1 A limit on government salaries?! Unprecedented!

2

..."It seems to be just foolish, because many superintendents would be making less than the principals working in their district,"

I can take care of that, too.

3 How about just capping the superintendents? /new jersey

4 Damn, he's on fire!

5

If the education system in this country was performing poorly, I would agree with Gov. Christie.  But with the genius level achievement most of the students are now...

 

I can't continue.  I'm laughing my ass off here!

6 Peg pay above some "minimum wage" to merit and success.  I'm sure some administrators deserve 100K+ salaries, but it's probably very exceptional...

7 So, how much of an effect on government deficits would it have if all government employees were paid the median income for their geographic area?

8 *I had this up for a minute or two earlier but took it down when I realized I'd posted at the same time as Ace.

Never stopped ya'll before.

9

Salary is directly tied to the number of students in the district.

"I think that if he was on the other side of this, he would call this arbitrary and capricious,"  - Jim OÂ’Neill

"You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means." - Inigo Montoya

 

10

So the school boards are not capable of setting reasonable pay?

Or the school district voters aren't paying attention?

There is no need for a state law to do this. School boards would do it if voters made them.

11 Most of us would consider a six-figure salary to be pretty sweet.  It's funny how tone-deaf and entitled those superintendents sound.

12 OÂ’Neill, who makes $210,000, would see his pay drop to $175,000 for overseeing a district of about 4,000 students.

A whole district with only 4,000 students has no need for a superintendant, at all.  They don't even need more than one or two schools, if that.

This O'Neill guy should be pulling in $45,000, tops, given though his job is a total waste of time.  To think that he makes $210,000 for leading a district smaller than many high schools is worse than a joke.

13

There is no need for a state law to do this. School boards would do it if voters made them.

Posted by: CJ at July 19, 2010 02:56 PM (9KqcB)

Your point is taken, but from reading the article it appears that this plan does not even require legislative approval and that it would be enforced by county executive superintendents appointed by the governor. So I am guessing that NJ handles school superintendents differently than other places. Maybe someone from up there can chime in.

If you really want to reduce the overhead in education, you have to start at the administrative offices and work your way down. We laughed about the NJ teacher who complained about her measly $86,000 pay, but consider that there are administrators above them who are making lots more while doing far less.

14 The latest video from Governor Awesome about this very topic. 

The Christie Tool Kit: Putting Children First By Cutting Out-of-Classroom Costs  

15

School boards would do it if voters made them.

Stands to reason, doesn't it? But here in NJ, we're told about these hirings after the fact and they justify the salaries by telling us how we had to lure the guy from some neighboring district that we're always trying to one-up.

Our super doesn't have a farging thing to do either. Some NCLB compliance he has to sign off on is about it. Guy makes 180k.

16 Six figures is too damn much for the job position in the first place, but good luck getting that past the media and unions. FOR THE CHILDREN!!!!!

School administrators should make no more than teachers, and probably less.

17 I cannot see Whitman doing anything approaching what Christie is doing in NJ. Not even close. Not even in the same galaxy. I'm not even sure she wants to.

18 I had bumper sticker magnets made for my car, and they went on last week.

One says "NJ - We love our gov"

The other has a GOP elephant and says "Chris Christie - Too big to fail"

Thanks to Ace or whichever moron came up with the second one.

19

Your point is taken, but from reading the article it appears that this plan does not even require legislative approval and that it would be enforced by county executive superintendents appointed by the governor.

Ah. So...I wonder how  much the COUNTY EXECUTIVE SUPERINTENDENTS get paid. Damn NJ, streamline.

 

20 The idea that principals should be making more than $175K is grotesque.

21 but...it's for the children.  (sniff,sniff)

22

so this guy O'Niel is being paid $54 per student per year !!!!  and he's just one of many "administrators" in that district ... talk about good work if you can get it ...  and he's crying about getting $44 per student if this cut goes into effect ...

lets see ...

 

classroom size of 30 students

1 teacher - $75k

1/10th of a Pricipal + admin staff - $40k

1/10 of janitorial/building staff - $20k

annual cost of facilities - $50k (in a school with 30 classrooms thats 1.5 mill per year)

so add it all up you get - $185,000 which should equal about $6,166 and to be conservative lets jack it up 50% ...  $9,250 ...

whats the bet that NJ spends more than $9k per year per student ?

 

 

23 whats the bet that NJ spends more than $9k per year per student ?

Its actually much much higher than that. I believe based on stuff I have seen in the past that its around 16K per student.

Hell, SC is 9K per student.

24

OÂ’Neill, who makes $210,000, would see his pay drop to $175,000 for overseeing a district of about 4,000 students

The man's crying because he'll only be making twice as much as any reasonable amount instead of the usual three times.

25

So the school boards are not capable of setting reasonable pay?

No, they are not. Most school board elections are low turnout affairs dominated by school related people.

Or the school district voters aren't paying attention?

That's right. Most people in school districts never even vote. How legit is a governmental organization in which only 20% of the people participate in elections?

There is no need for a state law to do this. School boards would do it if voters made them.

The problem is that the funding is so byzantine that a person has a hard time calculating his financial contribution to the school system. It's not like they send him a bill every year labeled "school tax". You have sales tax, property tax, federal funding, state funding, local funding. Not to mention the hidden taxes that business pass along to consumers. That's the typical voter.

On the other hand, you have well organized groups PTA, teacher unions, etc. whose sole purpose is to funnel as much money into the schools as possible. Who is going to be the more motivated voter, the person with the $8000 tax bill or the teacher with the $88,000 income on the line? Who is going to pay attention more, the single guy or gal with no children just out of college, the empty nester, or the couple with three children in the system?

The more motivated voter is always the one with the more economic skin in the game, especially on the local level.

26

Posted by: Prof. Venkman at July 19, 2010 06:22 PM (Bs34i)

I think you're letting local voters off the hook. Maybe I am biased because I had to claw my way onto the school board in a close election, but as a conservative I believe in local control, and that means the locals determine salaries, not the governor. (NJ seems to have a 'county executive' system.)

In PA, everyone knows that the school property tax is the main funding source. It's not complicated. I suspect people don't follow it enough because it doesn't make the cable shows, and there are no TV campaign spots, and few blogs. That is to say, it takes a little work.

 

27

I'm in Alabama and the funding is mostly from sales tax revenue. Generally speaking, all tax revenue increases are voted down. Beyond that, the only interest in school board elections are the highly motivated voter I referred to before.

Since Alabama is required to have a balanced budget (which means proration when the revenue is not there) and the voters keep a tight purse (most tax increases are by referendum) school boards can't raise salaries to their heart's content realizing they ain't got a lot of money to spread around. I think our local school board had to actually cut 10% from the budget this year.

It sounds like to me that the way NJ handles the system is much more screwed up.

28 I certainly hope the SEXIEST chubby man in America has IMMENSE security because he is ticking off a lot of people who are accustomed to RAPING Americans for lots of money and little work!

29 "At some point, I really think you've earned enough money..."

30 Why on earth would an apparatchik whose only job is to oversee glorified babysitting facilities be paid 200,000 a year?

How about we cap them at 40k a year?

Better yet, how about we get rid of the position altogether. 

31 In my Canadian province, all administrators receive their basic teacher's salary (at whatever level they have achieved) plus a stipend, which varies, depending on the number of students/teachers for whom they have responsibility. The unions have managed to negotiate a clause that allows an administrator, after leaving an administrative post, to keep the stipend, but only for one year; then it is back to the normal salary.  If we can do that, so can New Jersey.