greymom

Tue, Nov 16, 2010 : 9:08 a.m.

I also want to say I am a lot more then a custodian- I am a mentor, I have helped kids when hurt, or crying, I listen and give support. I make sure kids are safe. The list could go on but all of these things the Board doesn't even consider all the extras we do in our job, we are by far more then just custodians- we are part of the village that helps raise and educate the children!!!! So, no we are not paid based on what all our talents and skills are because I should be paid what a teacher, counselor and so on get paid!

greymom

Tue, Nov 16, 2010 : 7:32 a.m.

Gild- we were told we had to come up with two million dollar savings or our jobs were gone- we didn't have a choice on our income- get the facts before making comments! We simply had to save our jobs at a huge cost to all of us!!! We lost 8% plus 46 cents an hour plus the 3% the state took. Plus we lost over 1/2 our sick time, plus gave up 1 or 2 weeks of vacation, plus pay a ton most on medical and co-pays! We didn't have a choice, we need our jobs. I have twenty years in the District, so you have No idea what we have gone through!

ViSHa

Tue, Nov 16, 2010 : 6:55 a.m.

also, it's almost $15,000 more than Plymouth/Canton. it almost smacks of one-upmanship---"we are the best so we have to pay the most".

greymom

Tue, Nov 16, 2010 : 6:54 a.m.

I am not saying someone that voted yes should be President!! I just feel that for many year our president main concern has been special ed which I get, but that is not our only issue of concern!!!

YpsiLivin

Mon, Nov 15, 2010 : 10:42 p.m.

Gild said: You make whatever salary your talent, education and experience can command. The problem here is that the board of education has determined how much the candidate's talent, education and experience are worth without actually knowing who the candidate is. A reward of this kind should be offered only after the right person has demonstrated his or her talent, education and experience.

CincoDeMayo

Mon, Nov 15, 2010 : 7:59 p.m.

This is so offensive. I have not been able to write because I am still in shock. I think that the BOE expects this outrage to dissipate. Quoting some of glacialerratic's research: As reported in the Ann Arbor Chronicle (http://annarborchronicle.com/2010/11/07/aaps-sets-superintendent-salary-range/)-- William Newman of Ray & Associates, the search firm hired by the Board.....also challenged the board to address the public perception directly, and acknowledged that many people in the community will be surprised by the number, thinking, How can somebody be worth three, four, ten times what I make? Still, Newman said, the market for superintendent salaries has held up even though many districts are making significant cuts.... The search firm, the BOE, all of those involved in this decision, expected this outrage - and it is okay with them. Hopefully people made it to the board meeting. Even if the BOE presents it as something that can not be changed, we can have an influence. And, our opinions can still be heard. Keep writing to them. Do not vote again for those who voted in favor of this. They may expect this outrage, but hopefully it will be more fierce and longer lasting than they expected. Continuing the quote from glacialerratic's research: He counseled that "the public outcry happens in the opposite direction as well, when a really good superintendent leaves the district for a larger salary elsewhere. I am a firm believer that money is not the overriding incentive for hard working, qualified personnel. When Ann Arbor gets a qualified, hard-working superintendent, THEN increase the pay in accordance with their effort and results. If they are that good, we can give them a larger increase. Newman, of the search firm being used by the BOE, forgot the other reason there is a public outcry - when a community gets an administrator that is not qualified, and/or is overpaid, and then leaves the district with a buyout package. Use common sense BOE - hire someone who wants the job, who is willing to show you their work, and, who expects to be paid based on the work that they actually do. This salary inflation is ridiculous. And, if it is true that the consultant's pay is based on the salary of the position being filled, I think that a lawsuit brought on by us taxpayers is in order.

magnumpi

Mon, Nov 15, 2010 : 11:15 a.m.

@greymom. are you saying you think one of the members who voted "yes" to the increase should be president (aside from the current president)?

greymom

Mon, Nov 15, 2010 : 9:25 a.m.

Andy Thomas voted no, please know he puts out the e-mail that he is told to. Deb M. main concern has always been Special Ed. Folks you need to look at who voted for the increase, not the three that said not. Personally I say one of them should run for President. I wish I lived in Ann Arbor, sorry can't afford it with the big pay cut from the District. Maybe one day!!!

gild

Sun, Nov 14, 2010 : 11:40 p.m.

A lot of the comments here smack of jealousy. "If such-and-such a union is making less money, the superintendent shouldn't be making more." Guess what? You make whatever salary your talent, education and experience can command. Want to make a school superintendent's salary? Go get yourself the qualifications needed to do a school superintendent's job.

Mick52

Sun, Nov 14, 2010 : 8:59 p.m.

I see the vast majority of people posting believe the BOE's decision was a poor one. Too many to read, so I am sorry if I am wrong, but I wonder if any board member is reading (I am sure they are) and why they do not comment to try to convince us why this was a good idea. I have always felt that if an organization needs to hire a "consultant" to do its work, they are lacking in the knowledge it takes to be in management. I think these companies created the need themselves when they started springing up. I prefer management, leadership who can do the job they were given and not have to get someone else, at a price, to do it for them. And remember, if the salary if jacked up much higher than what Mr. Roberts made, then we will see the same thing after this next one. Another oddity. Why not put the salary where Mr. Roberts was, or lower and see if the new person can earn (is worthy) of more. Time and time again we see people in positions of authority that do not have the ability to hold the position. Especially in the public sector. Heck in this economy, put the pay at any level and you are going to get hundreds of applications.

YpsiLivin

Sun, Nov 14, 2010 : 7:52 p.m.

I don't understand why school districts don't make contingency plans for their top leadership before the superintendent announces s/he is leaving. By not doing any kind of succession planning, the district is thrown into disarray every time the superintendent leaves. Then they're forced to conduct an expensive "executive search" led by vulture consultants who are simply looking to enrich themselves. If more planning were done on the part of the board, when a superintendent leaves the backup - who is already on staff, familiar with the district, and reports directly to the board - takes over and the backup (not the superintendent) gets replaced. The board has time to examine each candidate for the open position and can dispense with executive search firms and employment consultants altogether. Under an arrangement like this, the superintendent would always understand that the dreaded "executive search" won't stop a board from replacing him/her for failure to perform, and the superintendent is replaceable on a moment's notice because his/her replacement is already on staff.

Tex Treeder

Sun, Nov 14, 2010 : 7:20 p.m.

Cost does not equal value.

magnumpi

Sun, Nov 14, 2010 : 7:12 p.m.

Dr. I Emsayin is correct, parents are frustrated! And there is a disconnect. Sadly I think it will be the kids who suffer as frustrated parents are less likely to donate time and/or money. Parent involvement is down in my children's elementary school. I also have sympathy for the person who takes this Super job--they will be coming in behind the eight ball by this situation created by the board.

proudparent

Sun, Nov 14, 2010 : 1:24 p.m.

This is exactly why i didnt vote for mexicotte. The whole board needs to be revamped. They keep voting to lower workers salaries and give more to the people who dont have any way in making AAPS run. The superintendant doesnt make the schools run, the teachers and everyone else involes make it run. The board makes me so mad. They have completely ruined some peoples lives already with outsourcing transportation, whats next. Pay the people who really make things work around here, not 1 man or woman.

Momma G

Sun, Nov 14, 2010 : 11:22 a.m.

@eastsidemon, I thoroughly agree with you. BOE better start cleaning house with their overpaid administrators who don't do their jobs. @salineguy1, AAPS has some very capable teachers who could make great superintendents and be more apt to stick around, too. How often have our past superintendent's actually visited the school buildings to see how their "district" is truly being run? Do any of the central administrators really know what is being done at the building level i.e. office professionals, custodians, teachers, lunch supervisors - I don't think so. If they knew they would be more aware of how to make changes and to help with these positions. Oh that's right they depend on the principals to inform them - wrong. That's where they need to clean house so they can afford to pay a "good" superintendent their due (after it is proven they are "good") not before.

Dr. I. Emsayin

Sun, Nov 14, 2010 : 9:33 a.m.

