I wonder how much over the cap they plan on paying this guy. Now, before you all sip your kool-aid and jump all over me, I'm not saying that I agree with the caps. I would however, like to know how much they plan to pay. Transparency should have required them to put that in the resolution.
But then again, nothing has been transparent about this whole ordeal.

Perhaps YOU misunderstood my comments. I asked whether or not the salary being offered was inside or outside the cap. Seems like a pretty simple question. So typical. Avoid the issue.

Happy Thanksgiving. Toback DOES seem like a good fit for the district - former football coach, Business Office experience, personable, familiar with special needs populations. He is not quite as saavy as some other candidates, but good overall.
The edict from the Governor's office to the County Commissioners to hold off on approving any superintendent contracts until the 'toolbox' legislation is passed places Hoboken in an interesting position. As far as an acting Superintendent, however, there are people who have the proper certification to keep the position occupied until Toback's permanent contract can be approved. Would appointing one of them to fill the gap period violate the edict?

If the board acted 18 months ago to find a new superintendent and didn't chase away at least two candidates, they wouldn't be where they are now. When Dr. Romano withdrew, there was a very viable second candidate. Instead, they decided to hire another search firm, spend more money and now find themselves in a position where they're going to throw away more money on legal fees. If the previous stories were true, there was another candidate who told them to take a hike. Now they're looking for someone to blame for 18 months of indecisiveness...

geesh, OOC can't even give it a rest on Thanksgiving?

Christie's cap runs counter to the rationale that was originally used to justify eliminating tenure for Superintendents in NJ. The idea was in exchange for security (tenure), Superintendent's would be able to "compete in the open market" and be compensated based on what the market would bear. In NJ, north, south, east, west, urban, and suburban, Superintendent salaries basically exceed the Christie caps. But, Christie wants it both ways. He wants no security for the position and he doesn't want an open, competitive market place for the talent. This is "big government" at it's best/worst. In my opinion, it comes from being a populist rather than having a real political ideology (i.e. a "true" conservative). But, Christie has found a horse to ride (education) and he's riding it.

The January 31, 2011 date is a false diversion. There are any number of certified and qualified individuals who could assume the interim position in Hoboken until a final decision on the caps is reached in February in Trenton. The Hoboken Board of Education has over 60 days to find someone to fill in the interim position for a few weeks if needed. And, there's no reason why Toback couldn't do it. By all accounts, his home district will not hold him to the full notice period and would very likely release him early if requested.

Bravo, Scott. Just 2 brief comments: Christie isn't just riding education - his ultimate goal is to kill public education as we know it in revenge for the NJEA's strong financial support of his opponent, Jon Corzine.
Locally, while Toback might be able to come in an interim capacity - that would certainly take a leap of faith on his part.

The NJ Legislature in 2008 bestowed on the state commissioner vast powers to limit compensation to superintendents. With those powers, the Commissioner's office has said it will impose the limits even without formal regulations in place.

Will Lane Bajardi ever answer the question if he writes for Hoboken411 ?

I guess when he doesn't answer in a way he sorta is answering the question. :-0

We know he works for the advancement of Beth Mason and when he speaks it is almost like Beth speaking, but yet he says he is NOT her spokesperson. ;-)

And that relates to this article how? Go peddle your nonsense in another blog, hobbs.

But Lane Bajardi was charged with assault at a BOE meeting wasn't he ?

I would think he is reading this thread about the BOE as Mason has an interest in undermining it's actions like she is doing with the City Council.

Lane Bajardi says he is NOT Beth Mason's spokesperson and he refuses to answer if he writes for is or employed by Hoboken411 so I am just reminding him the question will not go away. ;-)

The State is going to take the wind out of the sails of the bloated New Jersey superintendent market one way or another. Hoboken may need an interim but in the end, everyone is going to need to accept the new numbers. There is no lawyering around it, it's just not going to produce any desired result.

New Jersey has been creating its own inflated market but that's not going to last spending more on education than any other state on a per capita basis. Hoboken should have seen it coming to some extent as the State Assembly has the superintendent reductions already on its agenda and there's a strong possibility the state commissioner has the ability to limit the salaries altogether.

I will not be taking questions and neither will my political operative minion Lane. He does what I tell him and he is not allowed to answer any questions related to his ghostwriting on Hoboken411.

How can we get anything done in Hoboken and destroy those foes to my ambition for power if you insist on exposing our efforts?

Bet Mazin, Lane and Hoboken411 now control the City Council and soon my overthrow of the mayor will come too. My checkbook controls this town. Ask Tim Occhipinti.

When Romano was hired there were two finalists, him and some woman. I don't remember her name, but my husband attended the forum and said she was very impressive. As far as the other candidate, it was reported on this site that an offer had been made and rejected by someone. I can only go by what I read here. If there wasn't a candidate prior to Mr. Toback, let someone on the board deny it.

The two finalists were Romano and a woman who is an educator in Newark. She never held a senior role equivalent to superintendent or even assistant to one. Those in attendance were not altogether impressed.

Maybe you need to check back with your 'husband.'

