Regarding the Journal Star's May 5 editorial on Superintendent Steve Joel's salary ("Joel provides consistency to LPS"), if the editorial was written to convince us that Mr. Joel has earned his over-$1,000-per-day compensation, it would seem that less subjective observations and more measurable criteria could have been cited.
If the board just wants to give Joel a pat on the back, fine, but the topic was that Joel deserves his salary. For doing his job? All the references to job performance in the article would seem to be what is expected of a superintendent.
If Joel went above and beyond that expectation, then objective specifics should be given. Did his policies save money or improve test scores, etc. Things that can be objectively quantified or measured. None of these types of criteria or results were advanced by the editorial.
One interesting comment was the Joel “oversaw” the district’s growth. What does that mean? What did he have to do with that?
He didn’t take a raise last year. Good for him, nice gesture. I’m sure the Lincolnites who lost their jobs last year applaud him.
If you’re writing an editorial to justify his UNL football coach-level salary, try to give us more than “he did a good job.” Maybe Joel is worth his $7,500-per-week compensation. I don’t know? Convince me with facts. Maybe the newly elected school board members would want to jump in and give us some facts.