SLO County school district’s administrators get raises despite teacher objections
The Lucia Mar Unified School District board of trustees approved pay raises for the district superintendent, assistant superintendents and other management positions Tuesday night despite objections from some staff who argued the raises weren’t fair.
Tuesday’s school board meeting encompassed votes on several salary decisions, including approvals for classified staff and administrators.
The proposals to raise the salaries and benefit allocations for managerial staff generated pushback from audience members — many of whom identified themselves as district employees —who claimed the raises didn’t match those given to teachers and classified staff unions through their labor negotiations.
The Lucia Mar teachers union has been vocal about labor negotiations at other board meetings this year — and is one of several unions in SLO County to have demanded raises or cost-of-living adjustments during the most recent negotiation cycle.
The teachers union ultimately secured a 3% retroactive salary adjustment, with 2% raises for the incoming school year, according to the district’s negotiations website.
Board members, however, were adamant that the percentage in overall cost of the raises given to management were not higher than those given to teachers or classified staff — and trustees voted 7-0 in three separate votes to grant the pay increases for superintendent Paul Fawcett, assistant superintendents and other managerial and administrative staff.
The superintendent’s raise granted Fawcett a retroactive 3% raise dating back to July 1, 2025. For the upcoming school year, the board raised Fawcett’s placement on the salary schedule, granting him an annual salary of $309,947.
The three assistant superintendents each received retroactive salary adjustment payments of $6,310, and were granted annual salaries for the upcoming school year or $225,296 each.
Management generally was also granted a 3% salary increase retroactive to July 1, 2025, with the addition of a sixth step to their salary schedules, offering more room for growth, effective July 1 of this year. The district also increased its health and welfare contributions for management by $1,794.
Teachers oppose raises for school management, administrators
Several teachers spoke in opposition to the general management raises Tuesday night, saying they felt disproportionate to the raises granted to classified and teaching staff — though the district described the raises in an agenda packet as “equivalent to those provided to certificated and classified bargaining groups.”
Nipomo High School teacher Josh Stambaugh characterized the timing of the decision — which occurred the first meeting after the end of the school year — as “sneaky and underhanded.”
He added that raises awarded to teachers were necessary to their ability to live in the area, but felt that didn’t necessarily apply to management.
“I need a percentage increase in salary because I’m trying to keep up with the cost of living with gas and food, as you said earlier,” he told the board. “You do not need a percentage increase because you already have more than enough.”
Some speakers called out the superintendent for earning a projected salary higher than the governor, whose annual pay was listed at $245,929 as of December on the Cal HR website.
Board member Colleen Martin however, highlighted some positions like nurses and counselors, which are in the same category as management and would also benefit from the raises.
“Classified employees got raises, our teachers got raises and these people deserve a raise too, and I’m going to approve this tonight because everyone deserves a piece of the pie, and it’s all equal,” Martin said, evoking audible groans and chatter in the audience.
Board president Don Stewart addressed the timing of the decision — saying it is historically normal because the board waits until the classified staff and teacher contracts are solidified to take action on management contracts.
“There’s no subterfuge,” he said. “We’re not trying to do it in an opaque, nontransparent way.”
Board member Donna Kandel also addressed frustrations about transparency. She said the board is restricted on what it can and can’t say during negotiations and encouraged members of the union to make sure they were sharing accurate information.
“Please don’t misinterpret silence as being apathetic or being, you know, in opposition,” she said.
Ultimately, the board approved the proposed salary increases in three separate unanimous votes.
During the final vote, which was for the superintendent’s raise, the board members expressed their thanks to Fawcett for his work leading the school district.
“We appreciate all that you do,” Stewart said. “I know you to be a deep thinker and I know you do care very deeply about this district and probably think about it on your way home, on your way to work, right? ... I know you carry this job with you.”
He added: “I know the question came up earlier of like ... are you more valuable than the governor and the superintendent of instruction? And the answer to me is, yes.”
.JPG)