"their" dealings with the board

I don't get to attend many meetings, but just by reading the blogs you can piece it all together.
Hullabaloo cleared up the one about the finalist in the first search and as I said earlier, it was mentioned some time ago here that there was a candidate who was given an offer. Instead of trying to beat me up, why don't you search for the truth. Obviously, you know much more than I, so why not try to get the facts and share them. I suppose it's more about spin than truth. That's ok, i understand the game you're playing. It's called "politics".

Hullabaloney pressumes that information must come from Board members, because that is where she gets her info. She forgets that any CEO candidate worth their paycheck would do a little reconnaisance of Hoboken and the climate in which they would need to work before they accepted the position.
If the Board couldn't come up with a decent candidate after they drove Reaslowsky out A YEAR AND A HALF ago, jeez, what the heck have they doing???? They certainly haven' t been watching over student achievement.

Is Lane Bajardi playing politics or is he paid to do so ?

Why when Lane B. is so willing to share his opinion on every subject on the side of Beth Mason has he refused to answer a few very simple questions about his involvement with Hoboken411 and Beth Mason ?

More truth less spin be nice, Mr. Bijardi.

really OOC? Just an occasional, casual blog reader? looking for the "truth"

Your previous posts are full of language that belies that. You sound more ax grindy than casual, to me.

Your posts see "politics" in everything that don't fit your "truth"

Tburns. Didn't they win in Arpil? He bailed in June. You really think he wasn't interviewing for that job all along?

Hobbs has a sick obsession with Lane (just view how many of Hobbs' previous posts are about him - VERY disquieting that anyone is so venomous) and Hullabaloney is ALL about politics when it comes to the Board of Ed - she attacks people who have been out of the picture for years because there are no credible achievements for Kids First to claim.

I was looking up the name of Gayle Griffin, the Newark administrator (AKA the straw candidate whom the Board put in front of the public while feigning transparancy) before Dr. Frank Romano bailed to become the Superintendent of the Franklin Lakes school district, when I saw something I had posted back in April:

"Maybe it’s just me, but…don’t all these people seem better off: Jack Raslowsky now principal of a prestigious high school; Anthony Petrosino a university professor; Lorraine Cella an Assistant Superintendent; and Romano CEO of a K-8 for almost the same $$ and a LOT fewer headaches.
NOT working for the Hoboken Public Schools seems to be a career enhancing move."

Just an update, Dr. Cella, the Columbia University alumna who was ESCORTED FROM THE HIGH SCHOOL BY CARTER'S HENCHMAN,RUSAK, is now the SUPERINTENDENT in Edgewater.
Yeah, Kids First, great. And what did the kids in Hoboken get? A hokey temp who hired all his friends and a lawsuit.

I don't believe it really matters where someone lives, or how many children they have, or where they go to school--- especially when someone is forthright enough to post under an identifiable name while others post under a pseudonym. A productive discourse on the topic would be more appreciated and productive.

Seems as if once the discussion gets around to 1) accountability, 2) transparency, and 3) achievements of the present Board of Education in Hoboken--- this Comments Section suddenly gets inundated with ad hominem arguments as well as non sequitur and tangential attacks. For instance, witness recent comments on Raslowski and Petrocino.

The real issue is the transparency in the process of finding a permanent superintendent of schools which has been going on for a year and a half and continues. For instance:

1) Since they were well aware of the Christie caps via numerous communications with the Interim Commissioner of Education for NJ and the County Executive Superintendent---was there intention to bring a lawsuit against the State all along?
2) Back in the spring, the Board had a public forum with their top candidates fielding questions from the public-- why did the Board abandon this type of format?
3) When Romano took his name out of the running, why did the Board of Education abandon it's search?
4) Where are the results of the SurveyMonkey "poll" that was posted on the Board of Ed website? And how was this "public input" used in the selection process?

Thanks Scott. I think you covered it all very clearly. The only other question that I would ask is whether or not an offer was made, in secret, to a candidate between Dr. Romano and Dr. Toback. It may not seem important, but it will let us know whether or not the current candidate was the second or third choice of the board. Eighteen months is a long time to be searching without real results and had the board moved more quickly, they could have avoided the mess they are in now.
Now all we need are the answers.

See OOC, something we agree on. Things could have been so differnet if the previous Board had conducted a real search and not stuck the district with over 1/2 million dollar buyout just to provide room for their handpicked friend. Didin't Raslowsi then end up costing the district an additional 2 million due to his eperience?

Shame.

Answers are great. so is truth. I am still wating for answers from a previous thread about why Hoboken re-opend a Superintendent contract when he was leaving in six months, only to offer to pay for his future sick and vacation days. THEN pre-paid him a consultanting contract he never earned and hired an "inexperienced" Superintendent ans still never utilized the consultaning contract. unbelieveable.

sorry OOC.... "inexperience"

Hullabaloo, I'm not making accusations that weren't reported in this very blog. If I'm wrong, let someone tell me I'm wrong. Keep in mind that at the end of the process all records will be subject to OPRA.

Burns, Why did you re-open Gagliardi's contract when he was leaving in six months, only to offer to pay for his future sick and vacation days. THEN pre-paid him a consultanting contract he never earned and hired an "inexperienced" Superintendent ans still never utilized the consultaning contract?

