The Legislature has barely ended its 2024 session and already work has resumed on one of the central challenges for 2025: determining an adequate and equitable State School Fund.
Educator salaries are a fundamental component of the school funding discussion. Staff costs run around 85% of school districts’ budgets, and they are the biggest point of difference between what the Legislature says schools should be spending and districts say they need.
On Wednesday, the Joint Task Force on Statewide Educator Salary Schedules resumed trying to tease out a new way to pay school staff. The task force is exploring setting statewide salary minimums.
A statewide schedule could make salary costs more predictable and equitable, but unions and school board members worry about losing local negotiating flexibility to respond to community needs.
“We have a lot of work still ahead of us,” said Sen. Michael Dembrow, opening Wednesday’s informational meeting.
The 2023 Legislature created the task force, and it met a half-dozen times before it was paused for the 2024 session. The task force must submit a final report to the Legislature by Sept. 15.
Wednesday’s resumption was mostly dedicated to getting unions’ perspective on what statewide bargaining might look like. The discussion raised issues of differences between job classifications, regional costs and local needs.
The hearing also examined trends in educators’ pay and their connection to staff turnover.
Dembrow and Rep. Courtney Neron lead the task force. OSBA Legislative Services Director Lori Sattenspiel is on the task force, and other members represent administrators, teachers, staff and parents.
Sattenspiel used OSBA’s fall regional meetings to discuss a salary schedule with school board members. Responses were mixed, with board members’ seeing advantages for districts but wanting to protect local decision-making. OSBA leaders are talking with board members and education partners about where they would like to see this task force go.
Gov. Tina Kotek and the Legislature have launched multiple intersecting efforts in the coming months to re-examine how Oregon public schools are funded in preparation for 2025 legislation.
Dembrow said the goal is to create a clear framework to examine the appropriate level of funding, spending needs and accountability for budget decisions.
“We need to be really clear what the true cost is,” Dembrow said Wednesday.
In the 2023 session, the Legislature’s number crunchers estimated schools needed $9.5 billion in the State School Fund to continue their programs and staffing, known as the current service level. The Oregon Association of School Business Officials, working off current contracts and budgets, calculated that school districts needed $10.3 billion for most districts to avoid cuts.
Staff compensation was the biggest chunk of difference. The Legislature estimated school salary costs would increase 2.55%. OASBO calculated salaries would go up 5.11%.
That gap fuels labor strife and workforce shortages as districts struggle to pay wages competitive with other districts, other states and other industries.
When the allocation from the Legislature is less than union salary demands, districts are caught between a rock and a hard place. Districts can cut staff to give the remaining employees more money, or they can hold tight and face strike threats.
Districts in better financial positions because of legacy costs, local option levies or area cost of living can offer a better deal, though, luring staff from more challenged districts.
The Legislature settled on a $10.2 billion State School Fund for 2023-25, but it hasn’t been enough for all districts. Silver Falls School District budget officials say the district could run out of money in June, according to The Oregonian/OregonLive.
Last fall Portland Public Schools teachers went on strike, demanding higher wages the district said it couldn’t pay without cutting staff. Other districts have struggled in bargaining this year, and Salem-Keizer Public Schools teachers will vote this week on whether to strike.
The task force released an interim report in December. The report said a statewide schedule would introduce transparency, predictability and uniformity. It could reduce tensions between districts and unions and offer targeted support for hard-to-fill positions such as special education.
The report, however, said it would be challenging to create a system that accounts for work duty variations and regional differences. Setting up the system would also involve settling significant questions of how it would work legally, who would do the bargaining and how it would be maintained.
The report acknowledges the question of state vs. local decision-making, the biggest sticking point for both some school board members and union representatives.
The report also identified some “opportunities.” The report ties statewide salary discussions to reviews of the current service level calculations and the Quality Education Model, the state’s public school funding target.
Past testimony has highlighted just how complicated the road ahead could be.
Sarah Wofford, a task force member and president of the Oregon School Employees Association, said her union could not support any proposal that undermines efforts to bargain for local needs.
Jackie Olsen, OASBO executive director, said for her membership, “the largest concern by far” is losing local decision-making.
Morgan Allen, deputy executive director of policy and advocacy for the Coalition of Oregon School Administrators, in his January testimony said his membership is generally in favor but is skeptical about implementation.
Allen said something needs to be done, though, because the current funding model isn’t addressing schools’ workforce challenges. Ultimately, he said, it comes down to what the state is willing to sustainably pay.
“If we raise salaries, how will we be able to afford this?” Allen said.
– Jake Arnold, OSBA
[email protected]
