We Need To Ask These Same Questions Of Our School Board

Questions For Our School Board
Has anyone in our community been provided any justification as to how our school board has increased our Superintendent's pay from $137,589 in 2006 to $246,824 in 2013?

Dianne (Brown) Critchlow first shows up as an assistant superintendent in 2002 in the MO DESE data. She was paid $98,005 that year. She was promoted to Superintendent in 2006 and was paid $137,589 that year. As you can see by the numbers below she has had salary increases as high as 17% in a single year since being promoted to Superintendent. Those salary increases were given despite the poor economic conditions at the time.

Superintendent Critchlow speaks quite often about the Flawed Education Funding Formula. However, it doesn't seem to be affecting her salary whatsoever. Perhaps our school board has a Flawed Superintendent Pay Scale Formula which should be fixed!

Superintendent Dianne Critchlow's Salary Year By Year

2002 -   $98,005

2003 - $102,633

2004 - $105,749

2005 - $108,663

2006 - $137,589

2007 - $152,068

2008 - $164,428

2009 - $192,586

2010 - $207,393

2011 - $215,276

2012 - $228,573

2013 - $246,824

Comparing Superintendent Salaries With Other Districts
Our school board is doing a great disservice to both our community and to all taxpayers across the state of Missouri by paying our Superintendent such a high salary!

School Budget Amounts
Fox's annual expenditures are half that of Rockwood and only about a third of the amount of Parkway. That seems like a huge reason to question why our Superintendent is being paid a higher salary than those other districts. The percentage of her salary compared to the annual budget is obviously much higher than those other districts. It definitely doesn't make sense that you would pay higher salary with half or 1/3 the annual budget of those other districts. Plus, you have to look at how much of that funding is coming from local taxes verses state taxes. Should Fox burden everyone in the state by paying our such a high salary?

Percentage of Local Taxes
What's wrong with asking 42.29% of the taxpayers in the state of Missouri to pick up the tab for our overpaid superintendent? Only 50.73% of Fox's funding comes from Local Taxes while 42.29% comes from the state and the remaining amount comes from federal taxes. Therefore, our school board is burdening state tax payers with having to pick up nearly half the tab of Superintendent Critchlow's over the top salary. If school districts like Kirkwood and Lindbergh want to pay their superintendents a large salary, at least they are putting that burden on their own community. Let's not forget that the school district (aka taxpayers) is also paying another 14.5% on top of all certified salaries into Missouri's Public School Retirement System.

Transparency Issues
Transparency has been one of Fox's biggest problems. This is probably the number one reason that we have such a problem at Fox. Who is to blame for this? Our Superintendent and our school board. Our Superintendent is required to keep the board and the public informed about what is going on within our school district. However, it is definitely to our superintendent's advantage to not be forthcoming with information. If the public is kept in the dark about what's happening in the district, you have no reason to be asking questions. If you do ask questions, you most likely won't get a response or the district will make it expensive or time consuming to obtain the information.

However, it is the school board's job to make sure that the public is kept informed about how the district is performing and how it is spending your money. Fox spent more than $135 Million Dollars last year of taxpayer money. Do you trust that they are handling your money wisely? Without your ability to review how your money is being spent, you will never know. The same logic applies to hiring employees, salary schedules and how much and on what the district is spending your bond issue dollars on.

It has become pretty apparent that we can't "just trust" what our Superintendent tells the community. Below are some of the questions that I have asked our school board and have never received responses for or have received unacceptable responses as to why they couldn't do things. By not responding, it becomes quite clear that the district doesn't want you to know what's going on.

If our superintendent is one of the top paid superintendents in the state, then she should be keeping the community just as informed as the other school districts that have superintendents making far less than she does!

