Seller's market for superintendents

I received the below comments this  morning from an Anonymous Poster.  I thought they were good -- they also don't appear to be written by One of the Usual Suspects -- so I bumped them up to the top where they are more likely to be seen.

From Anonymous:

Since there continues to be much speculation about Dr. Johnson's salary, I am copying some information I've posted on another blog recently. My original concern was about the pool of talent available to Sandwich should we begin a new superintendent search. What I found was that there absolutely is a shortage of qualified superintendent candidates. Don't take my word for it. Simply google those key words and take a look at the articles that appear. 

In one article called "Seller's market for superintendents complicates search for school leaders", the executive director of the Massachusetts Association of School Superintendents explains that searches yield about 20 candidates, but only a small number come with strong credentials. About 60 of the commonwealth's 277 (about 22%) superintendents turn over each year. The job has become increasingly complex and demanding in a state with a highly regulated education system. 

What's more, in light of this shortage, districts who have the ability to pay are offering attractive compensation packages with added perks to lure the best candidates. I don't think Sandwich falls in this category. Add to the mix the acrimonious atmosphere in Sandwich right now, plus Dr. Johnson's contract in legal limbo, and I don't like our chances.

By the way, news to Marie Kangas who continually harps on Dr. Johnson's salary: The AVERAGE pay for MA superintendents was in the $140,000 range last year, but is now hovering around $150.000. Superintendents in the Boston suburbs are much higher. (Arlington $175,00; Andover $200,00). I'm sure a statewide comparison of salaries is available somewhere.

But my point was simply to show that qualified superintendent candidates are in short supply, and for districts to hire and retain them, they must be willing to offer a competetive compensation package. In Hadley, a district I don't much about except it's fairly rural and fairly small, the superintendent was just offered a contract with annual 5% increases that peaks at $147,735 in 2012 and also includes $6000 in longevity payments, a $2000 tax-deferred annuity, and a full payout of unused vacation time. This is the reality. This is what a new hire is going to expect.

In the rush to replace Dr. Johnson, her salary has been bandied about by her critics. I merely want to suggest that Dr. Johnson's compensation does not seem to be out of line. Moreover, if her critics think we can easily replace her, and possibly even save money by doing so, they're in for a big surprise.

That is why I wish the entire School Committee could have embraced Mr. Hunt's original idea: recognize the many accomplishments of Dr. Johnson and work on the deficits. A new superintendent search, regardless of who conducts it, frightens me very much.