Administrator salaries

The Library levy is a 45% increase.

The Mental Health Board levy is a 67% increase.

Children Services Board levy is a whopping 85% increase and they have more than $13 million in their reserve fund.

Did you - or anyone you know - get that kind of an increase in income this year?

The TPS levy is a brand new one, 4.9 mills for 10 years - on top of the 64.39 mills they already collect - and they have a levy up again next year.

It's never 'enough' ... they always want more.

Damn, and people used to say auto workers were overpaid? The most I ever made in a single year was just under $90k and that was working 3rd shift (shift premium), 10 hours most days, 9 hours any other time, and most Saturdays.

How much would you suggest an experienced director of a large public library system with a large number of facilities and staff make, comparatively speaking?

I don't know that you can compare being in charge of such a massive system with working the 3rd shift at Jeep.

The "comparatively speaking" part is important. How would you find a qualified replacement who would work for significantly less?

Agree. It's not exactly comparing apples to oranges.

^ Dammit, apples to apples. It is comparing apples to oranges.

No insult meant to jeep workers, of course. I have family members who work there.

There's just a big difference in responsibility between the director of a large entity and a line worker.

I can agree about some directors making that, but an administrative assistant making $89k? Where do i apply?

I guess i should also ask is this including a benefit package or is this salary only?

^^

Yeah, something seems off on that one. (Unless she has more responsibilities than her title would imply.)

I think the discomfort over these salaries comes from a couple of factors.

In an obviously depressed region, people are being asked to sacrifice more of their money to additionally subsidize the library (under implicit threat of services being cut). The library system portrays itself, knowingly or unknowingly, as "struggling". And I think most reasonable people, without looking deeper, want a strong library system and are inclined to vote for it.

However, when salaries are this large in fully government funded jobs ...and now stories are being published that say the additional levy money won't entirely be used to keep the lights on and maintain collections...it (rightfully) pisses people off. The median income in this city is something like $33,000 a year. When you have a "civil servant" making 5 times the median (dare I say...in the "1%") and having the brass ones to ask for additional money, you gotta figure it's gonnna rub people the wrong way.

I don't dispute paying people fairly for the work they do. And if you can get 5 times the median salary or more in the private sector, good for you. But 5 times the median salary in a government funded position...then telling people (essentially) "screw your problems--pay up or we're gonna fuck up the library by cutting hours, less-important staff, and it'll be your fault" is insane.

I'll agree with one position's pay--the guy who's probably worth his weight in gold on that list (for the library): the IT director. Think of how much computerized stuff their is at the library now...from terminals to book tracking to check out. That's a lot of responsibility...

The director's salary should have nothing to do with an operating budget. If you're expecting the library to provide certain services & resources, you'll have to pay for them. If the community would prefer to limit the responsibilities and oversight expected of the director, I suppose a comparative salary would be significantly lower.

Regarding the IT director...I think it's safe to say he has almost nothing to do with the actual library systems. There's most likely a Systems Librarian in place to handle that and he that person probably has a lower salary, despite making those systems work.

The director's salary should have nothing to do with an operating budget.

I'm sorry--that's plainly incorrect.

Operating budget--Wikipedia:

In the United States, businesses along with state and local governments divide their budgets into two types: the operating budget and capital budget. The operating budget is used to keep track of maintenance operations , salaries, and interest payments.

Operating budget--Cliff's Notes version:

The operating budgets include the budgets for sales, manufacturing costs (materials, labor, and overhead) or merchandise purchases, selling expenses, and general and administrative expenses.

In any case, let's go on the assumption these items are somehow seperate. The funds for both an "operating budget" and "salaries" come from the same pool of taxpayer money. If a levy used to fund the operating budget is also going to pay for salary increases, then these two items are going to be linked together, whether you think they should be or not.

If you're expecting the library to provide certain services & resources, you'll have to pay for them.

And if 100% of levy funds were assuredly spent on services and resources, I think it the levy would sail through by a 70-30 margin, even under current local economic conditions. But, through hard experience, people deeply suspect that the funds will be used to inflate already large salaries of administrators who have very little to do with day-to-day service or availability of resources.

