Some see 'brain drain' in N.J. salary cap for school chiefs

Gov. Christie vowed to rein in government spending when he took office in 2010, and one of his most controversial first-term initiatives was setting a cap on salaries for school district superintendents.

Anecdotes of seemingly exorbitant pay for school administrators became a symbol of the government excess Christie had pledged to rid from Trenton.

Four years after Christie set his own salary - $175,000 - as a maximum base for superintendents, Democratic lawmakers and school boards say the regulation has resulted in high turnover and made the state less competitive in attracting the best administrators.

"We've got a brain drain," said State Sen. Paul Sarlo (D., Bergen), who is sponsoring legislation that would prohibit the Department of Education from regulating maximum salary amounts offered by school boards to superintendents. The bill passed the Senate last week on a 22-13 vote, mostly along party lines.

The Assembly has yet to take up the measure, but Sarlo said he expected the bill would reach Christie's desk by the end of the fiscal year, June 30.

Assembly Speaker Vincent Prieto (D., Hudson) "shares the concerns about the negative impact of the salary cap, and the bill is under consideration," spokesman Tom Hester said in an e-mail.

While Sarlo credited the cap for helping to "flush out some really bad contracts between school boards and superintendents," he said districts now "can't attract any good, quality candidates."

With some exceptions, maximum base pay under the cap ranges from $120,000 to $175,000, based on the number of students in the district. Administrators can also earn merit bonuses.

About 70 percent of superintendents in New Jersey earned more than the cap before it was implemented, according to the state, some of them well over $200,000. The Christie administration projected the regulation would save $9.8 million annually.

For the 2013-14 school year, median pay for New Jersey superintendents was $167,500, according to state data.

Christie spokesman Kevin Roberts said in an e-mail that the cap had been "effective in driving down costs. It will be reviewed when the sunset comes along."

There's no evidence that recruitment has been affected, he said.

"There are many young, earnest, and excited young educators who want to take on these positions with energy and focus, which isn't contingent on them being highly paid veterans," Roberts said.

The cap is set to expire in November 2016. At his December confirmation hearing, Education Commissioner David C. Hespe said his department would review the matter. He said he thought the cap had improved racial and gender diversity among superintendents but he also expressed concerns, particularly with regard to longevity in office.

"If that's going down dramatically, that's going to be a problem," Hespe said at the time.

Christie's office points to a May 2014 report of the New Jersey School Boards Association, which shows that more superintendents (456) left their districts in the three years preceding the cap's implementation in February 2011 than the 400 who moved between the 2010-11 and 2012-13 school years.

But the school boards association, which opposes the cap, says much of the earlier turnover was due to retirement.

Of the 219 districts that reported a change in superintendents since the salary limit took effect, 97, or 44 percent, cited the cap as the reason the administrator left the district, according to the association's survey last year.

In Camden County, 64 percent of the 25 districts that participated in the survey said their superintendents left because of the salary cap.

"The turnover rate will fluctuate from year to year, but since the salary cap went into effect, that has been a major factor in superintendents' leaving their position," said Frank Belluscio, the association's deputy executive director.

Some are retiring early, and others are taking jobs in New York and Pennsylvania, he said.

Belluscio expects that trend to accelerate going forward because, he said, a number of five-year contracts that were signed before the cap was implemented are set to expire June 30, 2016.

At that point, those contracts will be subject to the regulation.

Plus, Belluscio said, other regulations are in place to help control district costs, such as the 2 percent cap on annual property-tax increases.

Cherry Hill may soon find out whether the cap is a factor in hiring a superintendent.

The district's top administrator, Maureen Reusche, is leaving June 30 for the same post at the Haverford School District in Pennsylvania's Delaware County. Cherry Hill school board president Carol Matlack said Reusche's departure was not related to the salary cap.

Matlack said the number of applications submitted thus far was comparable to the last time the board searched for a superintendent - in 2010, before the cap. She said she wouldn't be able to assess the quality of this year's pool until she reviews the resumés. The application deadline is July 2.

"Whether or not [the cap is] impacting our ability to recruit a new superintendent is difficult to say at this point," Matlack said.