| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
The Record ‘School officials assail Christie plan to cap superintendent pay’...Lack of respect’ seen for school chiefs…
Politickernj.com ‘Education buffs and free-market fans cringe as Christie cap zaps school chiefs’...For a complete look at the regulations, visit www.state.nj.us/education/paycaps. Three other public hearings are scheduled for 6 p.m., on Nov. 29 at the North Warren Regional High School auditorium in Blairstown; on Dec. 2 at Cumberland County College, Conference and Events Center, Vineland; and Dec. 7 at Burlington County Institute of Technology, Westampton Campus auditorium, Westampton.
Star Ledger ‘School officials say Christie's superintendent pay cap will cost N.J. talent’
Daily Record ‘Gov. Christie's plan to cap school superintendents' pay gets chilly reception’
Concerned parties voice opinion during public hearing
The Record ‘School officials assail Christie plan to cap superintendent pay’
by Leslie Brody
Seventeen people at a state hearing Thursday on proposed salary caps for superintendents took turns bashing the idea as a wrongheaded move that would gravely hurt New Jersey schools and students.
Only one speaker supported Governor Chrstie’s salary-cap proposal, saying it was a critical way to spare taxpayers from pain.
The first of four hearings on the plan drew more than 50 people to Kean University in Union. One critic after another warned that a salary cap would push great superintendents to jump to private schools or to other states, and discourage talented leaders from seeking districts’ top jobs. They said the cap undermines local control and allows for no regional differences in the cost of living.
Several speakers noted with dismay the absence of top state officials at the meeting and questioned whether public input was being taken seriously. There was only one Education Department representative listening at the front of the conference room, Eric Taylor, a lawyer from the office of statutes and code review. He noted that all comments would be taken into consideration.
“That there is no one here present from the Department of Education is really in keeping with the lack of respect” shown by the department, said Margaret Bennett, a school board member from Franklin Lakes. “This proposal pushed through by one individual is an act of bullying rather than real reform.”
The Education Department’s acting commissioner and her team should have attended, said James O’Neill, superintendent in Chatham.
“There is a widespread credibility gap,’’ he said. “Their lack of presence here at this event makes us all convinced this isn’t a valid hearing.”
Taylor said in an interview that he was not authorized to answer a question about which parts of Christie’s plan, if any, could be changed based on the testimony at the hearings.
Christie announced the caps in July to rein in some of the highest property tax rates in the nation. He said no superintendent’s base pay should exceed his $175,000 annual salary, though he did allow chances for merit bonuses. About 70 percent of superintendents currently earn more than the governor.
The caps would follow a sliding scale, with the smallest districts maxed at $125,000. Superintendents in only a few districts with more than 10,000 students could get waivers.
“If we’re asking teachers to sacrifice, administrators have to sacrifice too,” Christie has said.
Christie said he had the authority to impose the caps, which are scheduled to go into effect Feb. 7, by regulation. That process requires three public hearings.
One man who applauded the governor was Bob Crawford, a school board member in Parsippany-Troy Hills. That district became a lightning rod for this issue when the board approved a five-year contract extension this month for its superintendent, LeRoy Seitz, so he could get around the cap. His salary is $212,000. This week, Christie announced state officials were nixing that extension and called him a poster boy for greed.
Crawford said he voted against Seitz’s contract because so many people couldn’t afford their property tax bills.
“What is going on in our community is pain,” he said. “Not a day goes by when I’m not approached by someone who has lost a job … I want to thank the governor for providing the leadership on this issue that boards on their own couldn’t muster.”
Carolee Gravina of Allendale, a board member in the Northern Highlands Regional High School District, countered that cutting superintendent salaries sends the wrong message to students: It tells them “getting ahead by street smarts and ruthlessness is more valued in New Jersey than getting ahead through education and lifelong learning.” A salary cap “will not punish greed but devalue a critical role,” she said. By her calculations, the cap would save only $7 per household in her district.
Another Northern Highlands board member, Barbara Garand, said that during their search for a superintendent two years ago, virtually all the candidates earned more than the cap, so it would have ruined their chances to find a seasoned leader.
“Taxpayers in my district will not settle for mediocrity,” she said. Especially at a cash-strapped time that demands fiscal savvy, she said, “we cannot have a second-rate superintendent.”
Erik Gundersen, director of curriculum for the Pascack Valley Regional High School District, said he had hoped to be a superintendent someday, but it wouldn’t make financial sense for him to become one in his district under the cap. He said his pay already exceeds the $155,000 limit proposed for his district, and he would have to give up tenure. In New Jersey, superintendents lost tenure 20 years ago; a development that many say has led to escalating pay.