Regarding the IT director...I think it's safe to say he has almost nothing to do with the actual library systems. There's most likely a Systems Librarian in place to handle that and he that person probably has a lower salary, despite making those systems work.

Most likely true. I was trying to agree with you on the point of salary commensurate with responsibilities (if you didn't pick that up). This is an area that is quite important to current library service. A 67k administrative assistant, on the other hand, may not be.

"How much would you suggest an experienced director of a large public library system with a large number of facilities and staff make, comparatively speaking?"

I think that's besides the point. I think the story's gist was that these salaries might be ok in a booming economy, but when population is way down, median income is way down, and other economic indicators are showing a piss poor economy in the county, how can these people, who admitted some of the additional millage will go towards salaries, ask the public for more money? In 2008, Lucas County had a labor force of 221,000, about 12,200 more than this year.
The smaller labor force means that a net total of 12,200 people have moved, retired, or given up looking for work in the last four years, according to the Ohio Department of Job and Family Services.

Also, I'm not crazy about the library mixing its renewal with additional in one levy. So if I wanted to vote for renewal but not for additional, I can't. It's all or nothing. Very clever.

"How would you find a qualified replacement who would work for significantly less?"

Bwahahahah. I was waiting for that statement. That always finds itself into the debate. That's what we heard in 2008 when Wall Street decided to give multi million dollar bonuses amidst one of the worst recessions. "We have to pay them such high salaries and bonuses because they are quality people who will leave us to find other jobs and we won't be able to attract high quality people to replace them," blah blah blah. That article shows a chart indicating that government salaries have outgrown private sector salaries in Lucas County by two to one. That is ridiculous. I am going to bet these salaries do not include benefits, etc. Sounds like Researcher may be on the Administrator list. Those salaries are indefensible in this economy. I don't care what their responsibilities are. Total BS! If my salary goes down, so should theirs. If they want to go elsewhere, then go for it. I wouldn't want to get in their way of their ambitions for more money and prestige. Just my humble opinion!

My use of "operating budget" wasn't meant to be definitive, so my apologies. I was simply referring to the costs of providing resources and services.

In other words, you don't have an answer. People earn the going-rate. Nothing to see here.

Don't forget to factor that many of these people are double-dippers. They also have enjoyed very generous vacation time, sick leave, and paid less for health insurance than most Toledoans.

They belong to the gold-plated class here in town. Essentially, they are Toledo's very own version of the 1%.

However, instead of inventing great products, discovering medical cures, or working 15 hours a day 300+ days per year, they were public servants at the tax trough, stealing every last drop of money they could grab from a dying city.

And now here we stand at the doorstep of another November, and these same crooks are making the same threats, telling the same lies, all in effort to steal more money from us via the voting booth.

You can certainly see why Dan Burns didn't feel like he was making enough.

How dare those people get paid a competitive salary for a demanding job!

Those jobs would be a lot more demanding if they weren't publicly funded by taxes. Imagine having to create an actual business plan to support those puppies through commerce or philanthropy.

Hey Researcher, welcome to the real world! How much does a library director in China make?

Researcher: knock if off with your flippant attitude, you are NOT making the case for your levy.

Just to share a tidbit of info with you, all of our wages are stagnant in this economy!

However you bring up a really good point! But just to clarify, what you are saying is we the public can actively seek and hire "qualified" people willing to do these administration level jobs for less money? I agree with this philosophy and I think we should implement this policy and make it mandatory whenever there is a levy request.

Thank you for your insight, and the solution for this problem.

Am I the only one who is uncomfortable that this info is public? Guess I'm old-fashioned. Or naive. Or both. I don't live in Toledo anymore, but when I did I always voted for every levy, so I guess that makes me one of the people who spoiled all these entities, sorry. I guess I don't really care who gets the money as long as the services are still provided. Maybe I'm the spoiled one. ;)

I suppose you should have no trouble describing the position accurately here for all of us.

The real world where every other director of a comparable system gets paid a similar amount? Why, thanks!

