The story gives two cutoff dates. And it makes a big difference. Schutte says the program may not be funded AFTER 09-10. Icet and Nodler say the program for 09-10 AND beyond are in jeopardy. Since the program is back funded, money's appropriated after the commitment is made, this puts the state in a bad position. There are teachers that have already put their hours in this year toward this year's Career Ladder. Teaching summer school in lieu of pay and summer tutoring are ways that many teachers accumulate hours in the program. In many cases these hours have already been accumulated. To say now the program may not be funded is tantamount to having someone work for you and then refusing to pay them. I see this going to court and I see the state losing on this. A good labor attorney should be able to make the districts and the state fund their obligations, at least for the hours already served.

As a side note, what kind of idiots do we have running this state? The idea that they make a commitment for one year and not fund it until the next year is ludicrous.

The people in Jefferson City have their priorities all screwed up. Bicycle race-OK, statue of dead president-OK, flat screen TVs for prisons-OK.

But we will have to cut teacher salaries around 10%. And to think, I was actually considering supporting Mr Schaaf.

The Highway Patrol is also worrying about having their "career ladder" funded from year to year. They have historically dealt with huge pay disparities.

When MoDOT runs out of construction funds, they will go into maintenance mode. Anything more than salting roads and filling potholes will be a luxury and their ranks will thin through attrition.

Are politicians idiots with screwed-up priorities? Of course. And their idiocy affects a lot more than the media's precious teachers unions.

Re today's article, I simply agreed with the philosophy that Career Ladder is less a priority than Foundation Formula, Medicaid & prisons.

Career Ladder is a good program and I hope there is enough money to fund it, but the budget chairman do not believe the money will be there.

Regarding Bike Race--the money for it was not specifically appropriated by the legislature, but provided through the executive branch's Dept. of Economic Development.

Regarding Statue of Truman--the money for it was not appropriated by the legislature, I do not know how it is being paid for.

Regarding flat screen TV's for prisons--the money for that was also not specifically appropriated by the legislature.

This year the governor (and Senate) wanted to spend $28,000,000 more this year ($86,000,000 is 2012) to put more working parents on Medicaid. Not just everyone, mind you, only adults with kids would have been covered. The House rejected the proposal. In spite of such fiscal restraint, I am told the governor will still have to withhold about $500,000,000 is spending THIS YEAR because of the decreased revenue caused by the recession.

Once the federal tax reduction expires next year, state revenues will be reduced because of the greatly increased state deductions people will take on their MO taxes.

We have to set priorities as we decide how to spend the taxes people pay. We cannot stop the executive branch from wasting money on things some people place low on the priority list like bike races, statues and flat-screen TV's, but even if we could, the scope of the budget problem is giant in comparison. I agree we need to prioritize and provide core funding first, which is why I made the original comment.

I would welcome suggestions on where we should consider cutting the half billion dollars that will need to be cut in order to balance next year's budget. My email address is rob@schaaf.com. And, as the session progresses next year, I will again have legislative forums and encourage everyone to attend. (I usually only have 5 to 10 people care enough to show up.)

Rob Schaaf

As a former teacher I was there when carrer ladder was implemented. It was never a promised 100% deal, we always knew it was dependent on the level of funding, just like we were not always sure the formula would be funded fully.
I agree with Rep. Shaff on his comment, even though I hate to see career ladder in danger.

If Career Ladder goes, so be it. The point I was making is the inherent unfairness of having teachers teach and then not paying them. If it goes away in 10-11 it is understandable, but you have people that have already worked in the 09-10 Career Ladder cycle. To have them work an entire summer school cycle and then say "No, we don't have the money to pay" is most probably illegal.

Regarding the comments of "apple" above...

Vouchers for public schools are prohibited according to our state constitution. I did vote for a tuition tax credit for failing kids in failing districts, but tuition tax credits are not vouchers. That bill would have actually increased the amount other districts (such as ours) would have received under the formula. Unfortunately, the education establishment lobbied hard against it, fearing the "camel's nose under the tent". Their true fear is that the competition might actually work, and the program be expanded.

The comment that "anything he can do to even up puplic schoos teachers pay with private and bring down public schools he is for" is just mean spirited. I believe that teachers across the board are underpaid compared to their importance to society. I challenge "apple" to produce the News-Press article in which I was quoted as being against the levy and for vouchers. I am confident you cannot, and if you cannot, then a retracting comment would be appreciated.

I stand behind my explanation regarding the statues, flat screens and bike race. The legislature did not discuss these items. I said nothing deceitful that would warrant the title "smoke and mirrors".

I am committed to increasing funding for education, as we have done each year of the seven years I have been in the legislature. I voted for every one of those funding bills. As I said before, I agree with our budget chairmen that we should fully fund the seven-year plan to get the state up to full funding of the new foundation formula. It is a top priority.

