Letter to the Editor:
Here are some words directly from the mouth of school administrator, Andrew Cantwell, BUSD Chief Administrative Officer.
At the January 10, 2024, Measure S Bond Oversight Committee meeting, while discussing the annual Financial Audit, Mr. Cantwell reminded the group of the legal requirement for a separate Performance Audit. He told them; “The Performance Audit is to have an outside agency ensure that we are only using the funds for those things which are permissible according to the bond language. So, for instance, if part of my salary were being charged to the bond that would be impermissible”
One year later, at their February 5, 2025, meeting Mr. Cantwell again tells the committee members, “As a reminder for those who may be confused the bond does not allow us to pay for my salary or general administrator salaries. But it does allow us to bring in-house certain functions that might otherwise be outsourced to a construction management firm” Then he introduced two newly hired project managers whose salary will be paid by bond funds.
Of course this makes sense. Mr. Cantwell got this one hundred percent right.
To clarify this issue Attorney General Bill Lockyer opined in 2004 that “a school district may use Proposition 39 school bond proceeds to pay the salaries of district employees to the extent they perform administrative oversight work on construction projects authorized by a voter approved bond measure”
So why highlight Mr. Cantwell’s words? Because the District has been paying 100% of Mr. Cantwell’s salary from Bond funds since July 1, 2025. In my opinion this is outrageous. How does this Board let this happen?
Jef Vander Borght
Burbank
