Farmington’s school district is back in the news, this time wasting an enormous amount of money by renewing the superintendent’s contract without the support of two newly elected board members. The two future school board members who won’t be in office until next year wished to postpone the renewal until after the details of the contract could be made public and when a third new member would join their ranks.
Unfortunately for taxpayers in the Farmington School District, according to this article in the Pioneer Press, after a 5-1 vote, the current Farmington School District renewed Superintendent Brad Meeks’ ridiculously expensive three-year contract. Why is it ridiculously expensive? Well, if you take a look at the salary of the retiring superintendent from Apple Valley-Eagan-Rosemount School District (District 196), you’d see that he retired making $191,000 and Brad Meeks’ three year contract starts out at $172,000/year. The very big difference between the two is in the number of students each superintendent oversees. It has been said that the public just doesn’t understand how much work a superintendent has to do, how many people he has to supervise, and how many students are under him, well, let’s compare Farmington School District to their neighboring district, District 196 and see what we come up with shall we?
In District 196 there are around 28,000 students under the guidance of the superintendent while in the Farmington School District (District 192), there are around 6,200 with growth in the next ten years to top 8,000. Now, I don’t know about you but I don’t see how the Farmington School Board can justify paying Meeks 10% less when there are more than 4.5 times the number of students in District 196. This ridiculous salary comes right after the Farmington School District was admonished by the Minnesota Department of Administration when they refused to release a full copy of Meeks’ contract when requested by Tim Burke who is now on the Farmington School Board but was only a candidate at the time. You would think that after building the $100 million dollar shrine to Tiger Sports that they would take it easier on the taxpayers and do the responsible thing and wait for the new board, elected by the public to tackle the issues the school district is forcing upon the people. Unfortunately, the current Farmington School District, with the exception of one, took the low road and screwed over every single taxpayer in Farmington, parts of Lakeville, Castle Rock, Empire, Eureka, and Vermillion townships. I am disheartened by the entire ordeal. The Farmington School District members should be ashamed of themselves for behaving like a bunch of crybabies.
It’s obvious to me that the current school district board is trying to teach the taxpayers a lesson for electing those that were opposed to their past actions. Working in cahoots with the likes of Charlie Kyte, Executive Director of the Minnesota Association of School Administrators which is a group of, surprise, superintendents and other educators who only want to better the salaries of their members. Charlie’s comment to the Pioneer Press is too precious to avoid. He really shows off that PhD when he says that it would be “dumb” to allow the future school board to approve a superintendent’s contract in the first few months of their terms. Avoiding the will of the taxpayers makes the current Farmington School Board members seem just as “foolhardy” has Charlie feels the now irrelevant course of action would have been.
Are you a resident that lives within the boundaries of the Farmington School District? Do you support the action of the current school board members or would you have rather had the new school board members vote to approve Meeks’ contract instead? Comment on, I’d like to know your feelings on this one.
Dakota Complaints Map
Dakota Inmate Dashboard
Loading ...
December 9th, 2008 at 3:45 pm
As a Farmington resident, I’m furious! This guy has a pay of 10% than the 196 super for managing 400% less students? How in the world of economics does that make sense? He should be getting paid at most $100k, and even that seems a little much to me…
December 9th, 2008 at 6:07 pm
Here‘s another article on the topic from the Star Tribune.
December 10th, 2008 at 8:31 am
As an Apple Valley resident, read 196.. I remember when they promoted John Curie to the position and why his predecessor, Dr. Haro, “left” for a better job in Atlanta (and then wanted to come back a few years later if I remember correctly. John was brought in, not because of poor performance, but because there was concern in district leadership that the voters had rejected two consecutive school levies. Back in the day getting a school levy passed was like going to the cash machine for the districts.. No brainer, they didn’t have mess with justifying to the voters what the money was for.. a simple “it’s for the children†argument would pass.
Back then, after several straight years of property tax increases, someone had the audacity to question the school board about what the money was going for, we were told it was for the kids and we shouldn’t worry about it. Well the next two failed and they got rid of John Haro. Curie is at retirement age, sees the writing on the wall, economy is tanking, funding is going to be an issue, and finally got sideways with the district when his idea to change the start times for the high school, from 7:30 am to 8:30 or 9:00 or something went down in flames.
Now I’ve lost track ïŠ bottom line.. the key measurement of success for Superintendent seems to be their ability to get the voters to agree to tax themselves. With that in mind, voters should absolutely have a say on contracts since its their money paying for them.
December 10th, 2008 at 2:38 pm
As a Farmington resident, I have been living this nightmare superintendent for about five years now. Prior to his hiring, ISD 192 had experienced a fair amount of superintendent turnover. At the time he was hired, I remember board members stating they wanted to hire someone who would commit to sticking around. Well, that certainly has happened. We’re stuck with him, and these school board members are the ones who should be committed.