Barbara Horl from the New Jersey School Boards Association echoed several speakers, saying the governor’s 2-percent cap on increases in property tax levies already served the purpose of reining in costs.
“There is no more critical decision a school board can make than the selection of a superintendent,” she said, adding that boards need freedom to hire the best candidates they can.
E-mail: brody@northjersey.com
Seventeen people at a state hearing Thursday on proposed salary caps for superintendents took turns bashing the idea as a wrongheaded move that would gravely hurt New Jersey schools and students.
Only one speaker supported Governor Chrstie’s salary-cap proposal, saying it was a critical way to spare taxpayers from pain.
The first of four hearings on the plan drew more than 50 people to Kean University in Union. One critic after another warned that a salary cap would push great superintendents to jump to private schools or to other states, and discourage talented leaders from seeking districts’ top jobs. They said the cap undermines local control and allows for no regional differences in the cost of living.
Several speakers noted with dismay the absence of top state officials at the meeting and questioned whether public input was being taken seriously. There was only one Education Department representative listening at the front of the conference room, Eric Taylor, a lawyer from the office of statutes and code review. He noted that all comments would be taken into consideration.
“That there is no one here present from the Department of Education is really in keeping with the lack of respect” shown by the department, said Margaret Bennett, a school board member from Franklin Lakes. “This proposal pushed through by one individual is an act of bullying rather than real reform.”
The Education Department’s acting commissioner and her team should have attended, said James O’Neill, superintendent in Chatham.
“There is a widespread credibility gap,’’ he said. “Their lack of presence here at this event makes us all convinced this isn’t a valid hearing.”
Taylor said in an interview that he was not authorized to answer a question about which parts of Christie’s plan, if any, could be changed based on the testimony at the hearings.
Christie announced the caps in July to rein in some of the highest property tax rates in the nation. He said no superintendent’s base pay should exceed his $175,000 annual salary, though he did allow chances for merit bonuses. About 70 percent of superintendents currently earn more than the governor.
The caps would follow a sliding scale, with the smallest districts maxed at $125,000. Superintendents in only a few districts with more than 10,000 students could get waivers.
“If we’re asking teachers to sacrifice, administrators have to sacrifice too,” Christie has said.
Christie said he had the authority to impose the caps, which are scheduled to go into effect Feb. 7, by regulation. That process requires three public hearings.
One man who applauded the governor was Bob Crawford, a school board member in Parsippany-Troy Hills. That district became a lightning rod for this issue when the board approved a five-year contract extension this month for its superintendent, LeRoy Seitz, so he could get around the cap. His salary is $212,000. This week, Christie announced state officials were nixing that extension and called him a poster boy for greed.
Crawford said he voted against Seitz’s contract because so many people couldn’t afford their property tax bills.
“What is going on in our community is pain,” he said. “Not a day goes by when I’m not approached by someone who has lost a job … I want to thank the governor for providing the leadership on this issue that boards on their own couldn’t muster.”
Carolee Gravina of Allendale, a board member in the Northern Highlands Regional High School District, countered that cutting superintendent salaries sends the wrong message to students: It tells them “getting ahead by street smarts and ruthlessness is more valued in New Jersey than getting ahead through education and lifelong learning.” A salary cap “will not punish greed but devalue a critical role,” she said. By her calculations, the cap would save only $7 per household in her district.
Another Northern Highlands board member, Barbara Garand, said that during their search for a superintendent two years ago, virtually all the candidates earned more than the cap, so it would have ruined their chances to find a seasoned leader.
“Taxpayers in my district will not settle for mediocrity,” she said. Especially at a cash-strapped time that demands fiscal savvy, she said, “we cannot have a second-rate superintendent.”
Erik Gundersen, director of curriculum for the Pascack Valley Regional High School District, said he had hoped to be a superintendent someday, but it wouldn’t make financial sense for him to become one in his district under the cap. He said his pay already exceeds the $155,000 limit proposed for his district, and he would have to give up tenure. In New Jersey, superintendents lost tenure 20 years ago; a development that many say has led to escalating pay.
Barbara Horl from the New Jersey School Boards Association echoed several speakers, saying the governor’s 2-percent cap on increases in property tax levies already served the purpose of reining in costs.
“There is no more critical decision a school board can make than the selection of a superintendent,” she said, adding that boards need freedom to hire the best candidates they can.
