School board approves standard raise, extra bonus for superintendent

Also: Appointments of special ed director and Foothill VP, LCAP and budget hearings

The Pleasanton Unified school board approved a contract amendment for Superintendent David Haglund Tuesday night that retroactively increased his annual salary and awarded him an extra $10,000 bonus after completing his first year with the district.

The unanimous decision came at the conclusion of a four-hour-long open session.

“We as a board feel strongly that stability and longevity in leadership are crucial for effectively progressing our district on its important goals,” said board president Mark Miller after reading aloud the amendment.

Trustee Joan Laursen added, “We’re delighted to have your continued work with us.”

The amendment gives Haglund a 2% salary raise for the 2017-18 school year, along with a one-time bonus worth 1% of his salary -- compensation increases aligned with those recently approved for the Association of Pleasanton Teachers (APT), the California School Employees Association (CSEA), deputy superintendent of business services Micaela Ochoa and assistant superintendent of educational services Odie Douglas.

He was also given a bonus of $10,000 “in recognition of an outstanding performance and service,” staff wrote in their report. This additional payment will not affect his annual base salary amount.

The increases are retroactive to July 2017, the time Haglund began working for the district.

With the updated compensation increases ($7,950 for both the 2% ongoing raise and 1% one-time bonus) Haglund’s salary for the 2017-18 school year will total $270,300. The $10,000 bonus will “be made as practicable following ratification of this amendment,” staff wrote.

In other superintendent-related news, the board announced results from Haglund’s public employee evaluation from May 14. Miller lauded him for forging a strong relationship with the board.

“Through his leadership, we are also focused on supporting superior academic achievement for all of our students and increased organizational effectiveness and efficiency,” Miller said. “In addition, transparency, trust and openness are improving in our district.”

Haglund’s upcoming employment anniversary in July will mark the first time the district will have a sitting superintendent reach their second year of employment since Parvin Ahmadi’s tenure ended in June 2015.

The open session meeting ended at 11:10 p.m., at which point the board adjourned to another closed session.

In other business

*During closed session, the board appointed Mary Jude Doerpinghaus as Pleasanton Unified’s director of special education and Amber Carrion as a new Foothill vice principal, replacing Marcel Baker.

Doerpinghaus joins PUSD from the San Carlos School District, where she has been serving as interim superintendent and assistant superintendent of educational services. Carrion has been a math teacher within the district since 2006.

*The board officially recognized members of the Local Control and Accountability Committee and facilitators from the district’s School Smarts Parents Academy, which aims to familiarize parents new to California or to the country with their new school system

*The board heard updates and held a public hearing on the proposed Local Control and Accountability Plan (LCAP) for 2018-21.

This was the first reading of the LCAP, which is a three-year plan, updated annually, that is part of California’s funding formula established in 2013. The plan identifies the school district’s key, state-aligned goals for students, action steps that will be taken to achieve these goals (including expenditures), and how these goals will be assessed.

Some of the recommended goals in the proposed LCAP include increased support for PBIS (Positive Behavioral Intervention and Supports), increased employees to provide counseling support, support for intervention and integration specialists, more funding for ELD (English language development) sections at the secondary level, increase in the AVID coordinator’s section time, and professional development for school site council and parent liaisons regarding family engagement.

As part of the reading, director of assessment and accountability Pam VandeKamp pointed to data tracking student performance both overall and within pre-identified, targeted groups, such as the CTE/ROP and mariachi programs.

VandeKamp also highlighted feedback garnered through the Local Control Advisory Committee’s “listening campaign” earlier this year. She noted that the parents surveyed were especially concerned about student suspensions, and that tutoring services were perceived by the largest percentage of respondents to be most effective in supporting students.

In a discussion following the report, trustees honed in on student suspensions; in particular, they requested additional data on student vaping use.

*The board held a public hearing on the proposed 2018-19 district budget, presented by Tom Gray, executive director of fiscal services.

Per the proposed budget, the unrestricted revenue for the General Fund is expected to total $139,383,593, with unrestricted expenditures coming out to $119,341,123.

Gray especially highlighted increases in STRS and PERS funding of 1.85% and 2.51%, respectively, along with an anticipated increase in average daily attendance (ADA) from 14,360 to 14,587 students, which in part determines funding a district receives from the state -- the ADA projected, Gray said in response to a question from board vice president Valerie Arkin, is more conservative than the enrollment projections determined by demographers.

