SAN MARCOS -- Leaders of the faculty labor union at Palomar College are blaming the administration for stalled negotiations that have left the 1,200 professors at the two-year community college without a labor contract for nearly 16 months.

Union leaders told Palomar trustees Tuesday night that the administration is "stonewalling" them by refusing to make any counterproposals to a compensation offer the union made more than three months ago.

Bob Deegan, president of the college, suggested Tuesday that a third-party mediator should be hired to help bridge the gap between the two sides. He also said he is committed to finding a quick solution, but union leaders said verbal promises are no substitute for a concrete counterproposal.

"I appreciate your comments, Mr. Deegan, but at this point we really need actions and not words," said union President Shannon Lienhart. "The district fails to send people to the table who are prepared to negotiate, and instead they continue to stonewall us."

Lienhart said she went public with the union's frustration on Tuesday because union leaders decided that college trustees should be aware of the administration's negotiating position.

"I don't know what you're hearing, but negotiations have reached a point where we feel extremely frustrated with the district's inability to fully articulate a position after more than 10 months at the negotiating table," Lienhart said.

Lienhart said a key sticking point in the negotiations is what share professors will receive of more than $7.7 million in extra money that the college received from the state during 2006-07.

About $5 million was available last school year, she said, but the college will receive an extra $2.7 million every year thanks to a boost in state equalization money, which aims to reduce the gap between wealthy districts and poor districts.

"You are not dealing with idiots here," said Lienhart. "We know how to read a $12 million ending fund balance, and the district's pleas of poverty this year are especially insulting."

Deegan declined to discuss specifics, but he suggested that there might be some misunderstandings about the school's finances. He also expressed a commitment to push things forward.

"It is my intention to get this thing done, and to award a contract that is fair and equitable to the faculty," said Deegan. "It's something we all want for the success of the college."

Mark Evilsizer, president of the board of trustees, said he understood the union's sense of urgency.

"We are keenly interested in getting the two sides back together at the table to bargain," Evilsizer said.

Palomar's 350 full-time professors and roughly 850 part-time instructors were awarded 5.92 percent pay increases for 2006-07 in December 2006, but Lienhart said it was always understood that the union would bargain for larger pay hikes at the negotiating table.

The stalemate comes a little more than two years after the faculty union and the administration forged their first-ever contract in spring 2005, which followed many years of wrangling.

Negotiations were also rancorous last spring, when the union sought office hours and health insurance for part-time professors, in lieu of larger pay increases.

Full-time professors at Palomar receive annual salaries that range from about $55,000 to $95,000 depending on education level and longevity. Part-time professors typically earn slightly more than $50 per hour, with a professor teaching two three-unit courses receiving about $5,000 for a 16-week semester.

In other business, Deegan and Evilsizer acknowledged that an investigation of sexual harassment allegations against Spanish professor John Erickson may have been handled improperly.

Erickson was placed on paid leave in December, but he was exonerated May 10 and will return to the classroom when school resumes Monday, according to his attorney, Martha Torgow.

"I look forward to resolving some of the matters that have resulted from this bizarre investigation," Torgow told the trustees on Tuesday. "This investigation got out of hand, and it has violated almost all of your procedures on everything."

Lienhart agreed, calling the investigation a "witch hunt" and charging that "tactics were used that ran contrary to all accepted norms of investigative practices."

Contact staff writer David Garrick at (760) 761-4410 or dgarrick@nctimes.com. Comment at nctimes.com.