By: Rick Wood

Rick Wood — Tue, 11 Dec 2012 21:09:17 +0000

The Superintendent’s pay and benefits package should be worth no more than 10% higher than that of a high school principal, and bonuses of up to 10% for principals should be available based on established performance criteria. If that means lowering the Superintendent’s compensation and raising the principals’, so be it. All other compensation packages for management employees would be based on those benchmarks. If our district did that, it would communicate that good educational site leaders are valued above administrators, and a good high school principal will be compensated at the top of the district pay scale even if he/she has no ambitions to go to the district office. We want the best to become principals, not administrators. To lessen the burden on the Superintendent–and justify the lower compensation–other changes would have to be made to shift more management responsiblity to the principals and a “council of principals,” but that would be appropriate. It would also be necessary to have a highly supportive Board that wants to innovate. The Board would have to find ways to take the pressure off the Superintendent and district office staff and adopt a more team-oriented posture. It’s such a culture shift, I doubt it will happen, but I wish our district would try.

By: Fairfielder

Fairfielder — Tue, 11 Dec 2012 20:37:52 +0000

Low $100K and they pay their own pension. How do like paying over $250K for somebody’s salary that keeps cutting programs?

By: Mr. Practical

Mr. Practical — Tue, 11 Dec 2012 14:12:28 +0000

Woody, what do you feel the compensation should be?

By: Woody

Woody — Tue, 11 Dec 2012 12:41:45 +0000

I hope the salary of the next superintendent is reconsidered.

Comments on: Fairfield-Suisun school board meeting to focus on future

By: Rick Wood

By: Fairfielder

By: Mr. Practical

By: Woody