*The board heard an update on the Measure I1 Facilities Expenditure Plan, taking into consideration changes requested by board members on April 10. The update was originally scheduled for the May 22 board meeting, but was postponed due to time constraints.

The plan details how the $270 million from the Measure I1 school facilities bond, approved by voters in 2016, should be spent, in five separate issuances.

In particular, staff made adjustments to the allocation of funding for the VoIP systems being installed. Previously, the full $6.7 million for this category had been evenly divided between Issuance B and Issuance C, set for 2019 and 2022, respectively. In light of board feedback, the issuance scheduled had been adjusted so that the full amount for the VoIP system would be disbursed all at once.

Nick Olsen, director of facilities and construction, said the 460-page document was distinct from the more traditional plan put together in 2013, more data and scope-oriented.

“This was more focused on how we spend I1 dollars,” he said.

The plan is set to be brought back to the board for approval at the June 26 meeting.

*Trustees heard a report on a new online reservation system for district facilities, after having approved a contract with Facilitron, Inc. for these services earlier in the meeting on the consent agenda. Currently, the system is operated via paper, said Myla Grasso, director of operations.

Staff said the program would help streamline the process, and reduce the back-and-forth between renter and the district, particularly as images of all the available facilities would be posted online.

*The board approved the solicitation of proposals for solar installations at Amador Valley High School. According to Olsen, the PPA agreement stipulates the company that wins the bid will be charged with maintenance of the installations.

*Superintendent Haglund reported out on the community input meetings held in May to discuss how the district can address enrollment issues in northern Pleasanton.

Some of the options being considered include adjusting school boundaries, increasing the capacity at Donlon Elementary and Hart Middle School, building a new elementary school and using a K-8 school configuration at two existing schools.

“The community was very understanding in the sense that they realize that probably none of these options are going to make everybody happy,” Haglund said. Traffic concerns, however, featured prominently at the input sessions.

The district is still collecting community feedback, and staff is now pushing an electronic survey open to all community members, regardless of whether they have children in the district or not. The survey will remain open through July 13.

*The board awarded a $164,000 bid for the installation of upgraded door hardware at Foothill High School to BOBO Construction.

*Trustees approved HKIT architects as the architectural firm for the leased portable replacement project at Amador Valley and Foothill high schools.

*The board approved a contract with Fuel Education for summer school.

*Consideration of the district technology plan was moved to the June 26 board meeting due to the late hour.

What is community worth to you?
Support local journalism.


37 people like this
Posted by Angry
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Jun 13, 2018 at 9:25 am

$270,000/year! Gets a RETROACTIVE raise because he completed a whole year at the job. Plus a BONUS! Who could think there was anything wrong with this?

I'm sure we will have more campaigning for "needed" school funding this November. I'm through with more school bonds/taxes/etc. They have no idea how to appropriately spend money.

11 people like this
Posted by Livermore Parent
a resident of Livermore
on Jun 13, 2018 at 9:40 am

I wish Livermore rewarded employees who actually provided value to the community instead of rewarding them for political patronage.
Kelly Bowers, the Livermore Superintendent has gotten 10%+ pay raises from a complicit, rubber-stamping school board. - her total compensation package (as of June 2016) was $378,664.91 according to Transparent California.
Bower's base salary in 2016 was $318,932.34 compared to Pleasanton's Superintendent David Haglund's $270,300 base pay for 2018.
And apparently Kelly Bower's greed (and the Livermore School Board's ineptitude) never ends - the $378,664.91 isn't enough and she is demanding the board divert MEASURE J money for classrooms and athletic facilities to buy her an office building near Costco so she can sit (deleted) overlooking Livermore.

18 people like this
Posted by Spudly
a resident of Laguna Oaks
on Jun 13, 2018 at 9:43 am

What exactly are his top accomplishments to justify this? I would encourage this bonus if the accomplishments deserve it. I just don't know where to find that short list.

@Angry - Do you happen to know what he accomplished? For example, is it possible he implimented a new process that saved much more than the 10K he received?

24 people like this
Posted by Scott
a resident of Mission Park
on Jun 13, 2018 at 9:44 am

Money would be better spent in classroom.Juanita must be turning over in her grave. Pathetic. The money is in Management obviously, not in the classroom. BUT Pleasanton is a Management town so no worries, Right?

