Here are other opinions Phyllis Schlafly has shared.

On marital rape: "By getting married, the woman has consented to sex, and I don't think you can call it rape,"

On sexual harassment: “Sexual harassment on the job is not a problem for virtuous women”.

The per pupil expenditure in Ladue is $12,992.41 not $20,907.

“You are entitled to your opinion. But you are not entitled to your own facts.”
― Daniel Patrick Moynihan

Did you actually read the story? She clearly points out the figure includes the two funds, (as, by the way, does the Vote No committee website and all mailings). As much as you want your own facts, the figure she quotes is an accurate expression of how many total dollars Ladue School District taxpayers send to the district divided by the enrollment, which even includes the 140 children of district employees who don't pay taxes in the district or tuition. If you took them out, your enrollment would shrink by nearly 4% and the number per child would be higher. You cannot dispute that. You just don't want people to know it.

Destination

Again why do revert to the tactics of brown shirted storm troopers? Everytime I read one of your clueless mean spirited post here it emboldens our spirit and makes us work that much harder to stop the insanity of Ladue School Districts' fiscal policies. So thank you for fueling our enthusiasm! When prop 1 fails you can thank yourself! Have a nice day!

Are we trying to be the best district in Missouri or the worst?

Just for the record, Phyllis Schlafly did not send her own children to public schools, in Ladue, Alton (where she and her family lived) or anywhere else. Her daughters went to Mary Institute, and her sons all attended St. Louis Priory School. (And although she says she attended DeMun, she did not attend a public school either for high school, but rather Villa Duchesne.)

Private school parents are welcome as partners in public education - how would they like to get involved?

Congratulations on teaching your child to read before kindergarten. Your daughter would have been welcome to enter Ladue Schools whether she could read or not. If she had needed additional help learning to read, it would have been provided.

mjf Thank you so much for your commentary. It is unfortunate that you did not run for school board this year to offer your expertise to the entire community instead of lending it to just your child's school. Not knocking your involvement in your kid's school and I commend you for it, but you could do an even greater good by getting involved in public service for all. Just something to think about in terms of your analysis.

I'd like to point out that Schlafly is about 87 years old. When she was raising kids it was typical for women to stay home and be full time moms--there was no "pre K", not even for me, and I'm more like the age of a grandchild to her. There's no sin in thinking that if her generation could teach a child to read before sending him or her off to school, then current generations should be able to do it too. Sending kids off to school early has become a convenience because the majority of moms work these days. If it's impossible to educate a child at home, then someone please explain all the home school kids kicking behind at spelling b's and science fairs. (No, I'm not a homeschooler.)

Unfortunately, there are many things not left to district choice...I do seem to recall that we only had one principal and maybe two vice principals at my own h.s., plus several (grade-level) counselors. That was it. I want to say that was for about 1200 students but, again, I could be wrong. I don't recall positions such as "athletic director secretary" either...which is an open position at this time. Horton Watkins has about the same number of students, just over 1200, as my old alma mater; seems like one principal, three assistants - but also an "assistant to the principal?" Is that what vice principals are for?

I see a lot of comparisons between the LSD and MICDS (and other private schools). I have read about lower teacher salaries, better fiscal responsibility, and cuts in programming at private schools. Here are a few facts to consider (taken directly from MICDS' website).

Like Ladue, MICDS also has a Director of Diversity (along with many other "director" level positions).
More than $240,000 is spent annually on professional development for 173 teachers.
More than 70% of the school's operating budget is spent on teacher salaries.
In 2011-2012 over $3.6 million in financial aid was allocated to 24% of the student body. The average financial aid award for 2010-2011 was $12,300.

Personally, I don't expect that LSD should be compared to MICDS. Parents of private school kids should receive the added benefits of a tuition-based education. But, there are certain basic expenditures that all schools (both public and private) will have. My only point is to say, it seems unfair to say the LSD is overspending on teacher salaries, when other schools are hitting the same or comparable percentages. It seems unfair to crtiticize Ladue for having a Director of Diversity, when other schools do the same. And, even in a recession, teachers need to continue to improve their skills through professional development.

