At
the next Evesham Township School District Board of Education meeting on June 27,
2019, one of the items on the agenda will be the Superintendent’s
contract. The matter was discussed briefly at the May 23rd meeting, with Board Vice-President Trish Everhart presenting some facts
regarding the Superintendent’s contract, salary, and the superintendent job
market. While the salary of any employee of the School District or any
state or local government employee is a matter of public record, I usually do not write about anyone’s salary. However, in this case, I
will make an exception, as Superintendent Scavelli has exercised his right for
his salary discussion to be held in public.
Since that meeting, there have been quite a few misrepresentations of fact, so I wanted to document what was discussed and some history surrounding the Superintendent contract. The public does NOT get a vote on the contract, but we should be aware of how our current and future tax dollars are being spent.
The current average salary of the 14 Superintendents, including Evesham, is $188,502. The Evesham School Superintendent salary is currently $165,000. No Superintendent is being paid less than Evesham (Mount Laurel is being paid the same).
Since that meeting, there have been quite a few misrepresentations of fact, so I wanted to document what was discussed and some history surrounding the Superintendent contract. The public does NOT get a vote on the contract, but we should be aware of how our current and future tax dollars are being spent.
Mr
Scavelli was hired in 2010 at a salary of $170,000. He voluntarily froze his salary from 2010
through 2014. In 2014, then Governor Christie imposed a salary cap, and Mr Scavelli's salary was reduced to the cap maximum of $165,000 in 2014. The state salary cap was increased in 2017 to
$191,584 for an Evesham sized district, but Mr Scavelli’s salary remains at
$165,000, less than what he was hired at 9 years ago.
During negotiations with the Superintendent, the Personnel Committee reviewed the salaries of the 13
other districts in Camden and Burlington Counties with enrollments greater than
3,000 students. (The state sets the cap
by the number of students in the district, and Evesham is in the ‘3,000 and up’
category.) It
is not a perfect apples to apples comparison looking at these other districts,
because some are far greater in size, and others are considerably smaller. Some are PK-8 like Evesham, others are PK-12,
and two are 9-12 (including Lenape Regional).
But it is the closest comparison we can make, and the only way to
determine what a fair market value is for a superintendent. And this is important - while many look at Superintendent salaries as being too high, if the market has determined what the position is worth, finding a qualified candidate to work for less will be challenging.
The current average salary of the 14 Superintendents, including Evesham, is $188,502. The Evesham School Superintendent salary is currently $165,000. No Superintendent is being paid less than Evesham (Mount Laurel is being paid the same).
Looking
at the 2016-17 school year, the final year of the original lower cap, two of the districts
(Voorhees and Camden City) are outliers, with salaries far in excess of
$200,000, more than $35,000 more per year than the all of the other 12 districts.
Ignoring
those two for a moment and still looking at 2016-17, the remaining 12 districts were in a very small range
salary-wise – from $162,500 on the low end to $177,500 on the high end. Since the cap was removed 2 years ago, all of those districts raised their Superintendent’s salary, EXCEPT Evesham.
The Personnel Committee has met with Mr Scavelli 3 times over the past 5 months. After
negotiations, the Personnel Committee has proposed a 3% increase per year for the next 5
years, which will be voted on at the next school board meeting.
Why is anyone ever given a raise? It would seem there are three reasons to consider giving an employee a raise. 1) To reward past performance. If an employee has done a good job over the past year (or in this case, the past 9 years), you can reward them monetarily. 2) To incent future performance. If an employee knows they will make more money if they do well, perhaps they will be more dedicated to their job. 3) To let the employee know they are valued and discourage them from testing the job market. A valued and well-compensated employee is less like to wonder what else is out there. (In the case of our Superintendent, there would actually be a 4th reason - to honor the contract commitments Evesham made 9 years ago when they hired a Superintendent at $170,000.)
Why is anyone ever given a raise? It would seem there are three reasons to consider giving an employee a raise. 1) To reward past performance. If an employee has done a good job over the past year (or in this case, the past 9 years), you can reward them monetarily. 2) To incent future performance. If an employee knows they will make more money if they do well, perhaps they will be more dedicated to their job. 3) To let the employee know they are valued and discourage them from testing the job market. A valued and well-compensated employee is less like to wonder what else is out there. (In the case of our Superintendent, there would actually be a 4th reason - to honor the contract commitments Evesham made 9 years ago when they hired a Superintendent at $170,000.)
I’ve
heard some arguments that ‘due to cuts in funding, we can’t give him a raise’
or ‘if we have money for that, it should go to the teachers, not the
superintendent.’ There are a couple
problems with those statements. First,
the teachers are represented by their union and will have their own contract negotiations
later this year. This is an entirely
separate issue. Second, the raise being
proposed for next year is $4,950. There
were 494 teachers last year in the district in 2018 (1). Giving that money to the teachers would
average $10 per teacher per year.