My voting record speaks for itself. Show me, "apple", that I am am not for public education! Further, I challenge you to show up at the legislative forums I hold every week during session. Will you attend?

Rob Schaaf

Of course he won't, Rep. Schaaf. If he attended the forum then he cannot hide behind his keyboard and be forced to answer to his heinous comments. I support you for standing by your actions and not allowing the uneducated to spread falsehoods about your history and voting record. It is very easy for the uneducated, like apple, to sit back and sling mud until they are forced to answer for their comments.

Thank you for supporting our children and looking out for their best interest in Jeff City.

In response to "apple" (again)...

The reason you don't have time to dig it up is because it doesn't exist and so finding it would take you forever! But the article in which I am reported as backing the school issue can be found here:

http://www.stjoenews.net/news/2009/feb/23/schaaf-encouraging-passage-issues/

As I have said, I believe teachers are underpaid, and we should fully fund the foundation formula. But the most important thing is that our children must receive a good education. What you heard and read about me is that I think we can do better. If you have ideas on how we can do that, I would appreciate hearing them. Throwing more money at the same old system has not been shown to yield results.

...or do you think our education system is just fine?

Rob Schaaf

dr. schaaf, i agree with you.

just for laughs you should take time to read through apple's posts, especially the ones ( most of them, actualy, ) where everyone who disagrees with her is stupid, stupid, stupid.

the ones around the NO/NO vote were particulary interesting, but , alas, they were deleted by the mods....... ;0)

Whois, they do indeed intend to cut it this year, despite teachers already putting in extra hours. Hopefully the district can at least compensate teachers who taught summer school and chose career ladder over pay.

(See linked letter from politicians.)

http://www.msta.org/files/regions/careerladder.pdf

The letter was dated June 15th. :) Had they announced it at that time, I expect they would have had some holes to fill in summer school. Now the way I read the letter, it is not definately cut. "Cannot assure" is the key phrase. No matter what, I stand by my statement in my first post.
"As a side note, what kind of idiots do we have running this state?"
;)

I laughed when I noticed Matt did not spell career correctly, ironic.

Maybe, just maybe, any salary increases should be based on something called "performance"???

Measurable, documented performance levels achieved and maintained?

I know of one teacher who moved up the salary ladder because she earned her Masters - but, it does not and will not apply in any way to what she teaches!

Is that fair?

Hahahahahaha, no, but there is more than enough blame for everyone, everything seems so totally whacked out and screwed up, where to start?

You are correct, I guess I have been out of the classroom too long!!!

stjoemo, teachers already hate the "teaching to the test" issues as it is...... now the washington people in their wisdom are proposing that there be "merit pay"? yeah, and that will drain the "best and brightest" from the title one schools like a vortex.

you are right, SNAFU applies to most education issues.

( i think maybe we could let matt have a pass on the typo)

Mr Schaff,
Good luck with any form of communication with Apple as Heritage has said just read through her/his post in any of these forms and if you do not agree with her/him you are stupid.

How's this for an idea, Dr. Schaff......Imagine paying the admin people what they are worth instead of the ridiculous amounts they make. Have principals making $75000 a year instead of the avg of $105000. That would free up about 30 X 30000 which is almost a million before you even get started. That's well above the higher incomes in St. Joe for 10 months work a year. Cut out about half the para positions, which are a waste, then you wouldn't need to supply Mr. Flower's wife with a job, that they created just for her. I'm sure if I were privy to more of the mess, I could "reasonably" save a ton.
Going into your field would be even more fun. If we could take the "lobby money" alone spent in a year to buy votes, we could save America, with the billions that could be used for Medicaid, reducing the deficit, etc.
Finally, I don't think anyone has as much problem with your opinion on what is more valued. As a politician, why on earth would you expound the opinion. As our representative, show some good sence and just not express that opinion to the media. It just shows poor lack of judgement on your part. Kudos to you for getting on here and discussing your thought processes just the same.

Representative Schaaf, I have a question for you. By what standardized test or measurement has it been proven that the private schools are superior to the public schools? Private schools don't go through the Mickey Mouse games that the public schools have to go through. If a child has a certain condition, in a private school setting, they send that child to the public schools for help (example, speech therapy, hearing, vision problems...) If you are going to allow vouchers in the private schools, I feel that in order to prove the private school's worthiness (to take on these public school's young people), the same tests that are offered to the public schools should also be given to the private school students, AND to the home schooled. I would assume that due to the selectiveness of the private schools and even the home schooled, that private/home school scores would be superior to those of public schools. However, I am from Missouri. Show me. [Apple, don't read this. I wouldn't want to agree with you on anything. :) ]

dilly, the theory is that with vouchers you get choice, and with choice comes competition, and with competition comes a more excellet product. don't like the school? take your vouchers elsewhere. failing schools die, excellence triumphs.

the real reason private schools do well is that the students who attend them know that they can be expelled........ and will be if they screw up.

there MUST be consequences. ( can you tell my parents sent me 12 years to catholic private school? yep..... there were, indeed, consequences).