E-mail: brody@northjersey.com
Politickernj.com ‘Education buffs and free-market fans cringe as Christie cap zaps school chiefs’
By Timothy J. Carroll | November 18th, 2010
UNION – A Department of Education director read eyes down from a piece of paper and the people exercised the public airing of the grievances tonight in Union County, but at the end of the day, Gov. Chris Christie’s superintendent salary cap is coming on Feb. 7, 2011. Look out district CEOs and their chauffeurs.
Christie is tying superintendent salaries almost solely to student populations, personally issuing pay cuts to 366 school superintendents statewide by way of executive decree.
At the bottom end of the scale, a K-8 superintendent with fewer than 250 students would be capped at $120,000. At the top end, a district with up to 10,000 students could pay their schools chief a maximum of $175,000.
Other regulations are also included, for instance abolishment of chauffeurs for superintendents.
Yearly performance bonuses set by the local Boards of Education are allowed, with county superintendent approval, but do not figure into pension calculations.
Eric Taylor, state Department of Education director of statutes and codes, read the cap regulations from an otherwise empty dais tonight in a small, nondescript campus administration building at Kean University.
Then he acted as blocking dummy for a queue of school-supportive linebackers. Local education officials from the northern regions talked about the predictable decay of leadership in their districts and erstwhile Christie supporters ratcheted up the open-market rhetoric.
The state is depriving taxpayers in successful school districts the right to spend as they wish on educational leadership, said Mike Sockol of the Holmdel Board of Education.
Holmdel has been honored among the best schools in the nation, he said, and was dubbed the best district in Monmouth County by NJ Magazine.
That said, the superintendent in Holmdel is currently $50,000 over the cap, which will result in a savings of one-tenth of one percent of the schools budget once the cap is enforced, Sockol said.
With graduation and college acceptance rates near 100 percent, “Why would we risk that level of performance for that one-tenth of a percent?”
Also, the superintendent accepted a pay freeze on her own in the tough economic environment, he said.
All the new cap regs stand to do, according to Sockol, is “institutionalize mediocrity,”
Also, “Where is the deputy commissioner of education?” he asked. “Is this not important enough?”
The cap directive from Christie refers to a 2006 State Commission of Investigation report of taxpayer abuse. It mentions that the head of the entire state schools department – the commissioner of education – is capped at a salary of $141,000.
So, it concludes, the person overseeing the appropriation of millions in funding to hundreds of districts in the state is incongruously making less than many of the district heads he or she is dealing with.
But public speakers tonight said the same logic will apply in many district post-cap; assistant superintendents, other administrators, and some educators could be making more than their bosses.
Joseph Ricca, superintendent of East Hanover, called the move a “political play to make a quick impact,” without taking into account unintentional consequences awaiting the districts.
Ricca told Christie to let the market govern the pay scale, a turn for good old self determination.
“I respectfully submit to your committee of one,” Ricca said in jest of the lonesome bureaucrat at the table, “What metric has been used to establish these arbitrary caps? Student enrollment, what more? Were economic experts consulted?”
Christie is banking on a total of $9.8 million in taxpayer dollars saved, but some officials said the local saving is negligible.
John Sincaglia, who sits on the Berkley Heights Board of Education, said the local taxpayers will save approximately $2 per person from the regs, but he thinks the costs outweigh the savings.
He also said the regulations were questionable and at times arbitrary.
Why weren’t regional costs of living variations factored in, he asked, and how were tier boundaries established?
Should student number 1,501 be worth $10,000 per year to a superintendent?
Will the governor create a cap to prevent state universities from paying football coaches $2 million, Sincaglia queried?
He greatly took offense to the fact that Christie is stalling approved contracts until the regs kick in.
“The old rules are not suspended,” Sincaglia said. “It seems to me we are singling out superintendents because we can…Who would aspire to be new leaders.”
Some district and school chiefs have been trying to beat the cap deadline, starting with Jersey City Superintendent Dr. Charles Epps, whose early and potentially excessive contract extension has been held hostage by the state for months, and ending with Parsippany Superintendent Dr. LeRoy Seitz, whose contract extension was publicly nullified by the state this week.
Parsipanny-Troy Hills school board member Robert Crawford spoke at the meeting tonight. He was one of two votes on the board against the contract extension for Seitz.
In a district of limping taxpayers, union negotiations have stalled for three years while pay increases have been foregone, unaffiliated worker wages were frozen, and health plans were swapped on custodians.
All the while, the superintendent is netting nearly a quarter million dollars, Crawford said.
“How are we going to sit face to face with these unions,” he said, waiting for the inevitable, “You just gave our boss a 2 percent (pay) increase and guaranteed contract for five years.” That’s nearly a $4,000 per year raise, he said.
