Gov. Christie to school administrator … “Let me help you pack”

As school administrator contracts expire in New Jersey, employees will be subject to a salary cap. Of course, if you’re contract is about to expire and you’re making more than the proposed cap, that means a pay cut. To keep the high-paid administrators on staff at the current (or higher) salaries, school boards are suggesting contract extensions instead of new contracts.

Some of the contract extensions included guaranteed pay increases of thousands of dollars per year.

Gov. Chris Christie (R-N.J.) is calling some administrators out by name, and instead of shutting their traps, these over-paid administrators are fighting back. One in particular, who was called out by Christie, suggested he would simply have to consider moving to another state to work that does not have a salary cap.

Christie’s response? “Let me help you pack.”

A pretty good line I’d say. We don’t have video or audio of the Christie response (yet), but we do have the video from the event where Christie called out Seitz.

I give you the “new poster boy for all that is wrong with the public school system that is being dictated by greed. His name is Lee Seitz.” Seitz is the superintendent of schools in Parsippany, N.J. From the GovChristie YouTube Channel.


From on Nov. 11.

The day before the meeting Seitz is quoted in the Daily Record as saying, “Because of the proposed salary caps, I have to look at my future and the financial welfare of my family. I certainly would have options if I didn’t feel the compensation in this district, or New Jersey, is appropriate.”

The governor reacted to Seitz’s veiled threats to leave New Jersey and go to a nearby state where there is no state salary. “I will say in response to Mr. Seitz, ‘Let me help you pack.’ We have real problems in our state that we have to fix and we don’t have the time, nor the money, nor the patience any longer for people who put themselves before our citizens,” Christie railed.

Seitz suggestion was just arrogant and self-serving. Could you ever imagine this happening in the private sector? I’m serious, the public system is so screwed up at every level you’ve got employees suggesting they are just too good for the state of New Jersey and executive leadership calling them out … by name.

In the private sector, you would not have private cabals of school board members ensuring their favorites are guaranteed jobs  – with guaranteed pay increases – for the next five years.

Before you lefties point out that I’m a private market guy who believe people should be paid what they are worth with no caps, let me point out to you the pubic education system …. uhhhh … is public, not private.

Would you like to discuss the real solution to this problem or just deal with these education and state/local budget issues on a tactical level.

Think strategic readers … we need to tear down the public education system and get the government completely out of the education business. Although this issue has nothing to do with the federal Department of Education, they certainly are not doing anything to help, but how about we take a step in the right direction and close the federal DOE?

22 replies
  1. winnie888
    winnie888 says:

    Three things I see wrong with our education system?  Runaway salaries for administrators; lack of accountability for teachers who consistently under-perform as shown by their students' grades; & finally, the DOE's belief that they can raise our kids better than we can.  Take some adderal and focus on the 3-Rs.

  2. sammy22
    sammy22 says:

    Though I like Gov. Christie's response, I do not see why it's OK for the private sector to have no caps and the public to have them. What is the logic? That one is private and the other public? That's it?

  3. Steve M
    Steve M says:

    @sammy22 "In the private sector, you would not have private cabals of school board members ensuring their favorites are guaranteed jobs  — with guaranteed pay increases — for the next five years."

    That would not fly at all in the private sector. Shareholders would simply move their investments elsewhere. Although people can simply move out – of New Jersey in this case – you can't opt-out of property taxes. That's a pretty big difference. That said, I'm fine with paying folks what they are worth in the public sector as compared to the private sector. We've seen tons of data recently showing government pay is much higher than similar private positions.

    @TomL – very true. Once you hit the top of your tier or grade level, that's it unless you are promoted to a higher tier/grade.