Kool Aid anyone?

I'm not the one with the script.

ok. usually when I hear/read "kool aid" usually says script to me.

Probably because "script" was the key word they gave you when you drank the Kool Aid. It's pretty standard to do that from what I've read.

pretty funny.good one. LOL

but, really. What was said that you consider "kool aid"worthy? The last post before your charecterization of "kool aid" was the question about why the previous Superintendents contract was reopened when he was retiring in six months, then he leaves with large amounts of money. I thought that was a valid question. Most Superintendents don't get paid for future sick and vacation when they leave. I don't think Raslowski got that kind of deal. Did he? I dont' know.

IMHO, I think there's a non-trivial difference between "drinking the Kool-Aid" and "reading from the script". The former has cult like reverence for accepting a philosophy or social norm without critical thinking or examination. "Reading from the script"- is more familiar to anyone watching cable news and hearing what the "spin doctors" want the message to be-- the talking heads if you will. It's much more conscious, pre-meditated and thought out. Personally, I have more compassion for the Kool-Aid drinkers than the spin doctors-- but, that's just me.

thanks Scott, interesting answer.

However, I had addressed my original question to OOC. He claimed "kool Aid" and I was ondering which post he was refering to, because I has asked why the previous Superintendent's contract was reopend 6 months before he retired and then he left with a large "buy out" which generall doesn't happen when someone retires. Was that the "kool aid" question OOC?

More compassion for the Kool Aid drinkers and the children they murdered and your doctor WHO????

Score one for transparency, this from an "insider" on another blog: "Although it's not public knowledge, the likelihood the maximum length four plus year contract exceeds the State's compensation limits expected in place by February is very likely "
Of course, that comment may just be a fishing expedition, like Shep's repeated request for more accurate detail on the former Gagliardi contract. I would certainly have provided historical context if the request for information were genuine. However, turning my phrase "less experienced" into "inexperienced" when comparing someone who had 44 years of public school experience with a well-educated candidate from the private sector was enough evidence to know that my candid response would be twisted.
I am amused by the irony when this very "stalwart" group now complains about being maligned, when that has been THEIR tactic all along.
Then again, what do I know? I'm just one of the "old guard" LOL

Shep, Gagliardi had been an educator in the Hoboken schools for 44 years. He still had 2 years left on his contract. He was entitled almost $500k for sick and vacation days he had accrued during his time as an employee of the district. The contracting agreement was part of the legal negotiations. Both Gagliardi and Raslowsky were principals before they were hired as superintendent of the Hoboken Public Schools.
(Before you jump all over that - look carefully at Toback's current position.)
As to WHY I supported the buy out: there were 9 members on the Board and each of us had our own reasons. I seriously weighed both costs - Gagliardi leaving vs. staying. As I said in another thread, it was costly either way.
Now I'm off to make turkey soup (with spinach and tortellini) yum.

@Cat- To clarify-- I believe a "Kool Aid drinker" is ultimately a victim (psychologically, emotionally, physically, etc...) and in that sense, I have compassion. I also believe one who "drinks the Kool Aid" is substantively different than the often ego-driven, charismatic cult-like "leader" who suggests/motivates the figurative or literal "drinking of the Kool Aid" to his/her victims. Again, it's just my opinion but it is based on some training and education concerning emotionally distressed people in extreme situations. I hope that clears up the distinction I was originally trying to make. You may very well have a more articulate and nuanced understanding that you would like to share.

As an aside- I think bringing in the murdering of children and insinuating the compassion for such may be a more script-like than "Kool-Aid" but in either case it is less than productive and not conducive for meaningful dialogue ;-)

thanks for the zinger - you answered as i expected - hoped - you would.while the murdering comment was extreme ( but historically accurate - a reminder the leader also drank the stuff - was he a victim also) it was placed there to made a not so subtle point - Given a biased observers frame of mind any one (based on a poor choice of words, images or comparisions) can be made out to be some kind of racist, sexist, monster, etc. I know you did NOT mean what i said - but and correct me if i am wrong a number of people whom you support in hoboken politics lets call then the council of no - did not grant that courtesy to others - instead they sent a national organization to try to destroy a person who chose words (images) not as carefully as was warranted.

And to be more than honest - is the word sincere ? do either of us really want a meaningful dialogue??

Shep, Has Toback been Superintendent to more than the 650 students at the Sussex County Technical School? Or is that Principal/ Superintendent position the only place where he has served as Superintendent? I like that he worked as a BA, but that is a different skill set.
(That's not a critique, just an inquiry.)
Regarding QSAC - it didn't exist when Gagliardi was the CEO and Hoboken was one of the baseline districts for NJ under Raslowsky. It is merely a measure of how a district is doing - it is not something in which a CEO is proficient or not.
Sorry you don't believe me about what was in Gagliardi's contract - it was widely reported statewide. What the reports don't say is that he had earned the bulk of the money based on accumulated days over the course of his long career. That's why the Commissioner of Ed couldn't / wouldn't overturn his contract. And he knew state regs better than almost every other educator I have met. (Not better than the Board Attorney's father, though!)
Where do you keep getting this 6 month idea from?
Soup was bangin'!