• Why doesn't Fox Video and/or Audio Record school board meetings and post them on the district website like they do in other school districts? (Board meeting minutes don't reflect or document the meeting very well or very accurately on occasion. Our superintendent isn't going to publish details of Public Comments in the minutes that she doesn't want the Public to know about.)
• Why doesn't Fox post their Annual Budget on the district website like they do in Rockwood and other school districts?
• Why haven't 2013-2014 Salary Schedules been published?
• Why did it take more than 2 years of requests to get the school district to post school board meeting packets with check payment listings onto the district website? (The district just started posting board meeting packets in February 2013. An additional request had to be made to get them posted to the beginning of the school year.)
• Why won't the district post board packets dating back to the 2008-2009 to match the school board meeting minutes published on the website? (The board meeting minutes are pretty meaningless without the board meeting packets. This question has been asked several times with no response.)
• Why doesn't Fox publish the board meeting minutes within 3 days of a school board meeting like they do in other districts? (This question has been asked several times as well.)
• Why didn't Fox publish the August 2012 Bond Issue Budget on the district website until I requested it?
• Why did Fox remove the August 2012 Bond Issue Budget from the district website right after the Bond Issue passed when our Superintendent thanked the community? (I requested that the 2012 Bond Issue Budget get reposted onto the district website but received no response and the data has not been reposted.)
• Why did it take several years of asking to get the district to provide individual email addresses for our school board members?

Enrollment and Number of Schools
Fox has only half the number of students as Rockwood and only a little more than half the number of schools as Rockwood and Parkway. Lee's Summit's superintendent is making more than Superintendent Critchlow, but Lee's Summit also has nearly a third more the number of students than Fox.

Academic Performance
Lindbergh has been ranked #1 in the state in academics for 3 years in a row. So, their superintendent has something to show performance wise to validate his high salary. So, how does our school board justify paying Superintendent Critchlow more money than Lindbergh's superintendent? It is a perplexing question.

ACT Testing
Well, Fox is way behind most of the districts in both ACT Composite Scores and in the Percentage of Students taking the ACT. Fox has 40% fewer students taking the ACT test than Rockwood, Parkway and Kansas City. Fox has the lowest percentage of students taking the ACT of the top 10 highest paid superintendents in the state and by a significant amount. So, that's not a good comparison to justify why she is being paid a higher salary as well.

School Supplies
Has anyone ever questioned why Ridgewood Middle School requests that each student bring in 2 reams of copier paper for school supplies at the beginning of the year? Perhaps our school board members should reduce Superintendent Critchlow's salary and apply that money towards purchasing enough copier paper for the schools. It would also be helpful if they purchased enough books for each school as well. Our superintendent should be budgeting for those types of items as part of her job. Perhaps she isn't doing as good of a job as she tells the school board she's doing. It takes good leadership skills to hold people accountable. Somewhere there is a breakdown of accountability and we as taxpayers are paying the price as well as our students in the school district. This year Ridgewood Middle School is requesting a $6 fee for a locker combination and a school planner. I thought the lockers were already in the building.

Summary
It simply appears that there just isn't much data to justify paying Fox's superintendent the 4th highest salary in the state.Note that this ranking was for the 2012-2103 school year. We still don't know what her salary is going to be for the 2013-2014 school year. Based upon last year's salary schedule and what she was eventually paid for the year, she may have a salary at or above $260,000 for the 2013-2014 school year. That salary amount does not include benefits. Last year, the taxpayer was paying an additional 14.5% (at least $35,789) in addition to her salary into the Missouri Public School Retirement System as well.

Our community needs to wake up and start calling and emailing your school board members to let them know that this is unacceptable! Fox is not making the grade compared to Lindbergh, Rockwood or Parkway academically. So, to pay our superintendent more than their superintendents gives the appearance that our school board is just pulling numbers out of a hat.

If you were to compare the percentage of students taking the ACT as a comparison ratio to the percentage of students taking the ACT at Rockwood, Parkway and Kansas City, then her salary should be reduced by 40%.  That would put her salary more in line with what it should be.

The Missouri Education Watchdog website has an article from July 2013 titled, "You Might Need A New Superintendent If...". I recommend checking out this article as it is very appropriate.

Our school board members are accountable to the taxpayers that elected them to oversee our school district. They need to create a list of reasons as to why they believe our superintendent should be making this much money and post it on the district website.

Please contact your school board members and ask them to explain how our superintendent was worth $246,824 last year!