I'm curious: what are the duties of a "Director of Diversity?"

Today, I received my newest VOTE NO flyer. One of the arguments made by those opposing Prop 1 is that the District Superintendent is overpaid. The comparison is made between the superintendent and the Missouri governor. Let's take that comparison one step further. The President of the United States earns an annual salary of $400,000 (plus $169K for expenses). The President supervises nearly 3 million federal employees, so he must be really underpaid. The appropriate comparison is to compare one school superintendent to another (or one governor to another). The qualifications, hours, and duties of the governor are entirely different from a school superintendent (not to mention governor is an elected position). I could find a lot of individuals who head other public entities who supervise far fewer employees for a lot more money. If you are going to make a comparison, it should be a fair comparison.

mfj, the CFO moved categories, no one new was hired. Find the Information on this at the bottom of http://commit2ladue.org/debunking-the-myths/. I know this was told to you already, but I am posting it again in case someone reading your misleading post thinks it is true.

Ah, here we go: after a quick search, I found an open position in Boston for a "director of diversity."

"This position acts as program administrator for various diversity projects such as recruitment, and will be responsible for actively monitoring and conducting analysis of employment actions and practices including hiring and retention. The position also has a specific emphasis on coordinating ongoing district diversity recruitment and hiring efforts such as the implementation of the districts Diversity Hiring Plan and is the primary liaison between Human Resources and other departments on diversity-related issues."

http://www.schoolspring.com/job.cfm?jid=67518

Of course, Boston has 138 schools in their district....

You could be right, although that was two years ago.... Yesterday there was an open position for "Director of Diversity," sans "equity and safety," and today it's gone....

This is a comparison of administrative positions with other districts in the area. Keep in mind that the people in the positions of Director of Student Services and the Elementary Administrative Intern will be taking new jobs in other districts next year. Their positions will not be filled so there will be a total of 20 administrative positions next year.
Ladue Clayton Kirkwood Pattonville Webster
Total Enrollment 3,915 2,517 5,132 5,440 4,340
Central Office Administ. 9 10 9 11 11
High School Enrollment 1221 848 1709 1780 1309
High School Administ. 4 4 9 6 8
Middle School Enrollment 929 601 605/600 616/495 659/343
Middle School Administ. 4 3 4 5 5
# of Elementary Schools 4 3 5 6 5
Elementary Administ. 5 3 6 7 5
Total Administrators 22 20 28 29 29

Yes, it was open yesterday but disappeared today.

What I'm reading, your quote, sounds like more "blah, blah, blah, we're special." Not saying it's wrong, not saying it's right. But schools in general have had a tendency in the last couple decades to embrace every single education "reform" that comes down the pike and yet US kids are falling farther behind. [[shrug]]

Seems like a better use of time and money is to actually educate the kids.....

Superintendent salaries:

Kirkwood $247,248
Rockwood $230,000
Parkway $229,528
Clayton $190,000
Maplewood $188,598
Pattonville $187,353
Ladue $184,000
Webster Groves $173,000

here are some other 2010 salaries of area superintendents:

Fort Zumwalt 174K
Lindbergh 205K
Wentzville 207K
Brentwood 216K
St. Louis 225K

President of St Charles Comm College 188K
Wash U Chancellor 539K
UMSL Chancellor 292K
SLU Provst 246K

Yes, they make more than the Governor (133K), Mayor (131K) and County Exec (140K) but that is comparing apples to oranges.

Robin, I was just filling you in on the information that's readily available.

Reforms are embraced for many reasons - some are mandated. Perhaps your beef is with the State Department of Elementary and Secondary Education? Here's the current school improvement plan: http://dese.mo.gov/divimprove/sia/msip/

I don't have a "beef" with anyone in particular. I'm simply saying that education, in general, has gone downhill. That's pretty much common knowledge except perhaps among administrators. I'm saying that all districts and likely DESE are too knee-jerk in their responses to go along with every educational "reform" that comes along. Furthermore, this could be alleviated at least in part by cutting funding for b.s. positions that seldom help students directly.

