The Palo Alto Unified School District Board of Education on April 23 approved budget assumptions for 2024–25 that incorporate the district’s latest proposals in ongoing contract negotiations and project a roughly $24 million fiscal impact for next year.
Chief Business Officer presentation: The district updated revenue and expenditure estimates and highlighted new investments and staffing changes: launch of a Palo Alto program at Foothill for 2024–25, a projected net decline of 2.0 classroom FTE because of enrollment trends, the addition of 2.6 FTE secondary TOSAs (math, world language and humanities), two classroom teachers for Baron Park’s conversion to a two‑strand school and instructional leads for each high school. The presentation also outlined the district’s current compensation proposals for bargaining units, which are reflected in the budget assumptions.
What the compensation proposals include: The assumptions reflect the district’s most recent offers as posted on the district website: for PAEA teachers, 3.5% ongoing for 2023–24 plus a one‑time payment, and a restructured salary schedule yielding ongoing increases for 2024–25; CSEA’s latest proposal was presented as a 3.5% ongoing increase plus a 2% one‑time payment. The CBO said any changes resulting from final negotiated agreements will be incorporated into later budget materials.
Public reaction and board concerns: Dozens of public commenters—teachers, union leaders and parents—urged the board to do more to recruit and retain staff. “We don’t want to lose them to districts that pay higher,” Terry Baldwin, president of PAEA, told the board during open forum. Several speakers pressed the board to use reserves or restructure benefits to raise starting pay and shorten the salary schedule; one teacher noted a colleague could earn roughly $37,000 more per year by moving to a different district.
Board discussion: Board members acknowledged staffing and compensation as a central priority. One board member cited mental‑health and instructional needs and said the board has discussed a study session on toxic stress and academic pressure. The board also discussed program‑specific FTE adjustments and a tentative agreement to add preparatory time for certain secondary special‑education specialists as part of ongoing negotiations.
Vote and next steps: After staff presentation and public comment the board voted to approve the budget assumptions. District staff said they will update the assumptions if and when final bargaining agreements change underlying salary or benefits assumptions and will reflect those changes in the 2024–25 budget development and public materials.
What remains unresolved: Commenters and some board members asked for more transparency about reserve policy and whether more of the district’s $135 million in reserves could be used to address recruitment and retention. District staff reiterated that negotiated agreements and funding rules will determine any final adjustments.