Key Takeaways
Justin Conn was appointed as the next principal of San Dieguito Academy.
The board highlighted strong student achievement in the arts and at Canyon Crest Academy.
Trustees approved a revised Foundation MOU and received a stable Second Interim Budget update.
The sharpest debate focused on AR 5145.3 and board compensation and benefits.
Superintendent Staffieri closed with district recognitions, leadership updates, and comments on student free speech.
Closed Session Report
The board reported two unanimous closed-session actions. First, it approved the appointment of Justin Conn to serve as principal of San Dieguito Academy, effective July 1, 2026. Second, it approved notices to release and/or reassign five employees from administrative positions effective at the end of the 2025–26 school year. Before closed session, public speakers raised concerns about district leadership, discipline, tort claims, and whether student expression is being treated consistently across viewpoints.
4A. Visual and Performing Arts Education Month
The board received a celebratory presentation on district arts programs. Staff reported that more than 5,000 students are enrolled in at least one arts course and said Proposition 28 funding has helped sustain courses, supplies, and maintenance of arts programs across the district. The presentation also highlighted notable student achievements in music, dance, visual arts, and theater, followed by a student violin performance. Trustees responded warmly and emphasized the importance of arts access districtwide.
4B. Canyon Crest Academy Annual Presentation
Canyon Crest Academy’s annual report focused on access, belonging, and achievement. Principal Brett Killeen and student presenters highlighted updated student learning outcomes, strong academic and extracurricular performance, cultural programming, and campus supports. A particularly notable feature was the Wing program, which helps neurodivergent students and others participate more fully in school events and activities through alternative spaces, peer support, and thoughtful accommodations. The presentation also highlighted Science Olympiad, DECA, arts, accreditation, CPR/AED training, and CCA’s continued emphasis on both excellence and inclusion. Public speakers praised CCA’s Science Olympiad success, education excellence ceremonies, and student recognition connected with the Kyoto Prize.
5. Non-Agenda Public Comment
Public comments covered a wide range of issues. Speakers urged the board to remain accessible to families, questioned the delay of a planned social justice course, and asked for a clearer and more visible alternative diploma pathway for students with disabilities. Others raised concerns about the district’s handling of student protest activity, student speech, and whether district actions appear to favor one viewpoint over another. Additional comments supported arts, praised the Online Learning Program and specific academic programs, and reflected broader concerns about governance and transparency.
9C. Ratification of Memorandum of Understanding with SDFA
The board unanimously ratified the Memorandum of Understanding with the San Diego Faculty Association regarding revisions to transfer and leave policies. The item moved quickly and without significant discussion.
10E. Approval of Revised Foundation Memorandum of Understanding
The revised Foundation MOU was one of the meeting’s more important governance items. Staff explained that the revision followed multiple meetings with foundation representatives and additional board input. The revised agreement clarifies that school foundations are separate legal entities, changes the administrative fee language from “up to 10%” to a fixed 10%, requires an opt-in or opt-out structure for restricted donations, and includes a January 2027 review point so the district can assess whether the structure is working as intended.
Public speakers treated the item as an accountability measure, not a routine update. Their comments focused on donor confidence, district oversight, compliance, transparency, and the need for visible enforcement. Several speakers referenced prior concerns involving the CCA Foundation and argued that the revised agreement establishes clearer operating conditions for any school-connected foundation that wants to maintain district approval and public trust. There was especially strong support for the firm 10% fee cap, which speakers viewed as more understandable and more protective of donor intent than a flexible ceiling. One speaker said the new structure increased confidence in donating, while others urged the district to provide public updates on whether foundations sign and comply with the new agreement. The board approved the revised MOU unanimously.
10H. Second Interim Budget
The board also received the Second Interim Budget update. Staff described the report as relatively quiet and said the district remains in positive certification, meaning it can meet its financial obligations. Staff said the district has no formal budget reductions underway, remains in its second year as a community-funded/basic-aid district, and is still building reserves to where they ideally should be, but is “definitely trending in the right direction.” The overall message was that the district’s financial position remains stable.