Parents of children in AAPS are frustrated across the board. They care about the quality of education for their children no matter where they fall on the learning curve. The BOE is particularly concerned about underachieving students. There is a disconnect between what the BOE is focused on and on what the community members are focused. If your child is on the "gifted/talented" spectrum (as many parents assume their children are) they will not find new programs at the middle school level to address that. If your child would do best with vocational education, the AAPS is not increasing that within the district. Many hands-on courses are being cut or are dwindling, partially because at the high school level there are so many new state requirements that students who most need vocational programs can't take them because they need to make up credits in required subjects. It would be great if the vocational programs could award credit for some of the required courses where similar subject matter is covered. I would think there is a good deal of science and math in some of the hands-on classes. Other districts have found ways to maintain vocational education while graduating students. And other districts have found ways to have more students pass algebra courses. How do they do it?

YpsiLivin

Sun, Nov 14, 2010 : 8:44 a.m.

DonBee said: I wonder how Deb Mexicotte will feel knowing that if the millage fails, that it was her vote that decided the issue? Since Deb Mexicotte has not seen fit to explain herself (at least Andy Thomas, who voted no has spoken), I would suggest that she's not the least bit worried about how the next millage will turn out. It would be better for everyone if the next election result she pondered was tied to the recall of the yahoos who voted for this outrage. The voters of Ann Arbor have the opportunity to rectify this colossal mistake by removing these four board members from office, and the sooner the better. The "consultants" they hired are simply driving up the cost of superintendents in a market that can't support them, much like real estate agents did to housing in the late 90's. I guarantee that this search firm won't deliver a qualified consultant, who is willing to stay in the job without additional incentives and longevity bonuses. Get rid of the consultants; get rid of this board. And don't think for one minute that this decision has no impact on the neighboring school districts; it certainly does. After all, these geniuses just set the "going rate" for superintendents in this area.

beaumont_slave

Sat, Nov 13, 2010 : 9:03 p.m.

They have a lot of nerve.. after privitizing buses janitorial. the state takes 3% more from teachers. this after they give concessions. pay more for their insurance.. and to top it off the state isnt even sure they will have insurance if they retire, and this misquided school board has the nerve to pay this wage. Ann Arbor will no longer be a school system people want their kids to go to.

stunhsif

Sat, Nov 13, 2010 : 8:48 p.m.

@ J.A.Pieper, Could not have said it better. I will vote NO on any county wide millage plus my own local school district until these folks get a clue about what is going on down here at ground level.

J. A. Pieper

Sat, Nov 13, 2010 : 7:20 p.m.

I can't believe that the BOE is so ignorant about the financial situation in Michigan these days! And yes, even here in Ann Arbor, people are struggling financially. Taxpayers take note - if the AAPS can afford to do this, they do not need anymore of our tax dollars through any kind of millage. All the other districts around us voted down the county wide millage, and seeing what Ann Arbor is doing with their $$$$ now is just going to make more people vote NO in the future. Ann Arbor voters, I understand the value put on education, but at what cost to everyone who lives here? Some of you may be able to absorb higher taxes, hence you vote to support further funds to a school district that continues to waste tax dollars. Many more of us are barely surviving in this economy, and we are wondering how we can afford to keep our homes here. Maybe those board members can provide the additional $65,000 from their own pockets, but most of just can't support this decision.

jcj

Sat, Nov 13, 2010 : 6:29 p.m.

@Peter I agree to this extent people who think this is a non issue might be a bigger problem!

tmo

Sat, Nov 13, 2010 : 3:57 p.m.

Anyone interested in discussing the matter via Facebook I've created a community page: http://www.facebook.com/pages/AAPS-Board-of-Education-Recall/145927015455384?v=app_2373072738&ref=sgm#!/pages/AAPS-Board-of-Education-Recall/145927015455384?v=wall

Peter

Sat, Nov 13, 2010 : 2:57 p.m.

this is not newsworthy, we have much more important problems to deal with.

jcj

Sat, Nov 13, 2010 : 9:07 a.m.

Here are some emails for board members. I am going to copy and paste these post and send to each. Everyone should do the same. thomas3@aaps.k12.mi.us lightfos@aaps.k12.mi.us steadc@aaps.k12.mi.us mexicott@aaps.k12.mi.us patalan@aaps.k12.mi.us baskett@aaps.k12.mi.us

glacialerratic

Sat, Nov 13, 2010 : 8:46 a.m.

Perhaps not surprisingly, this vote took place at a study session, not a regular Board meeting. The session was held at Balas, announced on the BOE website as a "Superintendent Profile Finalization," and not videotaped for CTN.

tmo

Sat, Nov 13, 2010 : 8:26 a.m.

For as much as the BOE are thinking about students and teachers, I really don't think they are worrying about the next millage. That would suggest a conscience. I think the message the community needs to loudly deliver to such insulated administrators is much more personal. Option one - reverse their decision. Option two - have any increases in Superintendent salary come out of the existing budget for Board member salaries. Option three - face a recall (seriously).

eastsidemom

Sat, Nov 13, 2010 : 7:35 a.m.

Administrators have become more of the problem in public schools. They tenure bad teachers, protect bad teachers, harass good teachers and then suck all the money out of the school's budget. And yet a good leader can make such a difference. Sadly, there is a decided lack of talent at the top in education in this state. Pick one good one in charge of the whole county...then they might be worth this pay.

AlphaAlpha

Fri, Nov 12, 2010 : 11:49 p.m.

"[The Board of Ed.] reached our decision...after discussion...with...[consultant] Ray and Associates." Perfect! Now they can blame the consultant for any bad decisions. Aren't consultants great?

AlphaAlpha

Fri, Nov 12, 2010 : 11:35 p.m.

Excellent ideas Mr. Stevens - on all counts.

Anne Jackson

Fri, Nov 12, 2010 : 9:56 p.m.

There is a poll at the end of the annarbor.com story. Currently, out of Total Votes: 1,351, 84% do not approve of this increase. (11% in favor, 3% undecided.) I think this tells the story that some members of the school board are not representing the Ann Arbor community. I, too, take issue with seeing Ann Arbor as a "market" and the need to match other similar "markets." We have struggling schools and have lowered the benefits and salaries of our employees. We need someone who values the staff that directly affects our students every day. A superintendent oversees things and sets a tone. A creative, hardworking person yes; a highly paid, unknown entity for Ann Arbor, NO.

DonBee

Fri, Nov 12, 2010 : 8:40 p.m.

The board could just stop publishing any more of the ads, wait a couple of months, and start over, returning any applications that were submitted. But they are invested personally in what they have done. They have been led down the garden path by the guy who is creating the market for Superintendents. In meeting after meeting parents and community members told the consultants, no to the top range salary. The consultants told the parents they did not know what they were talking about. When it came time to vote, the consultants won and the community lost. A true public servant would realize their error and correct it at the next board meeting, releasing the consultant at the same time. But, I doubt the board has will to do that. I wonder how Deb Mexicotte will feel knowing that if the millage fails, that it was her vote that decided the issue?

glacialerratic

Fri, Nov 12, 2010 : 6:23 p.m.

As reported in the Ann Arbor Chronicle (http://annarborchronicle.com/2010/11/07/aaps-sets-superintendent-salary-range/) William Newman of Ray & Associates, the search firm hired by the Board, urged the Board consider the one longevity bonus year Roberts received as part of his base pay for the purpose of comparison, which would have made his salary $205,000. He also challenged the board to address the public perception directly, and acknowledged that many people in the community will be surprised by the number, thinking, How can somebody be worth three, four, ten times what I make? Still, Newman said, the market for superintendent salaries has held up even though many districts are making significant cuts. He counseled that the public outcry happens in the opposite direction as well, when a really good superintendent leaves the district for a larger salary elsewhere. The reason that the market for superintendent salaries has held up is in large part due to the influence and work of firms such as Ray & Associates, which recommendand directly benefit fromlarge increases in base salary. Newmans cynical strategy is intended to disguise the actual salary inflation. The Rhino Times (Greensboro, NC, March 10, 2008) reports Newmans presentation to the Guilford County (North Carolina) Board of Education: Newmansaid the county will have to pay enough to prevent another school district from hiring away the new superintendent. He said the school board should not worry about public reaction to the salary, because it would get a stronger negative reaction if it couldn't find a superintendent or lost one quickly to another district. "Your community will always react to the salary," Newman said. "So what?" http://greensboro.rhinotimes.com/Articles-c-2008-03-07-175420.112113-School-Board-Haggles-With-Headhunters.html Sound familiar? The Board of Education, and citizens of Ann Arbor, are being played.

jcj

Fri, Nov 12, 2010 : 5:33 p.m.