Probably everyone here has heard their mother refute that logic. Just because everyone is doing it doesn't make it right.

"The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore, all progress depends on the unreasonable man." George Bernard Shaw

In this recession, we are not even demanding progress. We are just trying to survive. The schools need to understand there is a real world and demanding raises while so many are not keeping up is just wrong.

http://andy-luttrell.suite101.com/the-importance-of-foreign-language-education-a219110

Cognitive Benefits of Multilingual Ability

Individuals in foreign language courses often demonstrate cognitive development, creative thinking, and attention abilities that surpass their monolingual peers. Jarold Weatherford, for instance, notes in the ERIC Digest article “Personal Benefits of Foreign Language Study” that people who can speak more than one language perform better than monolingual individuals on tests of both verbal and nonverbal intelligence.

Further, elementary school foreign language students score higher on tests of divergent thinking, indicating an increased ability to seek alternative problem-solving methods. Children who have learned another language also demonstrate an improved ability to keep attention on something in the presence of distracting stimuli. The website for the American Council on the Teaching of Foreign Languages lists a number of studies that show correlations between bilingualism and better memory, metalinguistic skills, and general cognitive health.

Read more at Suite101: The Importance of Foreign Language Education: Why Learning a Second Language is Beneficial | Suite101.com http://andy-luttrell.suite101.com/the-importance-of-foreign-language-education-a219110#ixzz1q4oHFQ6X

I was responding to Phyllis Schlafly's statement - "Elementary school foreign language instruction is a waste." So yes it is an issue. Why should only the kids whose parents can afford the "extras" as you put it get to learn a foreign language?

In response to Robin Tidwell's comment:
"I'm simply saying that education, in general, has gone downhill. That's pretty much common knowledge except perhaps among administrators."

I'm sorry that you feel this way. Your comment showed your frustration with management of tax-payer money, and the volatility of certain educational programs. What wasn't clear in your comment is how you feel about educator performance at the school level. When you say education is "going downhill," what are you referring to?

I suppose it has to do with the administration, DESE, general US educational "principles." Not teachers, although certainly not ALL teachers are wonderful, intelligent, compassionate, etc., etc. Teachers have to follow the rules, after all, and I know many who bemoan the restrictions placed on them.

The issue lies more with the higher-ups who, as I mentioned previously, embrace every educational "reform" in spite of its potential ridiculousness. Things such as "everyone is a winner," "catch them being good," "all children CAN learn everything, some have a different learning style." Oh, and let's not forget all the hoopla about "self-esteem." Our prisons are full of folks with abnormally high self-esteem - an individual with such has no humility, no sense of empathy; it's all about that person himself.

All "reforms" from a couple decades back when parents began listening to "experts" instead of tried and true methods; these have spread into public education and, in spite of now being deemed bogus and even harmful, continue to permeate schools. Far too much time and money are being wasted on "improvements" instead of simply teaching and educating.

And, if you vote in favor of Prop 1, you will be called a communist. It seems odd that flyoverland is now saying that schools have declined since the consistent VOTE NO position has been that these budget cuts would not affect the overall education of our children. Education IS declining, and we are trying to halt any further decline.

So, yes, I agree with Robin, and even if I did not agree with her, she has engaged in a very corgial debate and she is absolutely entitled to her opinion. I think where issues have arisen in the past is when facts are spun into something they are not. Education has declined, and something needs to be done. Is it possible that less spending on education, in general, is the cause for the decline? There was a time when education was a top priority and was seen as a solution to many problems (crime, poverty, unemployment). Now, education is being viewed as a handout and social program. We, as a nation, need to make education of all of our children a top priortiy (whether it be private or public education). We in Ladue are so fortunate to have some of the top private and public schools in the entire nation. Those of us supporting Prop 1 are fighting to make sure the education of our children remains a top priority in this community.