Lee's Summit R-7 School District: Teachers Being Bullied Into Not Doing The Right Thing

Lee's Summit R-7 School District: Teachers Being Bullied Into Not Doing The Right Thing



Why is a teacher removed from a building, told to resign, and deemed immoral to teach all because she made a mistake on an IEP?  She was trying to help students.  The district has destroyed her life and her emotional well being.



I have been in IEP meetings where personnel lied, denied services that were needed, ignored expert advice, and belittled parents concerns.  Which is more immoral? Which deserves the removal of the employee?  Which should be criminal?



Below are some examples of what I have seen:



Following are the concerns of the psychologist:



9. Jacob may benefit from more intensive, one-on-one instruction in multiplication and division. In light of his handwriting difficulties, he should be allowed to use a calculator when it is clear that he understands underlying concepts so he is not penalized for his motor skills difficulties. (Jacob still cannot multiply or divide)





The team felt that Jacob understood the concept of multiplication and division and that there was no reason to give him one-on-one help.  They felt that letting him use a calculator would solve the issues that he was having with math. Mother disagreed.  The team felt that Jacob understood math and most of his difficulties were due to his absences.  Mother stated, many times, that his absences are a direct result of the anxiety that he experiences because of school. Mother stated that his psychiatrist believes this to be true, too.  Mother stated that he was struggling with math before his absences.  The team disagreed and stated that he was having no problems with math except for when he was absent



I discussed this issue with Jerry Keimig in 2005 and told him that my son wanted to die because school was just too much for him.  

I met with Mr. Keimig for 15 minutes. I told him that I had read that most autistic children only respond to positive teaching. He told me that I couldn't believe everything that I read. I told him that I wanted my son in a class with a more positive teacher or in a modified curriculum. He told me that he may not be able to help my son in the future. I told him that my son was depressed and that being in this class was making it worse. He told me that it was a good life lesson for my son.

Jake has been told by teachers that his mom is making his life harder.  That he doesn't have a writing disability and that his mom is making rules.  He believes these people.  That not only makes my job harder, but it makes the district's job harder as well because he is then resistant to the help that he so desperately needs. 

Jake was given an Alpha Smart last year and it was kept in his 7th hour class and Ms. Jackson had to figure out how to use it each time that it was taken out of the closet that it was kept in.  Therefore, Jake believed that it did not work.  I stated this at the IEP meeting.  Finally, Ms Jackson let Jake use a class computer, which I had suggested in middle school, and told Jake that "I have figured out a loophole around your mom's rules."  That is unacceptable to me.  Joyce Jackson admitted in the IEP meeting that she had said this.  Jake came home and told me that I was making things harder for him because that is the impression that he received from this teacher.  My advocacy for Jake should never be discussed with Jake without my permission and should never be used as an excuse to find loopholes. 

I asked Jake why he was resistive to using the laptop this year.  He said that it takes so long for it to boot up. This is a child with organizational issues and a child that can not follow more than two step directions.  While he is getting his computer set up he is not being able to hear what the teacher is saying or what is going on in the classroom.  He asked why he couldn't just use the computer in the classroom like he did before.  So, Jake is not resistive to using AT, as is the district's position, Jake is resistive to using something that he feels is making things even harder. 
  
His present level states that the district feels he is resistive.  Once again, this should be addressed in a BIP.  They put the following in his IEP in May, "Jake has been resistive to carrying the Quick Pad to classes."  I asked that it be changed because the statement was not accurate.  In August we had a meeting and the following is taken from my notes, "As for the issue about the assistive technology, they added a sentence that stated, "Mrs. Tucker believes that this was because he believed it did not work." 
  
I told the team that I disagreed with that statement.  The device didn't work in Jake's mind and that's why he didn't want to use it.  He was not resistive to carrying the Quick Pad to classes.  He was resistive to working with a machine that didn't work.  The team refused to take that out.  I was told that I am the expert on Jake at home and the district is the expert on Jake at school. 

I would like to state that I find that offensive and incorrect.  If the district were an expert on Jake, at school, all of his teachers would be HIGHLY trained in his disability.  I wouldn't have to go to meetings and explain Jake's actions, issues, etc if the team at school was an expert on my son.  If the team were an expert on my son, they wouldn't have put him into a class that A) he was not qualified for and B) was totally inappropriate for a student with autism.  If the team were an expert on my son they would not have recommended an art class for a child with dysgraphia or a music class that he surely would have been overwhelmed in.  This is not the first time that the team has suggested a class that was totally inappropriate for Jake.  It was disastrous before and I'm quite sure that it would have been again if Jake had qualified for the 1st hour class." 
  