Crawford told The Record that the board tried to include several other perks in the Seitz contract – a $3,600 life insurance policy, $6,057-per-day sick day buy-back, and an automatic $500 per month in travel expenses – but were disallowed by the county superintendent.
Acting Commissioner of Education Rochelle Hendricks directed county superintendents to begin a “comprehensive review of all superintendent contracts.” In the meantime, the state is freezing all contracts and contract extensions. No contracts that expire after Feb. 7, 2011 will be authorized unless they submit to the pending cap regulations.
Franklin Lakes board members showed up to confront the new regulations.
Kathy Schwartz decried the unilateral approach Christie took, without consulting the state Boards of Ed.
Her colleague, Margaret Bennett, called it an “act of bullying” by Christie that will hurt small districts “where superintendents wear many hats.”
“We’re losing our ability to attract the talent we deserve,” Bennett said.
About 70 percent of the state’s school superintendents currently earn above the proposed salary caps.
In addition, administrator compensation would be restructured to provide the opportunity for non-pensionable, individual year merit stipends if superintendents achieve significant, state-defined improvements in student learning from the year before.
“Raises will no longer be automatic but will be earned, based on how students are performing in a school district,’’ Hendricks said in a release.
Local districts can develop the criteria for the one-year incentives based specific educational objectives and approved by the county superintendent, but the bonus will not count toward a superintendent’s pension.
The pay caps tiers are based solely on district student population: between 0-250 students, max $125,000; between 251– 750 students, max $135,000; between 751–1,500 students, max $145,000; between 1,501–3,000 students, max $155,000; between 3,001–6,500 students, max $165,000; between 6,501–10,000 students, max $175,000; and 10,000-plus students, commissioner may approve a cap waiver, on a per case basis.
Superintendents may earn $10,000 more for each additional district they supervise, and they can receive an additional stipend of $2,500 if their district includes a high school.
For a complete look at the regulations, visit www.state.nj.us/education/paycaps.
Three other public hearings are scheduled for 6 p.m., on Nov. 29 at the North Warren Regional High School auditorium in Blairstown; on Dec. 2 at Cumberland County College, Conference and Events Center, Vineland; and Dec. 7 at Burlington County Institute of Technology, Westampton Campus auditorium, Westampton.
Star Ledger ‘School officials say Christie's superintendent pay cap will cost N.J. talent’
November 19, 2010 by Jessica Calefati/The Star-Ledger
UNION TOWNSHIP (Union County) — Gov. Chris Christie’s cap on superintendent pay will bleed administrative talent from the state’s school districts, superintendents and school board members said last night during a hearing seeking public comment on the caps held at Kean University.
A single Department of Education official presided over the forum, which more than 50 people attended. Neither acting Education Commissioner Rochelle Hendricks nor Christie attended the hearing, much to the chagrin of those who testified. Many, including Cranford Superintendent Gayle Carrick, complained that their concerns were not being taken seriously and would not ultimately make a difference.
"I couldn’t find the room, I couldn’t find the building, there is one person here to listen to us and you’re not even looking at me," Carrick said to Eric Taylor, director of statute and code review for the department. "As educators, we know you have to make an interaction or a connection, and I also know you’re going to give me a zero for this because its all about the numbers, isn’t it?"
The pay caps will take effect Feb. 7 of next year, but some districts have been trying to beat the clock and renegotiate their superintendents’ contracts before the new rules take effect. Last week, the Parsippany-Troy Hills school board approved a new cap-exceeding contract for district Superintendent LeRoy Seitz, whom Christie dubbed "the definition of greed and arrogance" at a town hall meeting earlier this month.
PREVIOUS COVERAGE:
• N.J. school districts confused after state steps in to cap superintendent pay
• N.J. school districts hit brick wall on raising superintendent salaries
• LehighValleyLive.com: New Jersey education department puts hold on all school superintendent contract talks
• Proposed $216K salary for Parsippany-Troy Hills superintendent is rejected by state
• Superintendent candidates face public in Freehold Regional High School District
• Parsippany approves new contract for schools superintendent; Gov. Christie lashes out
• Superintendent salary cap has bigger impact in northern, central N.J. districts
• Gov. Christie proposes superintendent salary cuts, merit-based bonuses
On Monday, Hendricks sent a memo to executive county superintendents urging them to submit all superintendent contracts to her office for review by Dec. 3. and barring their approval of any additional contracts before "the submissions are fully analyzed by me and other executive staff."
