For school officials and union representatives it may be back to the drawing board after voters rejected every collective bargaining agreement that affected the tax rate at the ballot box.

Voters turned down proposed raises for the district’s teachers, aides, nurses, secretaries and custodians on last week’s ballot. It marks the second year in a row secretaries and custodians have been denied an increase in salaries or benefits.

An increase for food service personnel did pass, but the contract does not have an impact on the town’s tax rate.

Going forward, officials expect union representatives to request the School Board reopen contract negotiations. While the option of doing nothing and waiting a year remains on the table, School Board member Peter Morgan expects to be back in negotiations with union representatives in the near future.

Complicating the matter, voters also rejected an article that would have allowed the board to call for a special school district meeting to reconsider the contracts. Without a special meeting, negotiators will have to reach an agreement that has no financial impact on the 2009-10 school year.

While school officials could petition the Superior Court for a hearing to decide whether the district can hold a special meeting regardless – if the unions insist on pay raises – a judge would need to agree that the failed contracts constitutes an “emergency,” according to Morgan. Whether a judge would rule with the district remains unknown, he said.

“If we could just negotiate cost items only, the unions would get the message that the percentages that they were asking for weren’t acceptable,” Morgan said. “Now we have to weigh, given the economic climate, are we going to be able to convince the court that if somebody didn’t get a raise that’s an emergency? I’m not convinced that it would be the best option.”

Superintendent Michael Delahanty believes that the gloomy economic forecast, increasing unemployment numbers and numerous foreclosures made salary and benefit increases unpalatable to an electorate that otherwise endorsed the district’s operating budget.

“The fact that so many people have lost jobs or taken pay cuts has certainly affected the mindset of voters … because the way things are, there was no room for salary increases,” Delahanty said.

While Morgan agreed that the state of the economy played a major role in the election, he said voters rejected across the board any proposal that would have had an impact on the tax rate. With a proposed operating budget less than that of the district’s default budget, he saw the passage of the budget less of an endorsement and more of a negative reaction to the idea of increased spending.

“The message from the voters is clear. They’re worried about their jobs, they’re probably not going to get raises this year and they don’t believe anyone else should either,” Morgan said. “We want our employees to be satisfied and treated fairly, but we also represent the voters and they need to be satisfied and teated fairly.”