March 29, 2024

Administrator contracts debated at school board meeting

Board approves package increases, extends superintendent contract

Newton Community School District Board members were divided Monday night over administrator contracts.

A total package increase of 1.27 percent for administrators was eventually passed after a motion for a 2 percent increase was narrowly voted down. There was also lengthy discussion about the superintendent’s contract extension, which was approved through 2019-2020.

Teachers and other district employees, such as secretaries and head custodians, received a 2 percent increase in their compensation packages. Board member Donna Cook suggested the same 2 percent compensation bump for administrators and voted against the 1.27 percent increase.

“Two percent is consistent with everyone else,” Cook said. “It just seems the fair way to go to me. I don’t want to make balance on the backs of administrators anymore so than I do on the backs of teachers.”

The 1.27 versus 2 percent increase for administrators comes down to $14,000 dollars in a general fund of more than $31 million. However, the opportunities to make cuts are few and far between.

“In the four years that I’ve been here, we have reduced our non-personnel expenditures from close to $6.5 million to our present stance of $5.5 million,” Superintendent Bob Callaghan said. “I am not confident that we can reduce the non-instructional area any more than we have.”

To balance the budget, said Director of Business Services Gayle Isaac, the district is looking at attrition. When teachers resign or retire, the district will aim to fill the positions with lower-paid personnel.

Board members Cook, Andy Elbert and Robyn Friedman supported the 2 percent increase for administrators and voted against the 1.27 measure.

Ann Leonard, Sheri Benson, Josh Cantu and Board President Travis Padget provided the affirmative votes necessary to pass the 1.27 percent increase.

The board approved unanimously a 0.0024 percent package increase for the superintendent and business official, which is enough to cover increase in insurance costs. Directly afterward, the board dug into a debate over the superintendent’s contract.

In considering the extension of Callaghan’s contract through 2019-2020, Leonard said the three-year extension did not make business sense. She voted against the measure. Leonard said she was separating the person, Callaghan, from the contract.

“It makes very little sense to me — three years,” Leonard said. “I could see every year, every two years. I’m struggling with the three year and the thought process behind it.”

Leonard said a three-year contract traps the school district and it is a decision she is not willing to make.

Padget said three-year contracts for superintendents are common, and he checked with neighboring districts’ superintendent contracts. Indianola, Pella, Norwalk, Oskaloosa, Grinnell, Lynnville-Sully and many others have their superintendents on three-year contracts.

Benson said it is difficult to hire superintendents in Iowa, and it would be difficult to find a superintendent with experience that would take a smaller salary than Callaghan’s current agreement. Voting against the contract extension, Benson said, would give the superintendent insecurity.

“What I’m hearing is that we want to put that uncertainty in place,” Benson said. “And do you really think that’s a healthy decision for our district?”

Cook raised concern about three-year contracts, and Friedman remained open to different contract ideas. However, Leonard was the lone vote against the extension when action was taken.

Callaghan’s contract is a three-year “rolling” agreement, according to Isaac, which means the board votes to extend it every year.

Contact Justin Jagler at 641-792-3121 ext 6532 or jjagler@newtondailynews.com