@cat Touche ;)
Actually, I do wish there was an opportunity for real dialogue but I'm not very optimistic at this point in time. There's a very small "sweet spot" between productive discourse/dialogue and partisan politics.

Burns give it up. no spin is going to negate the facts. 1- not one peson believes that gagliardi didn't take even one sick or vacation day in 44 years. and 2- if that were remotely true, you admitted you paid him off w/ a no show, 100k "consulting contract." from student and taxpayer money. Responsible people woudn't agree to that. The contract the board gave away to Gagliardi was rock solid- this is why it couldn't be overturned .These readers understand contracts.
Do you really want to rehash all of the violations and abuses the prior board and supts perpetrated on the students, teachers and citizens of Hoboken? One only needs to review the 2006 KPMG audit report. In excess of 50k of students money spent on dinners at Amamnda's and other restautrants , 20k for florists shops, paying for mulitple speeding and other vehicular infractions for buddies, the list goes on... how's this for transparency.. Raslowski started Xavier on July 1st but stayed on our payroll until August 31st.
"While Raslowsky’s work at Xavier will commence on July 1, the Xavier school community’s plans for him will include an Installation Ceremony ....Read more:Hudson Reporter - Xavier High School announces they re getting Hoboken s superintendent
Let's just move on and agree that Toback looks like a great candidate. I am sure you want the best for your children and he seems like he'd be a dynamic leader that will continue to improve upon the great programs that are in place.

Gagliardi was given 5% raises in each of his last two years, increasing his total pay from $181,864 in 2004-5 to $199,255 in 2006-7. His sick and vacation time buyout was calculated by dividing his final base salary ($172,005) by 200 working days per year, not 260 (5 x 40 weeks vs 5 x 52 weeks). So far as I know, the superintendent's job is year-round. Had his payout been calculated on a year-round basis, his per-day compensation for his 396 sick days and 102 vacation days would have been $662. Instead, he received $860 per day, for an increased payout of $98,636.
His optional consulting position was to be paid at the same rate for a maximum of 100 days. I don't know if he availed himself of that provision, but smart money says heck yeah.

My understanding is that he was actually pretty decent in hiring good teachers and averse to "hires as favors" for the mayor. That - allegedly - was a factor in the push for his early retirement.

Eric, the divisor stipulated in the successor agreement is 1/200, but, like other administrators in the district, Gagliardi's original employment contract was 1/220. If he had stayed until the end - june 30, 2009 - he could have potentially earned another 45 sick days (15 per year) and his base salary would have been $200,000. $200k/220 = $909 per day X 485 days = $440,865 + 9,090 for 10, nonaccumulating, vacation days for a grand total of $449,955. The sick bank payout was essentially a break-even on the buy-0ut vs. the original contract. As I said twice earlier, it was expensive either way.
As far as the optional consulting position, the language was Veeeeery interesting: "Gagliardi shall have the option to be reemployed by the board in a consulting administrator position at a per diem rate of 1/200 of his final base salary, not to exceed 100 days unless otherwise directed by the Board."
I do not know how that was handled -I was no longer on the board.
You are quite correct that Gagliardi hired many excellent teachers in the middle of this tenure as Superintendent - that was his lasting legacy to the Hoboken Schools. But he and the mayor were at odds for the duration over just about everything - far more than just "hires as favors".
Shep, and let's indeed hope that Toback works out well for the sake of the district's students.

Tburns, How's your new house in Secaucus?

Still no answer as to whether or not our kids have a new superintendent. Again, if Kids First didn't waste 18 months, they wouldn't be up against the wall.

Why do some posters here feel that KF's superintendent choice is a "great fit"?

*The Hoboken School district has a student population that is roughly 75% "economically disadvantaged". The school where the KF's choice is superintendent (Sussex County Technical High School) is significantly lower.

*The school district of the KF's superintendent choice- Sussex County Technical High School- failed to make Adequate Yearly Progress in 2009-2010, consequently, the district was listed as a "**district** in need of improvement."

*The KF choice has expertise in vocational education-- generally, an alternative to traditional college and university study and is not considered to be "college prep". Given the recent adoption of Advanced Placement curriculum in Hoboken High School, there seems to be an inconsistency in vision and expertise.

*The Hoboken School District is an inner city, urban school district. Sussex County Vocational School is a suburban, rural school district. Great fit?

*Sussex County Vocational has about 544 students, the Hoboken School District has over 2100.

*The KF choice has no experience as a district administrator in a "feeder system" school district.

What is not clear is why KF felt he is the answer to the needs of Hoboken. KF has failed to articulate a vision of the district and how their choice supports the vision. Let's be careful of charactering their choice as a "great fit" as it boarders on being both disingenuous and ill informed.

wtf? Is this true???

Let's keep it simple---
http://education.state.nj.us/rc/nclb09/reports/37/5110/37-5110-010.html

Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) Status
School made AYP: NO

School classified as "In Need of Improvement": YES
"In Need of Improvement" status: year 2

District classified as
"in need of improvement" status: YES

To be clear--- This candidate is certainly a qualified person who is doing a fine job given the constraints and demands of his current position. However, the primary point is what were the characteristics that KF was seeking that made this candidate a "great fit" for the unique aspects of the Hoboken School District- (i.e. as opposed to the Board's "best choice from the pool of candidates").

