Let me tell you a little tale that I hope does not come true.
New TPS boss may hit salary ceiling
From the story in the local daily:
David McClellan, president of the Toledo Association of Administrative Personnel, told The Blade that an agreement between the school system and its unions prohibits the board from paying Mr. Harner more than former superintendent Eugene Sanders until union members get a raise.
"They will not be able to pay him more than [Mr.] Sanders, and we are not budging on that," Mr. McClellan said.
And later in the story:
Francine Lawrence, president of the Toledo Federation of Teachers, indicated she would support a higher salary.
Ms. Lawrence said she's "willing to have an open mind about it and enter into discussions with board members."
From the latest edition of The Matrix, the Toledo Association of Administrative Personnel newsletter:
Politics makes strange bedfellows
Ever since Tuesday, February 20, 2007 Board Meeting where the Board unanimously voted to hire Dr. Harner as the next Superintendent of TPS, TAAP has been trying to put together how the "deal" went down. First, some interesting facts:
Robert Torres was not present for the interviews of John Foley and William Harner (under the TAAP Agreement an interviewer must be present for all interviews or he/she is not allowed to participate in the process).
Darlene Fisher did not attend the presentation made by John Foley at the Community Format she arrived after he spoke.
Before she received her marching orders from the TFT president Theresa Fedor openly supported John Foley.
Here is how TAAP believes the "deal" went down. Board members Deborah Barnett and Larry Sykes supported Foley. TAAP believes that they thought they had the support of Steven Steel. They did not. All of the Board members were in agreement that Thomas Maher was not their choice. Unexpectedly, Steven Steel joined the "Two for Change" in support of Dr. Harner. AFSCME and TAAP supported Foley. TFT and African American Parent Association, the Urban Coalition, and Parents for Public Schools supported Dr. Harner. Is this the coalition of the future? Politics makes strange bedfellows.
By the way, I don't know about any deal and I'm co-president of PPS and the communications chair for the Coalition. To my knowledge neither the Urban Coalition nor PPS had any discussions with the TFT president or any other group about any support for Harner. Both groups, and I believe this is the case with AAPA, did nothing other than talk to board members about our concerns which is an option available to all citizens.
Well what does this all say? TAAP President McClellan is obviously going to make it hard to get Harner into town. As to whether there is an agreement of some kind that would prohibit paying Harner more than former Super Sanders is an interesting question. And if there was an agreement related to Sanders, would it actually be binding on the Board of Education relative to the hiring of Harner?
Even more troublesome is that Sykes apparently wanted Foley (and I had also heard this) and he is on the negotiating team.
Here is a little history. In 2000 Sykes was board president and head of the search to replace Merrill Grant. This process got down to two individuals with the board offering the job to Dr. Yates. We learned later that he was not the first choice for the board, but there was another candidate, Dr. Brown, who would not abandon his other job prospect so a job was not offered and Brown eventually went to work in Rockford, Illinois.
Yates was apparently buoyed by the public support he got and made some very serious salary demands giving Board President Sykes his chance to blow Yates out of the water and get his man, Eugene Sanders. By the way, Sanders had been acting as the liaison between the Board and the citizen search committee and had done considerable consulting with TPS. How convenient that he was in a position to know everything about the process and was the only person communicating with both groups.
Sykes made the salary demands public and as would be expected, the public started calling Yates all kinds of names. Now it is possible that a package would never have been negotiated. But we have seen the correspondence between the attorneys which was obtained from the district by an open records request. Once the initial demands were made, there was no real attempt at a counter offer by the district. The negotiations broke down and Sykes got his man as superintendent with a 4-1 vote. Terry Glazer was the lone dissenting vote.
The search was never reopened. The citizen search committee had no input into the final decision. Only Bruce Douglas identified and supported by Board Member Silverman and Eugene Sanders were interviewed. Douglas lost the first vote with Silverman and Glazer in support and Sykes, Welch and Kennedy against. And that folks is a very brief synopsis of what happened.
Now jump forward to 2006 and Sykes is again in a position to negotiate for the board. He and Torres were selected to enter into negotiations. Rumor has it that an attorney was not even appointed to enter into negotiations as of last week.