Who cares about China? Maybe Toledo should ship their public library to China. Don't let Mitt read that comment or he'll state it as fact like he did with Jeep!

I don't even live in Ohio, so I don't really care about your libraries.

My private sector business has done well the last 4 years. Stagnant it is not.

Researcher: My apologies to you.

Now that I know where you point of view comes from, your comments apply better for your situation.

In reference to China: The problem is that it seems as if the Executive/Administrative sectors of the economy prefer staff and employees be paid what is a globally comparative rate, while Executive/Administration think they are deserving of getting paid AMERICAN comparative rates.

Here's what really upset me when I looked that financials for the Library:

2008 into 2009: Carryover of $3.5 million
2009 into 2010: Carryover of $6.1 million
2010 into 2011: Carryover of $7 million
2011 into 2012: Carryver of $5.4 million

Each year, they've collected more than they spent. If they'd just set aside this $22 million total in carryover, they'd have plenty of funds to cover the additional levy amount they're seeking without asking for more from us.

When you're carrying over funds, why do you need more?

"Am I the only one who is uncomfortable that this info is public?"

Kudos to the newspaper for printing the salaries. We should see this more often. I was also glad when The Blade printed the salaries of Toledo Public Schools employees a few years ago. It's our money and we should know where it's going before these public entities hold out their hands for more money from the voter.

From the article, I would like to know why the metroparks needs another park? Can't they wait until the local economy improves? Some of the new money is going towards their salaries, which are also pretty hefty already. Why can't they make do with just maintaining the parks and freezing their salaries?
The metroparks' PR guy says in the article: “We’re concerned about falling behind. Our director refers to it as a `downward spiral.’ We’re down 10 employees. We’ve tried very hard not to let those cuts affect service delivery to visitors to the metroparks. We’re not sure how much longer we can continue to do that."

Welcome to our world. John Q. Public is going through the same thing. Many of us have seen cuts in wages, increase in health care premiums and out of pocket health care expenses. But you guys want more money from us, with some going for your highly inflated salaries.

And why does the library need to "restore hours?" Again, can't they do that when the economy improves? The article says that the Toledo Public Schools Superintendent and treasurer asked and received a 4 percent decrease in their salaries. That is a responsible thing for them to do, something the other administrators can do to gain support for their requests.

These organizations are on the ballot because it is a presidential election year, and they know there will be a record number of voters going to the polls, hence a better chance their levies will get passed.

The only groups I agree probably need more money are Children's Services and the Mental Health Board. According to the article, demand for their services has gone up as a result of the bad economy. That makes total sense to me.

"When you're carrying over funds, why do you need more?"

Good find, Maggie. I wonder why, too. Thanks for the info!

You can never compare salary information without having all of the facts concerning benefits. Health Care, Pension? What type of contributions are they required to make. How many sick days per year? Cumulative/Paid? Vacation days? Oh... do they have to pay into Social Security like most of us do? These are HUGE extras that need to be considered, especially comparing private and public salaries.

Question for Maggie - Have you ever heard of any publicly supported affiliation asking for less? Consider the costs associated with building the library has absorbed over the last ten years. I would think now that the libraries are pretty up to date we should see a remarkable decrease. "NOT!!!"

I suppose not. I wouldn't trade places with any of those directors who are dependent/beneficiaries on/of a levy. Diversity of revenue streams yields better sleep.

Sure, maybe some of those salaries are warranted, but let's look at TPS for example.
Pecko gets $175k for running a school system that is in academic emergency.
Plus, for that much money, what the hell does he need an assistant superintendent that gets $105k, another assistant superintendent who makes $101k, a third assistant superintendent who makes $97k, an superintendent administrative assistant who makes $89k, AND an executive assistant who gets paid$109k.
What that comes down to in reality is that in order to run the superintendents office, it apparently costs $676k!!
To operate one job, badly.

That would be like seeing your waitress spit on your burger and still giving her a 10 dollar tip.

This is all well and good, but again, what qualified replacement are you going to get for significantly less?

I believe the latest report I've read on increased periodical subscription costs for libraries is about 7% annually for public libraries. In the academic world I can safely say this issue is considered a crisis.