For instance- how is the area of study of the candidate's doctoral work, "A study of the impact of principal transformational leadership on teachers concerns surrounding mandatory community service programs" a "great fit" for Hoboken? Does KF want to institute mandatory community service programs? (fyi-- that was a major component of the IB curriculum which KF took every opportunity to criticize). Or was KF just enamored that the candidate has an Ed.D/doctorate?

"enamored" by Ed.D? Didn't you and Raslowski have doctorates? Didn't look like any "amore" there.

my guess would be experience in public education would be up there on a list.

I agree that experience in public education is a great thing to have and warrants strong consideration as a criteria for Superintendent of the Hoboken Public Schools. But, does "experience in public education" meet a "great fit" criteria? I believe a very high percentage of the applicant pool DID have experience in public education. Therefore, "experience in public school" is not a very discriminating criteria (able to effectively separate the applicant pool). In fact-- "experience in public education" may be closer to what some on this blog apparently see as a "necessary" criteria rather than a "great fit" criteria.
So--again, why is the current candidate a "great fit" for the Hoboken School District? Especially when considering the strengths and challenges that face this particular district at this particular time.

ASIDE: As for Raslowski and Petrocino-- in the words of Mark McGwire, "I don't want to talk about the past right now." But rumors abound that Petrocino never actually got his doctorate. I heard those rumors, I know others did too.

Toback performs well and is well liked in his district, saves them money. They offer him a raise, he accepts. The Freeholders take back the raise and he doesn't leave or quit?

"greed head"? Interesting view.

http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2008/05/freeholders_demand_tech_school.html
Toback sounds great!

"The board canceled the third year and instead gave him a four-year pact that would bring his pay more in line with other tech school superintendents in New Jersey, who on average earn $174,000, Pladdys said.

"We thought so much of Mark we renewed him," Pladdys said. "In the overall scheme of things, he has saved a lot of money administratively. We wanted to bring him up to parity with other tech schools in the state."

I have no doubt there are probably MANY things about the candidate that are good and descent. It's not about the candidate.-It is about why did the KF Board consider this candidate to be a "great fit" for Hoboken. Let's put it another way--- the KF Board owes it to the candidate they are hiring to have a clear, articulate, and detailed description of their plan for the Hoboken School District and how this candidate will make that vision a reality (if for no other reason- for evaluation and performance accountability criteria).

Or, vice versa, the KF Board should explain that they are in agreement with this candidate's clear, articulate, and detailed description of his plan for the Hoboken School District.

In either case, it is not unreasonable to be open and transparent in discussing the coordination of the vision for the district and "the fit" of this candidate to that vision. In is reasonable information for the parents, taxpayers, voters, and general public to know. So far, IMHO it has not been provided.

not been provided to whom?

Board comments regarding the candidate are on channel 77.

Tobak he seems like he could be the man,
to improve Hoboken Schools with a good plan,
Christie's ill thought out cap,
could turn his hire into scrap,
And Hoboken could be right back where it began.

At some point hiring the "new guy" involves a leap,
with a good hire, oh the rewards we could reap,
Do we in Hoboken expect low salaried perfection?
Or will this again dive into needless dissection?
Because the cost of no leadership is steep.

All I know is that the lawyers are going to make money, the governor is going to be angry around state aid season, the kids will have no leader and KF will try to explain away the fact that it took them 18 months to not hire a superintendent. Oh, and getting back to the article, they did it with no transparency!!! I guess if you do everything behind closed doors nobody really knows how much you screwed up. Unbelievable...

sounds so vindictive. sad.

not sure about the "no transparency" Your knowledge about the process consists of not attending "many meetings, but just by reading the blogs"

Was there a forum for the final two candidates...No.
Was the contract made public at the Special meeting as required by law? No.
Does meeting the finalist an hour before the offer was to be voted upon really transparent? No.
Does the public know the qualifications of the final candidates? No
Were the results of the "survey" ever released to the public? No.
Sorry, I just don't see the transparency.
I have no reason to be vindictive. I'm concerned that my children will have an educational leader and I'm concerned about how my property taxes are being spent. I'd rather see textbooks instead of legal bills.
Keep in mind that I voted for the majority of the board and find it terribly disheartening that they have let me down. So you can call me anything you want but all I am is a disappointed former supporter of KF.

I really don't have a problem if they pay somewhat above the proposed cap. Hoboken is as close to the NY market as one can get. I do think however, that we're entitled to know how much WE'RE going to be paying. Is that too much to ask?

Thanks "Outofcontrol" and "Scott Wilk"-- the picture seems much more complicated than what I hear about. Why can't we see the proposed contract? If the taxpayers are paying for the lawsuit, it seems like it should be public.

Jane, I'm sorry if you can't believe that someone is disappointed in the actions of the people she supported. I'm not alone either.