It also states the following, which once again proves that the district can't differentiate between typical behaviors and behaviors due to his disability.  "Small group testing was changed to "Access to small group testing with rephrasing of directions."  We had a very long discussion on what that meant.  Joy Rose stated, "Historically Jake has refused to take tests in a small group and it resulted in meltdowns and shutdowns."  I would like to know where that information came from because it is totally inaccurate and should not be in Jake's file.   

Jake always took tests in small groups at Prairie View.  It was no big deal and it lead to higher test scores.  When he entered Pleasant Lea they did not give him tests in small groups.  His IEP stated that they were supposed to.  Then they finally agreed to do it, but they asked if him if he wanted to.  Most times he said no.  That is not a refusal.  That is a child being given a choice and choosing.   
  
Had the district implemented his IEP throughout his ten years in this district, this would not be an issue right now.  I have no problem with Jake taking tests in the classroom as long as he understands what the test is asking of him and he is able to take it.  Making a child sit in the hallway is not my idea of small group testing and that is what has been offered on more than one occasion."   
  
On that same discussion, I would like my notes added to the district's conference notes.  The Lee's Summit School District refuses to allow parents to tape record meetings and it is not acceptable that the only conference notes in my child's file would be from the district's viewpoint.  That is not allowing me to be a full participant on my son's IEP team.  I been not been allowed to be a full participant in the past and I would like to see that change.   
  
Also, I have been in contact with OSEP and my contact told me that it was inappropriate for the district to make the statement that the district is the expert on Jake at school and I am the expert at home.  They also told me that Jake should have a dual diagnosis.  One would be educational autism and the other would be ld because of his written language deficit and his dysgraphia.  The team at the meeting yesterday told me that Missouri doesn't do that and I advised that I was contacting OSEP today to ask her why she would advise me to do that when it is not something my state does.  She also advised me that she would like for me to seek mediation and I told I didn't feel that we were there yet and would like to handle this among ourselves.  She is waiting for my report from my meeting yesterday. 

Heidi,

I was just making you aware of the issues that we are facing.  I have been in contact with OSEP and have been sending her information on what families are facing.  She has suggested that I go to mediation and that there are several things that the district is doing wrong. 

I wanted to give you an idea of families in Missouri are facing.  I have families from all over the state that are sending me their stories so that I can try to help them.  I have forwarded those to OSEP as well.

The one thing I would like for you to clarify is about dual diagnosis.  Or at least point me in the right direction.  The woman at OSEP advised me that Jake should have a dual diagnosis.  One for his autism and one for a learning disability.  He has a written language deficit and dysgraphia. But, the district doesn't acknowledge those because it came from his physician.  The district has only evaluated Jake twice in 11 years and their evaluations were inadequate.

When I approached the team they stated that Missouri doesn't do a dual diagnosis.  I just wanted to know if that is true.  If so, I need to let the woman at OSEP know that.

Thanks for your help,

Sherri

Dear Sherri,

In Missouri, a child is categorized by disability for reporting purposes (data purposes). The primary disability is reported. Many children have other disabilities or conditions. The category or “Label” used for reporting purposes does not drive the services.  A child’s services are driven by his needs and the free appropriate public education (FAPE) standard. In fact, there are many states that do not even use categories of disabilities.

Your note appears to indicate that the school district does not agree with your physician’s opinion that your child, whose primary disability is Autism, also has a learning disability. So it sounds like the issue is not really whether a “dual diagnosis” is permissible, but rather whether in fact Jacob has another disability besides Autism.

As you know, mediation and due process are certainly options, if you believe that your child is not receiving appropriate services to meet his needs.