And for the record, I don't mean to discount many of your concerns regarding pay in this economy. I simply mean to look at the situation from a broader scope.

Question for researcher.
You mention "qualified replacement"
I believe TPS is back in "academic emergency", so who is to say that the current administration is qualified?

I have a feeling that ALL of the levies are in serious trouble next week. I just feel there are a lot of people who have had enough of status quo or are tired of being hit up again for more $$$.

I spoke with someone at TPS yesterday and asked what the gut feeling was on their levy. The reply was 50/50 at best.

It is our only chance to provide them with our evaluation of their performance. And they fail.

Maybe they're not. I'm not defending their performance. My question has more to do with whom would replace them and at what salary.

Maggie - what does carryover mean? I'm not that educated when it comes to that stuff and I'm a little confused. Is this the amount of money they have in the bank they are saving or is it per year?

I have no problems with them needing to continue to save money in the bank needed for capital improvements to facilities or to build a new facility down the road. But if these are savings per year, I have an issue with it. Unless, they have some kind of end game plan where they need that much.

Thanks in advance.

Jeepmaker,

Pecko and his assistants have many meetings with each other. Thus, the greater number of assistants they can hire, the more important their meetings seem, and greater salaries they command.

Every year their circle jerk conspires which threats they will focus toward to force people to vote for a levy. The superintendent's secretary already has been caught for using public supplies and time to distribute pro-levy material.

So not only are these people being paid hefty salaries and benefits to do a poor job, they are using our money which is specifically for educating kids, to conspire ways to pass additional levies. It's somewhat criminal what they are doing if you closely analyze their tactics.

Fortunately, I'm confident the TPS levy will not pass next week. Ultimately, 75-80% of the TPS operating is for employee salaries and benefits. So when this levy fails, and they tell us "essential services" now will have to be cut, we know they again are lying to us.

There still is plenty to slash from their compensation before a penny of new money should be levied upon Toledo property owners. That also applies to every one of the organizations asking for additional money, but I don't think enough people are aware to fail levies like metro parks and the library.

I predict 3 of the 7 levies fail. TPS, city parks, COSI/IS. Maybe enough people have been angered by our arrogant mayor handing out raises, to fail 4 or more of the larcenies on the Toledo ballot. However, that is wishful thinking.

They all make more than me. That is depressing, given my skills and responsibilities.

Biker, I don't know where your lists of personnel and salaries came from, but in fairness, as far as the TPS personnel list some of those you cited have been retired as long as two to three years. With the cutbacks of the last couple years I doubt their replacements are making that kind of money.

Shortysmom, when you click on the article link, the data is all listed there.

The tps posted data is probably 2 or 3 years old.

When I looked up what Sparks was paid at CSB I think it listed a few k above 133.

www.buckeyeinstitute.org is a great source but it's tougher to navigate what The Blade posted with their excellent "What they're paid" series.

If the public votes against the metroparks, they would not close the metroparks. They would have to delay the addition of a new metropark and other plans. That's how it should be. They should wait until the economy improves before they decide to ask us for more money for more projects.

"Maybe enough people have been angered by our arrogant mayor handing out raises, to fail 4 or more of the larcenies on the Toledo ballot. However, that is wishful thinking."

Josh Thurston, the guy promoting the rec levy in Toledo, says in the article that the levy would "free up" $1 million in the general fund for the city to use for other things:

"Should we be funding (the pars) as surrounding municipalities do with a similar tax or lump it all in a general fund and have it be funded at the whims of the mayor and have it be raided for other services?"

Aren't the raises that Bell gave to his administrators coming from the general fund? This is the second raise that I know of that Bell gave to his administrators at a time the city is struggling. It's time the public says no to all these levies asking for more money and make these organizations get their own houses in order before they ask for for more funds in the future.

"Biker, I don't know where your lists of personnel and salaries came from, but in fairness, as far as the TPS personnel list some of those you cited have been retired as long as two to three years."