If you keep telling people ie the board and possible superintendents how much they are worth they start to believe it. Its like watching the antique road show. The "experts" tell people their item is worth so much but none of the "experts" would pay with their money. And none of our great leaders on the board would spend so frivolously if they were spending their money.

jcj

Fri, Nov 12, 2010 : 5:18 p.m.

I would love to have a home or a car to sell this school board. Something tells me I could get rich with their lack of knowledge about negotiating. Thanks Stephen Landes According to Andy Thomas "As part of the process for selecting a superintendent, it is necessary to post and advertise the position, including a salary range. Without this information, many potential candidates would be reluctant to apply. In order to move the process forward, therefore, it was first necessary to reach a decision regarding salary." HOGWASH!!! Take this to the bank! All you would have to do is post that Ann Arbor has an opening and you would be overrun with applicants. And if there are those out there that think they are worth so much let them find it elsewhere! We should be staying in house for this! Sometimes I wonder where some people around here were "educated".

jcj

Fri, Nov 12, 2010 : 5:10 p.m.

I would love to have a home or a car to sell this school board. Something tells me I could get rich with their lack of knowledge about negotiating.

Wystan Stevens

Fri, Nov 12, 2010 : 3:31 p.m.

So now the new guy gets a quarter million -- every year? After a couple of years, he(she) should be set for life. Now, I've just had a brilliant flash of insight: I know how the Ann Arbor School District can save itself a cool million bucks! We'll just postpone the tedious hiring chores for four years -- operating in the interim under a committee system, or with volunteers. Money in the bank! That will give the Board, in its copious unwisdom, plenty of time to consider applicants for this plum position. Let them select about a dozen acceptable geniuses, and then hold an "auction." Put all the eager beavers together in a nice room somewhere, feed them well, and have them bid against each other for the job -- start at $150,000, say, and have them work the salary down from there. (Better set the floor at about a hundred thou. If more than one candidate remains at that sum, have them draw straws to determine a winner.) Ann Arbor needs to stop making kings out of administrators. We don't need to hire a "star." Spend the money on teachers and kids.

Stephen Landes

Fri, Nov 12, 2010 : 2:48 p.m.

I wrote to the BOE to express my concerns. Following is the reply from Andy Thomas, BOE secretary, with my original note trailing: Dear Mr. Landes: Thank you for expressing your concern regarding the proposed salary range for the new superintendent for Ann Arbor Public Schools. This is a matter which the Board of Education has taken very seriously. We reached our decision only after long and careful discussion among ourselves as well as with our search team from Ray and Associates. As part of the process for selecting a superintendent, it is necessary to post and advertise the position, including a salary range. Without this information, many potential candidates would be reluctant to apply. In order to move the process forward, therefore, it was first necessary to reach a decision regarding salary. The salary range for the superintendent was discussed at open meetings of the Ann Arbor Board of Education on a number of occasions, going back to August of this year. There has been a significant amount of discussion among Trustees on this issue, with various opinions stated. The Board agreed to engage in a wide-ranging search of highly-qualified candidates, and to offer a competitive salary to the candidate ultimately selected as the best match for the District. The Boards decision regarding the salary range to be used in the posting was reached during the meeting of November 3. We have already begun the process of posting and promoting the position, with a tentative closing date around the end of January 2011. In order to meet this target, it is necessary to begin actively recruiting candidates during late November and early December so as to avoid the distractions surrounding the holidays. If we were to reconsider the salary range at this time, it could have the effect of significantly delaying the process, and could cause confusion and dissatisfaction among potential candidates who might already have been contacted by our search firm. At some point, the Board must make a decision and proceed based on that decision. We reached that point during our meeting of November 3. Once again, thank you for expressing your concern regarding this topic. Andy Thomas Secretary Ann Arbor Board of Education > I've been a voting resident of Ann Arbor for 40 years. My general > practice has been to vote "yes" on millage requests for our schools. > Well, as of now, you can no longer count on my vote because your recent > decision on a superintendent's salary range is simply inexcusable and > demonstrates your inability to properly manage the money we've sent to > you. > In an economy and environment where many people are working for less and > many people aren't even working I cannot understand how you can propose an > increase in salary for this position. My expectation is that you seek a > superintendent at a LOWER salary than Roberts was paid. Whatever salary > reduction you are expecting from teachers and staff should be applied to > the superintendent position, too. > As for qualifications I think you misunderstand what this community needs. > We do not need someone billed as a "superstar". We need a competent > manager who can put more resources into the classroom and less in into > staff and overhead -- especially at the top of the house. Once that > person is here and demonstrating progress for our schools we can address a > salary increase, but not before. > The days of spending more and more while expecting the community to just > rally 'round at election time are over. Go seek a superintendent we can > afford -- do all of your job, not just the fun "spending" part. > > Stephen Landes > Chief Tobacconist of the Arcadia Mixture of Ann Arbor 1260 > Barrister Road Ann Arbor, MI 48105-2820

jacquelyn wright

Fri, Nov 12, 2010 : 2:07 p.m.

Is this the "every one else is doing it" answer to fiscal responsibility? Overpaying Todd Roberts did not keep him here.If every school district continues to up the ante where does it end?

melgo

Fri, Nov 12, 2010 : 10:29 a.m.

Well not so long ago a Big City in Michigan went looking for a schoolsuperintendent...with the salary offr of $ 260,000...the "last Suer" ONLY worked for $ 187,000. The new super was on the "job" for 6-8 months when the borad had to let "HER-HIM' go.But the super sued for the remainder of the pay on the contract. SO WHO GOT THE EDUCATION...No the children

kathryn

Fri, Nov 12, 2010 : 8:43 a.m.

So, have you all sent your comments directly to the school board members? Mine: "This is a SERIOUS mistake. It is terrible public relations for your community, and, even worse, it will poison relations with the teachers and support staff who have taken financial cuts so that you could continue to provide services to the students of Ann Arbor. You may think this will attract a "better" superintendent into the position (not necessarily true), but you will find that your new leader will be handicapped by ill will and resentment on the part of the community and AAPS employees. Set a reasonable, regionally appropriate pay rate, then interview widely. There is someone good out there who will work for an appropriate pay rate. "

beaumont_slave

Fri, Nov 12, 2010 : 8:30 a.m.

Amazing.. just simply amazing.. the whole state is suffering.. and they vote to do this.. sorta follows suit with the u of m salaries. what college coach needs to be paid that much. and the school dist. has no idea what is coming down the line with cuts from the new adm.(the nerd). Any superintendent worth their salt would not need this pay if they were truly involved with the students and cared about the school dist.

Stuart Brown

Thu, Nov 11, 2010 : 10:48 p.m.

Why are they even announcing the amount? Ann Arbor could easily get away with DOE (Depending On Experience). Let the people who want the job say what they want to start off negotiations. Then need to reset this process and start over.

Dan Rubenstein

Thu, Nov 11, 2010 : 10:46 p.m.

A2.com, it might be helpful if you could report on the consultant contract... several people have alleged the firm earns more if the position carries a higher salary. Is this true? If so, their recommendations would have to be taken with a rather sizable grain of salt.

tmo

Thu, Nov 11, 2010 : 10:21 p.m.

Tell the Board next Wed they are welcome to increase the Superintendent's salary by $65,000 by whacking that much off their own salaries. We'll see who's in favor of it then.

Kai Petainen

Thu, Nov 11, 2010 : 9:38 p.m.

glacial.... http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fsb/bestplaces/2008/top100/index.html In 2008, of the Best Places to Live and Launch... Ann Arbor came in 42nd, Eugene came in at 96th place. So both cities are great. With a great quality of life. Since both flyers have similar language... perhaps the jobs are similar? But... according to a cost of living calculator. http://www.bestplaces.net/col/default.aspx a $245,000 job in Ann Arbor, should be $268,717 in Eugene, Oregon. or... the $175,000 job in Eugene, should be $159,544 in Ann Arbor, Michigan. (actually, the cost of the job in Ann Arbor would be $245,000 + benefits + fees to the agency with the similar job advertisements)

ViSHa

Thu, Nov 11, 2010 : 9:22 p.m.

good point, sbbuilder, about the ripple effect. unless i misread something in the article, it is amazing that all this was discussed and decided in one meeting, but i suppose they needed to get the flyer out.

walker101

Thu, Nov 11, 2010 : 9:22 p.m.

I think you need to pay them about $350,000.00 yearly with a bonus of 10% (like Google), this town is in a spiral heading downwards. Love it.

glacialerratic

Thu, Nov 11, 2010 : 9:16 p.m.