Give it up out of control, of course you are concerned if it is above the cap - so is every one - some care some don't - by definition when the contract gets approved we will know what it is - till it gets approved again by definition no one knows what it will be. So what your really asking for is information we are not legally entitled to get - if we are OPRA it. As I understand it the law suit is just asking for a decision from the state on whether or not the superintendent can be hired
then we can see whether or not it meets the CAP -
You guys/gals just seem to want to try to scare away another candidate -

Give me a break Jane. The Dept. of Ed does not outlaw transparency. The NJDOE doesn't ban public forums. Nor does it ban releasing contract information when the board passed a resolution to hire the guy. Admit it, the board doesn't want the public to weigh in. Same goes for you, cat. There is no reason why that information wasn't provided when the resolution was passed by the board. Once they released the name of the candidate, the rest of the information should have been released.
If the board lawyer does indeed file suit, he won't be able to hide behind any confidentiality garbage. Once they voted to offer a contract, the information belongs in the public domain.

Yeah right, Jane. Lump everyone together who doesn't agree with you and call it "politics". Classic denial. Try citing the state law that would be violated or the ethics code that would have been violated had your buddies provided the public with the information it was entitled to have prior to the vote that was taken at the special meeting. There is no law that prevented them from providing that information once they announced the name of the candidate. NOT ONE STATE LAW would have been violated at that point and you know it. Talk about politics....

Speak for yourself, Jane. People who don't even read blogs are justifiably questioning the actions of THIS Board, this KF majority who brought us the "wonderful" Mr. Carter and his pals. I notice that the KF rhetoric of how they did such a great job selecting Carter has silenced since reality set in.
Under a KF majority: ALL Hoboken schools except Calabro, have failed to make AYP; Saturday U has been scrapped; Adult Ed no longer runs; There has been NO SAT preparation for our college-bound students despite that fact that our students scores are some of the lowest in New Jersey etc. etc. etc.
When reasonable questions are asked about the actions of this board, what responsible response do we get? A) Raslowsky was baaad. B) The old guard is corrupt. C) The critics are all about "politics".
People who bought the "reform" brand, have begun to realize that they got swindled.

So Jane chose option A) Raslowsky was baaad. LOL
Still no word on what THIS Board has done to make this district better for students.
Now the excuse is "B.C. was sooo bad that we can't make changes overnight"
B.C. = Before Carter (KF terminology - how utterly ridiculous)
Other than getting rid of personnel who were not aligned with them and bringing in the Carter crew what again were the accomplishents????
p.s. As Carter says in his December newsletter - the best thing they have done was buy laptops!!! But even he admits, he isn't a "tech" guy. Good God.
And, by the way, Jane's reading comprehension leaves a bit to be desired - I never labeled myself a reformer. I DO call it like I see it. If Jane wants to improve her comprehension, she can do what the students were told to do to prepare for their SATs - watch the course on cable TV. Seriously. That's what they were told to do.
Toback HAS to be better.

Jane seems angry. Must have touched a nerve. She also seems to have a lot of info at her fingertips...let's see...anger+misinformation=((insert the name of a board member) lol

Jane---RU talkin' about 10R's? I heard it was a policy inherited...and was discontinued. It's well known that KF members had the old policy 1) explained to them, 2) spoke about the details, and 3) were informed that the policy would be come to an end (which it did "BC"). There was no secret. No drama. Pull out those details you seem to be threatening. Raslowski and Cella inherited it and they ended it. It was gone by August 2009.

Why is it that we know the terms of the Parsippany sup't contract when that one, very publicly, has not bee approved by the county sup't?

jane, you are the legal expert. find for us the state statute that prevents the school board from releasing contract details, even one, the salary agreed upon by the board and candidate.

wilk, what is 10R?

"Sussex County Technical School is located on a 90-acre campus in Sparta. The facility houses a comprehensive Technical High School, an Adult Career Center, and the 1,500 seat McNeice Auditorium. It is the school of choice for nearly 700 secondary students.
The Board of Education provides career and technical training in twenty-two different disciplines. Our cooperative work programs provide many students with actual work experience in many trades. All programs are designed in consideration of student learning needs with an emphasis on active learning experiences.
http://education.state.nj.us/rc/rc09/narrative/37/5110/37-5110-000.html

Many students from Sussex County Technical School take advantage of a rigorous academic program that prepares them for admission to many of the nation’s finest colleges and universities. In addition to providing Sussex County residents with many outstanding educational opportunities, we provide county businesses with skilled employees who drive the local economy through their work and entrepreneurship."

Now I get it - this really is about the CAP and trying to embarrass the entire school board (i believe they all voted to hire Dr Toback) - if the proposed amount is over the CAP (which none of us know) you want something to attack before a final hiring decision or additional negotiations can occur.

Nice

Now you get it? You are clueless. I already said that I don't support caps. But, I would like to know how much they are planning to pay this guy. It's my right as a taxpayer and nobody, I repeat nobody has the right to withhold that information from me or any other taxpayer. Look, if it takes 200k to get the best, I'm all for it. I just want to know. Is that so difficult for you to understand, cat?

clueless? who is angry?

don't know anything about Parsipany. Is his contract been finalized? I beleive the Hoboken contract has not been finalized yet. Aren't they waitng for a review?