It came from the article http://www.presspublications.com/from-the-press/10441-levy-revenue-would-go-toward-salaries-programs

I did look at 6th_Floor's link from the buckeyeinstitute.org and there does seem to be some discrepency in the TPS salaries. Thanks for the link, 6th Floor. Shows all their benefits, too.

@ gamegrrl -They all make more than me. That is depressing, given my skills and responsibilities.
Dr. Pecko is responsible for the education of over 20,000 children and adults as well as the safety and security of them and the thousands of TPS employees.
Your responsibilities are greater? Please tell us what you do.
Respectfully -

Progress forgot to add; Pecko is responsible for educating 20,000 children BADLY.

When you do a shitty job, you don't deserve more money. Just like Bell shouldn't have given raises to those administrators. The city is doing poorly, they don't deserve raises.

^"Damn, and people used to say auto workers were overpaid? The most I ever made in a single year was just under $90k"...and that's why cars cost $30K

".and that's why cars cost $30K"

You don't think it has anything to do with management making millions?
Near the end of 2008, when things were looking pretty sketchy for Chrysler, the company gave bonuses to management all the way down to the level of center manager, (which is the equivalent of the supervisors boss) that equaled 100% of their annual pay.
If you'd bother to educate yourself, you'd find out labor costs as a percentage of the sticker price has actually gone down.

Having the same title doesn't mean you do the same job, gamegrrl.

Sorry for the late response - been busy...

Avinsurer: The Library carryover is the amount of money left over at the end of each year and brought forward into the following year's operating budget.

They basically spent less than they took in and then put that money into their operating budget for use in the next year. It was not, as far as I can tell, designated for any capital item or program.

Their revenues exceeded their expenses all four years.

So, since they are not spending as much as they are taking in each year for each of the past 4 years, I don't understand why they haven't saved some of that and used it to avoid asking for a 45% increase in income.

If they're spending less than they take in, why do they need 45% more?

My conclusion is that they don't need the increase, but thought that, politically, it was a good time to ask for it.

Danneskjold - yes, I've heard of one entity asking for less. The Children Services Board has two property tax levies. One of the years I was a commissioner (2003-2006 inclusive), they requested a slight reduction in the renewal of one of their levies. I believe they had something like $25 million in reserves back then and I made a stink about them not needing all the income they were collecting when they had more in reserves than the county - and nearly 4 times what other public services agencies had. Additionally, in spite of projecting that they were going to spend down their reserves, they'd actually INCREASED them. So they asked for a reduction and it was passed.

But now they still have over $13 million in reserves and are asking for an 85% increase over what they are currently getting in their levy. My personal opinion is that they don't need an 85% increase from people who've seen their own earnings decline.

That's true, researcher. Who's to say which of us has more responsibility or works more hours or has a higher skill level?

Might be me, eh?

It's a pretty specific job title, so I'm guessing we're at least in the same ballpark in at least some things. I'm pretty sure the person in question doesn't work twice the hours I work, nor have twice the responsibility or even double my skill level.

And frankly, I know what regional salaries are for that job title. Yeah, I might be slightly under the average, salary-wise, but I strongly suspect that this person is being seriously overpaid.

Americans like to make decisions without all of the facts.

You are, of course, including yourself in that gross generalization?

Sure, but I haven't made any decisions here. Unless you count the gross generalization, which of course, is based on facts.

Here's a fact, researcher: I can guarantee the person holding the job to which I'm referring doesn't work twice as many hours a week as I do.

Great thread. I wondered for a while how much the administrators of these public entities make! The story's statistics on Lucas County's economic condition was really surprising, particularly the growth in public sector salaries exceeding private sector salaries over the years. These people are also part of the PERS reetirement system, which is terrific. I am glad they get it. It's a very generous retirement package. Considering the salaries, though, it's hard to support their requests for more money, especially when some is going to go into their own pockets. Times are just too tough right now.

That's a strange thing to guarantee. Not to mention, completely irrelevant.

That wasn't terribly difficult to understand. You were lamenting a dearth of facts. I thought I'd toss you a bone.

I'm done on this topic. Period.

Good posts Maggie.

I wonder if the increases are really for normal day to day operations or just for increases in salaries and perks?