28 people like this
Posted by Embarrassed
a resident of Pleasanton Valley
on Jun 13, 2018 at 9:51 am

Please, please email/contact the school board with all comments. I don't know that they read the comments, but they should. I am extremely angered and in disbelief, too.

We moved here for the schools 12 years ago and over the years I have grown very disappointed with the decisions/actions of the school board. This pay increase, bonus and retroactive pay for the current superintendent takes the cake.

Please, please do not get me started on the $2M for laptops that most children already have at home. By all means, please provide to students in need - give them the best laptops money can by. And next time, perhaps the district will complete a survey of laptops needed BEFORE purchasing them. Makes sense, right?

41 people like this
Posted by Kathleen Ruegsegger
a resident of Vintage Hills
on Jun 13, 2018 at 9:54 am

Kathleen Ruegsegger is a registered user.

Let’s look at it this way. A new teacher starts in the district. S/he gets paid for that year and waits for the union to settle for the upcoming school year and receives that raise for year two. The only way a new teacher gets retro pay for the first year is if the union has not yet settled the contract for that year. No other employee gets a retroactive pay raise or bonus. The superintendent had a contract spelling out his salary. There was no reason to give a retro raise and a smaller bonus (1%) on top of the $10,000 bonus. The bonus was for a satisfactory job and for staying a year. The other $7,950 is an insult, especially when all we hear is there is no money to operate s new elementary and this retro pay will add to the pension problem. I will actively fight any more taxes of any kind.

33 people like this
Posted by Old Time P-towner
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Jun 13, 2018 at 9:57 am

REMEMBER to vote OUT this PUSD Board! This is absolutely RIDICULOUS!!
And, YES, Scott, I've thought same Re: Juanita Haugen "turning over in her grave". PUSD needs more like Juanita.
Get RID of ALL existing board members!!!

9 people like this
Posted by SHale99
a resident of San Ramon
on Jun 13, 2018 at 10:26 am

SHale99 is a registered user.

How come PUSD super makes pretty much what the SRVUSD super does? SRVUSD has twice the schools, twice the student and around 3x the budget.

Seems odd.

21 people like this
Posted by Fed Up!
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Jun 13, 2018 at 10:30 am

Totally agree, Old Time P-Towner!!!! I have lived here my entire life. The decisions this current School Board are making are ridiculous!! Don’t get me started on the bait-and-switch tactics to get Meausure I-1 passed. The money needs to be put into the schools that are falling apart - NOT rewarding Haglund for not getting fired after one year. This school board needs to GO!!! Vote them out, Pleasanton!!

6 people like this
Posted by huh?
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Jun 13, 2018 at 10:51 am

huh? is a registered user.

It's great that you all want to vote the current school board trustees out, but which ones of you are going to step up and run to replace them?

13 people like this
Posted by Kathleen Ruegsegger
a resident of Vintage Hills
on Jun 13, 2018 at 11:25 am

Kathleen Ruegsegger is a registered user.

huh is correct. In November, without someone stepping forward to run, there actually won’t be an election and two incumbents will breeze in for another four years.

8 people like this
Posted by Karen
a resident of Birdland
on Jun 13, 2018 at 5:04 pm

It’s lunacy that the brand new superintendent makes that much more than our long term city manager. Disgraceful.

3 people like this
Posted by Map
a resident of Del Prado
on Jun 15, 2018 at 4:42 pm

Nice reward for not quitting or getting fired, if he can hang in there for 1 more year maybe they will give him the keys to the city, it’s great to have unlimited resources for things like this but not have the money for our schools and kids??

Sorry, but further commenting on this topic has been closed.

Be the first to know

Get the latest headlines sent straight to your inbox every day.

Premarital and Couples: "Our Deepest Fear" by Marianne Williamson
By Chandrama Anderson | 0 comments | 966 views

District elections will be problematic
By Tim Hunt | 4 comments | 711 views

Fly the flag, it’s “Flag Week”
By Jeb Bing | 3 comments | 334 views


Nominations due by Sept. 16

Pleasanton Weekly and are once again putting out a call for nominations and sponsorships for the annual Tri-Valley Heroes awards - our salute to the community members dedicated to bettering the Tri-Valley and the lives of its residents.

Nomination form