Are all contracts negotiated in public before they are finalized? Was Raslowski and Petosinos and gagliardi's contract negotiated in public. I know there wasn't so many blogs back then but I find it hard to believe the public knew about the buyout and the Petrosinos second job before the vote.

An offer HAS BEEN MADE and a resolution approving the hire was passed at a special meeting. That is the end of the negotiating stage...now it's time to come clean with the info. Besides, why the secrecy anyway. If they did such a good job recruiting this guy , they should be proud of their accomplishment instead of hiding behind lawyers.

Isn't the county review the final step? What if they reject it? Doesn't negotians contiune?

Back before the gov took over their job, it was the county job to review the contracts. Let's say a district had some nutty thing in the contract, fresh flowers delived daily, the county would reject it and the district would have to go back to the candidate to renegotiate it.

It would become final only after all three parties came to an agreement. Thats how it seemed to me.

Like I said before, I bet the proably approved Raslowski and Pertosions contracts before they became public. Were they reviewed (and negotiated) publically beofre the vote?

Parsippany's Superintendent's contract is being hotly contested and was the site of one of Christie's Town Hall meetings where an educator went toe-to-toe with him. A better comparison with Hoboken's situation is with the very Republican stronghold of Westfield and what is going on with the hiring of the Superintendent there.
As always, there are those who will try to discredit my position on issues, but can't say what they or the people they support have ever done for the betterment of public education.

Eliminating positions? you forget the HIRES for 2009-2010 ;-)

1) Acting Interim Supervisor of Instruction: Mathematics (@ $500 a day)
2) Acting Interim Supervisor of Instruction: Language Arts (@ 500 a day)
3) Interim School Business Administrator (@$640 a day)
4) Acting Fiscal Specialist ($3200 a month)*
5) Fiscal Specialist Accountant- $65,000 a year
5) Interim Assistant Superintendent ($120,000 extended to $136,000 2/10)
6) Acting Interim Supervisor of Instruction: Special Education (@ $500 a day)
7) Acting Fiscal Specialist for Technology (@450 a day)
8) Legal representation: Eliminated in house salaried attorney and hired a firm per hour
9) Interim High School principal ($560 a day)
10) Hired two people to develop workshops for staff and parents
$1000 per session- 1.5 to 2 hrs not to exceed $10,000
11) Senior Accountant- $85,000 a year
12) Supervisor of Curriculum and Instruction: Humanities ($99,978.00)

We could go point by point, but what's the use? Let's fact it. KF and these hires have done NOTHING:

* failed to implement the curriculum
* failed to raise test scores which were "guaranteed" to be raised
* Added Curriculum Director this year! (what is the Assistant Super doing?)

aren't some of these positions eliminated and some are repalcement?

every adinimstration is going to prioritize and hire for what they deem necessary. Raslowski hired you, HVAC, General Tech and Chief Info Officer.

Carter hired Dir. Of Curr, Math and LA Supervisors and legal represenataion.

@johnsmith- Most were non-posted and unadvertised administrative and supervisory positions that KF hired over the first 7 months of the 2009-2010 school year. KF might wish the public perception to be one of cutting administrative and supervisory positions but in fact, they have been very active at hiring administrators and supervisors and almost always electing not to require posting or advertising for these positions.

A memo from New Jersey Interim Commissioner of Education Hendricks dated November 15, 2010 required all districts to send new Superintendent contract info to the State by yesterday (Friday Dec 3rd). The Hoboken BoE's reply, whatever it was, is now public:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/43518136/MemoFromHendricks

shep---- KF has hired *at least* 5 administrators to do what Petrocino was overseeing in the district: Assistant Superintendent; Curriculum Director; Acting Interim Supervisor of Instruction: Mathematics; Acting Interim Supervisor of Instruction: Language Arts; and Supervisor of Curriculum and Instruction: Humanities.

Either says something about Petrocino or not much about those 5 hires ;-)

Maybe they wanted more then part time "oversite".

Enough of the past--- let's find out about the Dec 3 response to the Memo from Hendricks- that'll be interesting. The past will take care of itself. It's the future we're baking...

Should be interesting to see how it all plays out...

it's understandable why Scott doesn't want to talk about the past, but OOC sounds like he is lickin his chops.

She is licking her chops because it's going to be interesting. Whatever the outcome, it will have state wide implications.

Take a look at this 11/30/10 speech- should be interesting watching KF try to sue this Governor:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5_6Nv2aLEHk

I thought the Board was filing the suit?

and your point?
Watch the video 'whiteshirt' posted above and see Christie talk about the "conspiracy between superintendents and elected boards of education." Governor Christie goes on, "imagine this, I am being sued today by a school board wanting to give a salary above the cap and is paying taxpayer money to sue the Governor and the Commissioner of Education to get the higher salary for the superintendent....this is Dr. LeRoy Seitz, Superintendent in Parsippany NJ who I have now crowned the new poster boy for greed and arrogance in public education in New Jersey."

You think it is wise that Kids First puts their candidate, Dr. Toback, in THIS line of fire?

