LF School Board approves superintendent’s goals package

Members of the Little Falls School Board approved the superintendent’s performance compensation package for the 2001 school year at their Monday night meeting.

In a 5-1 vote, the board members agreed to give Superintendent George Maurer up to an additional $8,000 in performance compensation pay should he meet or surpass the expectations that board members have laid out for him.

The performance compensation pay is not a permanent adjustment to the superintendent’s base salary. It is a supplement to his contract which makes him eligible for the additional compensation based upon performance or merit mutually agreed upon in advance by both the school board and the superintendent each year of the term of his contract.

Previously, the board awarded Dr. Maurer $4,400 in performance compensation for the school year ending June 30, 2000, and $4,800 for the year ending June 30, 1999, giving him a total of $9,200 over a two-year period.

Board members agreed upon the $8,000 maximum amount that had been recommended by the board’s finance committee. They also agreed that the superintendent’s primary goal in this year’s package would be to articulate the direction for the district by May 30, 2001, as previously discussed at their November 2 special meeting.

Susan Prosapio, the only board member who voted against the motion, suggested the board’s vote on the performance package be deferred to a later date so specific indicators could also be included in the agreement. “Although the dollar amount has been set, and the goal has been laid out, the third component of the agreement has not been identified yet. We need to have indicators in place by which we can measure if, in fact, those goals have been met,” said Prosapio.

Other board members did not agree, however. “If the vote is deferred to a later date, it will be the next board who is voting on the matter. It is this board who did the actual work on this,” said Herman Pietrowski.

Bill Holmgren agreed, “We did this work and I would like to see it through. I think it would be reasonable to have a vote on two of the three components. The indicators can be put into place at a later date.”

Prosapio said, “I do not see any reason why this vote has to be pushed through right now. We need to have these indicators in place if we’re going to be able to access the performance package. The indicators should be in place before the board votes on the motion. In the past, the indicators have been put in after the fact. This needs to be a participatory process.” And, Prosapio indicated she would like to have staff and community input in the process as well.

In the other performance compensation packages awarded to Dr. Maurer, board approval was given prior to the indicators being put into place. According to the superintendent, “I usually put the indicators in and the board will later approve them.”

Prosapio’s motion to defer the vote until such time that indicators have been included was not seconded. The five other board members did approve the performance compensation package with two of the three components.