July 9, 2014 at 4:20 p.m.
Details of settlement between school district, Wall released
Details of settlement between school district, Wall released
The terms of the settlement indicate the district agreed to pay Wall $52,000 in back pay, in exchange for him dropping the suit, and bought out the final two years of his contract at a cost of approximately $90,000.
The district also agreed to pay $25,500 in fees to Wall's attorneys.
The settlement agreement, dated June 16, brings to an end a long-running dispute between Wall and the district.
In his lawsuit, Wall alleged the school district failed to abide by the terms of an agreement executed in 2007 which he claimed entitled him to annual wage and benefits increases of at least 3.8 percent over the last seven years.
According to Wall's complaint, the school district and its administrative team reached a settlement agreement in November 2007 following negotiations over future wages and benefits. The settlement called for pay increases to be based on a performance model though the total package (wages and benefits) couldn't be any lower than a 3.8 percent bump. The terms of the settlement continued in 2008-'09 and 2009-'10 in the form of individual contracts for district administrators. Following that time, Wall alleged that he and the district had negotiations but never officially established a new contract. As a result, he argued the prior terms - and the 3.8 percent annual increase - carried over into 2010-'11 and 2011-'12.
In 2012, Wall and the district entered into a new three-year contract running from July 1, 2012 through June 30, 2015. Though that contract did not stipulate a specific annual pay increase percentage, the complaint alleges that Wall was owed the 3.8 percent hike because the 2007 settlement agreement was still in effect. According to the complaint, other administrator contracts for the same time period included a clause stating that the new contracts would supersede all prior contracts or agreements.
"Everybody else has a contract that they have given up rights to any old contract language," Superintendent Kelli Jacobi told the River News Monday.
Wall's contract did not include this clause, the complaint states.
"Mr. Wall had a contractual right to salary adjustments at a rate of '3.8 percent total package increase' each year beginning with the 2007-'08 school year..." the complaint states.
While the dispute has been settled out of court, the settlement agreement notes the district is not admitting liability.
"It is understood and agreed that this settlement is the compromise of a disputed claim, and that the payment made is not to be construed as an admission of liability on the part of the district or any other parties hereby released, and that said releasees deny liability therefor and intend merely to avoid litigation and buy their peace," the agreement states.
The agreement stipulates that Wall retire effective June 30. His final day of active employment with the district was June 4. He was to use his remaining vacation days between June 5 and June 30.
Wall was to be paid $10,020 for his "remaining employment with the district through June 30." Because the agreement was executed on June 16, Wall received $5,010 on June 16 and $5,010 on July 1.
The district was also required to deposit $3,200 into Wall's retirement account on or about June 30. This payment serves as the employer's 403 (b) contribution for the 2013-14 contract year.
Furthermore, the agreement buys out the final two years of Wall's contract in the amount of $90,000.
That figure is broken down into three payments, according to the agreement.
On or about June 30 Wall received $26,400 for the first payment. At the same time $48,800 was deposited into his retirement account.
The final portion of the $90,000 will come in the form of a $14,800 deposit into Wall's retirement account on or about Jan. 15, 2015. That amount is in addition to a $3,200 deposit into the same account on the same date.
The $3,200 payments are part of the retirement agreement included in the settlement.
In addition to the two $3,200 payments already mentioned, Wall will also have $3,200 deposited into his retirement account on July 1 of 2015, 2016, 2017 and 2018.
The retirement agreement portion of the settlement outlined two benefit options for Wall.
The first option states the board "shall offer and pay life insurance and medical and hospital insurance coverages commensurate with those in effect and at an amount not less than the premium rate in effect at the time of (Wall's) retirement for 10 consecutive years immediately following retirement as set forth in the schedule of benefits."
The second option - which Wall chose - states he "may choose a Health Reimbursement Account (HRA) paid by the district in the amount of his exit health insurance yearly premium rate plus the life insurance amount plus his accumulated sick leave amount, per year for 10 years as outlined in the schedule of benefits."
That means the district will pay Wall an estimated $25,335 in retirement benefits per year for 10 years.
Jacobi said she is happy the lawsuit was settled out of court and thanked Wall for his service to the district.
"We're glad that we were able to settle out of court," she said. "He's worked in the district for many years and we appreciate all of the work that he's done and being able to keep kids first. We wish him well in the future."
Wall had no comment on the settlement agreement.
Marcus Nesemann may be reached at [email protected].
WEATHER SPONSORED BY
E-Editions
Latest News
E-Editions
Events
August
To Submit an Event Sign in first
Today's Events
No calendar events have been scheduled for today.
Comments:
You must login to comment.