Austin Public School employees may have to worry about more than just the district’s budget. They might have to look at their own budgets thanks to an education bill currently up for debate.

A bill proposed by Sen. Dave Thompson, R-Lakeville, would impose a two-year salary freeze on all school district employees throughout the state.

“The first thing to realize is it’s not just teachers,” said Mary Burroughs, the district’s director of human resources. “It’s all of us.”

The bill would forbid school districts and charter schools from putting any increases into employee contract packages. That doesn’t mean staff wouldn’t get a raise if they got promoted, however.

While that may not be good news for school employees, a district-wide salary freeze would stave off district budget cuts for two years, according to Mark Stotts, the district’s director of finance and operations. While the district will operate on an even budget next year, Stotts projects a $1.5 million deficit during the 2012-13 school year. Since step and lane changes for teachers alone amount to almost $500,000 a year, the district would more than make up the projected deficit.

“From a budgetary standpoint, it would be a positive,” Stotts said.

The bill also prohibits unions from striking because of the pay freeze and would eliminate the Jan. 15 deadline to settle teacher contracts.It would also put all union and district negotiations at a standstill.

Another of the bill’s provisions prevents districts from putting increases in contract negotiations from now until June 30, when the state’s fiscal year ends. That means any contract put together this year that has increases will have to be renegotiated, if the bill becomes law. Teachers, secretaries, custodians, food service, paraprofessional and superintendent contracts are up for negotiations. Until a definite answer is reached regarding the bill’s status, the district and unions must soldier on with contract negotiations as usual.

“It’s taking control away from our school board, district and unions to negotiate contracts,” said Brad Anderson, president of Austin’s teacher’s union. “As it sits right now, it eliminates our ability to negotiate a contract for any increases.”

Other unions are currently looking at the bill, seeing what changes could come this legislative session. The AFCSME Local 2566, which includes district secretaries, is scheduling a meeting with Sen. Dan Sparks, DFL-Austin, to learn more about S.F. 56, the bill in question, and other education reform that could happen this legislative session.

Education experts and many teachers feel the bill takes away a district’s power to set its own budget. Austin is in better financial shape than other Minnesota districts, as it will operate with a balanced budget next year thanks to a one-time $1 million payment from the federal Education Jobs Fund bill.

“It’s kind of crossing the line of local decision making,” Burroughs said. “You’re trying to find a solution by penalizing your employees when they’re not necessarily the cause of the issues.”

Many district employees have taken pay freezes within the last couple of years. Teachers currently have a soft pay freeze built into their contract, with a lump sum payment of $750 given at the end of the last fiscal year. Principals offered to take a one-year soft freeze in 2009 before their contracts were up for review. District secretaries have accepted a freeze for even longer.

“It’s basically been close to three years for the union secretaries,” said Connie Krebsbach, co-chair of AFSCME Local 2566.

No one knows whether the bill will pass the Senate or even if it will be signed into law by Gov. Mark Dayton.

“Until we know for sure what’s really going to happen, it’s hard to say what the district will do,” said David Krenz, district superintendent.

The many unknowns have some district officials worried about state aid. In 2009, school districts received a similar one-time payment from federal stimulus funding. In response, state legislators cut state aid, which makes up a majority of a district’s funding, by an equal amount. If the state does that again, it will offset any financial gains the district would make, according to Stotts.

“It’s kind of a double-edged sword,” he said. “If (legislators) felt like they could reduce the money they give us because we got this freeze, then it really does us no good.”