This IS a KF suit. Their political group holds the vast majority on the Board. It's their puppy. It's going to be interesting to watch them sue the county superintendent, the interim commissioner of education, and the popular governor Christie for the right to pay their candidate over the cap....

Scott you still want it both ways - I don't believe you stand for any thin other than your hate for the Hoboken Board of Education - "conspiracy between superintendents and elected boards of education" - never happened - LOL
.

cat-- that quote was from Christie in that video, not mine. If you haven't viewed the video, I suggest you do so. I think you'll get a better sense of what I'm talking about.

shep- if the suit is only about acting on Supt contracts (which it may or may not be- we'll see soon enough), why was the Hoboken Interim Superintendent's contract extension passed with no protest from the County Superintendent, or for that matter, anyone else at the State?

Yes i know it was from christie and i saw the video - so what is your point. what are you saying - take a stand, sue don't sue, christie good - christie bad, superintendents make deals with their boards yes - no

What do you really want

cat- it's not about me...or you. But, it is a little about trying to couch the discussion in terms of false dichotomies. As if a situation like this has only two choices, when many other choices could/should be considered. It is setting up a false dilemma, "good or bad"/"right or wrong" choices, false choices, or a bifurcation fallacy. You get my point.... it's complex and there are many factors to consider.

There's no hate-- believe me, having served on Board's of Education in WI and again in SC, and now a taxpayer in Hoboken, I appreciate the work these unpaid public servants do for communities.

Here is a link to Gagliardi, the Hoboken BOE legal counsel giving a good explanation as to the nature of the BOE lawsuit against the state of NJ in this matter.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0C-NKtfCKpk

It is not about the salary, it is about the need to be able to move forward and get a ruling from the county one way or the other. If you look at what Toback was making at is last job it is certainly possible and likely that his requirements for salary are above the cap. If they are it doesn't make the man greedy for expecting more renumeration for more responsibility. I didn't think 190K a year for a good super is out of line when you compare it to other schools in the area.

FYI- The $190K referrence was what the stated salary was offered to Romano before he withdrew his offer last year. I won't know until the contract is finalized. The fact that negotiations are private until the result is not some lack of transparency but rather the proper process.

All comparisons to other districts (based on size, # of schools, location, student body, district vision) are essentially null and void now.

Cat didn't ask me, but that never stopped me from giving my opinion before ;) Toback – good. Christie – bad. Lawsuit – not if it could be avoided.

Raslowsky left his position effective July 1, 2009. 16 months later contracts were still being approved in NJ for salaries that exceeded Christie’s caps. The moratorium was effective 11/15/2010. This shouldn’t have come as any surprise to anyone with a toehold in the education world. Certainly the attorney for the Board, who is exceptionally well versed in education law, should have seen the writing on the wall and told the Board members that they needed to hurry the fudge up. But a bumbling, lackadaisical timetable “let’s RFP for search firms” “Romano is what???” has brought the Hoboken School District to the position it finds itself in today. The temp leaving (don’t let the door hit you on the way out) and a decent choice waiting in the wings.

At least Toback was smart enough to know that, if the Superintendent caps go into effect in February, he would make $20k less by staying in his smaller district. Pay restrictions based on enrollment are: 251 - 750 — $135,000 (Sussex) 1,501 - 3,000 — $155,000 (Hoboken) - at $175K now, that would be a $40k drop in income. Ouch.

Can someone who holds the proper certification be appointed to fill the required position until a contract for the permanent superintendent can be approved or would the moratorium prevent that too. Does anyone know?

Dr. Toback should be thankful that it's Governor Christie's generous caps and not Assemblyman Dave Rible's legislation (A2576) that will be going into effect in February. Rible wanted superintendent salaries capped at $5000 LESS than the level of NJ Commissioner of Education ($141,000)- not unreasonable. Governor Christie advocates for a rough baseline similar to the Governor's salary ($175,000)---MUCH MORE generous!

Personally, I think a salary of $136,000 (with pension and health care) for a superintendent is fine for this school system. But, I can live with the $155,000 Christie is proposing (provided he pays 1.5% of his salary for health care). Not a penny more.

>The edict states no action on ANY supt contract
wasn't the extension for the current interim superintendent (until Jan 31, 2011) passed at the same meeting you claim the attny responded that the 'edict states no action on ANY supt contract'?

So---- since the interim's contract WAS extended (at the same meeting Toback's wasn't)--- did it violate the so called "edict" about NO ACTION on any supt contracts? Is the extension until 1/31 void? illegal?

Carter and company can't be gone soon enough for me - with the exception of the BA, Davis.
Tonight is the Board meeting, and I will wait to watch on TV rather than sit through approvals of garbage such as this: free motivational speaker at HHS
http://carlylespeaks.com/
yeah, sometimes you get what you pay for. Are they using instructional time for this?
Does anyone after looking at this website think that students should attend this?
Sorry, I know this is a thread about the incoming Superintendent, but these other little things really irk me. Who the heck thought this was worthwhile enough to propose this?

Looks like we'll have an approval or not within the next 14 days: http://www.nj.com/hobokennow/index.ssf/2010/12/nj_education_commissioner_perm_1.html