If you are a young mom today, you have no idea how much it has declined from the pre-1970's which has nothing to do with Prop 1. It has to do with things like the elimination of phonics and memorizing multiplication tables. It has to do with the elimination of core courses for feel good courses. It has to do with the loss of discipline in schools. As someone said earlier, the educational elites try to over think things that have been done for centuries because they work. There are probably dozens of reasons for it, but certainly money isn't one of them. We spend more on education today than we've ever spent, we just spend on too many things that don't impact the classroom. That is what this election is all about. How our money is being spent. How can you justify a board that keeps a travel budget and fires teachers? I attended a post-WWII grade school that had two grades in each room with one teacher who taught everything. No assistants. It wasn't because the classes were small, as I recall, we had about fifty kids in one room. Everyone learned. Everyone adapted. I can't tell you how many doctors and lawyers came out of that classroom. Is that optimal? Of course not. But just because something isn't optimal doesn't mean it doesn't work. (This is where she retorts, "so, you are saying we should have fifty kids in each classroom?)

No, I have no intention of responding sarcasticly to your comments. I actually agree with a lot of what you said. I, too, attended a school that had much larger class sizes. And, I think I turned out OK. But, times have changed since I was in school (and presumably since you were in school, too). Our schools now embrace inclusion (which I do not disagree with at all). When I was in school, I did not have children with learning disabilities and other disabilities in my class. They were taught separately in my school. I did not have the level of diversity (and I don't just mean cultural diversity) that we have today. So, there are a lot of new issues that make class size very important. If classes were filled with 50 kids who all learned at about the same pace, then I would not be so concerned about class size. But, that is not the reality of today's schools (at least not today's public schools --- I don't know that much about private schools). But, I think as parents, we always want better for our own kids than we had for ourselves. I hope that my children are more successful in life than I am. That is why I fight so hard for Prop 1. I don't want my children to experience the educational decline that we have been talking about.

Thank you, LadueMom. It's good to see that many agree that education itself has deteriorated. Seems as though the solution, however, it the source of the problem.

Flyoverland is correct, as far as my own opinion goes; things have indeed changed, but much of it not for the betterment of students. And it's not just a longing for the "good old days," the comparisons are obvious between "then" and "now."

A big part of the problem is that some people think that throwing money at the issues will resolve them; others, of course, believe in a more retro approach. In other words and, again, I'm speaking in generalities, just an opinion, folks who have more money tend to use that a first resort - folks with less try harder to make things work without increasing a budget.

Here's a real-world example: one parent will realize that the housework is getting away from her and, since she is able, she hires a cleaning service; another parent who can't afford this will marshall the kids and her husband to help or slightly lower her standards and expectations of perfection. The same problem, solved in different ways, depending on the means.

Now, if educational expenditures have risen over the years - and I'd be curious to know how those dollars of say, the 1970s, translate into today's dollars - but education itself is floundering, then obviously it isn't a money problem.

While I would agree that education has generally declined, the experience of my own children in the LSD is actually much better than the educational experience that I had as a child. Granted, I did not grow up in Ladue. As one example, my kids learned to read in kindergarten. I think that is probably the experience of most parents reading this page. But, that is not the experience of all kids around the country. I realize that my kids are getting an above-average education, and I believe it is due in large part to the small class sizes and great teachers in our district. Teachers are great because they do continuing education and keep their skills current, which costs money. Small class sizes mean having more teachers, which costs more money. Ladue pays market rates for its teachers and administrators, so we aren't talking about paying outrageous salaries. But, there are a wide range of offerings which are highly beneficial to students, most of whom go on to great colleges. So, while I would agree that throwing money after a problem will not always solve the problem, here, we are talking about just keeping what we already have. Ladue has traditionally done an exceptional job educating its children, and we are only talking about maintaining the status quo. We aren't looking to add anything new, just to keep what we have.