Richard Bozza, executive director of the New Jersey Association of School Administrators, said its "likely" his organization will take legal action against both the cap and the memo. Testifying at last night’s hearing, Bozza said he supports the governor’s effort to reduce costs, but criticized Christie for not seeking input from administrators on how best to reduce districts’ administrative costs.
"If the proposed amendments are enacted, both experienced and well-qualified aspiring superintendents will seek positions in neighboring states since the compensation of principals will exceed that of the superintendent," Bozza said. "We have already seen examples where candidates coming from other states have withdrawn from consideration in New Jersey superintendent searches because they were unwilling to accept compensation below that being paid in comparable positions in other states."
Administrators whose salaries would be directly affected by the cap were not the only ones voicing their concerns about the new rule at the hearing. The state also recorded public comment from Carolee Gravina, a freelance college counselor from Allendale.
Gravina said the rigor of a high school’s curriculum is one of the most important factors in the college application process — even more important than grades. The governor’s superintendent pay cap will drive the best talent out of the state, a shift that will affect the quality of districts’ curriculum, and thus New Jersey students’ chances at getting into college.
"We need to put a high value on education and the superintendent’s salary so that we can have the highest quality person doing the job," Gravina said. "We’re able to pay high prices for gasoline, plumbers, even clothing. We need to pay for the high price of high quality education, too."
Daily Record ‘Gov. Christie's plan to cap school superintendents' pay gets chilly reception’
Concerned parties voice opinion during public hearing at Kean University
UNION -- Gov. Chris Christie’s proposal to cap the pay of school superintendents received a failing grade from those it will impact during a public hearing Thursday night at Kean University.
Christie was out of the state and didn’t attend, nor did Rochelle Hendricks, the acting commissioner of education.
The absence of Hendricks irked Holmdel Board of Education member Mike Sockol, who noted that the 50 people at the meeting wanted to be heard.
Related
· Parsippany, NJ, attorney says he has proof school superintendent's contract was OK'd
· NJ Gov. Christie administration suspends superintendent contract talks as Lee Seitz pact voided
· Follow DailyRecord.com on Facebook
“Why isn’t she here to listen to the comments in person?’’ Sockol said. “This isn’t important enough for her?”
Department of Education staffers said the process for rule changes didn’t require Hendricks to attend.
The meeting was dominated by the comments from administrators and representatives of school associations who, with few exceptions, said the initiative is unfair and a shoot-from-the-hip response by the governor to rising school costs that misses the mark.
Joy Atkin, a retired Elizabeth School District teacher, didn’t sign up to make formal comments but said before the meeting that Christie “is bad for education.”
The proposed pay scale tops at $175,000, equal of the salary of the New Jersey governor, though superintendents can earn more through incentives.
“We call him Gov. Disaster,’’ said Atkin, referring to Christie. “This is wrong. I guess nobody can earn more money than our beloved governor.”
But in favor of the idea was Bob Crawford, a Parsippany school board member who has been a critic of that board’s decision to try to sign Superintendent LeRoy Seitz to a rich new deal. The state has disallowed the new contract.
Crawford said, “At the top, there can’t be greed and arrogance.”
With Crawford opposed, the Parsippany board approved giving Seitz a reworked $212,000 base salary deal to include five years of 2 percent raises.
Crawford said that would have put the school board in a poor negotiating position when teachers and other staffers needed new contracts.
“I want to thank the governor. I want to support what he’s trying to do,‘’ Crawford said.
The chief of the Manalapan-Englishtown Regional School District, John J. Marciante Jr., said the proposal is poorly written and has a passage that errantly allows a $10,000 pay bump for superintendents of consolidated districts when there is no similar award for shared districts.
Richard Bozza, executive director of the New Jersey Association of School Administrators, called the measure "poorly conceived public policy."
Sockol, who said he was not speaking on behalf of the entire Holmdel school board, said his district’s superintendent has an existing contract that is at least $50,000 over the scale -- a factor likely to have the district seeking a new schools chief in the future, if the cap is enacted.
Related
· Parsippany, NJ, attorney says he has proof school superintendent's contract was OK'd
· NJ Gov. Christie administration suspends superintendent contract talks as Lee Seitz pact voided
· Follow DailyRecord.com on Facebook
Sockol said the scale and maximum pays “are arbitrary.’’
Under the new rules, a superintendent’s salary is tied to the size of the school district, starting at $125,000.
Hendricks has sent notice to county executive school superintendents saying districts should not try get around the cap by renegotiating contracts.
The remaining public hearings are Nov. 29 in Blairstown, Dec. 2 in Vineland, and Dec. 7 in Westampton. The rule could take effect Feb. 7.
