Taxpayers will pay Wake County Schools Superintendent Del Burns $145,550 through the end of June to do nothing.
The school board’s 5-4 closed-session vote this week to put Burns on paid administrative leave through his June 30 resignation date means he has no official duties to perform. The $145,550 covers his salary and benefits through the end of the school year.
Burns would have received the money even if he had stayed on running the state’s largest school district. But now he’ll get the money to do whatever he wants, including working on his beloved 1986 Porsche 911 or going out on his sailboat.
Chief Academic Officer Donna Hargens is not receiving any additional money for serving as acting superintendent.
But taxpayers could be asked to pick up additional money to pay for an interim superintendent, especially if a person is brought in from outside the district. The interim superintendent would likely get some additional pay even if the person is a current school district employee.
School board members say it's likely the interim superintendent, who could be named as soon as March 23, will hold the job for at least three months until a permanent replacement is named for Burns. It could be six months or later if a national search is conducted.
Comments
I didn't presume anything ...
Fri, 03/12/2010 - 13:26 — essequamvideri... about your religious and political beliefs.
If you re-read my post, you'll see that I said "what if" ... so please don't misconstrue my hypothetical comment. The point being - "what if" you had beliefs opposed to the political agenda of the N&O, and "what if" you spoke out about them publicly, and had a huge audience to broadcast your views.
As to my "disrespectful" comments (according to Athey), too bad. Many of us are completely disgusted with the pro-NAACP, anti-new Board majority coverage of the N&O. If that wasn't true, pray tell where are all the angry comments, saying that the N&O is much too conservative? There aren't any. We N&O readers (and former subscribers) will never forget Duke LaCrosse - the inflammatory articles, the rush to judgment, the blatant disregard for even the pretense of fair & impartial reporting. The very fact that N&O reporters frequently quote NC Policy Watch, a project of the NC Justice Center, w/o disclosing that Orage Quarles (publisher of the N&O) is on the Board there, as some kind of arbiter of liberal Truth, just goes to show the lengths to which the N&O will go to push its agenda.
Regarding the front page treatment of the NAACP stories - it doesn't matter whether they were blog posts or articles - they were on the front page constantly. And the very important stories, where Tedesco defended himself, were buried - you had to go to the WakeEd blog to find them.
I am glad that you responded to my query about the John Tedesco story - I'll be looking for it.
Here's an idea for a story - interview Dr. Burns, and ask him why graduation rates for minority students slid during his time as Superindentent. Ask him what, if anything, he would change about his decisions during that time. Ask him for specific direction as to what the new Superintendent can do to improve education for all students in the Wake Co. system (specifics - not talking points). Try to do all this without mentioning the word "diversity". If you do use that word, then define it - and show exactly how "diversity" (racial, socio-economic, whatever) is correlated with or causes academic success. If you can't show that, then tell your readers exactly why Wake Co. parents should value "diversity" over academic success.
I'm just curious....
Fri, 03/12/2010 - 15:39 — Athey01On a scale of 1 to 10 (1 = I don't really care, and 10 = my highest priority if I was superintendent), how would YOU rate the importance of the graduation rates for minority (or ED) students?
I can't really put a number
Fri, 03/12/2010 - 19:54 — danofncI can't really put a number on it, but I think it would be somewhere in the middle.
You can't make kids show up. You can't make them study. You can't make them stay in school. All you can do is give them every opportunity to succeed. After that, it's really up to them.
As a superintendent facing
Sun, 03/14/2010 - 11:49 — woodstockAs a superintendent facing very distressing and declining graduation rates for ED students, I think most would agree that solutions to this challenge need to be a top priority. It is a seminal issue facing WCPSS, lack of attention to it led to a new BoE taking the reins of a system and working to intitute long overdue changes that Burns failed to tackle during his tepid tenure.
You may not be able to "make kids show up," but you can influence their parent to ensure that they do. You may not be able to "make them study," but you can employ innovative strategies and resources to encourage them to do so. You may not be able to force them to "stay in school," but you can create an environment to increase the chances that they will stay and graduate.
grasping at straws ...
Fri, 03/12/2010 - 12:10 — essequamvideriSo Burns got just what he wanted ... thanks to the N&O & the NAACP & NC Policy Watch/NC Justice Center & McClatchy - he can make himself out to be the sacrificial lamb, and can sit back on his lazy butt, with absolutely NO ACCOUNTABILITY for the low graduation rates for the past several years for minority students, which happened ON HIS WATCH.