As long as you're all up, take a look at Ray & Associates' search flyer for the superintendent of Eugene, Oregon ($175k): http://rayassoc.com/job-details.php?ID=82 Note the same language as the Ann Arbor flyer, especially under "Leadership Qualities." It all comes from the same can. And we're paying for this nonsense?

sbbuilder

Thu, Nov 11, 2010 : 9:15 p.m.

Why not turn all this angst into positive energy? Show up at the next board meeting at the library. Some others have posted that they will be there. I'll be going as well. We no longer have kids in the AA school system, but I sure as heck pay taxes here. This is a back-handed slap in the face to every single person working for the AA public schools who took a pay cut in the last year. This pay increase has a ripple effect thoughout the administrators (of which we possibly can't have enough). They'll be first in line with their hands out. Golly, gee, look at the Super's salary. I guess mine needs a little improvement too. I'm not sure we need so many layers of administrators anyway. See all the truly concerned folks at the meeting!

Stephen Landes

Thu, Nov 11, 2010 : 9:11 p.m.

Is any superintendent worth $14.85 per student per year? I think not.

glacialerratic

Thu, Nov 11, 2010 : 8:59 p.m.

Here's url to the Board of Ed search flyer: http://www.aaps.k12.mi.us/super.search/files/searchflyer_opt.pdf "...salary will be in the range of $245,000" (sic). Oh, and "Ann Arbor is frequently listed as one of the best cities to raise a family in the nation as well as an attractive place to retire." Spot the misplaced prepositional phrase. Is this the way to represent "a world-class system of innovative teaching and learning"? And this is what we get for hiring a search firm?

Aaron Wolf

Thu, Nov 11, 2010 : 8:49 p.m.

I'm offended as well. The AAPS Board needs to go watch Dan Pink's talk at TED.com All the old ideas of $ as motivation are garbage. It's a fair motivator up to the point of meeting basic needs, but beyond that it actually damages quality. Real motivation comes from purpose, autonomy, and mastering challenges. If we want the best superintendent, we advertise that the job will have more autonomy (that's what's probably most lacking in these positions among the three real motivators). If there's an applicant who would pass that up for more money, we don't want that person!

local

Thu, Nov 11, 2010 : 8:33 p.m.

Joe Average, I support you, but i get a sense that the BOE is going to do what they want no matter what. What a way to set the stage for the next leader of AAPS, a no win situation. I don't blame the other members of the district for being upset by this news, remember, they gave back money to help save programs, etc... I guess what the money was really being saved for was hiring an expensive new superintendent.

joe average

Thu, Nov 11, 2010 : 8:23 p.m.

So the next Board of Education meeting is 11/17 at the downtown library? They should make arrangements now to move it to a larger venue; say, Hill Auditorium. I'll be there. And I'll bring a date.

Go Blue

Thu, Nov 11, 2010 : 8:21 p.m.

This is obviously one school board that needs a HUGE reality check. Pure lunacy and completely out of touch with our world today. Michigan is back to number FIVE in the country with foreclosures. Hello - hello - hellooooooooooo out there. Take the blinders off, walk through the city neighborhoods - look at all the foreclosures. Where is this funding supposed to come from - the ghosts living in those houses? Seems to me a mega recall campaign needs to be happening right about now. Until those in positions that manage the purse strings get it right, they need to be removed. Obviously, with that type of pay hike, they are not doing their job.

Kai Petainen

Thu, Nov 11, 2010 : 8:20 p.m.

It'll be fascinating to see if a local person is hired in a national search. And if a a local person is hired, it'll be interesting to see what political connections / friends they have already in Ann Arbor that helped them get in. I trust this is not the case. Quite a few years ago, I was watching a graduation at Grand Valley State University, and it was dealing with the education degree. The valedictorian stood up and spoke about how happy he was to get a job teaching (i can't remember if it was for highschool or elementary). But then he thanked his mom, as she sat on the main stage, behind the podium... for she was a high ranked official within the education program in that region -- and she spoke in that same ceremony. perhaps he was a genius, or perhaps he was great with kids, or perhaps? For all the students that worked hard in that program and never got a job afterwards, i have wondered what they thought of the student who spoke, who got the job, and had the fortune of having his mom in the school system.

bruno_uno

Thu, Nov 11, 2010 : 8:13 p.m.

"The definition of stupidity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results." Albert Einstein

cook1888

Thu, Nov 11, 2010 : 8:07 p.m.

This is one of the major reasons Republicans did so well in this election. The perception that government bureaucrats do not care how much they spend because they think the trough is bottomless and when it is not they claim we are not taxed enough. Keep track and vote these people and their thinking out! Do not ask people at the lower pay scales to make the big sacrifices and then throw this in their face. We are in terrible economic times. Everyone needs to sacrifice and I'll bet there are loads of qualified people willing to work for less than this outrageous sum.

skigrl50

Thu, Nov 11, 2010 : 7:49 p.m.

1. First of all, who in the world would ever want to be the superintendent of AAPS?? 2. Hire Rossi back... Afterall she was the one that said we can build it but we can't afford to run it, referring to Skyline. But Fornero and that school board convinced the rest of Ann Arbor otherwise. And you know what, Rossi was right!!! She is one smart lady!!

stunhsif

Thu, Nov 11, 2010 : 7:44 p.m.

Ridiculous of course. Now your AAPS employees are going to line up demanding you give them back their miniscule givebacks. Already have seen it in a post on this thread. Good job school board, think recall folks for those that voted in favor of the increase.

eastsidemom

Thu, Nov 11, 2010 : 7:42 p.m.

Obscene...we listen how we all have to tighten our belts, cut social security to save the tax cuts and reduce the deficit and then we keep hearing about how very important superintendents are...so important they need a $65,000 dollar raise...Obscene

townie54

Thu, Nov 11, 2010 : 7:40 p.m.

saying you get what you pay for might have been true 20 years ago.In this economy you dont have to pay this much.Post the job for $190,000 and you will have all kinds of candidates that you can sift through.Someone that would do just as good a job because they wanted to prove themselves and would be glad to make that much.This kind of ceo worship went out with the 3 martini lunch.Again Ann Arbor ranking officials in la la land

Duane Collicott

Thu, Nov 11, 2010 : 7:30 p.m.

Michelle Rhee is available. She'd be worth it.

Speechless

Thu, Nov 11, 2010 : 7:25 p.m.

"... The shock has worn off...." Glad to hear you're no longer feeling like... me.

teacher

Thu, Nov 11, 2010 : 7:12 p.m.

The shock has worn off. I guess the superintendent will need that extra money because bringing them into the community with a controversy right from the start is not likely to mean a long tenure within the district. Do people remember the former EMU president who had to have a new larger more acceptable for entertaining home built on the university's dime? The controversy never ended so his time at EMU did. The school board is not doing the next superintendent any favor by front ending this salary. I agree that it would have been far better connect any increase to an already very generous salary to tangible improvements within the district especially at a time when the district has asked other employees to make concessions. Ann Arbor is a prestigious district. I am not sure I buy the argument that they could not find an qualified candidate at the former superintendent's salary. In many other districts in our county superintendents do multiple jobs for a lot less money. Ann Arbor has the funds to support the superintendent and the work that needs to be done with many other highly paid administrative positions as well. It doesn't make sense more support and more money versus more work with less support for less money. Perhaps Ann Arbor Public Schools has too many funds if this is how they choose to use them.

tennisfanatic

Thu, Nov 11, 2010 : 7:06 p.m.

Unbelievable.................... I am not shocked nor surprised, just completely disgusted with the board members who voted to approve this. Teachers and other staff have taken cuts for many years, despite what is typically misreported-- and now this. It is beyond irresponsible. Congratulations AAPS BOE!! You have ensured further financial woes for the district and have created a contentious relationship with anyone who agrees to take this position and the staff of AAPS-- before they are even hired. Bravo!

Fred&Barney

Thu, Nov 11, 2010 : 7:01 p.m.

Hey Ann Arbor, you elect morons to run your city and your schools, deal with it.

JimFuester

Thu, Nov 11, 2010 : 6:52 p.m.