I blog on this and other ISD 192 matters over on http://isd192watch.org/
Thanks to Bill for making this issue more visible.
December 10th, 2008 at 10:34 pm
I also am a Farmington resident. I have wondered for years why I pay $200 a year more in taxes than my buddy in Lakeville, with my home being worth $40,000 less and all other things being close to equal. Your welcome Mr. Meeks. I also love the fact that by the time my daughter enters Farmington High school in 13 years you will be long retired to a beach somewhere with really fat pockets. To Mr. Burke I would like to say in the car on the way to voting in November I told my wife to vote Burke for school board and other than that she could vote for who ever. She asked me why and the reason I gave her is matters exactly like this. I loved the work you did saving me hundreds of dollars on the sportsplex and I know that it may be too late to fight the school on this contract but please fight as hard as you can the second you officially get into office.
December 11th, 2008 at 8:14 am
[...] post on LazyLightning.org about the superintendent’s contract states: "It’s obvious to me that the current school district board is trying to teach [...]
December 11th, 2008 at 10:20 am
Make sure you check out this post which contains an analysis of Meeks’ contract for the next three years. It’s quite eye opening.
May 14th, 2010 at 7:31 am
[...] the students were as important as they like to pretend then this would be a no brainer for them. It’s not like Brad Meeks should make $176,000 (and $180,000 in the 2011-2012 school year) in t…. But I’m willing to bet the ISD 192 administration has no interest in taking pay cuts even if [...]
November 8th, 2010 at 7:32 am
[...] The request of information regarding Superintendent Meeks’ salary was done back in 2008 and while the district and the school board at the time didn’t much appreciate it, the public was appreciative of the fact that they could make educated conclusions as to its value when compared to other local school districts which have over four times the number of students enrolled. [...]
November 9th, 2010 at 1:47 pm
Like any of you would turn down a nice salary.
It amazes me when people get upset at a person because they think they are making too much. Was he supposed to say, “No, sorry. The Eagan guy has more students, so I think I will accept the job at a lower salary. The guy clearly negotiated a price that the board was willing to pay. If he can’t do the job, fire his ass.
Contracts go both ways. An employee could easily over perform, but he accepted the salary as such regardless. Danny Valencia earned a whole lot more than the Twins paid him this year, if I may use a sports analogy.
I don’t know this Meeks for didley, but he ain’t the one at fault.
November 9th, 2010 at 1:50 pm
lefty,
Brad Meeks might not have been man enough to take a paycut but Lakeville’s super sure did: http://www.lazylightning.org/isd-194-super-to-take-pay-cut-brad-meeks-nope
So while you’re spot on about Meeks, it’s not a common thread for all superintendents.
November 9th, 2010 at 2:34 pm
I’ll say it here and now: I would. If my salary was disproportionate to the marketplace or was to the detriment of the success of the organization I am running, I absolutely would.
In the private sector, you’re not even given the option. If your salary is out of line with the market, your head is on the chopping block. I would, in a heartbeat, take a pay cut to save my skin especially nowadays.
November 9th, 2010 at 3:22 pm
To your point MSPD, I would take a pay cut if my head was on the block as well.
If I had a signed contract, however…no way.
Again, I don’t want to sound like a Meeks apologist because I have zero knowledge of his performance/qualifications etc other than to think he is a good interviewer/negotiator. But once a person accepts a salary (no matter how high or low it might seem to the average salaried person they buy a bigger house, take on car payments etc that might make it hard to just blindly take a pay cut when there is little anyone could do to cut it otherwise.
The problem altogether is that there is a contract in the first place, don’t you think?
November 9th, 2010 at 4:17 pm
If it is the difference between having a job and not having a job, I’ll take the pay cut, every day of the week. Searching for work is expensive, both in time, and lack of income while you are doing it. I’ve been unemployed a total of maybe 10 weeks in my entire life. (mid 40′s now). The most, almost 8 weeks around October 2009. My salary is ~85% of what it was before the company I was working with folded in 2009. I would have taken that cut to stay where I was.
(I’ve yet to receive a dime in unemployment, ever)
March 1st, 2011 at 8:51 am
I see Meeks resigned today.
March 1st, 2011 at 9:08 am
Story at http://www.startribune.com/local/south/117128068.html.
Seems rather sudden, with no one seeming to know it was coming. Reactions will be interesting over the next few days/weeks.
March 1st, 2011 at 9:08 am
More links:
http://www.farmingtonindependent.com/event/article/id/16753/
http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/Thisweeklivecom/~3/MPxFq87IKXE/
March 1st, 2011 at 9:11 am
I saw that too. I soooooooo want to know the scoop.
