To Members of the Steamboat Springs School Board,

We, the certified and classified members of the district Collaborative Bargaining Team (CBT) feel
that there is a great deal of confusion about the CBT process, and we would like to clarify how
CBT works, and how we come to our decisions. We would also like the opportunity to publicly
comment on what we perceive to be a blatant attempt to undermine the CBT process, and to use
an invalid accusation against a school board member in order to advance a political agenda and
eliminate the voice of opposition on the school board.
The CBT Process:
CBT is comprised of staff members who represent classified and licensed staff, representatives of
building Administrators, the Superintendent, the Finance Director, the Human Resources
Director, and one member of the Board of Education. There are two facilitators---one that is
district appointed, and one appointed by staff. A district-wide survey is sent to all district staff,
including administrators, at the start of each school year, and responses are used at our first
meeting of the year to create our agenda for that year. When we discuss an agenda item, each
member has an equal voice in the process, and is given equal time to express any and all relevant
information, options, ideas, etc. that pertain to that issue. The item comes to vote only when a
majority agree that there is a viable option on the table, and at that point all parties vote on the
issue, and any compromises or adjustments can then be made. Only when ALL staff agree and
vote yes does an agenda item become part of the CBT package that then goes to the school
board for approval. No one staff member has any more influence than any other member at the
table, but all members make every effort to be fiscally responsible, and to look at the district as a
whole when determining our options. The Finance Director plays an integral role in educating
CBT members on the fiscal implications of each decision, and we are guided by that information
as we collaboratively agree on options. All meetings are open to the public, and this year two of
the meetings were held at night in order to allow more public attendance. Unfortunately, very
few people attended the night meetings.
The proposed CBT package for 2016-17:
This year, all parties to CBT agreed that we needed to be conservative with any expenditures in
order to allow the district to move back toward solvency, but that we also needed to value staff
and keep our salaries competitive with comparable districts around the state. Rather than adding
a cost of living percentage increase of 1-2% on top of the step, we agreed that this year it was
more fiscally responsible to only offer a step to eligible staff (those eligible are licensed staff
(teachers) who have been teaching in Colorado for less than 15 or 20 years, and certified staff
(support staff) who have been with this district for less than 10 years). Many of the veteran
certified and classified staff who serve on CBT will not be getting any salary increase at all. Our
Administrative team members all felt that this was a legitimate package and approved it. Our
BOE representative also supported the package, and indicated that the board would support the
proposal. When it went to the whole staff for a vote, they also overwhelmingly approved the
package, even though it was less than past years packages.
The attempt to eliminate staff voice and undermine the democratic process:
Two of the five members of the current BOE voted down the package this year, and used
duplicitous methods to try to push their agenda, despite being outnumbered. These two BOE
members, Roger Good and Joey Andrew, used an invalid accusation against another member of

the BOE, Margaret Huron, in order to keep her from casting her vote on the package. This was
manipulative and divisive, and was a deliberate attempt to thwart the collaborative work of CBT,
as well as a deliberate way to undermine a fellow board member with whom they disagree. Their
claim that Margaret Huron has a conflict of interest because her daughter is a teacher and member
of CBT was already addressed earlier this year by both the BOE and CBT. All members of CBT
who have worked within the process, and who have worked closely with Margarets daughter on
CBT, determined it to be a non-issue and agreed to move forward with no changes. The claim
was also openly discussed by the BOE during public meetings in November, and the board
likewise did not determine any action to be necessary. A similar familial situation with Joey
Andrew was also raised because his sister is a teacher in this district, and because neither board
member has any financial ties to the teacher to whom they are related, there was deemed no
conflict of interest. But now, at the last possible minute, these two board members have reopened
the issue as way to block Hurons vote on the package. They knowingly allowed the CBT
process to go all the way through May, and allowed CBT members to take valuable time and
resources to meet and work towards improving district policies and creating a compensation
package, only to block it at the last minute (after 9:00pm at the very end of the meeting during
which the vote was scheduled this past Monday, 5/23) by pressuring Huron to recuse herself from
the vote.
Good and Andrew are reviving an old and unfounded accusation that has already been addressed
and put aside because it has no legal merit. They are attempting to dismantle the democratic
process by using a dead issue to push out a Board of Education member who was duly and legally
elected by this community because she disagrees with them. They are manipulating the vote on
the salary package in order to get their way. They are trying to serve their dual purpose of
undermining CBT and eliminating the voices of the staff, and push aside the legitimate vote of a
fellow board member with whom they disagree. Incidentally, this tactic has been used in the past
after elections were held for board positions and for a recent vote on a legislative action regarding
election financing.
Redirect your energies towards education and our students:
All Board of Education members have a right to vote on the package how they see fit. But all
Board of Education members have a right to vote. That is what they were elected to do.
Reviving an accusation that has already been resolved in order to undermine staff voice and
eliminate political opposition is not only disrespectful to CBT members, administration, and the
staff as a whole, but is a betrayal of the public trust that this community has placed in its duly
elected school board members. It is unconscionable and unethical. This community voted in
November for the BOE members of their choice, and now the board must be allowed to do its job
as the community intended. We ask Good and Andrew to stop blocking the democratic system, to
do the job you were elected to do, and to allow your fellow board members to do the same.
Please redirect this energy away from your political agenda, and towards actually doing what is
best for our students. This community expects and deserves better.
Sincerely,
The Classified and Certified Members of CBT