Two bills introduced this legislative session propose to negatively impact school administrators by prohibiting severance packages for district superintendents. The bills are:

• Assembly Bill 164, Mendoza, D-Artesia, prohibits a governing board from entering into a contract that has a severance clause with a superintendent. It also states that the superintendent should receive benefits aligned with the lowest civil service employee of the district.

• Senate Bill 307, Alquist, D-Santa Clara, requires a school district governing board to include in a superintendent contract that the superintendent will not receive a severance package; that any superintendent who resigns prior to the end of the contract is not to receive a severance; and to conduct an annual evaluation of the superintendent based on his or her contract.

ACSA is working diligently to defeat these bills. ACSA understands the potential unfavorable perception of a dismissal with pay for a school superintendent. Superintendents are sometimes looked at as the CEO of the school district. 

With the current state of the economy and the public federal bailout of large corporations, CEO compensation has become a controversial issue. However, a school superintendent’s position is much different from that of a private corporation CEO, and under much more scrutiny than any other public or private official.

Unlike teachers, a superintendent can be released without cause. School superintendents are at-will employees without any due process rights.

Under both of these bills, a school board could unilaterally, and without cause, terminate a multi-year superintendent contract without compensation. Current law allows for up to 18 months of a superintendent’s contract to be paid upon dismissal by the board. And oftentimes, Early Termination Clauses in superintendent contracts are negotiated at far below the 18-month maximum.

A superintendent operates with all eyes of a community on him or her and is subject to the needs and desires of school board members, collective bargaining units, the community, businesses, and even the Legislature. School superintendents are hired by a board of laypersons, but a school board is still a political body.

Superintendents’ positions are vulnerable after every school board election, depending on who is elected and what philosophy or political cause those persons have. It is all too common for a superintendent to be dismissed after a school board election with the simple excuse given that they just don’t seem to fit any longer.

Early Termination Clauses are not considered extra pay nor are they a gift of public funds. They are damages paid to an employee who is released at will in a breach of contract. Without an early termination clause, the dismissed superintendent would be forced to go to court and file a wrongful discharge lawsuit, ultimately resulting in much higher costs to a school district.

In the past two years, ACSA’s Professional Standards Department has assisted 34 superintendents whose boards have unilaterally and without cause terminated their contracts. It’s unreasonable to expect superintendents to take positions of leadership under the direction of an elected school board without a contract that ensures the individual some measure of protection.

These bills eliminate that protection. ACSA believes these bills will have a detrimental impact to attracting and retaining dynamic school district leaders whose role is a key factor in improving student achievement.