Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the AB1390 Compensation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Merced trustees split over using AB 1390 to raise board stipends
Summary
Trustees debated Assembly Bill 1390, which raises the statutory ceiling for board stipends; some called it inappropriate while employees remain underpaid, others said the opt‑in stipend can make trustee service accessible to more residents.
Merced — Trustees spent an extended portion of their June 23 meeting debating Assembly Bill 1390, a state law effective Jan. 1, 2026 that raises the ceiling for school board stipends based on district average daily attendance.
Superintendent Stocking summarized the law and explained Merced’s ADA places the district in the band that could allow monthly stipends up to $2,000. "Looking at the ADA for school boards currently we would fall within the 10,01 to 25,000 students ADA... this would give now effective as of January 1st, 2026, the ceiling option would be up to $2,000 a month within our ADA school district," he said.
Trustees voiced sharply different views. Trustee Delgado said the board should not raise trustee compensation while district employees remain underpaid. "I don't think this is the time for the board to consider giving it," Delgado said. "I know we have employees who've put in decades with our district who are still making minimum wage." He framed the issue as about priorities and optics.
Trustee Jeang argued the stipend is an optional statutory ceiling and could make service more accessible to people who cannot afford unpaid public service. "A stipend is not considered as a payment," Jeang said, noting the rising costs of living and the demands of board work. Several trustees emphasized that any increase could be structured so members could opt out and that stipends are typically prorated based on attendance.
Trustee Brooks said she serves "for the love of my community and for the love of the kids," and voiced concern that treating the role as a paid job could change who runs for office and the character of board service. Other trustees raised practical points — child care, committee workload and parity with neighboring districts that have adopted higher stipends.
No motion to change the board stipend was made. Board members agreed to continue the discussion later; staff offered to provide policy language options and comparative data from neighboring districts.
The topic drew sustained public and trustee attention because any change would be a policy set by the board (or via board policy) and would be visible to district employees and residents at a time the board was simultaneously approving contracts and reviewing budget designations.
