Financial Impact for BSD

How do BSD and BEA Compensation Proposals Compare?

As of October 3, the District is proposing a cost-of-living salary increase (COLA) of 11.5% over three years for an average of 3.8% per year. BEA is proposing a 16% COLA increase over two years for an average of 8% per year. These salary increases are in addition to the raises for experience (called step increases) that teachers already receive each year until they reach the top of the salary scale.

To understand more about how much teachers and other licensed staff are currently paid and how those salaries compare to other districts, please review our Compensation webpage.

BSD vs BEA COLA Proposal

	Year 1 2024-2025	Year 2 2025-2026	Year 3 2026-2027
BSD	3.75%	3.75%	4%
BEA	9%	7%	-

What is the Cost of BSD and BEA Compensation Proposals?

Below, we’ve outlined what the financial implications for each proposal would be over the next two years. (While the District has proposed a 3-year contract, BEA has proposed a 2-year contract, so the figures you see below only reflect this school year and next school year.)

Both BSD and BEA have proposed salary and benefit increases. BEA also has proposed limits on class sizes and caseloads that would require adding staff or giving extra pay for any overages. This additional cost has been accounted for in the calculations.

Financial Breakdown

Financial estimates are based on budget projections and the best current information available.

The District’s proposal would increase costs by about $42.3 million over the first two years. The union’s latest proposal would cost about $271.7 million over two years. The difference in cost between the two proposals is more than $229 million.

Total Costs of BSD vs BEA Proposal

Assuming current and projected revenue, BSD’s proposal would result in a deficit of $29 million next year. BEA’s proposal would result in a deficit of $161.8 million next year.

General Fund Projected Deficit

General Fund Reserves (Ending Fund Balance)

While the District has financial reserves and will dip into those reserves to mitigate the financial impact of increasing costs, these reserves are limited and dwindling.

Bottom line, both proposals would require the District to make cuts; accepting BEA’s more costly proposal would require much deeper cuts. As a district, we have only three ways to substantially lower costs: