Letter to the Editor:
During the sixteen years that I volunteered in Burbank schools, I worked with five BUSD Superintendents including Dr. Jan Britz.
I have serious concerns regarding recent consultant agreements for Dr. Britz. The issue is not about the value of coaching or professional development. The issue is fiscal oversight, documentation, and whether this Board is fulfilling its obligation to safeguard public funds.
The former Superintendent’s contract authorized up to $10,000 a year for coaching, plus additional consultant agreements for principal leadership support. The $10,000 a year was not a guarantee. It was a maximum amount. In total, $30,000 was authorized over two years. Yet the payment records tell a very different story.
On April 24, 2025, Dr. Britz was paid $10,000 in advance, without providing any time sheets or invoices. Dr. Britz’ 2023 consultant agreement indicated a $175/hour rate. It seems necessary that there would be invoices for 57 hours at $175 an hour in order for the consultant to earn the full amount of UP TO $10,000. Yet detailed invoices for most of those hours are missing.
When community members requested these invoices through the Public Records Act, the District produced documents that were signed by two principals, rather than provided by the consultant herself. These “invoices,” lack specific days and times, and were dated August 11, 2025 – the day before the District was required to release said records and four months after the $10,000 advance payment. That timing raises serious questions about whether the documents were created after the fact to justify payments that had already gone out. And they come nowhere near reflecting 57 hours of services.
Some invoices were counted against more than one purchase order, resulting in a $350 duplicate payment across two fiscal years. That is an accounting red flag. And even though the contract clearly states that mileage, speaking fees and any additional fees are part of the overall consultant agreement, one invoice included an unauthorized reimbursement for $225 in office supplies. Sure, a $350 duplicate payment here and a $225 reimbursement there doesn’t seem like much, but tell that to teachers who are buying their own supplies for their classrooms!
And then there is the issue of overpayment: The combined agreements for consultant services totaled UP TO $30,000. Yet records show $33,575.55 was paid — an overpayment of more than $3,500, or 10.5%, with no Board approval for the excess. And again, at $175/hour, where are the invoices that would indicate 171 hours of consultancy were actually provided to warrant the payments made?
In other words, the controls that should exist to prevent overpayment, to ensure invoices are valid, and to safeguard public dollars failed at every level. Every unaccounted for hour that this consultant was paid is $175 taken away from kids and from classrooms. Many programs that have been cut at our schools might have been salvaged with sincere, effective fiscal management. Our community deserves accountability. Our children are counting on our Board of Education to make every dollar count.
Suzanne Weerts
Burbank
