The Star-Ledger thinks it’s unveiled a conspiracy among retired NJ school superintendents. In “an investigation by the New Jersey Watchdog,” the paper reports that these retired school administrators, while collecting generous pensions, proceed to “double-dip” by taking jobs as interim superintendents for up to two years. This sleazy practice is costing state taxpayers “millions of dollars” every year. Here’s an example in the Watchdog report:
“There are a lot of superintendents who are retiring and coming back to the work force,” said longtime South Jersey school chief Ralph E. Ross Sr.
Ross collected $292,272 last year – $149,256 in salary as interim superintendent of Deptford Township schools in Gloucester County, plus $143,016 from pension as retired superintendent of Black Horse Pike Regional schools in Camden County.
“Of course, people are going to call it double-dipping because you get paid twice,” said Ross. “I don’t apologize for any money I get. My services are worthwhile and appreciated.”
When Ross hit the two-year mark at Deptford, the 72-year-old retiree didn’t have to go far for his next post-retirement job. Ten miles away, the Monroe Township school district quickly hired him as its $136,500 interim assistant superintendent.
Let’s unpack this a bit. The analysis from the Ledger says that during this school year 45 districts in NJ hired interim superintendents. That’s less than 10% of districts, not that high given that the average tenure of a NJ superintendent is about 3 years. Superintendents don’t get tenure in NJ anymore, but instead are signed to 3-5 year contracts. This tends to increase mobility. Add on the salary cap and you’ve got a lot of movement from district to district.
A full-fledged search for a permanent superintendent takes at least a couple of months, and in rare cases longer than a year. Districts need someone at the top and interims fill that need. In fact, interims often cost less than permanent superintendents because districts aren’t paying for health benefits, or awarding sick days and vacation days. It’s a per-diem arrangement.
Finally, it’s not a surprise that boards rely on a short list of competent and productive interim superintendents. Think of it as a niche business.
The issue is not the reliance of school districts on interim superintendents. (They also rely on other interim administrators.) The issue is that these itinerant professionals are collecting hefty pensions while also collecting salaries. On the one hand, they’ve earned those pensions. On the other hand, annual income of close to $300K (from the above example) seems like a lot of public money.
Should the age for pension eligibility be higher? Should pension pay-outs only commence when someone stops working, or stops earning a certain amount of money? Should interims be allowed one year at districts instead of two? Should retiring superintendents have to give longer notice to school boards? These are regulatory questions, not moral ones.