It seems to me that the debate being had in this forum regarding quality of education is NOT about Ladue Schools. What measure is used when making these claims? Very general statements have been made that are NOT backed up by a single piece of evidence. The measure used to determine a public school's quality is the MAP test. Take a look at how those scores have been improving over the years. Better yet, how about looking at the graduation rate? Or, how about looking at the schools graduates of Ladue are attending? How about looking at the number of kids taking honors classes? I'm sorry to be so blunt, but FlyOverLand you don't know what you are talking about. You couldn't be further from the truth with your claim that "everyone learned". Even though I have been out school for a while, I remember enough to know that my teachers stood at the front of the classroom, gave me some examples, and then I worked out of a book all alone. Why don't you take some time to watch what happens in classrooms today? Teachers are sitting down 1-1, in small groups, before school, during their breaks, after school, even on weekends to make sure their students are succeeding. I'm not telling anyone how to vote, or even expressing my own vote. What I am saying is that Ladue is a fantastic school system and I moved my family here, spending an extra $200K on a house to tear down, JUST so my kids would be able to attend LADUE SCHOOLS! Please keep your arguments focused on the real issue at hand.

Well said GreenThumb! Also-I am continually amazed by the residents who pretend that their property values are not linked to school districts?!?

When I was in school a MAP test was about Geography. Do they even have geography anymore, or is it incorporated into something else? It isn't just public schools. Private schools have also embraced things like whole language instead of phonics. I remember my child's first grade teacher, an older lady who told us they forced her to used the whole language method, but she did her best to sneak in phonics because she knew it worked so much better. Is Spanish in the early grades really Spanish, or is it a fun class that really studies Mexican culture and learns a few cute phrases. My daughter was involved in it from Kindergarten and couldn't order a taco after wasting all those years making posters about llama's in Peru. It is impossible to learn the fundamentals of Spanish grammar before you've learned them in English. Most of her class opted out of Spanish as soon as they had the chance. She has taken Latin for the past six years. The real reason Ladue students do so much better than their peers in other districts is the parents. Those living here are, for the most part, high achievers. For example, you would not see moms in most districts bothering to argue with a retired guy about a tax issue. I firmly believe you could switch Ladue's students with the City schools and the results would switch. When parents make their kids attend classes and study it works. That's the way it used to be. No one is saying Ladue isn't a great school. We are arguing about how the money is spent.

There is an enormous amount of data that shows that if children are exposed to a foreign language while they are young (I believe most of the data shows before about 7years- but that obviously varies from one brain to the next) that they are much more readily able to learn and retain more formal language training later- it also aid sthem in their ability to learn music- it has to do with certain areas of the brain that actually "shut down" after certain patterns have been laid. I will try and find you a good article on this-it is quite compelling. ALSO- and more importantly I have personally asked ALL of the high school and middle school teachers of spanish if they are seeing a difference as our kids who started this program have just matriculated to Sophomore year at this point and ALL of them said yes. They see an improvement in vocabulary and accent and ability to learn at a faster rate...could we ask for more??? Also- my Junior who just missed this opportunity and is a very good Spanish student is annoyed at how much more the kids who are Sophomores in her class know! So- that should at least make you rest a bit easier that those particular dollars are not going to waste!

btw...we absolutely have children that are a product of our parents!! YOu are so correct in that...but I think that should also support the argument that we are educated and involved parents who see what is going on and are worried about the decline...WE are IN the schools all the time...in the meetings....SEEING first hand the class size and flagging attention available...so WHY do you think we are willing to pay more taxes?? I can assure you that it will effect my life a lot more than most of the people who I see with NO signs in their yards!!!!!!

Parental involvement is exactly the reason it is so hard to defeat school tax issues. They are easily organized and they all vote. The problem is the parents just usually do what they are told and vote for every tax increase and the "right" board candidates. What the No people are saying is we can have a better school system if the money is more efficiently spent. Certainly, you don't mind spending more, however, not everyone can. I've talked to dozens of retired people who just can't afford it. You are imposing your desire to give your kids' teachers a raise but are not taking into account those living on fixed incomes will have to give up something to do it. When the parents take control instead of being led, things will get better and the opposition will go away. The former Supt. was a communicator. There were no campaigns against anything while he was here. The board is too loaded with teachers and former teachers who are like the old saying, "if you are a hammer, everything looks like a nail." The board is too centered in one city of the district. When parents come together and run candidates with backgrounds in finance, who represent all areas of the district and all constituencies, things will get better. This isn't about your kids. It isn't about your teachers (they are making it about teachers), it is simply about how the money is being spent. Why don't parents every question this administration?