While I have always been pretty o.k. with paying taxes, as I love living (was born and raise here actually) here in Ann Arbor... this increase in pay, which comes from my taxes paid, BEFORE a qualified applicant has even been identified or the process begun to identify candidates, is perplexing to say the least! Unbelievable actually, except that it seems to have happened already. Like many others have said- 'What were they thinking!?' I cast my vote with those who are aghast at the School Board offering up such a HEFTY increase in pay BEFORE the results of a search have indicated any serious lapse in competitive pay for the position. And $65-70,000 is a heck of a serious raise in anyone's book and frankly I find it just this side of impossible to believe that Ann Arbor is THAT far outta whack in the compensation level for this position. While I strongly believe that all people involved in education of our youth are highly important, and mostly underpaid for their efforts, to increase this position salary ahead of the game is irresponsible on the part of the Board members who voted to approve it... especially in light of those of us who are getting by with making less. In my case, being in retail, I am getting by on a LOT less than in years past, barely getting by is how you'd term it currently. I also agree with those who've said it is NOT always about the money in securing a good candidate. There is so much more about this community to attract a good person to this district than simply money, and I feel the Board may have forgotten this?

Brian Kuehn

Thu, Nov 11, 2010 : 6:52 p.m.

Whatever happened to promoting from within? Is there no one in the AAPS capable of running a school district? Hiring someone from outside the area seems to only perpetuate the revolving door we have in this position. Better to have an "average" person connected to the local area than to hire a superstar who will provide a flash of brilliance and them move on to bigger or perceived better things.

Brad

Thu, Nov 11, 2010 : 6:40 p.m.

"One of the questions the candidates are asked is how good their negotiating skills are" I guess they should take a lead from the BOE: "180,000 per year?? That's preposterous!! We'll pay a quarter of a million and not a penny less! And we'll announce it to the public and the headhunters up front.". And they are responsible for educating our youth? We're so screwed.

teacher

Thu, Nov 11, 2010 : 6:25 p.m.

Wow! I am speechless.

Dawn Nelson

Thu, Nov 11, 2010 : 5:23 p.m.

Promoting from within would strengthen the sense of community. It is disheartening that it seems acceptable to perpetuate such socio-economic division. I agree with Tony Livingston that this community needs to consider the education of all the kids, not just the award winners. A pay increase for the superintendent is not what is needed, but rather an equitable distribution of resources for all the folks who are part of keeping our schools a meaningful and nurturing learning environment, from which all of the kids will benefit.

CynicA2

Thu, Nov 11, 2010 : 5:13 p.m.

Whew!!! How clueless can you be??? Time for a reality check, AABOE! Wake up and smell reality. The new guy should be paid no more than the last guy, until he proves himself worthy of more.

Roadman

Thu, Nov 11, 2010 : 5:03 p.m.

This is absolutely disgusting with the state of the economy locally and with so many residents going into bankruptcy or foreclosure.

Bertha Venation

Thu, Nov 11, 2010 : 5:01 p.m.

I agree with the other folks. That is WAY TOO much money considering the sacrifices the people at the grass roots level have made. When is the board going to get real??

antikvetch

Thu, Nov 11, 2010 : 4:52 p.m.

Maybe with a higher salary, we can pay a bigger Rossi Ray-Taylor buyout if it doesn't turn out right! Again!

ResidentAnvil

Thu, Nov 11, 2010 : 4:35 p.m.

I hear Doris Hope-Jackson is available! She'll probably do it for $50,000!

Mike

Thu, Nov 11, 2010 : 4:28 p.m.

The board is out of touch on this move. Communities all across America are hurting financially, making deep cuts. Last I heard Ann Arbor was discussing cutting programs and sports to balance their budget. I'm sure the State of Michigan is going to have to freeze spending or cut so where is the money coming from? If I had a dollar for every time some elected official said "it's only a small part of the overall budget", I'd be a millionaire. It's this kind of thinking and reckless spending that's gotten us in the deficit trouble we're facing as a nation. We can't keep printing money, we have to live within our means. For such a supposedly, overeducated populace it's hard to believe they can't grasp that simple concept. I want to own a million dollar home and drive a sports car, instead I purchase what I can afford and do the best I can with the money I have. If there's someone out there willing to pay that kind of money, let them work for them. You could find plenty of good candidates, like Todd Roberts for example, for what we were paying; in this economy maybe even less. Maybe the Board of Education is loaded and can afford to pay the extra instead of spending our tax dollars. It's always easier to spend someone else's money isn't it? These are probably the same people when they spend their own money they negotiate the best deal they can.....unbelieveable...........

Bill Kerans

Thu, Nov 11, 2010 : 4:23 p.m.

Im curious to know why the board feels that the proximity to a large research university has any bearing on what the K-12 superintendent is paid? And since when is Ann Arbor such a dismal gulag in which to live and work? Do we have to overpay, sort of like the Tigers apparently do to get good free agents to come to Detroit? Does the board think we need to offer something like combat pay to entice a competent administrator to work in Ann Arbor? Now, if we had a county-wide consolidated school district, eliminating much redundant educational administration, maybe that would be a district large and complex enough that I could buy the need for such an outsized executive salary. For a medium-size citys school district, I wonder if all the board is trying to buy is an outsized ego. From my years of living in Ann Arbor I always considered it one of the most attractive and desirable communities in the nation. In theory, we have one of the best school systems. And having a fine university in town only enhances the communitys appeal. Seems to me prospective superintendents would be breaking down the door for the chance to lead the Ann Arbor district. If anything, these factors argue that we should have to pay less to attract a top-flight administrator, not more.

Dr. I. Emsayin

Thu, Nov 11, 2010 : 4:20 p.m.

One of the questions the candidates are asked is how good their negotiating skills are; in other words, can they bargain a contract for teachers that saves the district money. Better that the new superintendent be a learned and wise educator who spends time in classrooms regularly and engages with teachers as they move toward improved achievement for their students. If the pay offered would attract someone who is pro-teacher, who has studied a subject other than education in depth, and has proven her/himself a profound educator, then that person may be worth the salary. AAPS has a poor history of vetting their hires fully, especially at the top levels, so hopefully the search firm will do a complete job of looking into the personality and history of the candidates. Get beyond the politics in this search.

DrLyon

Thu, Nov 11, 2010 : 4:08 p.m.

Would be better to hire several new teachers with the money. The race for Superintendent pay needs to slow down in an economy where teachers raises are not increased by this big a present.

ez12c

Thu, Nov 11, 2010 : 4:08 p.m.

I continue to be amazed at stories on Ann Arbor.com and reader's reactions. OK....hire an AFSCME janitor as superintendant! I love it!!!! He/she can run Ann Arbor School System better than any degreed individual. Why hasn't anybody else thought of that?? Bunch of stuffed suits with fancy letters next to their name... that's why. While we're at it....shut down that annoying university that eats up all the good services of Ann Arbor.

glacialerratic

Thu, Nov 11, 2010 : 4 p.m.

No, Mr. Feldscher, the increase in base pay is $70,000, not $65,000. In your article, Trustee Baskette refers to the $70,000 increase, an amount other trustees also used in the meeting. According to the Ann Arbor Chronicle, Mexicotte explained that Roberts was hired four years ago at $175,000, and his compensation remained at that level each year until he voluntarily took an 8% pay cut during the last school year. The Chronicle article goes on to say that since he was opposed to a salary increase in the current financial difficulties, the board him an additional $5,000 against the $13,000 health insurance plan he would have received had he not been insured under his wifes policy. Using the original hired in salary, or base pay, of $175,000 (before his voluntary pay cut), the proposed increase is $70,000, or 40%. If his actual last annual base pay salary was $161,000 ($175,000 minus 8%) the proposed starting salary for the new superintendent would be $84,000 or about 52% above the base pay of Roberts last year The next School Board meeting is November 17, 7 pm, at the Downtown Branch of the AA District Library.

Huron74

Thu, Nov 11, 2010 : 3:59 p.m.

Okay school board. Pay the best candidate you can find that salary. But...with the firm, nailed down stipulation that requires all goals, deadlines and budgets be met with no excuses accepted. And the contract is only good for two years. Then we'll see who will take it.

Rita

Thu, Nov 11, 2010 : 3:58 p.m.

It will probably be written into the superintendent's contract that if for any reason he/she gets let go, or leaves, they will walk away with half a million $$$$$$. Does anyone know why this seems to be standard procedure for area superintendents???

russellr

Thu, Nov 11, 2010 : 3:53 p.m.