It's official... I am really depressed. Who knew working for a library would pay big bucks? I am in the wrong business.
This may be naive, but, when you are the top dog at the library with minions working for you, how much work do you actually do? I mean, there are layers of highly paid administrators/directors/managers/coordinators that do your bidding. What exactly is it that Scoles does?

Meetings. Lots and lots of meetings.

The same question could be asked of any top dog of any organization, really.

And the big bucks in a library only come from being a top dog in a very large system. Everyone else, as expected, makes very little.

Meetings, meetings....let's go out to lunch, who's buying.....meetings, meetings and meetings

"The same question could be asked of any top dog of any organization, really."

Yeah, but I'm not paying the salary for the guy who's in the private sector. Big difference!!!!!

Only if the assumption is that neither are crucial to their organizations.

Just because you're ignorant doesn't make anyone or anything unnecessary.

Did we read the same post? I read that bikerdude saw a difference between private sector and non-profit/public sector/taxpayer funded executive positions in terms of salary comparison and the origins of that salary.
It seemed to be a fair point, as there is a marked difference between being the executive in a private (revenue funded) or public (Tax or donation funded) organization. Those differences are apparent internally and externally. I know this from personal experience in both sectors.

I don't see where the "assumption that neither is crucial" and "you're ignorant" parts are coming from.

Thanks for backing executive pay in general. I personally appreciate it.

"Only if the assumption is that neither are crucial to their organizations.
Just because you're ignorant doesn't make anyone or anything unnecessary."

Geeez. Hey, buddy, no need to insult me. I'm just giving my opinion. I never said neither position is crucial. Where did I say that in any of my posts. To say I'm ignorant just because I don't think a community suffering from low wages and a reduced population should be asked by public entities for more money. Why is that ignorant? Pretty arrogant guy, eh?

I really didn't mean to insult you, bikerdude. I was simply referring to a lack of knowledge of what it is a person does in their job. It's been discussed earlier in this thread. We're all ignorant of many things...that's just a fact, not an insult.

Equal pay for equal work doesn't sound all that bad.

I don't see any possible way that you could NOT have meant to insult bikerdude. I understand if you are apologizing now, but there is no other meaning to your words as delivered. There was no element of the "universal and proverbial" ignorance of all involved.

Bikerdude revealed no ignorance of job knowledge in his comment. He revealed an opinion of a difference between the origin of funding and the two different roles. As an executive and a director, I can tell you that there is indeed a difference in the working environment, expectations and day to day of an executive in the private vs. public sector. Not only does the public perceive a difference, but there is actually a difference in the workflow and day to day. They have vastly different constituencies, stakeholders and activities.
For example: when one attends a workshop, conference, seminar, or retreat, guess who is there? The public sector and non-profit directors.
NOT the private sector folks, who actually have to attach a productive use of time to their activities.

Consider this an insult: you don't see any way possible because you're not very bright.

He quoted me. Context matters. I'm not apologizing.

"I really didn't mean to insult you, bikerdude. I was simply referring to a lack of knowledge of what it is a person does in their job."

You sound a little too defensive about this, Researcher. I don't think Biker was saying in any of his posts that he doesn't respect these positions and what these administrators do. There are people who simply cannot afford to pay more taxes in a sluggish economy. Get it?

If I am not very bright, I must be incredibly lucky. The Holy Spirit must be the hand in the puppet at board meetings, million-dollar deals and growth I acheived through the recession.
Thank God.

If you are not an intentionally rude and offensive person, you need to take another look at your approach.

This dim bulb has a 1:00 tee time. Come to find out, most people who get paid to play golf are NOT PGA players.

If you don't get paid to play golf, you're doing it wrong. You sound VERY successful!

Nah.
I have worked hard and applied myself and was just successful enough to enjoy a small amount of recession proofing. We're not talking old money or anything here. Just a small fish in a tiny fish town, with all due respect to all us fishies.

I will admit to praying the prayer of Jabez and feeling that it worked, but that's enough about me.

You already dumped me.

I mean, I am no Jerome Pecko, for example.