Thanks for the the respectful and useful information Haley...I too have watched the agonizing process that our board and employees go through to come to the conclusion to ask for money. It is like a lot in this world- people are very comfortable accusing without looking more closely and how easy it is to criticize without getting involved an making a difference. The Vote No campaign is running on completely false statement and they refuse to put forward a "face" to respond. I actually think that it does a lot of the people in this discussion a great diservice to align yourself with this campaign. You obviously may vote no, and feel you have your reasons- but please take the time to go to the meetings and be sure that you are hearing both sides of the issue- and perhaps explain your concerns to the board so they may answer them...so far I haven't seen any "conversation" from the Vote NO at the meetings. How cavalier you all seem to be with our children. (and I mean "our" children collectively)

Ms. Schlafly,
You were educated in private schools. Your children were educated in private schools. Whether we were talking about a public school in the 1950s or a modern day public school, you have no idea what it takes, what is involved, the day-to-day issues, the issues forced upon the teachers and administrators by a far-removed state administration and an even further removed federal administration. Numbers on a piece of paper -- salaries, benefits, contractual hours and days, percentages, etc. -- do not even begin to shed light on the things the teachers, administration and staff are held accountable for and are expected to deal with.

One thing is for sure, this website is on its knees praying Phyllis Schlafly writes an editorial a week. They probably have never had this kind of response to any story.

Haley, if you really believe that, you will get some new board members. This board has lost the confidence of a very material percentage of the district. A few cranks can make noise, but they can't get 500 people to put up yard signs and turn out on election day. Only the parents can fix the problem when they realize people want to see a change. I don't see a lot of difference between the three running. They all support Prop1. At least Mrs. Goldstein had the guts to stand up to the No people and speak directly to them on their own website with a video today. That's the most communication I've seen in the entire election and please don't tell me about all the meetings the schools held after the fact. Everyone knows it isn't going to do any good to go. Communication should have started before, not after the voted to put it on the ballot.

Flyoverland..unfortunately their was a ton of dialogue before the vote....and huge amount of volunteer time spent on this by the board and committees comprised of residents who are experts in the financial field and well meaning, highly educated people- BUT the Vote No people weren't there apparently. Most people don't get involved until we get to this point- which is frankly a waste of everyone's money: those who give to the VoteYes and VoteNo....we wouldn't need all the money if people were more involved in he PROCESS. But, sadly,not the case.
I appreciate your desire for the facts- but I haven't seen you debunking any of the VoteNo's inaccurate statements. We did for the first time in I believe 7 years have a decrease at the time of enrollment-which was actually only brief- apparently by the end of September we had new student enrollment. The prior 5 years had more enrollment than than 15 before. There was a comment about selling the unused LECC property-which makes sense to me- but ironically I have had a lot of older residents say "NO!- Don't sell- we did that 30 years ago when enrollment declined and we should have held those properties so that when we needed them we would have them" It is hard to make everyone happy and do things in the way that everyone agrees with- I find the implication that the board has shown negligence or intentionally mis-managed our funds. I still haven't heard why you haven't run for the board? You seem interested and capable?

flyoverland Lincoln was "unelectable" and lost several times before he won. But his voice was heard. To me, flyoverland, that is just an excuse. As my 7th grade science teacher told us all "Excuses are only made to satisfy your self."

If you knew my circumstances you would be ashamed of what you just said.

Who is making it personal now Flyover??? We don't know your circumstances any more than you know all of ours. Though this may come as a shock to you given all of your comments here.....You, do not know everything.

I have been keeping up with the debate comparing education costs in 1980 to education costs now. MJF, I understand your argument that if you simply convert 1980 dollars to 2012 dollars adjusting for inflation, then we actually have more money to spend now than in 1980. So, I did a little digging and found a ton of research that says education costs always significantly outpace the cost of inflation. I found dozens of articles explaining why. Here is a short one that explains the fundamentals: http://schoolfinance101.wordpress.com/2011/01/12/understanding-education-costs-versus-inflation/

The amount of language students learn taking Spanish at the elementary schools is amazing, considering they only get it for an hour a week, if that. They are like little sponges. While some of you consider it an "Extra," in many other countries, students start a second, third (or beyond) language very young as standard practice. The US is one of the most educated countries, yet so far behind on this. Students should be learning another language everywhere. It would be a travesty to lose another language.

