The multi-million dollar cash grab in Washington schools

From an article published at ClarkCountyToday.com

Yacolt resident Mark Rose says here in Clark County, the disconnect between the district office and the classroom has officially hit a breaking point

Editor’s note: Opinions expressed in this letter to the editor are those of the author alone and may not reflect the editorial position of ClarkCountyToday.com

You know that sinking feeling when you open your property tax bill? That specific mix of dread and frustration? Keep that feeling in mind the next time a local school district tells you they’re broke.

Here in Clark County, the disconnect between the district office and the classroom has officially hit a breaking point. We’re watching school boards plead poverty, cut essential staff, and threaten to shutter programs. They come to us, hat in hand, asking for more money. But if you look at the payroll for the people at the very top, the math just doesn’t add up.

Take a hard look at Vancouver Public Schools. They just slashed the budget by nearly 9%. That’s real pain for teachers and students. Class sizes go up, support goes down. Yet, Superintendent Jeff Snell is pulling down a base salary reported at over $356,000.² When you add in the benefits and the perks that don’t always make the headlines, the total compensation can climb even higher.² It’s tone-deaf. You can’t tell parents you can’t afford paraeducators while the CEO is making private-sector money.

Evergreen Public Schools is in the same boat. They’ve been grappling with cuts ranging from $16 million to $20 million. Enrollment is down. Inflation is up. It’s a mess. But Superintendent John Boyd? He’s one of the highest-paid school employees in the entire state, with a salary north of $390,000. That puts him in the same tax bracket as superintendents in the wealthiest suburbs of Seattle. Does that make sense for a district in Southwest Washington facing a fiscal cliff? Hardly.

Then there’s Battle Ground. This one really stings. Voters rejected the levy, twice. They sent a loud, clear message that they were tapped out. The result was brutal — up to $20 million in cuts. Staff positions gone. Safety and nursing hours reduced. It was a gut punch to the community. Yet, the superintendent position still commands over $272,000 a year. I don’t care how hard the job is; it’s hard to justify a quarter-million-dollar salary when you can’t even convince your own community to fund the basics. And get this, they’re bringing us the levy vote for a third time in 12 months.

I’ll give a little credit where it’s due: Hockinson’s Steve Marshall is taking a pay freeze next year. His salary is already lower than his neighbors, at around $160,000. It’s a gesture. It shows he gets it. But in the grand scheme of things, it’s a drop in the bucket compared to the bloat we’re seeing elsewhere.

Here’s the thing that really grinds my gears. If these massive salaries were buying us world-class results, maybe — maybe — I’d swallow it. But they aren’t. Washington ranks 34th in the nation for recovery in math proficiency post-pandemic and 26th in reading. Test scores are flatlining. We are paying Cadillac prices for a lemon.

There’s talk in Olympia about capping these salaries at $250,000. The “experts” say if we do that, we won’t be able to recruit “top talent.”

I have to ask: Is what we have now “top talent”? Or have we just created a system where districts get into a bidding war with our tax dollars, driving up prices without improving a single student’s reading level?

Until these districts get their own house in order and stop treating the superintendent’s office like a corporate boardroom, they shouldn’t expect a warm welcome from voters. We want our money in the classroom, not in a golden parachute.

Washington State Superintendent Compensation (2023-2024)

Selected Districts emphasizing Top Earners and Southwest Washington (sources 4,6,9)

Mark Rose
Yacolt