While normally such a vote might be a conflict of interest, San
Benito High School Board Member Evelyn Muro’s
”
nay
”
vote on the District’s labor contract last Wednesday was
protected by law, despite the fact that her husband holds a
certified staff position with the high school.
Hollister – While normally such a vote might be a conflict of interest, San Benito High School Board Member Evelyn Muro’s “nay” vote on the District’s labor contract last Wednesday was protected by law, despite the fact that her husband holds a certified staff position with the high school.
“It’s ironic that conflict of interest concerns come up when I was voting to reduce my family’s salary,” Muro said.
The labor contract, which was ultimately approved by a 3 to 1 vote, specified retroactive pay dating back as far as the 2004 school year, meaning that some teachers will be receiving a pay raise of up to 6.4 percent. With pay raises and benefits all told, the new contract will cost the District about $3 million over the course of three years.
An initial agreement between the SBHSTA and the District regarding salary and health care was reached in early December, after three years of unsuccessful bargaining on both sides. After those two major sources of contention were hammered out, negotiations proceeded fairly quickly over the next few weeks as negotiators sought to revise language issues in the agreement. A tentative, 53-page contract agreement was decided upon Jan. 9.
Some of the language in question, according to union representatives, had not been reviewed in more than 20 years. Issues the recent negotiations sought to clarify included safety conditions, grievance procedures and leaves.
Muro voted against the contract last Wednesday, after reading a written statement asserting that although she supports the teachers’ right to collective bargaining, she could not approve the contract in good conscience because she believed it would drive the District into deficit spending.
Although the contract directly impacts her household situation, Muro was allowed and expected to vote on the matter because it affects the entire teacher’s union, and not her husband as an individual, according to the regulations of the Fair Political Practices Commission.
“Before I even ran for office I consulted legal authority,” Muro said. “This is not a unique situation at all, a lot of schools have to deal with spouses and family members serving at different levels.”
While Muro could have abstained from the vote if she so chose, an abstention is considered to be in agreement with however the vote ultimately goes, according to SBHS District bylaws, which would not have correctly represented Muro’s position on the matter.
“I did not consider abstaining from the vote,” she said. “I felt it was my responsibility to vote. It would have
been a lot easier if I had, but the voters elected me because I would have to make some difficult and sometimes unpopular decisions.”
Danielle Smith covers education for the Free Lance. Reach her at 637-5566, ext. 336 or
ds****@fr***********.com
