Ask the Board to defer the renewal decision until the newly elected Board takes office

We respectfully urge the Montgomery Township Board of Education to reject the proposed five-year contract for Superintendent Mary McLoughlin and allow the Board taking office in January 2027 to participate in this important decision.

Three Board seats are on the November 2026 ballot, and two current members are not seeking re-election. The superintendent's current contract does not expire until June 30, 2027, and the Board has until March 2, 2027, to provide notice of its renewal decision. The district does not need to bind itself to a new five-year agreement before voters choose their representatives and the newly elected Board takes office.

What the proposed contract would do:

• Approve an early five-year commitment. The current Board is scheduled to vote on September 15, 2026, nearly one year before the existing contract expires.
• Increase the salary by 19.54 percent. The annual salary would rise from $233,398 as of June 30, 2026, to $279,000 effective July 1, 2026, an increase of $45,602 in one year.
• Commit Montgomery taxpayers to fund $2.12 million in total compensation. The proposed agreement would obligate Montgomery taxpayers to fund $2.12 million in total compensation over five years.
•  Limit the authority of future Boards. A five-year term would reduce the flexibility of future Boards to evaluate performance, respond to changing district needs, and negotiate different terms.
•  Provide automatic salary increases. The proposed increases are not tied to publicly stated performance targets, measurable benchmarks, or documented improvements in district results.
•  Add a new enrollment benefit. The proposal adds enrollment eligibility in the MTSD for the superintendent's children that does not appear in the current contract. Before approving it, the Board should explain the benefit publicly and address questions about fairness, transparency, and equal treatment.
• Require closer review of termination protections. Residents deserve a clear public explanation of whether the termination provisions adequately protect the district in cases of serious misconduct or other conduct that could impair the superintendent's ability to serve.

Why residents should be concerned:

This increase comes as the district faces long-term enrollment decline and significant facility maintenance needs. Our school roofs are leaking. Our children sit in classrooms with buckets collecting rainwater. Students must pay to park at the public high school parking lot. Some extracurricular programs turn students away because of limited capacity and funding. At the April 2026 budget hearing, the superintendent stated that the district needed an additional 6.5 percent increase in school taxes to retain teachers and student programs. Against that backdrop, approving a 19.54 percent salary increase deserves far more scrutiny and public justification.

According to salary reports published by the New Jersey Department of Education, Mary McLoughlin is already among the five highest-paid superintendents in Somerset County. Each of the Somerset County districts that currently pays its superintendent more than MTSD also serves a larger student population.
This comparison raises a reasonable question about whether such a substantial salary increase is justified, particularly when the district is asking residents to pay higher taxes while citing limited funding for teachers, student programs, and facility maintenance.

We recognize that salaries should reflect responsibilities, experience, and changes in the cost of living. However, a 19.54 percent increase in one year is far above ordinary inflation and the 3 to 4 percent increases generally received by teachers. The Board should not approve such a large increase without clear performance standards, strong protections for the district, and meaningful participation by the representatives voters will elect in November.

Our Community Asks: Wait till next year to negotiate renewal!

Waiting until the newly elected Board takes office would not prevent the district from considering renewal. It would simply ensure that the decision is made closer to the end of the current contract, after voters have chosen three Board members, and with the next Board sharing responsibility for the financial and policy consequences.

Please sign this petition and ask the Board to reject the proposed early renewal.
The January 2027 Board should decide whether to renew the superintendent's contract and on what terms.