Sincerely,

Heidi

During the IEP meeting we discussed that Jake's short term memory was not just information that the parents shared from outside testing, but it was also very apparent from the district's testing as well.  When I received the IEP it stated that  "Parents share that outside testing also indicates learning disabilities in written language, short-term memory, and theory of mind.  Teachers observe short-term memory weaknesses in the the classroom also."  That is not what we agreed upon and it is not completely accurate.  The district's tests also show a weakness in short term memory and we agreed that the Present Level would state that.  Also, the reason that district tests do not show that Jake has a weakness in written language is because I gave permission for Jake to be given the OWLS test and the district gave him the CASL test.  If the district had given him the OWLS test they would have the results that show that Jake has a written language deficit and that it needs to be addressed.

 

The present level also states that Jacob has shown improvement initiating, maintaining, and ending conversations appropriately, as well as identifying the emotions of others.  Later on the same page it states that Jacob has difficulty joining in appropriately with peers to participate in conversations, understanding how to reciprocate with peers, It also states that Jacob's disability affects his functional and academic involvement and progress in regular education curriculum in the following manner:

Class participation, staying on task, understanding and following instructions, completing and turning in work on time, organization, self-advocating for make-up work, taking notes, expressing himself through lengthy forms of written expression, test-taking skills, understanding the emotions of peers and teachers, and general social skills.  

 

Jake's psychiatrist and I do not believe that Jake has made any progress in the area of conversations or in identifying the emotions of others.  Jake's psychiatrist has a practice of teenagers with autism and it is his opinion that Jake is not on the high end and that he is too affected by his autism to be able to be doing what the present level states.

 

I would like the sentence, "His forgetfulness or memory is reported to also be affected by inattention."  That leads to the impression that he does not have an issue with his short term memory.  I have stated above why I believe that he has an issue with short term memory and I believe that his IEP needs to address this fact.

 

Under strengths it states that Mrs. Tucker shared that she does not feel that Jacob has any strengths.  That is taken totally out of context and is completely inaccurate.  I was asked what strengths I felt Jake had for his future.  I said that he didn't have any strengths that would lead to him living an independent "normal" life.  I did state that Jake is great at math and reading.  But, he was not given the tools to live within society because the district did not address his social issues when he started in the district at the age of 5.   I want that statement removed.

On the Modifications and Accommodations page I specifically stated that I was not in agreement to As Needed being used.  That is defined as to be determined by the special education and/or regular education staff and that is leaving an important party out of the decisions.  I do not believe that it is appropriate to use that term on this IEP. 

 

Under Regular Education Participation it states that Jake is rejected from less restrictive options because of lack of previous progress in regular education with modification, and with the use of supplementary aids and services.  Jake has not received services or modifications.  What does this mean?  It also states that student's diverse learning styles require alternative instructional environment and Jake is in a regular education classroom.  Finally, it states that student requires highly structured, small-group setting, and individualized instruction.  Once again, this is not taking place.  Jake is in a classroom of over 25 students with two teachers.  That is not small group or individualized instruction.

 

Finally, we discussed a social skills class and my psychiatrist and I believe that it is totally inappropriate for Jake.  He requires one-on-one instruction from a person that is HIGHLY trained in his disability.  It is necessary for the person that is giving Jake services to COMPLETELY understand his disability so that they can understand the difference between one sided conversations and real conversations.  Jake has made no progress in this area and has very little time left to make some progress.

Lee's Summit R-7 School District: Why My Son Was Forced To Become A High School Dropout

Lee's Summit R-7 School District: Why My Son Was Forced To Become A High School Dropout

Below is my letter to Jerry Keimig, David McGehee, and John Faulkenberry

 

 

Lee's Summit High School

400 S.E.Blue Parkway

Lee's Summit, Missouri 64063-4399

(816) 986-2000 • FAX (816) 986-2095

April 16, 2009

Dear Mr. and Mrs. Tucker:

Please find a Notification of Meeting for May 4, 2009, 2:45, in Room Bll2.  The purpose of this meeting will be to review and consider new information from the independent evaluation, as was noted in the 04-08-09 Amended IEP Draft. After considering that information, it is our intention for the team to decide whether any changes need to be made to the IEP. We truly hope that you will choose to attend.

Your e-mail dated April 07, 2009, requested several criteria be checked in relationship to the justification for placement section. This subject will be discussed during the IEP Meeting. Generally the more criteria that are checked, the more restrictive the placement. Please be prepared to discuss this at the meeting.