BTW, did Burns make himself available to comment this time? So nice of him to share with the N&O that now he's free, and has the money, to do whatever he wants - working on his '86 Porsche or sailing on his sailboat. Don't try to make that the new Board's responsibility - you all at the N&O were only too eager to feed that man's ego & give him an unquestioning audience, without asking him any hard questions at all. Burns mirrored the political agenda at the N&O - so he got a free pass.
Really, Mr. Hui - what if you were (heaven forbid) a conservative Christian, and were vocal about your opinions & beliefs, in direct opposition to the Democrat/liberal/progressive-controlled McClatchy Corp? How long do you think you'd last, after publicly berating the very hand that feeds you?
I also see that this story & the "State NAACP on Burns ... " story didn't make the online front page - why not? Somebody finally decided you all need to tone it down a little? You all have been stoking this fire since the new Board members were voted in. And I see that Ron Margiotta gave an interview on school assignments to WRAL, not to you folks - serves you right.
And where's the profile on John Tedesco - you had written that a story was forthcoming. When can we expect it? I also noticed how both stories on Tedesco, including his own letter describing his own "under-privileged" background, were buried in the blog section, unlike all the NAACP stories (except for the most recent one).
Anything that postively reflects on Margiotta & Tedesco you bury. Any idiotic utterance by the NAACP gets front-page sycophantic treatment (exc. the most recent posting).
Any investigation into the great "Rev Dr" Barber's qualifications? Maybe he could share with you all his doctoral dissertation from Drew University. Why don't you ask him?
Don't presume what my
Fri, 03/12/2010 - 12:23 — KeungHui (author)Don't presume what my religious and political beliefs are. I don't presume what your beliefs are.
The $145,550 figure came from the district. It took a couple of days to get that number.
Blog posts don't routinely run on the front page of the web site. What you're referring to was a blog post last night about the NAACP. The other NAACP items you mentioned are stories, which we do run on the home page.
As I mentioned earlier in the week, I'm working on the nigh copt shift of 2-10 p.m this week. I'm answering your questions on my own time. Because of all the other stuff that's going on this week, the Tedesco profile is running next weekend. I talked with Tedesco this morning to get some additional information for the story.
Mrh. Hui, you are a better man than I am.
Fri, 03/12/2010 - 12:41 — Athey01Based upon the disrespectful tone of his letter, I would have ignored him.
It is surprising why some
Fri, 03/12/2010 - 18:47 — red_balloonIt is surprising why some posters pick on Keung.
It is not that surprising.
Sun, 03/14/2010 - 11:34 — woodstockIt is not that surprising. While most would agree that Keung is mostly fair and balanced in his articles, he works for -- and therefore represents -- the N&O which is an organization clearly entrenched with the left and vehemently opposed to the new BoE. All one has to do to understand this is read the biased and one-sided editorials, the letters to the editor the N&O chooses to publish, and the headlines that are routinely biased in subtle and not so subtle ways.
Exactly. Considering the
Sun, 03/14/2010 - 11:44 — red_balloonExactly. Considering the employer's preferences, I believe the employee has been doing a great job.
Heh...
Fri, 03/12/2010 - 12:32 — Bob_SconceAs if anybody here believes that you only work an 8-hour day. Or is that supposed to be 2 a.m.?
Is the 2-10 shift why Tom Goldsmith has been more involved in this week's WakeEd stories than typical?
Since I'm tied to the police
Fri, 03/12/2010 - 12:44 — KeungHui (author)Since I'm tied to the police scanner this week, it made more sense for Tommy to attend Tuesday's meeting and start the advance work on stories in the morning.
Dr. Burns had nothing to
Fri, 03/12/2010 - 11:14 — loriacDr. Burns had nothing to lose. He resigned, gets a great pension.
He then holds press conferences stating his philosophical disagreement w/ the new board. This serves to stir up the opponents to the current board. The board was in a no-win situation. If they took no action - they look weak, if they fire him then Dr. Burns is a martyr for 'diversity'. I think they took the right path for administrative leave, since he said he couldn't fulfill his duties.
All this noise and hoopla also serves to divert attention away from his record.
Keung,
Fri, 03/12/2010 - 10:51 — louiselee44Keung, I know it's a different situation, but I'm just curious. What was Bill McNeal's "package" when he resigned in 2004?
I'm doing this from memory
Fri, 03/12/2010 - 12:18 — KeungHui (author)I'm doing this from memory but I believe that staying through the end of June 2006 meant McNeal got the equivalent of one year's salary as a bonus for staying in Wake.
Thanks
Fri, 03/12/2010 - 20:49 — louiselee44Thank you! Doesn't the N&O have that amount archived somewhere?