After renegotiating their contract with the Salem School Board, the Salem Educational Personnel Association has withdrawn its Superior Court petition asking for a judge’s approval for a special meeting and revote on salary increases for the 2008-09 school year.

“The contract was renegotiated with language changes only, none of which affected any new money,” said Jack Brouse, a member of the National Education Association who was representing the school secretaries union. “There’s no new money, and we move on.”

Brouse would not comment on exactly why the union agreed to withdraw the petition, but said they would go forth with a new warrant article in March 2009.

Salem Superintendant Michael Delahanty said the decision to withdraw the petition came about during a conversation among negotiating parties from the union and the School Board on Wednesday, July 9. The School Board was scheduled to vote on ratifying the new agreement at their meeting on Tuesday, July 15, he said.

“I believe that both the secretaries and the board members had some reservations and were second guessing the wisdom of moving forward with a special meeting given the time and the costs involved,” Delahanty said.

In March, voters killed a warrant article asking for 2.5 percent raises for the 2008-09 school year for the 22 secretaries in the union. They also voted down an article that, if passed, would have allowed the Salem School Board to hold a special meeting to reconsider the raises, along with several other warrant articles.

The union filed the petition on Monday, July 7, asking for a judge’s ruling on their plan to insert a ballot question on the Sept. 9 primary ballot for renegotiated 2 percent raises for secretaries for the coming school year.

The union argued in the petition that doing so would not require any spending on the part of the school district on staffing and facilities.

The Salem Budget Committee was asked to hold an emergency meeting scheduled for Wednesday, July 16, on the subject. Budget Committee member Stephen Campbell said he questioned the legality for holding such a meeting before a Superior Court judge ruled on the petition.

“You’re asking me to vote on something that at the point of July 16th is hypothetical because the judge hasn’t said you can have the meeting yet,” said Budget Committee member Stephen Campbell.

Budget Committee Chairman Susan Covey said she conferred with Town Manager Jonathan Sistare, also a lawyer specializing in municipal law, who said that voting whether or not to recommend a primary ballot warrant article for the raises would be within the confines of the law.

“They were two separate processes. There’s no reason why one shouldn’t be done before the other,” said Covey.

The time constraints associated with preparing for the vote were a major factor in the decision to withdraw the petition, Delahanty said. If carried through, the Superior Court judge’s ruling on the petition would have been expected by the end of July.

The school district would only have until July 28 to post notice for an Aug. 12 deliberative session, which would be just enough time before the Sept. 9 primaries. The school district would spend a lot of effort organizing the deliberative session, getting moderators and notifying the media.

The exact terms of this newest collective bargaining contract have not been disclosed, said both Delahanty and Covey, but both said that there will be no financial implications for the 2008-09 year.

Delahanty said the conversations have been at least congenial since the March vote against the contract, adding both sides were professional and understanding.