Private schools get to cherry pick their students. The ones that don't make the grade are booted back to the public schools. It really is quite a racket. Slough the non-performers off to the public schools then brag about how they outperform public schools. LOL.

Heritage, the REAL reason private schools do well is because the parents have an investment to protect. Nothing like having hard earned money in the game to insure parental involvement.

Apple,
You are just a sinical person with nothing good to say about anybody or what anybody thinks or views. But remember I am just stupid remember I think that is what you called me so what do I know.Why dont you like Mr Schaff asked you if you have any ideas put them out there he said he would appreciate hearing them.

Heritage, I have no problem with private schools. The problem is that the public school can't do some of the things traditionally known to be done in private schools. My argument is that public schools have been forced to prostitute themselves in their quest for the federal buck. In so doing, they eventually suffer a term that means, "an order but no money." It is called, a "mandate." A mandate says, "We aren't going to pay you for the particular program that we paid you to start. However, if you want to continue to receive money from us, you will keep that program as a mandate." I just happen to feel that any school that is going to, in essence, be taking taxpayer money, should have the same basic requirements that the public schools do. This is not to diminish the private schools. This is to free up the public schools to do what should be done...educate our young people. The idea of competition is fine by me. However it needs to be an equal competition for all schools involved. The current evaluation tool, for the public schools, is the MAP test. I feel that if a school is going to take tax money to educate students, the tool that will evaluate the private school's value, should be the same MAP test that the public schools must be evaluated with. I don't feel that a private school, that takes tax money, should be burdened with what I consider to be one of the dumbest things ever perpetrated on the public schools. I also feel that home schooled students should have the same evaluative tool, IF they take a voucher. Mr. Schaaf, do you honestly have the guts to look into this? Here's one voter who would like you to.

Awwwww Gosh, Apple. We did it. For what it's worth. I have asked Shields that same question. He stumbled. It might not be a popular thing to discuss.

sounds like a lot of pepole work for heartland mr.schaff.

i look forward to one of your forums, maybe some of the folks who disagree with you will show up. unlike some dems we won' call them un-american for voicing their opions.
to bad more reps. don't do them.
at least if i have a question i can always get a response from your office,more than i can say for others including our mr graves, guess i didn't write him a check. didn't write you one either still got an answer, thanks.

i abhor unfunded federal mandates, and have said often that if this president were to use the schools as his sole stimulus package it would be fine with me.

i agree, level the financial playing field and put a national testing standard in for any school which takes federal funding. know however, that a voucher is nothing but the government giving parents Back Their Tax Dollars which they then choose to supplement ( in most cases) and opt out of a system which is not working for them. a voucher does not represent federal funding.

the NCLB is, in theory , a good premise. it is comparable in stjomo microcosm to the sidewalk weeds and grass length requirements. good on paper, but executed badly by government. now, instead of changing the poor administration of a good idea, we have sidewalks which people are mowing and yards which look like no one lives there. ( okay, mine looks like heck right now, and three years ago i would have been in trouble with the lawn police).

fully fund our schools.

Dr. Schaaf,

I think it is great you came on here to clarify and defend some positions and did not come on here under a pseudo name. Wish more high profile would get the confidence to do that. It is unfortunate that a program like this has come on onto the chopping block, but when weighed out against public services that provide for those in need as opposed to what I interpet as an incentive bonus, public need will almost always win out. To the other issues with the tvs, bike race, etc, Dr Shaaf points out how that funding is appropriated, through different processes.
The teacher incentive funding in my view is no different than funding that is provided for other government bonuses, both at the state and federal levels. The military is a classic example, over the years bonuses come and go depending on funding resources, it is an incentive, not a need.

I commend Dr Shaaf for standing his ground and putting his name to it. Nice work. When weighed out against pseudo name comments, I rest my case on that one as I have been very clear about my position on that issue.

Dr. Shaaf, your posts on here garnished my support and vote when the time comes.

Standing what you have to say and putting your name to it makes a difference. I encourage others to follow Dr. Shaaf's lead.

apple didn't mean to imply anyone did. just some of the post reminds of heartlands attacks and support for the other party who ran againist him. any rep, state or local who can a least come on here and use his name to point out his view, like it or not i find refreshing. i just would like to see some of these same folk show up at a forum. i know you will be allowed to get your point across and new solutions to our problems can be discussed. we can only do it if its done together. a good debate is always healthy and what better way than face to face. bet some of us have more in common than we would like to addmit.