Greater Latrobe School District’s recently approved 2019-20 budget includes a one-time salary adjustment of nearly 8% for Kurt Thomas, the district’s director of facilities, operations and planning.
The additional pay hike for Thomas, based on his abilities, was discussed as a budgetary item during a Feb. 26 school board retreat, business administrator Dan Watson said. It was approved this week as part of the district’s $57 million spending plan for the coming school year.
As part of the budget process, Watson explained, a minimum annual pay hike is recommended in accordance with each employee’s contract. But he noted that “the board has the ability, if they believe somebody is going above and beyond and deserved something a little bit higher, to make that recommendation, and that’s what occurred.”
District officials on Tuesday didn’t identify Thomas as the recipient of a pay hike. On Thursday, while releasing requested salary addenda to budgets for the current year and coming year, Watson said Thomas was recommended for the adjusted salary increase in recognition of the additional education and experience he brings to his position.
As a result, the district didn’t need to contract with an outside consultant for some services and saved money, Watson said.
According to his LinkedIn profile, Thomas, who assumed his current position in December 2015, served as the clerk of works for construction of Greater Latrobe’s athletic/wellness complex, from October 2012 to September 2014. He also has worked as a project architect for Axis Architecture and SHP Leading Design, which he joined as a project designer in 2002.
He is an accredited professional with the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design green building program. He holds a degree from Bowling Green State University, having completed studies in architecture and environmental design and construction management and technology.
Budget documents show Thomas’ salary will increase by $11,099, to $106,449, in 2019-20. The extra adjustment accounts for about $7,500 of the raise.
School board member Michael O’Barto cast the sole vote against the budget. Among his objections to the spending plan were the included 1-mill property tax hike and the fact that the salary adjustment wasn’t made clear by voting on it in a separate motion.
“I am not going to dispute whether he deserved an additional raise or not,” O’Barto said. “My problem was with the process. I just believe that, when we are handing out raises that are not of the norm, the board should be voting on it in a public setting.”
According to Watson, the only occasions when the school board has conducted a separate vote for a salary increase are when it has hired a new employee, created a new position or transferred an employee to a new position.