Whoever makes up these salaries needs there head examined. Why can't the job pay $75,000 a year? You got rid of all these bus drivers to save money only to ruin there lifes and give one man there money. What a joke. Judgement day will come.

Elaine F. Owsley

Thu, Nov 11, 2010 : 3:50 p.m.

There was the same kind of talk about paying a coach for UM football a lot of money and look what happened with that choice. It's like a school yard chant "We pay our superintendent more than you do...."

Bulganzio

Thu, Nov 11, 2010 : 3:44 p.m.

Did the board just take a national search firm's word for the salary range, or did they try to determine what the rationships between performance (standarized test results, graduation rates, etc.) and the super's compensation? This "mid-range" solution is the readily defendable, easy way out. Try to do some critical thinking, why doncha.

FeebesMa

Thu, Nov 11, 2010 : 3:37 p.m.

And my understanding from reading this is this is just the base pay. Todd made an extra $60,000+ in extra pay (transportation etc). I don't get paid to drive to work, but apparently they do. So this will really turn into a $300,000+ a year job. Two teachers or more cut for that! Really?!?

tmo

Thu, Nov 11, 2010 : 3:29 p.m.

Have school board members ever been recalled in the AA District?

dogpaddle

Thu, Nov 11, 2010 : 3:24 p.m.

I, too, want to know how the district who was making cuts and sacrifices (people and programs), merging transportation systems and asking all of the staff (teachers, admin and all of the wonderful support staff) to either leave or make financial sacrifices(including Dr. Roberts), along with the state asking veteran staff to take early retirement to save money, where is this extra $65,000 coming from?

Sam

Thu, Nov 11, 2010 : 3:21 p.m.

Why stop at $265,000? Use the same logic as minimum wage, no limits! I say pay this person $400,000 and give them FREE health care, FREE retirement, FREE housing....Heck, look how you will be the leaders in the state making the next opening worth $450,000! Most of those agreeing with the raise on this blog probably don't pay property taxes in Ann Arbor.

YpsiLivin

Thu, Nov 11, 2010 : 2:54 p.m.

Ethics Advocate said: "So how would you explain chosen changes of employers by athletic coaches..." I don't dispute that people will change jobs for more money. The question isn't whether you can find someone to take that salary; the question is whether you'll get what you pay for by flashing a lot of cash. In this case, I'm saying that AAPS won't draw qualified candidates by offering more money. They'll draw far more unqualified candidates who are just sniffing around for better bone to chew on. Worse yet, this backwards board will actually go ahead and hire one of them. For those candidates who are TRULY qualified, a high salary isn't as much of a draw as you might think. In fact, the most highly qualified candidates for the job are LEAST LIKELY to seek out new employment or respond to "executive search firms" because they're happy where they are, doing what they're doing for the district(s) they're working for right now. For these people, NO amount of money will make them seriously consider switching employers even if they would perform flawlessly in the position. The AAPS board will get a bunch of job-jumpers and ladder-climbers who are looking for good resume fodder. If the "perfect candidate" lasts even five years, the school board will be lucky. AAPS would have been much better off at least trying to locate an internal candidate. They could have saved a bundle, too and found someone who was willing to stay in the position. If you haven't already done so (and by your comment, I'm assuming that you haven't) read Drive: The Surprising Truth About What Motivates Us by Daniel Pink. The book explains quite eloquently why using more money as either an enticement, a motivator or reward can be a shockingly bad and exceptionally counterproductive strategy, especially when the skill set required for a position involves substantial decision-making responsibilities, creativity, genuine leadership and no significant physical risk.

Dexterdriver

Thu, Nov 11, 2010 : 2:53 p.m.

This salary competition for PUBLIC jobs is part of an insidious, bankrupting of the hard working taxpayers. You can't convince me that you can't find good administrative candidates, perhaps very locally, who are willing to work for far less than these mega-salaries, dangled to lure high falluting candidates sought out by expensive national search organizations. The same thing goes for public university presidents, football coaches, school principals, etc. Somebody's got to put the brakes on this waste of money. It is shear MONEY MADNESS!

Kyle Feldscher

Thu, Nov 11, 2010 : 2:48 p.m.

@glacialerratic During his last year in the district, Todd Roberts base salary was $180,000, which is the number the $65,000 increase is based on. The number which the Chronicle is referring to is the base salary at which he was hired in at, which was $175,000.

glacialerratic

Thu, Nov 11, 2010 : 2:44 p.m.

Please see this story in the Ann Arbor Chronicle about the School Board discussion which offers more details about the positions of the members and the numbers they are using. The proposed increase in base pay is actually $70,000. http://annarborchronicle.com/2010/11/07/aaps-sets-superintendent-salary-range/

ViSHa

Thu, Nov 11, 2010 : 2:31 p.m.

Sounds very familiar A2Dave!!

salineguy1

Thu, Nov 11, 2010 : 2 p.m.

Look to Saline as a model. Scot Graden was hired several years ago. He grew up in the district and has local roots including children in the district. He is young and will likely lead our district for the next 25 years. He is paid fairly for what he does.

conairaa

Thu, Nov 11, 2010 : 1:21 p.m.

Yet another example of a horrible decision by the members of the Ann Arbor school board. I would think that many qualified candidates would LOVE to come to Ann Arbor, a city known for the high value its residents place on education and one that is consistently included on "Top 10" lists including "Top 10 Cities to Raise a Family" and "Top 10 College Towns."

Stephen Landes

Thu, Nov 11, 2010 : 1:17 p.m.

I voted "no" in the poll and will vote "no" on every millage for the school system until the Board gets the message. Paying the proposed salary is simply inexcusable in general and even more so considering the economy in our state. Our Board members seem to be isolated from reality.

jcj

Thu, Nov 11, 2010 : 12:55 p.m.

Let me make this more politically correct! Although there WAS no personal attack on another poster. I tire of hearing how the poor teachers are under paid and over worked. "Like everything else in life, you get what you pay for." That is an old stale argument. Sometimes you can get the exact same result for less money.

AlphaAlpha

Thu, Nov 11, 2010 : 12:37 p.m.

On consultants: "Consultants are a great ploy much of the time. Government officials can claim credit for successful initiatives, and yet blame the consultants in case of failures. It's a great scam for all parties involved, and often lucrative; many consulting companies hire retired gov officials as well, greasing the skids both ways, as it were. Once rarely used, consultants have a role, but today are way overused. Imagine government officials who could make basic decision by themselves."

AlphaAlpha

Thu, Nov 11, 2010 : 12:33 p.m.

Why not post the job on maybe Craigslist, then have a reverse auction, where acceptable candidates bid ever lower for their compensation level? It's worth a try; the free publicity would make it known to applicants worldwide.

MjC

Thu, Nov 11, 2010 : 12:32 p.m.

No wonder Dr. Roberts left A2 - the School Board wasn't paying him enough! This is such unbelievable nonsense and supports the idea that we combine districts.

A2Dave

Thu, Nov 11, 2010 : 12:32 p.m.

I wouldn't mind so much, except whoever it is will immediately retain a high priced consultant to tell them what to do, and then be given a salubrious severance package when they fail and either quit (one step ahead of the sheriff) or are fired. Sound familiar?

Mick52

Thu, Nov 11, 2010 : 11:57 a.m.

Ah, the old "best and brightest" approach to finding a candidate nationwide. One of the main reasons so many local units of govt are in fiscal distress is the incorrect belief that public salaries have to match salaries seen in the private sector. Now public service salaries and compensation packages are well above many in the private sector. Thanks to Greymom for pointing out a severe problem in our system. Pay scales need to be scrunched, starting at the top. The people toward the bottom of the pay scale are always those who have the most contact with the people they serve and when they do their jobs well, the most impact. Yet they have to often suffer financially. When elected official believe in this folly, it makes me wonder what special skills, knowledge and ideas the winner of this lottery possesses that a person who might accept $100,000 does not have. I guess they must have a larger hat from which they can pull their magic. I have a suspicion that being a superintendent does not require one have extraordinary skills to run a school. This is silly. Didn't Willow Run do this? Nationwide search and hired a Supe from the Chicago area? Didn't work out so well.

SonnyDog09

Thu, Nov 11, 2010 : 11:37 a.m.

Median income dropped 6.5% from 2008 to 2009 in Michigan. The new superintendent should be making less money than the previous guy. The Ann Arbor School Board is totally out of touch with reality.

Ethics Advocate

Thu, Nov 11, 2010 : 11:30 a.m.

