Do you really believe the board should not have had a search for the new Superintendent?

I certainly think they should have had one.

Your comment has missed the point of the discussion over the past few months. No one has ever said this woman is not a good candidate and won't make a good Supt. The problem has been with the Board's ham-fisted process of handling the former Supt and paying her nearly $100k to move and spend time with her grandchildren. That is what they said. Not once has the board admitted there was a problem, although anyone who follows the news already knows that. Then, it conducted a search, which according to one board candidate rounded up 12 applicants and narrowed things down to three people: the winner and two guys who came from districts that were nothing like Ladue. It is the "too cute by half" way of conducting business that has earned this board such disdain from so many in the district. If things were not working out, just say so. Don't use excuses like grandchildren. Don't waste our money on a search when you already knew what you were doing. You accuse Mr. Goodman, who I don't know, of "believing in the all mighty (sic) dollar," instead of the academic well-being of children. The best thing a board can do is to be good stewards of the tens of millions of dollars we send the schools every year. It is my opinion this board failed in that regard on this manner. The next time I hear the schools whining about having to lay-off a teacher, or a parent complaining their kid doesn't have a chair in class, I will redirect them to this where probably over $100 grand was spent (more)

(continued) needlessly. Now, we will see what kind of Supt. she will be. Will she be like Dr. Benson and reach out to those who have a problem with the district? Or, will she be like the last one who didn't? Will she be fiscally conservative, or an empire builder with a wish-list that will require even higher taxes? Will she continue to allow the board to micromanage at the tactical level, or demand they operate like a board should? I am sure the teachers are cheering today. The two members of the selection committee were both teachers as are five of seven directors. Everyone knows we need more laymen, especially those with a finance background. So, now the ball is in her court. The first test will be to see if they publish that list again at the high school as we near the end of the school year. All that being said, I do wish her good luck.

flyoverland, how is a new superintendent going to stop a list from being published? From what I've heard about this list, the writers are usually anonymous (except for last year) and the lists are just randomly thrown out at the school. A new superintendent isn't going to completely stop kids from doing stupid stuff.

I guess we will see.

flyoverland: "I am sure the teachers are cheering today. The two members of the selection committee were both teachers as are five of seven directors."

Would you please elaborate more on these 2 comments? I'm not quite sure I understand your point. Who is the "selection committee" you are referring to? And why in the world does it matter if five of the seven Board Members had experience in education? I voted for 2 of them because they had experience in education and the things they had to say during the elections led me to believe that they understand the profession. I would hate to offend you with assumptions about your own personal beliefs about their capabilities to make sound decisions. So could you please clarify those comments for all of us?

I am unsure how to elaborate on a simple statement. The two members of the Board's Supt. search committee are both teachers. Five of the seven members are teachers, or former teachers. You may feel teachers should be running the district. I don't. Running a school district is much more than running a classroom. It is like running a $50+ million a year business. Teaching kids to read is an important skill. But, it is a totally different skill than issuing municipal bods or negotiating employment contracts. I think having one former teacher is probably a good thing. A good board requires a diversity of skills. There's an old saying: "when you are a hammer, everything looks like a nail." We need a few saws and screwdrivers on our board, too.

@flyoverland:

Thank you for clarifying. That stance I can definitely agree with and it is a very reasonable expectation. I guess the place we differ is that I do feel like there is diversity on the current Board. Having attended several Board meetings I feel like Mr. Bresler, Ms. Langsam and Ms. Washington all provide a fresh perspective outside of the educational world. Mr. Kappalow and Mr. Smith bring the current knowledge of how current public school systems are run, and Ms. Goldstein bring a perspective from the higher education world. I think that there are some very viable candidates for this year's election that have experience outside of education. I hope for, and will be voting for, the candidates that support the schools and have convince me that their motives for running for the Board are not rooted in money. After reading the bios on the candidates, I feel that Mr. Shirley and Mr. Goodman are in it for that main purpose. And I'm sorry, but Mr. Goodman's 15-20 years on a condo association do not make him a better manager of a $55 million budget.

Wow, I guess I hurt your feelings Mr. Goodman. Welcome to the world of politics! My opinions of your stance on education are rooted in the same assumptions and distrust that you have for the Board. You criticize and question the decisions of the Board (which are rooted in factual information rather than your opinion, speculation, and misinformation). I criticized and questioned your stance based off of your tone and demeanor on these forums. Whether you intended to or not, your statements on this website have led me (and many MANY others) to believe that you will make decisions based on the dollars before the benefits of the kids. Philosophically speaking, I don't agree with that stance.

Oh yes, and please clarify your statement "Be a leader, not a follower". How does anything I said make me a follower? Come on Mr. Goodman, if you can't handle my opinions of you, do you really think that you can take the pressure and negativity that will be thrown at you if you make it on the School Board. You better grow some thicker skin if this is what you really want!