We will also discuss whether dropping from school is appropriate in order for Jacob to achieve his transitional post-secondary goals.

Respectfully yours,·

Joy Rose

SPED Process Coordinator

I have not been able to be a full participant in the IEP meetings and I don't believe that this would be productive.  Jake's last day of school is May 8, 2009.  As far as the IEP team deciding whether dropping from school is appropriate in order for Jacob to achieve his transitional post-secondary goals, I believe that can be answered with the following:

1.  I am Jake's mother and I am the only person that can decide if it is appropriate for Jake.  I don't need to attend a meeting to make decisions for my children. 

2.  The district's position on me is the following:  "It appears that Ms. Tucker is more interested in a personal attack on the individuals responsible for providing educational services rather than accessing existing services designed to provide educational benefit for her child."

3.  Jake is not receiving services that he needs to become a productive citizen.  Jake's psychiatrist agrees that there is no reason to continue sending Jake to school because his educational and developmental needs are not being met and it is effecting his emotional and physical well being.

4.  When I provide information, from experts, that would help the team understand Jake's disability it is dismissed or it is stated "parent reports". 

5.  I am unable to present my concerns in the IEP without it being paraphrased. 

6.  The special education process coordinator has not received the district's autism training and states that she is an expert on my child.  His special education math teacher has not received the training, either.

7.  Information that is shared in the meeting is misrepresented, left out, or taken out of context and there is no valid information as to what is discussed.

8.  Jake's postsecondary goal for independent living is:  Jacob plans to live with his parents while receiving post-secondary education/training. His long-term goal is to live semi-independently in a group home as an adult.

9.  Jake's postsecondary goal for education is:  Jacob's goal is to attend post-secondary training or a 2-year college with a focus on computer game designing.  (This can be done through DeVry.  He can enter DeVry with a GED at the age of 17)

I don't see how Jake's transition plan has anything to do with remaining in school.  He can live semi-independently and go to DeVry without attending high school.  Therefore, I don't believe that the team needs to discuss how appropriate my decision is. 

Jake is not receiving the services that he needs to become independent.  He is not receiving the one-on-one help that he needs to keep up academically.  Therefore, Jake is attending school, failing, becoming anxious, and his health is being affected.  I can't imagine what we could discuss in a meeting that will change any of that.  The draft IEP doesn't call for any significant changes and past experience has shown me that it will be a battle of wills and that I will leave having not attained any of the things that my child so desperately needs.

I would like to meet with you to discuss this and the procedures for having Jake drop out.  I don't want to add more stress to him by making him finish this year. 

Thank you,

Sherri R. Tucker

Fox C-6 Watchdogs: We Have A Problem! Fox's Superintendent Was The 4th Highest Paid in the State for 2012-2013!

Fox C-6 Watchdogs: We Have A Problem! Fox's Superintendent Was The 4th Highest Paid in the State for 2012-2013!