Second of all, the Director of Diversity position should be eliminated. The person in it is someone who almost no one in the district respects, can't get an administrative job that actually leads a building, and is just put in a corner of the admin building to be invisible. Yet, it's NOT being eliminated, whether Prop 1 posses or not. Why? You tell me.

Lastly, the counselors and principals at the elementary level are extremely stretched thin. There are so many kids who get pulled out of class due to behavioral concerns that they have to be with them all the time. There isn't enough time in the day.

There is a lot of talk about "average" teacher salaries in Ladue but not much about starting salaries to bring that number into perspective. Ladue teacher starting salary is $38,850, which is actually 6th out of the top 8 county schools (behind Clayton, Kirkwood, Pattonville, Rockwood, Parkway). Not far behind Ladue are Webster Groves and Maplewood. I think this is very important so that voters realize that Ladue is NOT setting the pace for teacher salaries. And, while the average teacher salary is approximatley $60,000, we all know how averages work. One teacher who has been with the district for 25 years and makes a nice salary can really affect the average. So, while I don't dispute the average salary being posted, I think it is important to remember that teachers don't start at $60,000 and many teachers don't make anywhere near that number.

I'm voting YES on Prop. One. But I strongly disagree with any district raises at this point. I care more about my own child than I do about giving raises. I understand that we need to retain good teachers but there are hundreds of thousands of teachers out of work nation wide. We're not the only district having problems. If there are teachers in our district who cannot stick it out a few years for a raise then so be it.....I'm sure there are other wonderfully qualified teachers who will fill those spots. I'm not really interested in getting into a competition with other districts over who pays their teachers more or who has the highest starting salary. We're taking our eye off the ball. Do the math. If we give even a 2% raise to all teachers that will mean taking a LOT of money out of the budget which could have been used to save programs or to bring previously cut programs back. We can't have it all people. We have to live in the budget and I for one want to spend the budget in a way that is of maximum value to my CHILD not to adults who want raises. Not saying they don't deserve them.....just saying it might not be the smartest choice right now. We NEED Prop. One to pass and then we need to get real about how to spend the budget.

Also meant to add. I in NO way agree with Mrs. Schlafly on her statements regarding full day Kindergarten or early learning of foreign language. These are VITAL to a strong educational foundation and I find her views on this extremely antiquated. I am a stay at home mom and choose full day kindergarten because of the wealth of knowledge my child is experiencing.....it's not day care.

After reading through every comment on this article, my IQ dropped about 30 points.

Jill, if every teacher offered to forego a raise, we wouldn't need the tax increase. The shortfall is a little more than $2 million. The tax increase will raise about $7 million. They will use it for more raises and then be broke again. Their own projections show another multimillion dollar deficit in 2015. Voting yes is simply enabling a board that is insatiable. If this passes, they will be back again for more within a year.

Investing in quality educators does not equate to financial irresponsibility. I spend almost every waking moment of every day thinking about my Ladue students. To those of you commenting on how funds should be allocated in a more child-centered way: I would suggest that you trust the teachers that your children interact with for 6-8 hours every day-- dedicated individuals that know and value child-centered practices, from both an academic, and a social-emotional standpoint. If salaries freeze, a quality teacher may eventually move on-- not because he or she is greedy, but because, as people in all other walks of life who accept promotions/raises know, a teacher wants to maximize his or her market value. Haley Morgan says her child has already paid a price, and Jill Moore says she wants the district "to spend the budget in a way that is of maximum value to my CHILD not to adults who want raises." Jill, Haley is not imagining the effects of cuts on her children's education. Top-tier teachers will leave if they are compelled to. Teachers ARE selfless, but it doesn't make financial sense for them to leave Brentwood/Kirkwood/Clayton money on the table. If other districts continue to give raises, and Ladue does not, it will become a less attractive destination-- maybe marginally, or maybe significantly over time.

