> ## Content Index
> Fetch the complete content index at: https://www.smdp.com/llms.txt
> Use this file to discover other available public pages before exploring further.

# Educators’ salaries competitive, but not enough
- URL: https://www.smdp.com/educators-salaries-competitive-but-not-enough-editor/
- Published: 2004-11-29T16:00:00.000Z
- Updated: 2026-10-23T05:43:33.000Z
- Author: Guest Author
- Tags: Opinion, Malibu, #archive-import

*By José Escarce President, SMMUSD Board of Education*

Re: “Administrators take top school salaries,” SMDP, Nov. 22, page 1). Your recent article on salaries in the Santa Monica-Malibu Unified School District could lead your readers to think there is ongoing rift between teachers and administrators in our district, as they debate the allocation of our scarce resources. On the contrary, our teachers and administrators have rejected the “us versus them” mentality that plagues so many public school districts, and instead work together every day to improve the education our students receive. Moreover, our Board of Education recognizes the essential roles and contributions of both groups, and has strived to offer compensation packages that can attract top-notch educators for every position. Some key facts may help your readers understand what our district has done.

According to both the National Education Association and the American Federation of Teachers, the two national teachers’ unions, California teachers earn the highest salaries in the nation. In 2002-03, the average teacher salary in California, $56,283, exceeded the national average of $45,891 by 22.6 percent. Adjusting for California’s high cost of living drops the state’s teachers to 11th in the nation, but this is still noteworthy given that California’s per student spending is 31st in the nation, unadjusted, and near the bottom of the list when cost of living is taken into account. California public school districts manage to pay teachers competitive salaries despite the state’s stingy funding for public education by devoting a higher fraction of expenditures to teachers than most other states and hiring fewer teachers than they would like; the state’s student-to-teacher ratio of 20.2 is the fourth worst in the nation.

Closer to home, teacher pay in SMMUSD ranks favorably when compared with other unified (i.e., K-12) school districts in California and in Los Angeles County. According to Ed-Data, in 2002 the lowest salary on our district’s salary schedule, $39,021, exceeded the state average by 11.9 percent and the county average by 6.1 percent (my calculation). The highest salary on our salary schedule, $78,442, outpaced the state average by 13.3 percent and the county average by 6.3 percent. The California Teachers Association, the state teachers’ union, reports that between 1999 and 2003 teacher salaries in our district increased by a cumulative 21.1 percent, fourth highest among the 46 unified districts in Los Angeles County and easily surpassing the county average of 17.7 percent. Our district also offers teachers generous benefits and stipends for advanced degrees and for National Board certification. The conclusion is clear: SMMUSD offers teachers a highly competitive compensation package and has done everything it could to enhance teachers’ earnings in recent years despite the state’s budget crisis. The justification is just as clear: Teachers are the heart and soul of our district, and without smart, talented and dedicated teachers we cannot hope to offer students an excellent education. We are fortunate to have been able to attract a cadre of outstanding teachers to our schools.

With regard to principals, the California Teachers Association reports that in 2002- 03 their average salary in our district was $104,091\. This figure exceeds the county average of $98,527 for unified districts by 5.6 percent (my calculation), which mirrors the “premium” our district pays teachers. A teacher quoted in your article suggested that the salary differential between principals and teachers provides an incentive for teachers to leave the classroom to become administrators. While on the surface this may appear to be the case, in fact few teachers opt to become principals. Contemporary principals require extensive special training, and they are expected to be educational leaders of their schools, as well as top-flight administrators, plant managers, communicators, motivators and data analysts. Under our district’s contract, moreover, principals work about 220 days annually, compared with 183 days for teachers. Not surprisingly, finding experienced and effective principals is extremely difficult despite the seemingly high salary. Our district has been fortunate to recruit numerous superb principals in recent years.

In my opinion, all educators are underpaid. I believe this not because I like most of them — although I do — nor because I admire their hard work and unflagging dedication, which I do as well. Rather, I believe it’s because they are charged with one of the most crucial responsibilities in our society: Educating future generations to be productive, informed and socially conscious citizens of a democratic nation. What educators earn does not come close to reflecting the worth and importance of their contributions. More consequential, it is insufficient to attract into the profession enough talented young people to meet future students’ needs. Addressing this problem is one of the greatest challenges facing local, state and federal governments in an anti-tax age; the failure to address it will have incalculable long-term costs that all Americans will bear.

*Originally published in the Santa Monica Daily Press print edition on November 29, 2004.* [Read the original PDF.](https://s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/smdp%5Fbackissues/112904.pdf?ref=smdp.com)