So, with Sykes a Foley supporter will we have a repeat of 2000? Will Sykes leak information that might poison the situation and lead us back to Foley as our only option? Would the board reopen negotiations or just fall back on Foley as the only option given the time and expense?
One thing appears certain, there are internal forces at work to keep Foley. So the question is what will they do to attain that goal?
After watching Sykes since his appointment to the board in 1997, I can only say that this is well within the realm of possibility. Sykes wants his way and he will do most anything to get it. If the negotiations break down, I
What a company pays a CEO should be based on the company's ability to compensate that person. Not on what employees of the company think the CEO should be paid.
Granted we are not talking about what happens in the real world but I would be concerned about a qualified superintendent who would take on the complex situation facing TPS for a salary lower than the average rate for similar positions in Ohio.
African American Parents' Association had no comments as to who the new superintendent should be. As a matter of fact when we went to the Parent forum and the business leader's forum we were put on a gag order by the Consulting firm until the board had their meeting. We honored that ridiculous request.
My choice (as secretary of African American Parents' Association) was Maher and Harner was second, Foley was a distant third.
Where TAAP got the fact that we wanted Harner is part and parcel of the lies and propaganda that permeates TPS.
Once again it appears as though Larry Sykes is leading the parade in attempting to circumvent the correct process in hiring a superintendent.
While I commend Mr. Foley for his many years of service, I don't feel that he is what TPS needs in the current situation. We need change and we need it FAST.
While the Sykes' of the world are busy playing political strong-arm games our children are suffering.
It's time to stop this nonsense and make every effort to obtain and retain a superintendent that has the knowledge, drive, passion and compassion to make our school system whole again.
This boardroom backstabbing and lame attempts at power plays are disgusting. And, so far, I see Larry Sykes as nothing more than a stir stick in a pot of stinking mess. He needs to be gone. His arrogance and lack of genuine interest in our schools makes me ill.
...about backroom deals and maneuvering, though I'm sure it's happening, but didn't the board establish a salary range when they advertised the position? If so, then it shouldn't matter what the unions think so long as the the range is adhered to.
I've got a different perspective on the Blade article and union comments on my blog:
http://thurbersthoughts.blogspot.com/2007/03/is-tps-board-hamstrung.html
And then I'm off to work.
Does anyone think that it would just work again? That one person would be named, PUBLICLY, as the boards' 'choice' as Super and then the process would be sabotaged and the real good ole' boy pick would somehow miraculously wind up in the position?
That's the question. Do you think that people in some key positions are assuming that we are so stupid that they can pull the same obvious and tired old trickery and we will never ever stand up to them?
If your answer is yes - then answer me this. Would you tolerate it?
(And Maggie, if that isn't a backroom deal, then I don't know what would be).
If you're here to tell me it's my fault - you're right. I meant to do it. It was alot of fun. That's why I have this happy smile on my face.
It's like they stuck their foot in the water to test it. To check and see if the city would tolerate another maneuver like the one that landed Eugene 'Pay me on the Way Out' Sanders.
I was tuned in and heard the resounding Oh Hell No! But I haven't seen anything, no course correction with a new tactic to try to get rid of Harner yet?
Anybody got the inside skinny?
If you're here to tell me it's my fault - you're right. I meant to do it. It was alot of fun. That's why I have this happy smile on my face.
Yes they established a salary range and it was given to Proact the search firm. Proact was supposed to make sure that everyone would accept this salary. One of the finalists that pulled out was a guy named Williams that had made about $250K when he was at St. Louis. So one has to wonder if he was ever going to be willing to work here for less. And there were rumors and speculation about why he was in the field and then withdrew.
In the 2000 search the same guidelines were given to - hold it a minute as I time travel back - to the same search firm. And as noted in the narrative above there were issues with the candidate and salary. For the record this search firm was hired on a 3-2 vote with Sykes, Barnett and Steel voting for Proact.
Holy Toledo, maybe there is some backdoor maneuvering going on or maybe we all just have very active imaginations. But as we have seen in the past, the deal is not done till the fat lady is singing.