.
Feedback

29 High School District Employees Made Over $150K

New records show that two high school district employees made over $200,000.

Twenty-nine employees at the made $150,000 or more in 2011 and two made over $200,000, according to data recently released by Bay Area News Group.

The online database was created as part of an ongoing public records project started by Bay Area News Group that has detailed the spending for 271 government agencies throughout the Bay Area.

The data shows the cost of salaries, medical insurance and retirement benefits and other compensation for more than 185,000 workers at counties, cities, special districts and school districts that released the information under the state public records act.

Some highlights for the Sequoia Union High School District:

Out of the district's 1,645 full-time and part-time employees, Superintendent James Lianides made the most with a base salary of $196,055 and income of $244,941.

There are two teachers from the district who made this list. The rest are administrators.

Here is a breakdown, by total compensation, of the 29 top-paid city employees in 2011:

 

Name Title Salary Total Cost of Employment James Lianides Superintendent $196,055 $244,941 Enrique Navas Asst. Superintendent, Admin Services $163,703 $215,521 Susan Vickrey Asst. Superintendent, Human Resources $160,000 $198,392 Raul Zamora Principal, Carlmont High $147,440 $185,078 David Reilly Principal, Woodside High $144,562 $182,678 Susan Berghouse Director, Enrollment & Registration $137,789 $180,681 Bonnie Hansen Principal, Sequoia High $144,562 $179,053 Matthew Zito Principal, Menlo-Atherton $149,652 $176,763 Frank Wells Principal, Redwood High $136,766 $173,397 Ravnel Burgamy Assistant Vice Principal, Green Street $134,285 $173,330 Martin Fuentes Controller, Acounting $137,789 $172,651 Steven Lippi Instructional Vice Principal, Menlo-Atherton $130,749 $170,056 Hector Rico Director, Ell/Categorical $134,138 $168,609 Lionel De Maine Chief Operations Manager, Adult School $123,502 $166,860 Judy Duran Assistant Vice Principal, Carlmont High $130,749 $166,499 Ralph Crame Assistant Vice Principal, Carlmont High $127,861 $164,357 Donald Milhaupt Assistant Vice Principal, District $129,778 $163,403 Simone Rick-Kennel Assistant Vice Principal, Menlo-Atherton High $127,861 $160,659 Robert Fistrom Instructional Vice Principal, Carlmont $125,971 $160,277 Lisa Gleaton Instructional Vice Principal, Sequoia $123,512 $160,249 Wendy Porter Teacher, Woodside $99,712 $159,625 Brandon Lee Director, Research & Evaluation $123,917 $158,330 Gregg Whitnah Teacher, Menlo-Atherton $101,667 $157,859 Karl Losekoot Assistant Vice Principal, Menlo-Atherton High $107,158 $156,922 Maureen Campbell Assistant Vice Principal, Woodside High $120,108 $155,142 Diane Mazzel Instructional Vice Principal, Woodside 130,748 $154,448 Carolyn Schuster Director, Purchasing $110,948 $153,049 Alvaro Calderon Assistant Vice Principal, Woodside $129,779 $150,675 Nora Decaro Director, Food Services $106,893 $150,248

 

**Total Cost of Employment includes overtime, other cash pay, employee contributions to medical, dental, vision, pension and deffered compensation, and miscellaneous payments.

 

For news about San Carlos and surrounding areas, follow us on Twitter and "like" us on Facebook. Get Patched in daily - for free - by signing up for our newsletter. 

Want to blog for us? Simply click here.

Newsletter & Alerts

Get the best stories each day and important breaking news

Subscribe

Not from San Carlos Patch? Find your Local Patch »

Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors. Write a new post... What's up? Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell something
Bob Winters June 18, 2013 at 08:51 am
Best of luck finding good homes, we already have two cats. You may want to consider this advertisingRead More technique: http://i41.tinypic.com/2s17tk0.jpg
Michael G. Stogner June 15, 2013 at 05:07 pm
Marl Olbert said this right after refusing to second Matt Grocott's motion for 2 week delay of vote.Read More I wasn't here at the time but i talked to various people who were. It's my understanding that when Mr. Maltbie was hired into this position he was offered a significantly below market salary. both in terms of compensation and provision I think part because he has never been a city manager before. and he had to prove himself. you can make a argument that that wasn't fair. if you think the person is capable for doing the job not necessarily the fact that they don't have the experience. it happens all over the place it happened to me personally it's just a part of the accepted process but another part of the accepted process is that if the person proves themselves you have to keep faith with them and if you don't you're actually sending a message You're saying that you can't trust us and i totally think that Mr. Maltbie is worth the pay, but besides that i think it is a issue of integrity and maintaining the integrity of the negotiation process and the hiring process that's why I'm going to vote yes for it.
Michael G. Stogner June 15, 2013 at 05:08 pm
I would like to know who those various people were who gave Mark Olbert that understanding.
Michael G. Stogner June 17, 2013 at 04:54 pm
Council member Mark Olbert one who refused to second Mr. Grocott's motion made an interestingRead More statement. "I wasn't here at the time but i talked to various people who were. It's my understanding that when Mr. Maltbie was hired into this position he was offered a significantly below market salary." I know for a fact that he didn't talk to Matt Grocott who was there. That leaves 3 potentials, 2 of them are deceased and the 3rd was Andy Klein who did not attend that meeting so he didn't vote. I would like to know who the "various people who were" are.
Marc Parent June 11, 2013 at 07:50 am
San Carlos just spent 10 Million after lawsuit from the "Bay Keepers", more activistsRead More wanting more money?
Holly Bell June 8, 2013 at 01:23 pm
Unbelievable!! Many voters are watching this issue closely and will remember this vote. Evidently,Read More these commissioners believe that resident's have no voice in city decision-making. Someone please name those commissioners who disregarded the loud-and-clear preference of the people. Time to clean house.
Bob Farkas June 8, 2013 at 02:01 pm
The two commissioners who voted for turf were John Seiling and Ray Merala. It was Ray's lastRead More meeting as a commissioner since he has termed out after 9+ years of service. I think they felt that the needs of the elite CYSO program should take precedence over neighbors and others who use the park. Youth sports seems a principal influencer at Parks and Rec. as they are the largest organized user of the facilities. I agree with many other opponents of this project that we all need to support adequate fields for youth sports. I just think these needs have to be in balance with those of the rest of the community. It was very disappointing that, although it is field availability which is purportedly driving this initiative, there was no available recent data to demonstrate the problem or an analysis of how much of the problem would be addressed by this measure. To a businessman like me, this seems a very unprofessional approach.
Concerned Taxpayer June 8, 2013 at 07:08 pm
This is purely a NIMBY issue. Lets just all be honest about that. The folks who live across fromRead More Highlands Park were the loudest opponents there and were citing all kinds of crazy issues when they should have just been honest and said,"I really don't want to look at more people and cars at the public park that is across the street from me and was there when I moved in." That is essentially the true gripe. NIMBY!!! A very weak argument and unelectable dishonest. Unless you can create more land we have to extend the use at existing parks and fields. This is very logical. We live in California and having to use astro turf stinks but we also live where there is no more available land to utilize. The commissions punted this to the council pure and simple. Well we already know who will vote against it. I am curious who will vote for it?????
Bill June 5, 2013 at 02:53 pm
This post makes zero sense. Bike lanes are a visual reminder to drivers that they must share theRead More road with riders. For every cyclist who is not observing the rules of traffic, I will show you 100 texting drivers. Removing bike lanes is not the answer.