Promises by Pennsylvania school boards will cost taxpayers millions
Promises by Pennsylvania school boards will cost taxpayers millions when superintendents leave for other jobs, retire or even die. An Altoona Mirror analysis of 447 Pennsylvania superintendents’ contracts shows that those promises rarely are in the form of the already-publicized salaries. Many costs occur after departure and while taxpayers compensate a new administrator. Payment for unused sick days can exceed a teacher’s annual salary. In addition to life insurance policies, free or discounted access to health care sometimes extends to spouses, even if the superintendent dies. “I think there has been, in the last decade, a remarkable increase in compensation, and that is primarily a reflection of the market and the fact that many school boards recognize an investment in leadership is worth it,” said Stinson Stroup, executive director of the Pennsylvania Association of School Administrators. The value of that leadership is cumbersome for the public to learn. The value of sick day bonuses is not readily available for school districts not limiting the payment. Contracts also refer to separate employment agreements. Obtaining some of the superintendent contracts was a challenge: about 50 Pennsylvania school districts are challenging or ignoring the Mirror’s request.
While residents pinch pennies for health care after employment, some also will pay for former superintendents to have free or cheap access to insurance until Medicare. That coverage could last many years because superintendents often qualify for early retirement programs. The health benefit usually extends to spouses and dependents. Some superintendents also have access to cash reimbursements in the event their insurance doesn’t cover an expense. The issue is a potentially explosive one as school boards and administrators pressure teachers to share the cost of health insurance. Pennsylvania school boards are not trying to hide superintendent compensation, said Tom Templeton, director of school personnel services for the Pennsylvania School Boards Association, which works with districts seeking new superintendents. He said boards trying to attract and retain administrators are attempting to create fair, reasonable and transparent compensation packages. The 447 contracts show that many districts pay superintendents’ tuition bills during employment, a few receive cars, and others are promised monthly travel stipends in addition to the 48.5 cents a mile allowed by the Internal Revenue Service. Superintendents already are guaranteed a subsidized state pension, but many also receive annual payments for a separate retirement plan. Then there are the sick days. While some school boards cap sick day value at several thousand dollars, many administrators will leave their jobs with at least $20,000 dollars. Some receive that money in the process of taking a job with another district.
So why all the obscure ways of providing cash to these school administrators? Administrators and associations from across the country say it’s the method used to retain good leaders while avoiding public backlash against pay hikes. There is little oversight or restrictions for superintendent compensation in Pennsylvania. When it comes to superintendents, most of the regulation involves hiring, termination or length of employment. There are no limits on payment or the method of compensation. Some in Minnesota say the salary cap that state tried caused widespread use of creative compensation, which continued after removal of the cap. Minnesota’s auditor general blasted the compensation trend after a 2003 investigation. Charlie Kyte, executive director Minnesota Association of School Administrators, said there was some movement in his state toward a more salary-based compensation. “The hardest thing for a school board in terms of salaries for top executives is having a person there doing the job and getting a significant salary increase,” Kyte said. “People see the $25,000 increase and beat up the superintendent and school board over that.” The public pressure to keep pay down makes retention difficult without benefits that don’t directly impact salary.
Altoona Mirror By Jay M. Young
[Editor’s Note: The 2003 report on Minnesota superintendent contracts is below. The NSBA resource at the second link is about considerations for school boards in the superintendent hiring process. The articles discuss the market realities but warn of the kind of questions and criticism school boards should expect over issues like this.]
Minnesota Auditor’s report
Leadership Insider on superintendent hiring