Missouri's Top 25 Superintendent Salaries for 2012-2013

Rank	District Name	Salary Amount	2012 Enrollment	2012 ACT % Tested	2012 ACT Comp Score	2012 Total Expenditures	% of Funds From Local Taxes
#1	LEE'S SUMMIT R-VII	$258,660	17,558	77.4	23.1	$250,528,227	65.83
#2	KIRKWOOD R-VIII	$257,220	5,132	76.9	23.9	$104,967,480	91.90
#3	KANSAS CITY 33	$250,000	15,336	97.2	16.4	$225,824,117	71.12
#4	FOX C-6	$246,824	11,614	56.0	22.3	$135,958,353	50.73
#5	ROCKWOOD R-VI	$234,600	22,268	95.9	23.7	$271,432,719	82.05
#6	SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT	$233,700	4,211	n/a	n/a	$374,210,620	65.38
#7	LINDBERGH SCHOOLS	$233,698	5,830	84.5	23.0	$81,605,925	92.52
#8	NORTH KANSAS CITY	$233,322	18,674	65.2	21.1	$275,109,441	69.43
#9	PARKWAY C-2	$227,000	17,353	96.1	23.3	$315,911,726	92.23
#10	ST. LOUIS CITY	$224,004	22,516	69.9	16.5	$452,146,762	62.80
#11	BLUE SPRINGS R-IV	$225,000	13,943	70.7	23.2	$145,535,677	62.35
#12	INDEPENDENCE 30	$222,600	13,843	52.3	21.1	$184,433,300	45.75
#13	WENTZVILLE R-IV	$221,769	13,103	69.9	22.6	$201,635,884	64.88
#14	PATTONVILLE R-III	$218,129	5,509	70.5	22.5	$121,302,899	86.78
#15	FERGUSON-FLORISSANT R-II	$217,644	11,494	64.0	18.0	$139,326,735	56.20
#16	CLAYTON	$205,000	2,516	88.8	25.9	83,023,438	96.08
#17	ORCHARD FARM R-V	$203,057	1,536	67.7	22.4	$20,131,990	78.98
#18	FRANCIS HOWELL R-III	$195,993	16,998	76.6	22.8	$230,803,025	71.51
#19	COLUMBIA 93	$195,992	16,923	73.6	23.4	$265,069,863	65.54
#20	NORMANDY	$194,855	4,207	51.5	16.1	$68,140,754	35.75
#21	UNIVERSITY CITY	$192,238	3,024	85.1	18.5	$63,192,643	75.26
#22	LADUE	$190,900	3,922	78.4	26.4	$58,775,046	94.76
#23	JEFFERSON CITY	$189,500	8,690	65.2	21.5	$90,848,492	68.66
#24	MEHLVILLE R-IX	$187,775	10,647	66.4	22.5	$100,131,713	80.48
#25	ST. CHARLES R-VI	$185,000	5,008	68.0	22.3	$81,680,373	75.24

For comparison, I have listed a couple of other 2012 salaries below. Is our Superintendent really worth twice as much money as the Governor of Missouri or worth more than what the Vice President of the United States makes?

United States Vice President  -  $230,700

Missouri Governor Jay Nixon  -  $133,820 

Hiring! Police Chief - City of Lee's Summit - Lee's Summit, Missouri

Hiring! Police Chief - City of Lee's Summit - Lee's Summit, Missouri http://bit.ly/N8gK5Z  #police #jobs

Lee's Summit R-7 School District: David McGehee (DrDavidMcGehee) on Twitter

Lee's Summit R-7 School District: David McGehee (DrDavidMcGehee) on Twitter



My superintendent has blocked me from following him on Twitter. What is that all about? My tax dollars pay his salary, which is the highest in Missouri, and I can't see what he is twittering.

Lee's Summit R-7 School District: How Do They Sleep At Night?

Lee's Summit R-7 School District: How Do They Sleep At Night?



Tuesday, August 9, 2011

Sometimes I sit and relive the past four years. I think of all of the tears, anger, frustration, fear, anxiety, and hurt that my family has gone through. Then I think of all of the other families that are going through the same thing. Their lives being destroyed while they sit back and helplessly watch it happen.

One thing always comes to mind. How do the people that are paid with my tax dollars sleep at night? How can they destroy the life and future of another human being and then take their paycheck? How can they hug their children while they are destroying the lives of other children?

I was raised in the 60s and the 70s. My parents were strict and taught us to be honest, caring, and loving human beings. We were taught that you never progress in life without hard work, integrity, honor, and respect. You never hurt others or lie.

I wonder what the parents our of teachers, principals, superintendents, legislators, and school board officials taught their children. Would they be disgusted by the things that their children do to innocent children? Would they be dismayed that their children care about nothing more than self promotion and the almighty dollar? Would they be proud that their children are successful because they are robbing children of their future? My parents would disown me. They would not tolerate the behavior that I see every day.

I have been to many school meetings and sat across the table as these people have lied, cheated, and stolen my child's future. I have seen my legislator sell out my child to further his political career and then lie about it and call me a politcal stalker. I am powerless to stop them. They have all of the power and my hard earned tax dollars have bought it for them.

How many lives are going to be destroyed before this is stopped? How many people are willing to stand up for their children no matter what the consequences are? I am. I have been for four years. Its a lonely journey and I invite you to join me.