11B. Administrative Regulation 5145.3
This item exposed one of the board’s clearest philosophical divides. In practical terms, AR 5145.3 appears intended to explain how the district should treat and support students in a way that protects their dignity, inclusion, and rights under district policy and California law, especially in situations involving sex, gender identity, and student treatment at school. That practical purpose was reflected in the board’s discussion, even though the debate focused more on values than on line-by-line wording.
Trustee Phan Anderson voiced objections to the revised regulation, stating, “I believe that there are two sexes male and female and sex is not fluid.” She added that the district should not be “promoting and affirming” what she characterized as a mental health issue and concluded that she could not support the revision. In response, another trustee said the regulation supported student “dignity and their inclusion” and was “well grounded in our policies and in California education code.” The board approved the regulation on a 4–1 vote.
11C. Board Compensation and Health / Welfare Benefits
The longest discussion of the night centered on trustee compensation and benefits. Staff explained that board compensation has remained at $400 per month for more than 25 years and that SDUHSD could legally increase compensation up to $2,000 per month. Superintendent Staffieri recommended a more moderate increase to $1,200 per month, together with changes to board health and welfare benefits so they would align more closely with classified employee benefit levels. She confirmed on the record that this was her recommendation and said it was based on declining enrollment and fiscal impact.
Public speakers generally supported increasing compensation. One speaker argued that board service should be more accessible and that the time commitment should be reflected in the compensation structure. Michelle Horsley, President of the San Dieguito Faculty Association, said school board service clearly requires significant time, training, effort, and personal investment, and agreed that compensation matters. At the same time, she urged the board to keep in mind the broader importance of competitive pay and health benefits for district employees as well.
Trustee discussion revealed real differences in how members viewed the issue. Trustee Williams said she had “spoken to a number of people who have contemplated running” and “never once” heard someone say they could not run because the stipend was too low. She added that she had actually heard more surprise that there was any stipend at all, said she was “uncomfortable with this agenda item in general,” and emphasized that if the board was going to act, she wanted to remain with Superintendent Staffieri’s conservative recommendation.
Trustee Allman took the opposite view. He said the issue was “not about us” but about “the people who aren’t here” and the people who might want to run but feel they cannot. He said that when people hear trustees receive only $400 a month, “inevitably it’s a joke,” and people react with disbelief. He argued that the district should not be an outlier compared with surrounding districts, noted that nearby districts had moved to the maximum allowed, and emphasized that the work of the board is substantial regardless of district size. He ultimately made the substitute motion to increase pay to $2,000, while keeping the reduction in health benefits as presented.
A third trustee said she was “a little bit torn” because she saw the equity argument, but when uncertain her “default is to go back to listening to Dr. Staffieri’s recommendation and the fiscal impact.” That reflected the central tension in the discussion: whether broader access to public service justified going to the maximum, or whether the district should move more cautiously.
The board first voted on Trustee Allman’s motion to go to $2,000 per month. That motion failed 2–3. The board then returned to the original proposal, and the motion to increase compensation to $1,200 per month while revising benefits as presented passed 3–2. Overall, the item highlighted different board philosophies about service, equity, public expectations, and fiscal restraint.
Superintendent’s Report
Before adjournment, Superintendent Staffieri highlighted several districtwide developments. She congratulated Justin Conn on his appointment and said the district would begin the La Costa Canyon principal recruitment process immediately. She also celebrated four 2026 California Distinguished Schools in the district, praised the evening’s arts recognition, and addressed public claims surrounding a recent Torrey Pines student discipline matter involving a social media post. She stated that students are not disciplined for political viewpoints, that the district supports lawful free speech, and that individual discipline matters cannot be discussed publicly because they are confidential. She also noted the arrival of four electric buses, more buses on the way, completion of bystander/upstander training for all eighth graders, and recognition of the district’s classified employee of the year.
Overall Takeaway
The March 11 meeting showed both the strengths and tensions within SDUHSD. On one hand, the board celebrated arts education, school achievement, student leadership, and an important principal appointment. On the other, the meeting reflected continued public attention to student speech, curriculum, accessibility, governance, transparency, and district accountability. The result was a meeting that was both upbeat and consequential, with several decisions likely to remain part of the broader public conversation.
AI Assist