Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Superintendent Transition topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Public raises concern over five‑month superintendent overlap and $130K–$150K cost
Summary
A public commenter told the Azusa Unified board a planned five‑month overlap between the outgoing and incoming superintendents could cost $130,000–$150,000 from the general fund and urged the district to consider Fund 17 or other sources; a separate commenter suggested retaining the outgoing superintendent in a targeted emeritus role instead of an on‑site overlap.
Meg Savala, a public commenter at the Azusa Unified board’s April 22 special meeting, told trustees the district’s planned five‑month overlap between the outgoing superintendent and the incoming superintendent would be costly and urged officials to find alternative funding.
"It’s my understanding that there will be a 5 month overlap between our existing superintendent and the one that you will be choosing here pretty soon, and that is going to be a huge cost to the district," Savala said, estimating the expense at "probably 130 and $150,000 by the time you're done with the salary, the benefits, the statutory costs." She said that drawing that amount from the general fund would displace other priorities and suggested Fund 17 as an alternative source.
Why it matters: Savala framed the overlap as a one‑time expenditure that could be repurposed for staff pay or other district needs. She noted the district previously declined a 2% salary increase for staff citing budget limits and said the overlap’s cost, even if one‑time, is significant when weighed against those trade‑offs.
Brody O'Brien, another commenter, urged the board to preserve the outgoing superintendent’s institutional knowledge without an overlapping management structure that could limit the incoming leader’s authority. "If he's there as a guide for 6 months, all that does is kinda kneecap the next person," O'Brien said, but added that placing the outgoing superintendent in a focused "special assignment" or "Emeritus" role that uses his curriculum expertise could justify the expense if the board chooses to proceed.
Board response and next steps: During the public comment period the chair enforced speaker time limits and no formal board response was recorded on the record. The board later moved into closed session under Government Code section 54957; after returning it reported no action was taken and then adjourned. The transcript does not record any motion or trustee vote to change the overlap timeline or funding source.
Provenance: The article draws on public‑comment remarks recorded at the board’s April 22 special meeting (comments by Meg Savala and Brody O'Brien) and the board’s later announcement of closed session and the report that no action was taken.
