César Morales, Ventura County’s superintendent of education, paid himself a $15,575 bonus in 2024 that was not approved by the Ventura County Board of Education, then repaid the money after people began to ask his office about it.
Morales issued a public statement on May 15 acknowledging the unauthorized pay, which he said was a “one-time stipend” that was paid to all Ventura County Office of Education employees at the time.
As an elected official, Morales does not answer to the board on most matters and he can award extra pay to his office’s employees without board approval. However, state law requires that elected county superintendents get board approval, with a public vote, for any increases in their own pay.
In his May 15 letter, Morales states that he has “since learned” that his bonus should have been submitted to the board for approval, “and that process did not occur.”
Morales wrote that he has returned the money and will work with the board “to implement steps to ensure this does not happen again.”
“I am sharing this information to be fully transparent, to acknowledge the error, and to reaffirm my commitment to accountability and sound governance,” he wrote.
The Board of Education learned of Morales’ unauthorized payments a week before he disclosed the matter in his open letter to the “Ventura County Community.” After Morales’ letter was posted on the Office of Education’s website, board members issued statements expressing their disapproval and disappointment.
“Integrity is doing the right thing regardless of whether anyone is looking — and in this case, Superintendent Morales did not meet that standard,” one board member, Richard Lucas III, wrote in a statement posted to Facebook.
Another board member, Richard Teasdale, withdrew his endorsement for Morales’ re-election.
Morales is one of three candidates in the June primary. If no candidate gets more than 50% of the vote, the top two will advance to the general election in November.
In a statement provided to The Star, Teasdale said he was “deeply disappointed and shocked” by Morales’ disclosure.
“I am also troubled by the hesitation and delay in disclosing this payment during an election period,” Teasdale wrote. “Such conduct is unbecoming of a public servant. At a time when public trust in our institutions, schools, and educators is already strained, it is imperative to remain vigilant.”
Why did Morales get extra pay?
Morales did not agree to an interview, but his office’s spokesperson, Dave Schermer, answered The Star’s questions via email and explained how the payments came about.
In 2024, the Office of Education had a budget surplus, and the office and its unions had agreed that such a surplus would trigger one-time bonuses.
The office has a policy of extending union-bargained raises to management and other non-union employees, so in November 2024 every employee was given a one-time bonus equal to 5% of their salary, Schermer said.
For Morales, the bonus was $15,750, based on his salary of $315,000.
The payments to all employees were included in a mid-year budget update from Morales’ office to the board in December 2024, after they were paid. That budget presentation did not mention Morales’ pay specifically and board members now say they were unaware of it.
That was the only time Morales ever received an “off-schedule salary stipend” as superintendent, Schermer said.
Morales paid the Office of Education back on May 14, the day before he disclosed the payment in his open letter. He paid the office $7,619, Schermer said, which was the net amount he received from the $15,750 bonus after taxes and benefit contributions were taken out.
How a records request led to Morales’ disclosure
Jess Weihe is a Newbury Park resident who blogs about local news and politics as “Anonymous Mommy,” though her posts are no longer anonymous. She had heard rumors of financial malfeasance in the Office of Education, and on April 21 she submitted a request to Morales’ office under the California Public Records Act for payroll records and other documents, including those pertaining to “off schedule or one-time payments or augmentations.”
The California Public Records Act gives state and local government agencies up to 10 days to respond to a request. When Weihe didn’t get a response in 10 days, she sent a follow-up email to Morales and his top deputies, and this time she copied the members of the board.
That was enough to get the matter before the board in a closed session on May 8. State law allows public agencies to hold closed-door meetings under certain circumstances, including discussions of pending or potential lawsuits. The agenda for the May 8 meeting says that the closed session was held due to “significant exposure to litigation.”
Weihe said she still hasn’t received any records from the Office of Education, though on May 5 she got an email that said the office would need two more weeks to produce the records.
“Where are the records?” Weihe said. “Why are they not releasing the requested records, which could back up what they’re saying? It’s very disappointing. I’m left with more questions than answers.”
Weihe said she was also concerned that Morales’ public statement “was vague and passive and did not take responsibility.” It did not include the dollar amount of the unauthorized pay he received, though his office did provide the total when asked.
Superintendent is ‘answerable to the voters’
Members of the Ventura County Board of Education told The Star they want to provide more oversight, but the structure of the Office of Education makes that difficult. The board’s main responsibilities are to act as an appeals board for decisions made by local school districts about topics including student transfers and discipline and charter school applications. The rest of the Office of Education’s duties, including running certain special education programs and overseeing the finances of local school districts, lie with the superintendent.
“Our authority over an elected superintendent only goes so far,” said board member Rachel Ulrich. “The superintendent is elected by the voters and answerable to the voters.”
The board does set the superintendent’s salary. Morales’ total pay went from $282,000 in 2022, his first full year in office, to $323,000 in 2024, according to payroll data provided to The Star from the Office of Education last year. The Star recently requested the same payroll information for 2025 as well and the office has not provided it yet.
Ulrich said she has voted against Morales’ raises in the past because she didn’t think spending more on top management was the best use of the office’s funds. While the board doesn’t have authority over the pay of employees other than the superintendent, she said she didn’t think a “me-too” policy of giving managers the same raises as teachers and other union employees is a good idea.
“I feel like we really needed to be fiscally responsible moving forward,” Ulrich said.
She said the board’s next meeting, on May 26, will start the process of “reviewing board policies and seeing where we can do better in terms of oversight and transparency.”
One opponent says Morales should resign
Morales has two opponents in the June 2 primary election: Kathy Sher, a teacher and a member of the Oxnard Union High School District board, and Maggie Marschner, an educator who was principal ofLa Reina High School and Middle School in Thousand Oaks until it closed in 2024.
Sher said she thinks Morales should resign from his post immediately.
“When the superintendent inappropriately takes taxpayer dollars, it betrays our students,” Sher said. “Those dollars belong in the classroom, not in administrators’ back pockets.”
Marschner did not call for Morales to step down. That’s a decision for Morales and the voters of Ventura County to make, she said in an email interview.
“Ballots are already in voters’ hands,” she said. “What they deserve right now is full transparency and a complete accounting of what happened. Whoever leads this office must be committed to making sure it never happens again.”
Tony Biasotti is an investigative and watchdog reporter for the Ventura County Star. Reach him at tbiasotti@vcstar.com. This story was made possible by a grant from the Ventura County Community Foundation’s Fund to Support Local Journalism.
This article originally appeared on Ventura County Star: County schools superintendent took $16k bonus without legal authority
Reporting by Tony Biasotti, Ventura County Star / Ventura County Star
USA TODAY Network via Reuters Connect
