School Board eliminates fine print from top administration contracts

SPARTA - In an effort to dispel rumors, the school board moved last week to take some of the fine print that is so often hidden from public view out the contracts of its three top district administrators. Board members narrowly approved a measure that will transfer payments for tax-sheltered annuities, extra disability premiums and compensation for in-district travel and physical examinations into each of the base salaries of the school superintendent and his two assistants. “We saw this freight train coming across the state and for the first time - to its credit - this board acted in a proactive manner rather than after the fact,” said David Slavin, Sparta Board of Education president. “I don’t think we did anything wrong with the salaries. We did exactly what the state has asked us to do.” The action came on the heels of a statewide investigation and report on “questionable and excessive” compensation packages awarded by New Jersey school boards to attract and retain top-flight administrators at the expense of millions of taxpayer dollars. After examining the payrolls of dozens of school districts around the state, the State Commission of Investigation found that the most coveted administrators were lavished with cars, computers, cell phones, improper pension increases and donations to tax-deferred annuities. The report suggested that state officials take measures to ensure that expenditures by school administrators are reasonable and appropriate and that citizens are adequately informed about how their money is spent. “We’ve got nothing to hide,” said Slavin. “And, in an apples-to-apples comparison with similar districts throughout the area, we can honestly say - and prove - that we have remained frugal and kept the taxpayers’ best interest at heart.” Sparta was one of two Sussex County school districts identified in the report. “Bottom line - Sparta district passed muster with a squeaky clean bill of health,” said Slavin. Other school districts weren’t so fortunate. State investigators found that some school boards, including Hopatcong and its longtime superintendent, Wayne Threlkeld, tried to shield generous compensation packages for administrators by either understating their value or failing to draft written contracts that spell out the terms of an agreement. Sparta’s decision came at the recommendation of the district’s auditor and board member Douglas Chesnulovitch, whose aim was to remove any inference to the intent or use of “perks” that might negatively impact the district administrators - especially in light of a controversial referendum in September that will ask voters to approve the $71.5 million reconstruction of the existing high school. “Every story about my salary is going to hurt the referendum in the perception of the public,” said schools superintendent Thomas Morton, who spearheaded the referendum to address the high school’s overcrowded classrooms and growing student population across the district. “We wanted to come clean. We wanted to make sure there was no inference about parts anywhere in the contract - so we took them out.” The school board’s move increases the superintendent’s annual salary from $195,415 to $200,915 by rolling back a $300 per month in-district travel allowance, a $400 incentive to undergo a physical examination, and $1,500 a year in tax-deferred annuity payments. “It doesn’t cost the taxpayers of Sparta one more cent because it is going to be paid out one way or another,” said Morton. “The difference is it is being paid out up front in salary. Anybody who says anything negatively about this is making an issue out of something that doesn’t exist.” Ron Wolfe, assistant superintendent for business, will have his annual salary increased from $148,515 to $154,415; and Kathleen Monks, assistant superintendent for curriculum and development, will receive an increase from $148,515 to $150,715. Not all township school officials were pleased with the board’s decision. Some board members criticized the process and timing of the vote, which came after a lengthy regularly scheduled meeting and closed session that followed nearly five and a half hours later. “Maybe it has merit,” said Richard Sullivan, of the motion. “I was certainly not prepared to vote on it one way or another because of the way it was presented to us.” Paul Johnson echoed similar sentiments, arguing that the public had a right to be present at all meetings of the school board and witness in full detail all phases of the decision-making process. “I don’t have a difference with the size of the money; I’m upset about the way this was done,” said Johnson, who insisted he first learned of the proposal during the evening of the vote. “I’m concerned about the effect it has, that we couldn’t get answers to our questions to evaluate it before voting on it.” Some members of the board questioned the legality of the 5-4 vote as well as the ethics involved. School board member Michael Schiavoni said the issue is very complex and still under consideration. The 71-page state report, whose findings were drawn from payroll and other records from a sampling of 71 of the state’s 616 school districts, said lax enforcement of pension guidelines and poor oversight of local school boards had cost New Jersey residents millions of dollars in unjustified expenses. Investigators said the competition for highly rated administrators had driven some districts to stretch rules on cashing in unused vacation time and to engage in often improper pension manipulation. “It’s a system that seems designed to pit school districts against each other in a ‘sky’s the limit’ contest to recruit and retain top personnel,” wrote investigators.