  4. TomTGRWolcott
    TomTGRWolcott says:

    Its about time that someone stand up to the unions

    I think better work could be done with out them…



  5. Wayne SW
    Wayne SW says:

    This can become the Chris Christie theme song:


    <object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value=";hl=en_US"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src=";hl=en_US&quot; type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>

  6. Lazybum
    Lazybum says:

    Malloy will not do this in the Banana Republic we have allowed ourselves to become. Perhaps we need to sink as low as NJ before our Blue Citizens finally see Red.
    Hopefully that will coincide with a shift in GOP power to actually allow something other than un-electable RINO’s to rise to the top of the ticket.
    In the meantime we can only watch Christie and dream….

  7. Dimsdale
    Dimsdale says:

    Seitz clearly suffers from Specteritis: the belief that the world will stop turning on its axis if you are not present in all your glory.? And that you have no replacement.
    “You can leave in a taxi.? If that isn’t soon enough,? you can leave in a huff.? If that’s too soon, you can leave in a minute and a huff.”? Groucho Marx in “Duck Soup”.

  8. djt
    djt says:

    Seitz should have refused the raise, but…

    Seitz' pay cut would be quite substantial, from 225k to 175k. still a lot of $$ and not worth shedding a tear over, but a sizable cut (over 20%) considering its an edict from the gov't.

    The "private cabal of school board members" that voted for the extension is  democratically elected.

  9. Lynn
    Lynn says:

    Just noticed that the write-up from was dated Nov. 11. What an interesting comparison, that the day we honor our veterans, Nov 11, the news was pointing out the outrageous selfishness and greed of a Superintendent in the N.J. educational system. What a "wonderful" lesson for our kids.

  10. Steve M
    Steve M says:

    @djt – If the district wants to pay their superintendent above the salary cap, and institute guaranteed pay raises for the next five or six years, tell them to come up with 100 percent of the funding for their schools on their own, with no money – not one dollar – from the state … who by they way … is broke.

  11. Rip
    Rip says:

    So, if the super was paid $300,000 the graduation rate would be 99%?    What if he stays in place at a $175,000 salary cap? Does the graduation rate fall to 89%?  What a rediculous comment/argument you are making.

  12. Dimsdale
    Dimsdale says:

    Now that is my argument, Steve: if you want to pay him more, then do so.  Just don't ask me (in this case, the rest of the state) to do so.  Likewise, if your kid wants to have a dozen extracurricular activities, YOU pay for them.


    Now isn't this ironic:


    One of the tasks a school superintendent has to handle is adhering to school budgets. This includes deciding on pay raises for teachers and staff. The superintendent may have to decide whether to let teachers go for the upcoming year, based on budget cuts, or to hire teachers if additional money is in the school budget.  (


  13. djt
    djt says:

    I only added the graduation % as an indication that Seitz is doing his job well, not that more $$ would equal a higher rate.

    I agree with your premise Steve, but the dollars that come from the state as education cost sharing (CT's term anyway),  are not related to salaries or the total education budget. Its a complicated (and unwieldy) formula that takes into account the number of students and the wealth of the town. All the education costs beyond the state grant are covered by local taxes. So, since the grant is not tied to salary or even the total amount spent on education, they already are paying what they decided to pay. They don't get more money from the state just because they pay their superintendent, or anyone for that matter, more money.

  14. cbpraise
    cbpraise says:

    our towns superintendent and principles went to the council for a raise. They already make 6 figures. We denied them. OUr town can't afford it. So they took us to court and won. I can't believe were in a recession and they demand higher salaries while most here are barely getting by or jobless. How greedy.

  15. goddess7240
    goddess7240 says:

    Yes, they are fighting back because they see, that there cozy existence is being threatened by the truth. Wouldn't we all LOVE to have security like they are expecting. But then again, we teach people how to treat US…and we have done a good job at allowing these extravaganzas to take place for years and years. Now the little spoiled brats are crying foul, as a baby would when you take away the bottle.

    Man-Up people……your cozy life-style has come to an end and it is time now to take care of the greater good, America. You alone are not America, you along with the people you are supposed to be working FOR, are America.

    Not our fault you lost sight of what is important in your job. You should have had the American people's stake in the forefront and you would not be where you are right now.

    Arrogance on steroids

Comments are closed.