Compared to other superintendents in the area, she's cheap.

I agree that in general, school superintendents are drastically overpaid, especially compared to other government jobs, but that's what the market requires. There is a mythology about superintendents that they make a huge amount of difference and can make or break a school district, hence the bidding up of their salaries in recent years. I highly doubt their influence is as great as their salary implies, but that's what the market dictates, so that's what we pay.

I'm glad you agree these jobs pay too much. Remember what you mom always told you, "just because everyone else is doing it, doesn't mean you should do it, too." I was told by a member of a rural district that they peg their salaries to what metro districts pay. If one draws the line, others will follow. I asked a Congressman once why they always tried to stick it to doctors? He said, "because with their degrees, they aren't going to quit and become plumbers." What else do you do with a doctorate in education? The board lost the opportunity to reset our pay schedule during the recession when there was a surplus of teachers and administrators. You are right, the top executive in any organization can make or break it. But, going back to the governor, he runs numerous universities, the state police, National Guard and tens of thousands of state employees and he is willing to do it for $138k...and he didn't raise our taxes.

Doesn't the Governor also get a house, the use of an airplane, a car, etc, etc,?

The Governor's airplane was taken away by the state legislature a few weeks ago, however, I see nothing wrong with the state allowing him to use a plane if he has to be in two ends of the state on the same day. The Governor's mansion, is available for the Governor to use while in office. It is also used for state ceremonial functions. I believe our Governor still maintains a home in Jefferson County. If you are suggesting the difference in salary is so the Superintendent can buy a home, then I would counter with argument that the Governor's mansion is not "given" to the Governor. The extra salary is given to the Supt. who is not required to give it back when leaving office. Also, I am pretty sure the Supt. gets a car. There is absolutely no question we pay our school administrators way too much and that most of them would work for much less if we simply had the courage to draw the line. The old line that they could make much more in the private sector is no longer true, if it ever was.

The President of the United States is paid $400,000. CEO are paid many multiples of that. Why? There is a market for CEO but not for the pay for president.

There is no market for Governor, but there is a market for Superintendents and Dr. Jahnke gets paid below market. You mentioned that you were paid in the lowest quartile of CEO pay in STL. So is Dr. Jahnke.

The difference is that you had stock options that rewarded your performance. Dr. Jahnke does not.

The market for President is so fierce that each candidate spent over a billion dollars to get the job. Your comparison to CEO's, who are paid by private shareholders with private funds is not useful, although I feel many CEO's are overpaid, too. I would be in favor of a bonus system for the Supt. over and above a lower, more reasonable salary for hitting benchmarks like: balancing the budget without raising taxes; adding to the fund balance; graduation rates; ACT test score averages; improvement in minority student performance, etc. You are correct, I had stock options, however, I also had founder's equity for which I paid cash. I also had to mortgage my home a number of times to meet the payroll. I don't see anyone asking a Supt. to do that. It worked out for me, but for every one like me, there are ten others who fail. That's the difference between the risk of the private sector and guarantees of the public sector.

Mr. Goodman,

What is your financial training?

Thank you.

I made a mistake on the amount of the contract of the recruiting company. It is $16,210 instead of $50,000. So in the last two months the board threw away $116,200 instead of $150,000.

Yes, but if you have raised their condo fees any time in the last 20 years, the according to some on this board, you are nothing but another tax-sucking bureaucrat out to separate hard working people from their money.

But like a typical politician, you didn't answer the question asked, you answered the question you wanted to answer. Did you raise condo fees in the 20 years you were on the condo board - yes or no?

According to the St. Louis Dept. of Revenue, the Ladue School District taxes have been, and continue to be, the lowest in St. Louis County. That means that you live in a condo complex with the lowest fees in the whole area, and you live in a school district with the lowest tax rate. So I would say that's definitely a positive for your pocket book. Ladue schools are a top tier district, ranking in the top 2-3 every single year in not only St. Louis County but also the state. You are a real-estate agent so you can probably answer this question. Is your condo complex considered one of the top in St. Louis, County?

My point is simply that I believe the taxes in this district are relatively cheap, and yet I am getting a great product. I don't believe in squandering money, and my opinion is that the Administration and current Board have made fiscally responsible decisions, while also making tough decisions to keep the district moving forward. They have received a LOT of negative reaction to the situations with Dr. Chappelow and Dr. Herman. They obviously know a heck of a lot more than we do about their personnel. If it was in the best interest of the kids and the district as a whole, than so be it. I would say that paying Chappelow the remaining salary is a much cheaper alternative than having her stay on board and making bad decisions for the future.