School administrators get 2.7% salary hike

The Shawano School Board approved giving administrators — at least the ones who remain — a 2.7% pay hike during its May 16 meeting. The question of where to find the money to fund an all-staff raise, however, is still up in the air.

Business manager Josh Swanson presented a proposal that would give administrators a 2.7% increase in their base salary as well as a bonus that equates to 2% of their pay. However, the board voted 6-2 to only give the 2.7% increase, with board members James Davel and Mart Grams voting against the raises and Chris Gull abstaining from the vote.

The decision comes as the board also had to accept the resignation of a third principal, Aaron Manders with Olga Brener Intermediate School, later in the meeting. The district is also losing Shawano Community High School Principal Scott Zwirschitz, who is going to Clintonville, and Shawano Community Middle School Principal Stuart Russ, who is becoming principal for Wittenberg-Birnamwood High School.

Shawano parent Bobbi Lemerond spoke at the beginning of the meeting and recommended that the full raise go to administrators for the individual schools, but not for administrators in the central office.

“Our principals and vice principals and deans and building secretaries, they’re right on the ground with the teachers. I do believe they need a raise, as well,” Lemerond said, noting that the previous meeting when the board approved a 4.7% raise for teachers and support staff but left out administrators was a little confusing. “I don’t think the administrators at the central office need a raise at this time. I think we need to look into the consultants and the money being spent there.”

Swanson told the board he recommended against having the 4.7% raise in the base salary for administrators, as he did when it came to raises for the rest of the staff on May 2. He said the move would lessen the financial impact for the district, which had a $2 million deficit for the 2022-23 school year. That hole was plugged up with one-time Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief dollars, but the district is anticipating further deficits in coming years.

Board member Michael Sleeper, who made the first motion to approve Swanson’s recommendation, pushed for the administrator raises. Sleeper said he believes the district will have a better idea where it’ll be financially next year once a decision is made on a proposed operational referendum in November and the Wisconsin Legislature looks at its next biennial budget in early 2023.

“The combination of salary increase plus stipend to me is the right fiscal combination to not encumber us with the entire amount going forward,” Sleeper said.

Grams disagreed that the raises would be fiscally sound. He noted that even though the board voted to up debt payments by $273,000 to cut down on future interest payments at the meeting, it was unwise to assume that voters would agree to an operational referendum, which is proposed to add $1.75 million to $2.25 million annually for a five-year period.

Grams also questioned what good the raises would do since three principals are leaving the district.

“All of our administrators are leaving anyway,” Grams said.

Davel also expressed concern about fiscal responsibility, adding that the $600,000 or more needed to pay the other raises hasn’t been found yet. Further, he noted a continuous decrease in student enrollment means less state funding coming into the district.

“When you add that payroll, that is every single year,” Davel said. “We don’t know what we’re getting in state aid. What we do know is that we’re down students, which does affect the calculation for state aid. When we made that decision, whether it was from the heart or not, that was grossly and fiscally not responsible. Period.”

Allowing the raises will impact how much the district can contribute to employees’ health insurance, Davel added, and it is expected to impact other areas of the budget going forward. He also questioned if an operational referendum would be possible without raising taxes, as administrators have suggested.

Board member Alysia Pillsbury, who amended the initial motion to eliminate the bonus, pointed out that the district is having to fill three principal positions in the near future and questioned how it could do that if it doesn’t approve any raise for administrators.

“I agree with you,” Pillsbury said to the board members concerned with where the money is coming from. “It’s just a mixed bag. Aren’t we separating one group from another?”

Board president Mike Musolff questioned why district officials were recommending any raises if there isn’t the money to accommodate them. He noted that the district is losing employees “at an unprecedented level,” but he admitted the raises might not do much to stop the bleeding.

“If we’re going to talk about it, we should have the ability to do something,” Musolff said. “I don’t how we go from that to not giving a raise of some sort.”

Superintendent Randi Anderson argued the board should not deny administrator raises a second time, noting a compensation study done in 2021 froze the salaries of some officials.

“I’d really like for you to consider something for administration to be able to show a united front,” Anderson said.

lpulaski@newmedia-wi.com