I also read a quote from Tim Burke on the story, and thought that he handled it professionally.
March 1st, 2011 at 9:35 am
A Thisweek commenter notes, “This reflects terribly on our school district and community. Tim Burke must go.”
Do you agree or disagree?
March 1st, 2011 at 9:42 am
It will be interesting to find out how much his severance package is. My guess is 6 months pay starting with his last day on the job.
I also find it interesting that he is important enough to keep around for a smooth transition and also free to leave if he finds another job. Seems as if Meeks negotiated a pretty cushy exit package,
I don’t know that Farmington is the clear winner financially. It will be interesting to see if Meek’s pay + severance plus what they need to pay the replacement is more or less money than if Meeks rode out his contract.
Obviously, my analogy only works if the new guy is “equal” in performance to Meeks, which I presume is not the goal of the board. I use the word presume as a kind gesture, not that I know their actual motives.
March 1st, 2011 at 2:28 pm
The commenter should have stated:
“This reflects terribly on our school district and community. Brad Meeks had to go.”
March 1st, 2011 at 3:44 pm
I disagree with the commenter. I think of the two, I’d pick Brad Meeks to go rather than Tim Burke. Brad Meeks, an education professional has admittedly worked to thwart state law regarding public information. This reflects extremely poorly on him and I wonder who would hire him. No surprise that the article focuses on the mistakes that Burke has made, as a part time board member. Apparently the media feels it is o.k. to give Meeks, a person who’s job it is to know better, a pass on his questionable activities.
March 1st, 2011 at 4:05 pm
Here are the two documents released to the media about Meeks’ departure:
1. Statement from the district: http://tinyurl.com/48vb2fd
2. Terms of the agreement: http://tinyurl.com/4a8lqzt
March 1st, 2011 at 4:22 pm
Making a rough judgment that salary and benefits are equal to an additional 25% of salary (rudimentary, but for the sake of my point).
The person who replaces Meeks will need to get paid about 73,000 (plus benefits) for the first year on the job in order for Farmington to break even financially up to August 31, 2012 compared with what it would have paid Meeks to stay. Pay any higher than this will result in even less money available for things that schools need money for.
March 1st, 2011 at 6:21 pm
They’ll lose money on this; that much is certain. What isn’t is whether or not whatever they gain in return is worth it.
March 1st, 2011 at 7:39 pm
Given the environment in which everyone is working, the district may gain an environment where people feel safe acting on behalf of the kids first and foremost. Unlike the current administration where many people feared retribution for any opposing opinions. Meeks’ arrogance was a significant problem. I would take Tim Burke’s need to ask questions any day over the scorn that Meeks showed parents, students and staff alike.
With 4 kids in the district, I am a happy parent today. It is money much better spent that the ridiculous witch hunt that still has bills rolling in.
March 28th, 2011 at 10:36 am
From: http://www.farmingtonindependent.com/event/article/id/16940/
Do you think that these changes may be for the best? Would they have happened with any departure?
March 28th, 2011 at 11:22 am
Change is hard for a lot of people. The question is do you look at this as a problem (so many senior people leaving) or do you look at this as an opportunity to make things better. I would hope for the taxpayers of Farmington, the school board and school district staff work to make things better.
March 28th, 2011 at 11:47 am
Financially, the district has been weathering things well. At a minimum you have to acknowledge the vision of the district staff in getting their house in order long before other districts in the region acted. Since Priess came in in 2007, I don’t know if you can put it all at his feet. So I’m not sure how it will all go.
Obviously, whatever has been going on in Farmington hasn’t been aligned well with a vocal portion of the community. (not sure if it is a majority, or just a noisy minority) Regardless, I believe that Meeks set a terrible example to the staff. An example where staff doesn’t need to obey the law and provide public information. An example where direct questions are answered with vague answers, if answered at all.
If Jeff Priess still feels that what was going on before is the right way to operate a school district, well then it’s time for him to go.
March 28th, 2011 at 12:19 pm
DSW, I think you bring up a great question. With Jeff Priess leaving in addition to Linda Goers and Dr. Meeks, I think the board has a daunting task, but it’s definitely an opportunity to define what will benefit the kids and our community in the upcoming years. I also agree that the district is in a better place than neighboring districts as far as our budget is concerned.
I have to say that I absolutely love the experience my kids get in this district and have no complaints about how the schools deliver on my expectations. I think that gets lost often in all the high-profile antics that have been plaguing the district in recent years.
April 14th, 2011 at 7:38 am
http://www.thisweeklive.com/2011/04/13/is-burke-to-blame-for-farmington-school-board-problems/