"A higher salary is rarely an incentive for a truly qualified candidate." Rarely an incentive?? So how would you explain chosen changes of employers by athletic coaches, university presidents, deans, nonprofit organization directors, ministers/pastors (if their religion allows them to make a choice), school teachers, corporate presidents, store workers, professional athletes (when their current contracts are ending), financial advisors, and more? AAPS has very high quality that helps attract folks to our area that has high school taxes. If you haven't already done so, read the 16th comment above from Rosie Lemons, the spouse of an AAPS teacher.

Jonas Dainius Berzanskis

Thu, Nov 11, 2010 : 11:14 a.m.

There should be a decrease in salary, as the teachers will face another round of cuts and layoffs soon

AMOC

Thu, Nov 11, 2010 : 10:59 a.m.

The BoE has been hornswaggled by their clever consultants and it is the taxpayers who will end up paying. The Ray & Associates staff have carefully managed to define "comparable districts" in order to make it appear that Ann Arbor would have to pay a quarter of a million or more to get a high quality candidate for superintendent to move here from other regions of the country. Not true! This is exactly the same process by which executive search and executive compensation consultants have made themselves, CEOs and corporate board members obscenely rich when compared with their average employee. Each time they place someone at a higher pay level, they use this as "evidence" to their board member clients that every subsequent search must offer even more money to attract quality candidates. The salaries for C-level executives are vastly overinflated in the US as compared to Europe and Asia, and Ray and Associates is using the same strategy in education. While we want a new superintendent at least as good as Dr. Roberts, which sets a pretty high bar, we don't need to offer a 40% raise over what he earned when our district, along with school districts all over this country, are facing reduced tax revenue and the Federal stimulus expires at the end of this budget year. Because of the state of the economy, we should be prepared to offer to make the right candidate whole for any loss on selling his or her current home in order to move to Ann Arbor. But we absolutely don't need to include that one-time cost in the base salary to be paid every year for as long as the person serves. This vote by the school board is a serious mistake. A salary range of up to $200,000, with a potential one-time signing payment to cover the costs of housing in the frozen real estate market, is much more in line with the pay scales in the rest of the district and with the fiscal situation the new superintendent will have to face once hired.

leaguebus

Thu, Nov 11, 2010 : 10:59 a.m.

So we pay this much and hire someone from wherever, then when a job comes up in the district from whence they came, they leave and we raise the salary and start looking again. Sounds like a good plan. This person is not God, its a school superintendent, promote someone from within..

Carole

Thu, Nov 11, 2010 : 10:12 a.m.

I find an increase of $65K to be totally dispictable in a time when many AAPS employees have either been asked to take a pay cut or have already taken a pay cut or a decrease in hours to help offset the budget deficient that AAPS claims to have. Shame on the Board of Education for even thinking about this type of action.

AlphaAlpha

Thu, Nov 11, 2010 : 9:42 a.m.

"...Ray & Associates, the search firm hired to help the board, looked at superintendent salaries from university towns around the nation. Aside from Iowa City, Iowa, and Cambridge, Mass., all of the school districts included serve a far greater number of students than Ann Arbor." Perhaps a second look would be in order? We don't have to have a candidate from a large university town. We just need a candidate who has a history of good job performance.

joe average

Thu, Nov 11, 2010 : 9:22 a.m.

Unhappy with this decision by the AAPS Board of Education? Let 'em know what you think at: boe@aaps.k12.mi.us Do it today.

Momma G

Thu, Nov 11, 2010 : 9:17 a.m.

A bad administrator, makes for a bad school environment. Our last superintendent didn't do a very good job of getting rid of bad administrators in the schools and AAPS lost quite a few families because of it. They better make sure they hire someone who will actually do a good job of cleaning out those who are collecting big salaries now but not performing their duties - starting at the administration building on down to elementary school principals. Then they can afford to pay this superintendent this kind of salary. I thought AAPS was for the students - not!

doglover

Thu, Nov 11, 2010 : 9:16 a.m.

Remember, it's in the search firm's best interest to have the highest base salary possible, since they get a percentage. Looks like they totally snowed a majority of the board members, who are being played.

SuperFreckleFace

Thu, Nov 11, 2010 : 9:11 a.m.

'The motion to set the incoming superintendents base salary in the range of $245,000 was approved 4-3. Mexicotte, Nelson, Patalan, and Stead voted for the motion, and Baskett, Lightfoot, and Thomas voted against it.' It'll be easy to cast my vote next time.

glimmertwin

Thu, Nov 11, 2010 : 9:09 a.m.

Why should this position get paid the current salary? Employees and taxpayers expect leadership... proof is in the pudding. When push came to shove, the superintendent failed to act. I.e., lunch bunch. No need for this position to be paid any more than any other person in the district.

joe average

Thu, Nov 11, 2010 : 9:07 a.m.

Why use an outside search firm in the first place? Isn't this a job for our elected school board? I'm fed up with how quickly our government entities resort to the use of outside "experts" and "consultants". AAPS has indeed become a stepping stone for superintendents. Don't these people sign contracts? AAPS should include a clause requiring a HEAVY penalty for early release (think Rich Rod). If Ms. Mexicotte is indeed "sympathetic to the economic situation in the region", she has an odd way of showing it. This decision by the board is both an outrage as well as an insult to any taxpayer - and voter - out there trying to earn a living wage. Kudos to the three board members rational enough to realize what an absurdity this decision really is. For the rest of them, a recall vote should be considered.

Ellen

Thu, Nov 11, 2010 : 9:06 a.m.

That is a crazy-high salary! Especially given all the budget cuts within the schools. I didn't realize A2 had so much $$, why not filter some of that $$ back down to some of the poorer schools?

Nerak

Thu, Nov 11, 2010 : 9:05 a.m.

Are they nuts??? I've been unemployed here in Ann Arbor for 2-1/2 years and can't afford my property taxes. It is obscene to consider laying off staff, raising fees and cutting budgets, & then turn around & pay substantially more for a superintendent than the previous -- and very good -- one was making. I don't care what the next millage request will be for -- I'm voting NO.

Steve Pepple

Thu, Nov 11, 2010 : 9:02 a.m.

A comment that contained a personal attack against another commenter has been removed.

KeepingItReal

Thu, Nov 11, 2010 : 8:53 a.m.

I am perplexed by the decision of the Ann Arbor School Board to allot this enormous salary to an indiivudal who may only be in the District a short period of time. Given the lifespan of a Superintendent of a school district, it does not make sense. If we are hiring a superintendent to come in here and change things it takes time and more than likely this individual will be gone before any changes are realized. If we just want this individual to be a caretaker, then why pay this gigantic salary. If Ann Arbor is such an attrative district, potential superintendnets will be motivated to come here for incentives other than pay. I applaud those board members who did not support this salary.

Basic Bob

Thu, Nov 11, 2010 : 8:49 a.m.

Why would you announce how much you are paying _before_ you find the right candidate? If the "right" guy would come here for $150k, we will hire the overpaid guy instead. Obviously the board or the search firm picked the wrong search criteria.

peterplywood

Thu, Nov 11, 2010 : 8:31 a.m.

Hot Sam your right on.........Hell I'm retired now and looking for something to do, I'll do the job for free.

DonBee

Thu, Nov 11, 2010 : 8:26 a.m.

This board is out of touch with the reality of this community. If they do this, the next thing that will happen is the unions will be back at the table for raises. Starting with the Ann Arbor Administrator's Association (Principals) and then the Teachers, and so it will go. This is a budget busting decision that was roundly turned down at the parent meetings we attended. I guess the board has decided they don't have to take the input from the community into account. Andrew Thomas - The AAPS total budget (All sources) is $243,963,246 in 2009. I have not done the math for 2010 yet. YpsiLivin - This is more than ANY Dean makes at MSU. More than the director of Finance makes at MSU. The Governor of the State of Michigan only makes $177,000 a year. I have to ask Ms. Mexicote what was she thinking? I also have to wonder if there is a conflict of interest in their consultant? I understand they place candidates with districts. Never consult and place in the same district, to avoid a direct conflict. But a higher salary base here might mean they can get a higher payment someplace else for a candidate, since Ann Arbor, a leading district, a benchmark is paying $265,000. So their guy in another district should get $250,000. Since placement folks normally get a percentage of first year salary, this helps the placement make more money. Just like what happened with CEO placement and CEO compensation. If they are worried about the new Superintendent moving, offer a buy out of their house and moving allowance. Don't put it in the base pay. This was discussed in the parent meeting. The consultant wanted everything in the base pay. The parents offered a number of options to deal with items out of base pay. This is bad, really bad, similar to the way the district treated the input from the community when Skyline Bonds were being discussed. Shame on the board, shame, shame.

