Unions Unite Against Admin Raises as County Warns Pacifica Schools on Fiscal Distress

The Pacifica School District's Sept. 9 board meeting laid bare a district caught between modestly improved finances and deep frustration from its own workforce — with both teachers' and classified employees' unions delivering forceful objections to proposed administrator raises while the county's fiscal watchdog warned the board that a state takeover remains a real possibility without disciplined budget execution.

• Both unions blast proposed 3% administrator raises, calling them an insult to classified workers earning $28.60/hour after 22 years and a betrayal of collective bargaining

• San Mateo County fiscal oversight finds Pacifica still under "going concern" designation, with $4.1M in required structural cuts and the threat of state takeover if cash runs out

• Surprise shift to basic-aid status adds $902,000 in one-time revenue, boosting reserves to 6% — but the structural deficit remains

• Public commenter demands stabilization plan be translated into real budget line items before the revised budget is submitted

• Teachers union opens 2026-27 contract negotiations on pay, hours, class size, and calendar

• Board schedules Sept. 23 special meeting to review revised budget, stabilization plan, and the explosive administrator raise proposal

"Did They Bargain for That 3%?": Unions Draw a Line on Admin Raises

The sharpest exchanges of the evening came during communications, when representatives of both the Laguna Salada Education Association and CSEA Chapter 128 delivered a coordinated rebuke of the superintendent's proposal to give administrators a 3% retroactive raise for 2025-26 and an additional 3% for 2026-27.

Why it matters: The district is under a county going-concern designation, has been told to cut $4.1 million in structural spending, and has not yet settled its certificated contract — making any new compensation commitment a political and fiscal flashpoint.

Where things stand: Rachel Merlo, LSEA representative, opened by targeting the timing: "There are many, but mostly the audacity to present a raise for the 26-27 school year for admins. When you haven't settled with certificated, you don't know about the parcel tax or Prop 3." She added: "We've crunched the numbers on that proposed retro and our students would like a chance at those dollars. Many services and resources have been directly cut from our students this year."

A CSEA Chapter 128 representative followed with a detailed indictment of the district's pay structure, zeroing in on the mechanics of how administrators received their 3%: "Did they bargain for that 3%? Did they sit across the table and fight for it? Did they make the compromises that our bargaining units made? Or did we do all the hard work? And then they get to say, great, now we get a me too?"

The CSEA representative's critique turned personal to illustrate the stakes: "I've been with this district for 22 years, 35 as a parent and a volunteer, and my current pay is $28.60. 22 years. And I am not an exception." She noted that while administrator pay is competitive with other San Mateo County districts, classified pay is not — with some starting salaries near minimum wage. "Giving raises to 23 administrators is the equivalent of the cost of at least two of our highest paid 12-month classified employees. Make this make sense."

The other side: No administrator or superintendent responded directly to the criticism during the public session. A second CSEA representative also recognized classified employee Yolanda Pranza for stepping into an enrollment-season role previously held by a longtime staffer, while asking leadership to protect that position from being proposed as a cut for the fourth time in upcoming budget cycles.

What's next: Board Member Elizabeth Bredall requested detailed data for the Sept. 23 meeting: "The past five times we've given raises, can you give me each group that got raised in those past five times? Also the number of people who would receive this administrative raise if we give it." She also asked for the total cost and clarification on what the 3% is calculated from. The Sept. 23 meeting will be the decisive forum for the raise proposal.

County Delivers Blunt Fiscal Warning: "That's When a State Takeover Actually Happens"

Kevin Bultema, Deputy Superintendent of SMCOE's Business Services Division, presented the annual AB 1200 fiscal oversight report and did not mince words about Pacifica's position.

The basics: Under California's AB 1200 fiscal oversight framework, county offices of education are required to monitor school districts' financial health and intervene when a district cannot demonstrate it will meet its financial obligations. A "going concern" letter is one of the most serious designations short of a state takeover.

Why it matters: SMCOE issued a going-concern letter on Feb. 18, 2026, after finding the district's ending fund balance was lower than projected, special education costs were inadequately budgeted, enrollment was declining, and district leadership had turned over. The county followed up with progressive interventions: weekly meetings, a FCMAT fiscal health risk assessment that rated the district as high risk, assignment of a fiscal expert, and a requirement to submit a third interim budget.

Where things stand: Bultema laid out the remaining challenges — declining enrollment, the $1.2 million annual Measure D parcel tax expiring in June 2027, rising special education costs, reliance on one-time funding, and unsettled labor negotiations. He urged the board to stay focused: "It's probably a little premature to say we see you as in better position other than to say your administration is working with us. You have a fiscal recovery and stabilization plan approved by the board."

He made the consequences concrete: "You hear this term all the time, state takeover. That's when it actually happens, is when a district is projected to run out of cash."

The other side: Public commenter Tiffany Button pushed harder, citing SMCOE's own criticism that the stabilization plan exists on paper but not in the budget. "My continuing concern is that without clear concrete execution steps, staff does not have actionable line items needed to build these savings into the budget," she said. She demanded accountability: "There must be clear oversight and accountability to ensure that the $700,000 in first-year cuts are fully calculated, verified and reflected in that submission."