And while I can certainly understand the sentiment of cutting expenses due to State funding cuts, putting a freeze on salaries, there are financial risks involved with that. If we decide not to give our Superintendent a raise and he leaves for another job in another
district in NJ or PA, or in the private sector, we would then need to find
a qualified candidate that is willing to:
- accept a salary far below the average
- come to a town where the board has shown unwillingness to offer the superintendent a raise
- come to a town that will be losing state funding for at least the next 5 years
- come to a town that has a history of the Mayor, Council and Planning Board repeatedly and publicly castigating the Superintendent and School Board
To
find this new Superintendent, there are costs associated with a job search,
which would potentially include:
- Cost of advertising the position and/or hiring a headhunter. An executive search firm typically charges anywhere from 15-30% of the first year's salary.
- Cost of drug tests
- Cost of background check
- Relocation fees. Some districts offer lump sum payments or reimbursement of actual relocation expenses.
- Attorney’s fees. The School Board Solicitor would be involved in some meetings and would need to create and execute the new Superintendent contract.
- Lost man hours for anyone in the district who is involved in conducting interviews, reading resumes, calling potential applicants, corresponding with applicants, checking references etc
- Lost man hours in researching and doing due diligence to find an executive recruiter
- Lower productivity for the new Superintendent as they learns the job - there is a long ramp-up period, plus loss productivity for those employees who have to show them the ropes
- Possible sign on bonus
My
guess is that those costs will far exceed the $4,950 of the proposed raise in
2019.
Several districts in the area have had difficulty hiring qualified Superintendents in the past several years, most notably Voorhees and Moorestown. Voorhees is currently employing an Interim Superintendent, as they have not yet found a full-time replacement. “In May 2016, Moorestown hired a new Superintendent, the 3rd full superintendent since 2012 and the 5th person to hold the position in 4 years. “ (2) "School districts have had trouble holding on to superintendents in recent years as school leaders — seeking higher pay amid salary caps — play musical chairs with their appointments.(3)" With districts having difficulty finding qualified Superintendents, it would seem like a good time for a Superintendent to test the job market, and it would be more difficult (and costly) to find a replacement.
It should be noted that the budget for the current school year has already been approved by the board. Any raise for the upcoming school year would be already included in that budget. For future years, $4,950 would cost the average household approximately 13 cents per year. (4)
It should be noted that the budget for the current school year has already been approved by the board. Any raise for the upcoming school year would be already included in that budget. For future years, $4,950 would cost the average household approximately 13 cents per year. (4)
And
I always think back to the words of Board President Joe Fisacaro from a board
meeting almost a year ago. This was
the first meeting where they were publicly discussing the loss of funds from
the State, and he expressed his concerns that while Evesham was losing money,
other nearby districts, such as Cherry Hill, were gaining money. He was worried that good teachers might leave
Marlton if we weren’t able to offer a competitive salary. The same would be true for a Superintendent.
I admit I have no idea how robust the current Superintendent job market is. Would our Superintendent consider leaving for a higher paying job, and are those jobs out there? I have no basis to make a guess one way or the other. For Evesham, the question is whether the risk is worth the savings.
Note: According to the budget presentation (4) above, a 1 cent increase in the tax rate produces $1,053,305 in budget dollars and costs the average household $27.27. A 1/100 of a cent increase produces $10,533 in budget dollars and costs the average household 27 cents. The raise being proposed for year 1 is less than half that amount.
I admit I have no idea how robust the current Superintendent job market is. Would our Superintendent consider leaving for a higher paying job, and are those jobs out there? I have no basis to make a guess one way or the other. For Evesham, the question is whether the risk is worth the savings.
 |
| The salary caps on the right were effective May 1, 2017 |
- https://www.state.nj.us/education/finance/fp/cafr/search/18/1420.pdf Page 159
- https://www.burlingtoncountytimes.com/91c7225c-8294-11e7-83f4-879dffad9547.html
- https://www.northjersey.com/story/news/education/2017/08/15/schools-have-trouble-finding-long-term-superintendents/539379001/
- https://www.evesham.k12.nj.us/cms/lib/NJ01000514/Centricity/Domain/5/Final%20Budget%20Presentation%202019-2020.pdf
Note: According to the budget presentation (4) above, a 1 cent increase in the tax rate produces $1,053,305 in budget dollars and costs the average household $27.27. A 1/100 of a cent increase produces $10,533 in budget dollars and costs the average household 27 cents. The raise being proposed for year 1 is less than half that amount.
Like my Facebook Page to get the latest posts - A View From Evesham. You can email me at MarltonNeil@yahoo.com.