Tony Livingston

Thu, Nov 11, 2010 : 8:26 a.m.

I agree with the promote from within comment. I also find it offensive that the board considers our schools a "market". Let's get back to the job of educating kids -- all the kids, not just the ones that win championships, awards, and high test scores that the schools are constantly bragging about.

rouzer

Thu, Nov 11, 2010 : 8:24 a.m.

Ann Arbor has an inflated sense of self. Brad got it right, we want someone who "looks good". Yes, we voted the board in, but we can also begin the process to oust them. If I were a school employee, I would be highly insulted. JHW's suggestion of hiring someone within is spot on. The employees know the district, know the employees, know the students, and they are much more likely to stick with the job instead of moving onward and dare I say, upward (aren't we the top???). And no big money search firm fees!

jcj

Thu, Nov 11, 2010 : 8:20 a.m.

That's the way I do my shopping! When I wanted a new roof I announced to each contractor I expected to pay 30% more than the neighbor did last year. And I make sure I told them BEFORE they gave me an estimate. LOL! Maybe the fact that Ann Arbor voters were in favor of the failed millage in 2009 gave the board the feeling they can throw the Ann Arbor tax payers money where ever they want! Remember this Ann Arbor the next time they ask for a millage increase.

DC

Thu, Nov 11, 2010 : 8:19 a.m.

@JHW426...the district has already promoted several central office employees. The executive director for elementary education is now an associate supertintendent with a nice pay increase. I agree that we can't whine too much. We voted this board in. Too bad the majority just don't get it! AAPS is a good district, not great. I also agree that a superintendent should be hired and when the district shifts from "good to great" based on the merits/work of the new superintendent, then an increase is merited.

Rosie Lemons

Thu, Nov 11, 2010 : 8:18 a.m.

My husband, a teacher in the Ann Arbor district, was just telling me last night that if you have a poor administrator, EVERYTHING suffers. Like everything else in life, you get what you pay for. Which is why areas that pay their teachers less usually have poorer school districts. You can't attract the best and the brightest if you aren't willing to pay them. All that said, if Michigan doesn't start treating it's teachers and staff better, it's going to find that it's glowing scholastic record will start to fail.

Lisa Starrfield

Thu, Nov 11, 2010 : 8:12 a.m.

Teachers and other employees have taken a substantial hit this year between our concessions and the special tax on teachers for retirement benefits we won't actually get. And you want to give the new superintendent more than a quarter of a million dollars? Funny... we were told how dire the situation is but I haven't seen ANY cuts except for salaries. And now somehow you can afford MORE for the superintendent. It really makes me feel that the district did not bargain in good faith with us.

Hot Sam

Thu, Nov 11, 2010 : 8:06 a.m.

Call me old fashioned or whatever, but shouldn't it be that someone comes in, gets better results, balances budgets, etc., and THEN gets a raise???

antikvetch

Thu, Nov 11, 2010 : 8:01 a.m.

Maybe if we pay s new superintendent more they will finally love us and stay with us? I'm also positive that the increased pay will make getting the next millage request passed that much easier....

Huron74

Thu, Nov 11, 2010 : 7:57 a.m.

Ah the chorus of whiners. We voted in this school board. Only ourselves to blame.

Brad

Thu, Nov 11, 2010 : 7:51 a.m.

For the market were in, size is not the critical factor, What "market"? Just more of the Ann Arbor As A Product mentality that seems to have taken over here. We don't need someone who can run the schools, we need someone who looks good to outsiders so we can show them how wonderful and smart we are here in AA. And of course, if we pay them a lot they'll look even better to the outsiders.

Andrew Thomas

Thu, Nov 11, 2010 : 7:44 a.m.

Kyle: Your article contains a misprint with regard to the District's budget. The correct number is $180 million, not $280 million.

JHW426

Thu, Nov 11, 2010 : 7:31 a.m.

This sounds more like a professional sports free agent than a superintendent search? Years ago you didn't hear about these people changing jobs every couple years. Paying salaries like this just creates more jumping around by supers. How about promoting from within and giving somebody already within the district a shot, somebody who actually cares about the district and community rather than someone chasing a higher paycheck who will be gone as soon as a better offer comes in.

KJMClark

Thu, Nov 11, 2010 : 7:29 a.m.

The Board should go back to its overpaid search firm and specify that they only look at districts within 10% of the size of Ann Arbor's, that are college towns. Further, they should more heavily weight districts in states with similar economies to Michigan. Seattle? So we're going to get a superintendent who thinks the solution to all our problems is to ask the legislature for more, since where ever they came from the state provides more help. That will be a totally useless strategy, and waste a good deal of time and effort. I really appreciate Baskett, Lightfoot, and Thomas trying to interject some sanity. Too bad the executive search inflation mill is still hard at work.

YpsiLivin

Thu, Nov 11, 2010 : 7:25 a.m.

A higher salary is rarely an incentive for a truly qualified candidate. Instead, this inflated and unrealistic base salary will merely encourage applicants to pad their resumes commensurately. Does the AAPS board realize that the president of Washtenaw Community College makes $40,000 LESS in base salary than what they plan to spend on a superintendent? Did they understand that the president of EMU makes $285,000 in base salary? When it comes to exaggerated executive pay, organizations rarely get what they pay for, and the higher the executive salary, the more disappointing the executive is likely to be. By offering this gross compensation, the board has ensured that the incoming superintendent will enjoy a complicated, antagonistic relationship with the unions - which gave salary concessions and accepted layoffs - apparently to fund the new superintendent. Good job, AAPS school board. Consider yourselves lucky if you're not recalled over this.

Jeffersonian

Thu, Nov 11, 2010 : 7:18 a.m.

The people in the ivory tower must be in a time warp too. The action is one of a mind-set that is a decade old enacted by entrenched people. Just like wall street past performance is no guarantee of future returns. CEO's retain high pay even when numbers for the marginalized bear the brunt of a downturn. There's a dirty secret of academia to know. Universities are cranking out Phd and masters as fast as they can go, while the number of jobs in the marketplace is static. This points to lower pay not higher! Qualified people are abundant but locked out of the system by numbers. We've all seen how touted people can still mismanage large amounts of money- like a new high school project- and will gladly take a pay raise to do so.

Jacob

Thu, Nov 11, 2010 : 7:17 a.m.

This is absolutely absurd. It is a perfect example of what is wrong with our education system. We ask the people who are doing all of the work(teachers and faculty) to take a pay cut, so we can hire a suit that talks a good game and collects an even bigger pay check.

local

Thu, Nov 11, 2010 : 6:59 a.m.

I agree totally with greymom, every employee in the district took pay cuts, added insurance cost, etc... and for this board to agree to pay more is simply unacceptable. I guess the board doesn't realize that all the people who took pay cuts allow the schools to run. I propose that all teachers and all custodial staff have a job shut down for a few days. Excuse me, use sick days and see how things go. I know that when my kid has a sub, (if there are enough to fill all positions during the sick days), it is a free for all in her room.

Grant

Thu, Nov 11, 2010 : 6:52 a.m.

You are just paying an incoming superintendent an enormous salary, to assist them in leaving later for that bigger and better job opportunity.

greymom

Thu, Nov 11, 2010 : 6:43 a.m.

I find this sad because once again AFSCME Local 1182 pay cuts helps support someone else get more money and most of us are having to take second and third jobs- when is it that we matter? Did you say NEVER!! Custodial and Maintenance do matter in this District, we play a big role in the growth and education of the kids but sad to say all I see is no one really seeing all we do! Sad thing on top of this if we want to do a second job- say in child care or noon hour, we can't even do that because they say they would have to pay overtime- sorry I need to make up some of my pay cut. I'm not looking for overtime, just a second job!!! Tell me where is fellow feeling and caring for all- not in Ann Arbor Public Schools!!!

ViSHa

Thu, Nov 11, 2010 : 6:28 a.m.

I agree more with Andy Thomas---an increase, but not as high as what was proposed. I think anyone who takes the job for that high amount will be under a microscope---always having their worth analyzed. perhaps in a different economy it would be different.