pottstown’s out-of-district coordinator, who will now earn $61,200 per year.

For the 216 classified and support staff employees, the 4 percent was applied to their hourly wage, which ranges from a low of $10.79 per hour — mostly for student summer help — to a high of $29.23 per hour.

Board member Susan Lawrence said she finds it “unconscionable that our support staff is not paid a living wage.”

Board member Kurt Heidel apologized to the employees for the delay in implementing the raises.

“I know a lot of people in Pottstown will say that’s a lot,” said Heidel. But he noted money for the raises is included in the current budget, which did not raise property taxes, and it is unlikely there will be any raises next year.

Later in the evening, the board discussed the likely necessity of raising taxes in the 2018-2019 school year, and the desire to get the community more involved in the budget process.

Following up on borough council’s attempt — ultimately fruitless — to lower this year’s 12-percent tax hike by forming an advisory committee to look for savings, Heidel suggested the school board do the same.

Board member Ron Williams said attempts have been made in the past to get the community to offer suggestions and that the results of council’s attempt were “just as disappointing as anything else.”

He added, “I don’t know how we jostle our community into participating in this.”

Heidel and board member John Armato said the advisory committee is also a way to get more people to understand the fiscal challenges the district faces and how little control it has over the majority of its budget.

Rodriguez urged the board to ensure the committee “has a purpose.”

“Without specific purpose, this is doomed to fail and I don’t want to be part of the mudslinging that may follow,” said Rodriguez. “We must make sure we are not setting up our community members for failure.”

Board members and members of the community were asked to forward suggestions to Heidel, however, after the meeting Heidel rejected the names of some potential committee members because they do not live in the borough.

“I want stakeholders,” he said. “But other board members may have different ideas.”

“I find it unconscionable that our support staff is not paid a living wage.”

Susan Lawrence, Pottstown School Board member