I apologize for back-to-back comments, but I just wanted to add one more thought. If Prop 1 does not pass, class sizes will increase. Elementary classes currently have about 20 students. The recommendation is that class sizes increase to around 27 students. This may be another cause for teachers to search for a job that provides a better quality of life. I feel that by teaching 20 students, rather than 27, I have a greater opportunity to make a difference in my students' lives, simply because I can devote more individual time to each child. I'm sure some would consider a move motivated by class size a betrayal of the community's children. From the outside looking in, it's really hard to understand the impact of an extra seven kids. It's been said again and again, but please trust someone who teaches to understand the practice of teaching. As a teacher, I want to make the biggest impact I possibly can.

Our work is replaceable, no doubt. But if the conditions for work become less favorable, the high-quality education that Ladue is statistically-proven to provide will be more difficult to replace.

This election is not about the teachers. The district made it about teachers when it said it would fire some if this didn't pass. Teachers are paying the price for bad decisions made by the school board. Probably every teacher in the district now wishes the board had not been so impulsive to buy Westminster in a recession. The opponents of Prop O were right. Everyone sees that now, except the board and its administration. Think about it. Who else was going to buy it? We probably could have even bought it for less if we made them wait. Any business guy would tell you that's how it works. The board then made the bad decision to try to soak taxpayers with a huge increase when a more modest, temporary increase probably would have passed without opposition. The board never even bothered discussing it with those they knew would oppose it. Then you get the junk mail propaganda from the incumbents and they brag about what a great job they're doing. They honestly can't be serious. Do they think all those yellow signs are the work of three or four cranks? Half this district is disgusted with the job they are doing. Until the teachers have a vote of no confidence in the board and the parents field a blue ribbon panel of board candidates, nothing is going the change. There is plenty of money, this is about how it's being spent. This board has never seen a buck it didn't want to spend twice.

LAS, I want you, and all teachers, to know that I appreciate you VERY MUCH! And I do not think you are greedy for wanting raises. It is not that I do not want teachers to have raises.....it is just that I feel it is wrong for the district to cut programming and increase class sizes saying we have no money and then turn around and give raises. It sends the wrong message. I completely agree with you about the extreme value of smaller class sizes. It is better for the students and better for the teachers. When the district is increasing class sizes and cutting programs yet still giving raises, it feels like those raises are on the backs of our children. I think most teachers are rational, appreciate their position, appreciate the seniority they have built up within the Ladue district and appreciate that, when the economy is better, we will continue to increase pay. However, I do not like the scare tactics the district is using right now and all the propaganda about keeping "competitive" with other districts. I don't stay "competitive" with what all my neighbors buy or spend money on because I can only afford what MY budget allows. I am PRO teacher and PRO prop. one. I just think we need to hold off raises right now if, in fact, the district feels our funds are so low that class sizes cannot return to preferred levels right now and if we are still talking about programming cuts.

Ran out of character space above but I also wanted to mention this. I am willing to give MORE than the amount of money Prop. One will cost my family if it means we can get class sizes to preferred levels, keep all programming AND give TEACHERS raises. I am told it is a monumental task, but I am currently trying to work with the district on ideas for a charitable fund to which parents could donate annually. The fund would then be divided up evenly amongst district teachers. Here is my thought. A 2% raise on the average Ladue District Teacher's salary is $1,200 per year. However, if we averaged a $100 donation per student, teachers could see a check closer to $2,200 per year from the charitable fund. Of course, some parents will not be able or willing to donate but some parents will donate MORE than $100 per student they have in the district. I'm TRYING to come up with a solution that would make the teachers and moms like me happy. Like I said, it's not that I don't want the teachers to make more money.....I just don't want my children paying the price by losing programming and having these large class sizes. If we can get back to Ladue preferred class sizes, keep programs AND give teachers raises, then I'm all for it and I'll happily write a check over and above the Prop. One increase.