Board Vice President Laverne Villalobos requested monthly meetings with SMCOE to track implementation: "I would like to meet with you on a monthly basis so we can sum up what is going on with those monthly bills. And if we're on track as far as our plan, our fiscal plan."

What's next: The revised 2026-27 budget will be presented at the Sept. 23 special meeting, where the board and community will see whether the $4.1 million stabilization plan has been translated into line items.

Basic-Aid Windfall Boosts Reserves, but "Picture Is Better, Not Fixed"

The district's fiscal consultant presented the 2025-26 unaudited actuals remotely, revealing an unexpected revenue gain that significantly improved the district's near-term financial picture.

Why it matters: In mid-July, the district learned it had shifted to "basic aid" (community funded) status — meaning local property tax revenues now exceed the state's Local Control Funding Formula calculation. That shift generated approximately $902,000 in additional one-time revenue.

Where things stand: The general fund ended 2025-26 with $5.16 million total — $1.6 million unrestricted and $3.5 million restricted — pushing reserves above 6%, compared to the 3.7% projected at adopted budget. Multi-year projections also improved: the 2026-27 ending balance projection rose to 4.6% (from under 2%), and the 2027-28 negative projection shrank from -$1.7 million to under -$500,000.

But they cautioned against complacency: "The picture is better, but it is not fixed yet, which is what needs to happen with the fiscal stability plan." She noted the $902,000 is one-time: "We were notified July 20th. It's one-time additional revenue from 25-26. So it's not like we're going to get an extra 900,000 on top of 900,000."

Restricted fund carryovers included $729,000 for expanded learning, $485,000 for Prop 28 arts and music programs, $500,000 in restricted lottery funds for textbooks, and $1.2 million in local grants including the new parcel tax. Other funds showed $52 million in building bonds, $1.5 million in child nutrition, and $1.4 million in the special reserve (3% requirement). Salary increases for certificated and classified staff accounted for $1.5 million in additional expenditures not reflected in June estimates.

Decisions: The board approved the unaudited actuals 4-0 (For: 4, Against: 0, Absent: 1) and authorized the superintendent to file with the county office of education.

Teacher Calls for Investment in Paraprofessionals

Jason Miranda, a third-year teacher at Ortega School and 10-year education veteran, used public comment to make a specific, detailed request: fund paraprofessionals to address two critical staffing gaps.

First, teachers running combo classes — two grade levels and curricula in a single day — cannot cover both with fidelity under current staffing. "My colleagues have shared that there simply aren't enough instructional minutes to provide both grade levels with instruction these programs call for," Miranda said.

Second, schools with Special Day Class programs lack enough adult support for meaningful inclusion. "Meaningful inclusion requires support. Current staffing cannot always provide adult support," he said, asking the district to consider "inclusion paras" at SDC sites.

Miranda framed his plea around a simple principle: "Every teacher wants to teach. Every child wants to and deserves to learn. And giving them the people they need to do both is what I'm asking for tonight. It's people, not programs."

Teachers Union Opens Bargaining on Pay, Hours, and Class Size

Rachel Merlo, LSEA representative, read the union's sunshine proposal for 2026-27 contract negotiations per Government Code Section 3547, opening four articles: calendar, compensation (attracting and retaining qualified teachers through total compensation), hours (duty day and professional obligations), and class size (class size and class size impacts).

Merlot expressed hope for continuing the district's traditional interest-based bargaining process and requested notification if the approach changes. The proposal was presented as an information item; no board action was taken. These negotiations will unfold against the backdrop of fiscal distress and the administrator raise controversy.

Board Endorses Prop 3 to Protect School Funding

Superintendent Dr. Bowman presented Resolution 2026-0909B in support of Proposition 3, a ballot measure that would permanently extend California's marginal tax rates on incomes above approximately $360,000. Those rates, set to expire in 2030-31, have generated over $120 billion for schools and other critical programs since 2012. The resolution states that without Prop 3, California's 8 million public school and community college students face billions in cuts. The board approved 4-0 (For: 4, Against: 0, Absent: 1). Both LSEA and CSEA had also expressed support earlier in the meeting.

Minor Items

• GANN limit resolution adopted 4-0. Resolution 2026-0909A reflects an $896,000 increase in the district's appropriations limit tied to declining enrollment and higher revenue from the basic-aid shift.

• Ignite Reading MOU approved 4-0. The MOU with CSEA Chapter 128 establishes $3,000 stipends for one classified employee per elementary site to coordinate daily 15-minute virtual high-impact reading tutoring for first graders, funded by a Give Forward grant, running Sept. 10, 2026, through May 20, 2027.

• Hispanic Heritage Month resolution adopted 4-0. Katherine Prescenzi, district staff, noted that Latina students are the district's largest ethnic group.

• Board governance calendar for 2026-27 approved 4-0.

• First read: board bylaw updates on governance, elections, and closed sessions. Will return for approval at a future meeting.

• First read: instructional policy updates including new state recess requirements (at least 30 minutes for K-6 students on regular days) and athletic non-discrimination policies.

• Consent agenda approved 4-0 with minutes pulled for corrections.

• No reportable closed session actions.

• Sept. 23 special meeting approved 4-0 to review the revised budget, fiscal stabilization plan, and administrator raise proposal. Board Member Bredall signaled it will also serve as an accountability moment: "The past five times we've given raises, can you give me each group that got raised in those past five times?"