Loophole allows school districts to shield what they pay teachers, administrators

Every year, the state controller publishes thousands of public employees’ salaries, from nearly every city, county and special district, on its transparency-focused “Government Compensation in California” website.

Here’s what you won’t find: about two-thirds of the Golden State’s school systems.

Unlike other public agencies in the state, California’s schools can choose whether to participate because of a loophole in state law. Most do not even reply to the controller’s requests.

This year, of the 1,915 requests sent to education employers, only 447 provided the appropriate information. Another 128 responded, but with either incomplete or unacceptable records, according to the state Controller’s Office.

Though the numbers are bleak, there was an improvement as 35 more school systems replied this year than last. Still, fewer were compliant overall than in 2020.

“We are consistently working to improve our processes and encouraging and assisting employers with accurate, timely data reporting,” state Controller Betty Yee said in a statement. “I am encouraged that so many employers embrace the value of transparency enough to — even in the middle of a pandemic — produce a strictly voluntary report for our office. I call on additional employers to do the same.”

Bell scandal was impetus

The state Controller’s Office established the Government Compensation in California website in 2010 in response to the scandal in the city of Bell and it has received 12 million page views since its inception. A Los Angeles Times investigation in 2010 revealed that city officials in the small, economically disadvantaged community of Bell in south Los Angeles County had amassed outlandish salaries, including a city manager making $800,000 a year, among other perks.

In 2014, Assemblywoman Cristina Garcia, D-Downey, authored a law making it mandatory for cities, counties, special districts and state agencies to turn over annual compensation data. Garcia, who was once active in the campaign to push corrupt Bell officials from office, had experienced first hand the need for transparency around public employee compensation.

Her bill, AB 2040, specifically includes school districts in the language, but when the Legislative Counsel’s Office reviewed the matter in response to a request from a reporter, it concluded that the state controller was right: schools can technically opt out.

The issue rests on a technicality. While her bill gives the state controller authority to collect information about “financial transactions” from school districts, a separate law requires the state controller to go through the superintendent of public instruction, and specifically states that school districts shall not be “required to furnish separate reports to the Controller.”

Lawmaker plans fix

Now, Garcia says she plans to introduce new legislation to fix the exemption and clean up any other contradictions between the various laws at work.

“It’s frustrating,” Garcia said in an interview. “If we can’t access that information, we can’t keep them accountable. We saw the consequences in the city of Bell.”

There are few official alternatives for the public.

The nonprofit Transparent California publishes payroll records obtained through the California Public Records Act, but it isn’t affiliated with the state. The state Department of Education’s “School Accountability Report Card” lists averages for teachers and administrators for each district, though those figures sometimes under-represent just how much employees are paid.

School chief pay ‘alarming’

A Southern California News Group investigation earlier this year found that the superintendent of the Ontario-Montclair School District, James Hammond, made nearly $700,000 in 2020 through a series of out-of-the-ordinary perks that includes the ability to accrue and cash out more than 110 days of sick and vacation time every single year. Over the course of 10 years, the district gave him an extra $331,000 to assist him in paying off a town house that he taken a line of credit on, records showed.

If a parent looked at Ontario-Montclair’s report card, however, they would see a $299,676 salary listed for the superintendent as of the 2018-19 school year. Yet, Hammond was paid $554,151 in 2018 and $561,748 in 2019, not including his lucrative medical and retirement benefits, according to figures provided through a public records act request.

Ontario-Montclair has been listed as noncompliant on the state controller’s public pay database since 2017.

Garcia described Hammond’s salary as “alarming” and said it is an example of the need for changes to the law.

“Clearly, the system is failing us if we’re not able to know that a superintendent is earning $600,000 to $700,000 a year,” she said.

Much of the information requested by the state controller is already compiled by school districts on an annual basis. The fact that school districts still ignore the state controller’s requests feels “a little bit intentional,” she said.

“You don’t have to wait for us, just do what is right,” Garcia said. “Sunshine is good for the democratic process. If your decisions are valid, you shouldn’t be afraid to share that with the public.”

Public interest ‘obvious’

David Snyder, executive director of the First Amendment Coalition, agrees. The coalition is a nonprofit advocating for open and accountable government. Snyder said he was not aware that school districts did not have to participate in the public pay database.

“I don’t see a reason that school districts should be exempt from the disclosure requirements of that law,” Snyder said. “If police officers and firefighters and city clerks have to have their salary information disclosed, why not teachers, principals and superintendents?”

The state public records act already makes it clear that this same information is releasable to the public upon request, he said.

“There is an obvious interest that the public has in understanding how much they are paying the people who act in their name,” Snyder said. “It only makes sense that educators would be included in the mix.”