School board to reconsider 3-percent raise for super
Workshop on legal issues also scheduled for Dec. 14 meeting
By Chris Busby
The Portland School Committee will hold a public meeting on Dec. 14 — a week earlier than planned — to vote again on a proposal to give Superintendent Mary Jo O’Connor a three-percent raise. The school board’s two previous meetings ended in anger and frustration after members clashed over the size of the pay hike and argued over basic board procedures. In an attempt to address the latter, the Dec. 14 meeting will be followed by a public workshop on the board’s legal responsibilities, led by school department legal counsel Harry Pringle.
New board chairwoman Ellen Alcorn said “we obviously have a fundamental disagreement on our board about how to discuss [the proposed raise].” Though Alcorn said her preference – and the preference of five of the nine board members – is to further discuss the super’s salary in a closed-door executive session, it was clear after last week’s meeting that the board lacks the six votes necessary to hold a private session on the subject.
The board has already voted to give O’Connor a new three-year contract, but action on a salary increase has stalled twice in the past two weeks. If the board, which normally holds a formal business meeting every two weeks, does not approve a raise before the end of the year, the superintendent will continue to earn her previous salary — about $108,800 – when the new contract begins next summer.
The proposal to give O’Connor a three-percent raise – bringing her salary to nearly $112,000 – was defeated by a 5-4 vote on Nov. 30. An amendment to halve the raise to 1.5-percent failed when the board deadlocked 4-4-1 that same evening. One member abstained out of concern that public discussion of the raise violated a confidentiality agreement in the super’s contract.
On Dec. 7, the board adjourned after a motion to discuss the pay hike in executive session failed to pass by the super-majority required by Maine’s “Right to Know” law. As was the case with the earlier vote, members of the officially non-partisan board split along party lines.
On Nov. 30, the board’s three Green Independent Party members were joined by its two registered Republicans to force the vote on a reduced raise. On Dec. 7, the new board, now made up of five registered Democrats and four Greens, adjourned after the motion to discuss O’Connor’s raise in private failed to get six votes (all four Greens opposed it).
At the upcoming meeting, “if people want to amend the number, then amend the number,” Alcorn said of the super’s salary.. Last week’s motion to go into executive session was made to try to bring the board’s three new members “up to speed” on contract negotiations the previous board had with O’Connor, Alcorn said. After this Wednesday’s second public vote, “hopefully we can put this past us and move on,” she said.
Approval of the reintroduced three-percent raise requires a simple majority of five votes. New board member Lori Gramlich, a Democrat, had no comment on the matter. Fellow freshman members John Coyne (a Democrat) and Susan Hopkins (a Green) could not be reached for comment.
Board member Stephen Spring, a Green who voted against the three-percent pay raise on Nov. 30 and opposed the motion to discuss the raise in private at the Dec. 7 meeting, said today he had not yet decided how he will vote on Wednesday.
Spring added that the strife the board’s been through these past few weeks may have been constructive, in that it’s brought attention to past board practices that deserved closer scrutiny – like the process by which the board votes to meet privately. “I feel like whatever happened was for the right reason,” he said.
In the wake of the board’s contentious Dec. 7 meeting – O’Connor walked out during the discussion of her salary – several members expressed concern the superintendent would resign. Board members have also been worried that public discussion of the raise leaves the school department open to a costly lawsuit by O’Connor.
Reached for comment today, O’Connor said she has no intention of resigning, and never considered quitting during the past few tumultuous weeks. Though she said she has consulted with a personal attorney in order to better understand the legal issues involved — and declined to comment on the result of that consultation — the idea of suing the school department also seems most unlikely.
“I don’t want folks to think this has broken my spirit or the pride and the energy I have in this role,” said O’Connor. “It hasn’t.”
“Whenever we take a detour like this, it just detracts the board from the work that needs to get done,” O’Connor said.
O’Connor is in her sixth year as superintendent of Portland’s public schools. She called the board’s haggling over the size of her raise a “little blip on the radar screen,” considering it has already voted in favor of entering into a new three-year contract with her, and much work remains to be done.
Asked if she’d ever seen such contention on the school board, O’Connor said, “It’s new for me.”
