Perhaps if Brentwood spent less money on fountains, they would have more money for schools and cops.

And the city admin needs a new $40K car?! Brentwood is tiny; what city business requires for her to travel long distances to complete that would require the need for a city funded vehicle?

Why am I continually amazed by our board of alderman?

City and school budgets are completely separate, I believe. City actions have affected the schools with development decisions.

The tax base for the school district has eroded. However, the services and demands on the school district and it's employees have gone up. We need to step up and support our schools which anchor our community and are vital for the future.

The main assets of Brentwood - schools, people, location, and quality services (library, parks, fire, ambulance, & police). Whether you have kids in the district or not, the value of property, the people that choose to raise families here, and quality of life are greatly affected by our schools.

As the school district has made tough cuts, at some point the responsible thing to do is bring forth a tax referendum.

Carol, looks like your facts are wrong on both Patch sites this morning... The Brentwood fountain was not paid for by the city of Brentwood. A litte bit of diggin revealed that one of their Tdd's sales tax dollars paid for that one. Do your research/.

I agree. Why have we not waived the Hancock amendment, if that will provide more funding? Give us the opportunity. Our schools are our very best asset. We can't let them suffer.

I went to Brentwood but no longer live there. Looking at the salaries of superintendents in Missouri, Brentwood has substantially fewer students (856) but the superintendent earns more than those in most other districts. The superintendent salary is $185,000 yearly plus a $5,000 a year car or annuity allowance. Webster's super earns about the same with a student base of more than 4,000 or Lindbergh with more than 5,000 earning $195,000 with a $7,800 expense allowance. Teacher salaries are about the same as Webster's and considerably more than those of Lindbergh. I think Brentwood is a great community and I would love to live there again but if the schools and government does not get their act together then it won't be a desirable place to live for long!

Kudos Marie... and welcome to the party Dave...

Marie, we have good teachers that are paid competitively. Big deal. Like any entity, there is waste. However, cuts have been made, and surely more will be coming. You can only do so much before the quality of school suffers. Taxpayers have subsidized major development in Brentwood. As a taxpayer here I suggest there be a referendum vote on whether we directly invest in the schools.

"taxpayers have subsidized major development in brentwood". Wrong...SALES taxes of all SHOPPERS who visit the municipality of brentwood pay/subsidize the development incentives...not the residents, unless they shop. Do the diggin, it s here on the net.

Actually, Faulkner's salary is $150,000. http://patch.com/A-wH6g

Wrong Herald.. the residential taxpayers have subsidized development. When the TIFS are issued exempting the developers from paying into the school system..Brentwood School District has no choice but to come back for more from us.... And when we don't cough up the dollars.. we are the bad guys....

I was at one of the meetings Mr. Faulkner had with the PTO's and it was very informative. Brentwood City and Brentwood Schools are not the same. The revenue brought in from businesses go to the city and basically part of the taxes from your home and personal property taxes are what pays the school district. Please do not confuse the two. On another note, yes our teachers are paid well, but we do have one of the best school districts. And for us to be the best, we need the best teaching our students. So yes, we could use those that we pay less of a salary, but would they all have the degrees in so many specialized areas? The current super does not make the same as the last one. And has a wonderful open door policy. I never had a problem getting a hold of him or getting a response back. The school district does have money issues, I liked how he was very forthcoming with his information. I hope that everyone in the community can come together, not just those with school age children, and support our schools.

I stand corrected Herald... I omitted they are exempt from the difference of the undeveloped vs developed property.. Probably just a few hundred thousand or so....
It's a good thing Brentwood is small .. no fiscal problems there either....

I would like to see more information about why the school district feels it is in financial crisis. Specifically, what costs are escalating fastest? My suspicion is it is the same thing confronting most government or quasi-governmental entities: pension and retiree benefits costs. The TIF argument is a red herring; tax revenues are simply re-directed to subsidize some of the development costs for a period of years. Once the TIF bonds are retired, the TIF liability ceases to exist. The increased revenues from sales taxes and property values then accrue to the City and School District.

You can polish up a turd or a Tiff all day long and end up with the same smelly mess. For a resident/homeowner/taxpayer/student, a Tiff is Voodoo economics for a developer its free money.

Average people are against Tiff sponsored development simply because they believe everyone should rise or sink with the tide equally.
.
The intersection of Brentwood Blvd., Hwy 40 & Eager road is clearly one of the most desirable retail locations in St. Louis County. Absent the current recession, it’s almost guaranteed success to open any retail store in this area. So why shouldn’t the developer/property owner pay his fair share of taxes into the school system just like a homeowner? Why shouldn’t this valuable chunk of land (and its tax potential) be a significant source of revenue for the school system?

The net result of Tiff sponsored development is; more demands on police & fire (both personnel and equipment must be increased to service these developments) increased traffic, increased crime, higher sales tax on purchases compared to nearby, non-Tiff retail stores. Where residential property is converted to commercial, students are lost (along with the state and federal revenue) and the schools are deprived of a tax bonanza that should have been paid by the new owner/developer.

Wake up Brentwood! The mayor sets the agenda for every board of aldermen meeting. The buck stops at his desk. For a resident a Tiff is Voodoo economics for a developer its free money.

I keep reading that property tax revenue has gone down but if that's the case why has my real estate tax bill gone up from $2,151.57 in 2008 to $2,886.02 last year? That's an increase of over $700 per year even though the appraised value of the property has decreased slightly. Someone (and it may not be the schools) are getting plenty of $.

Mr Completely - While I dont agree with all TIFF's, I believe for the most part the ones in Brentwood have served the residents well. The Prominade was paid off two years ago I believe and the school district recieved an increase on that property I believe 60K a year to over 500K a year. Had the area not been developed, what would the school district have done? They would have come back to the residents for the increase in taxes. This is also true for most of the other major developements in Brentwood. While I do pay taxes at these developements when I shop, so do people from all around St Louis City, County, and beyond. Because others pay taxes at these developements, we as Brentwood citizens enjoy many services for free that other municipalities charge for.

I think Jim Davis is right here. What we have is a a lot of hearsay and emotions. We all want strong Brentwood Schools. What the Patch and Doug Miner could do to help us make an informed decision is to give us facts. We need five years history of School District Income - broken down by all sources, property tax, TIf Districts, etc. We also need five years of expense history. Lastly there is a widespread feeling in the community that these problems arose when the early childhood center was built. What were the projections, actual project cost and operating expenses. If we the voters have these facts then I think we are in an informed position that will allow us to make a good vote on whether or not the district is being a good steward of our funds.

Thanks for that link, Striek. I'll add the current year budget PDF to the article.

Couple comments - It appears that the District issued 6 million in bonds for the Early Childhood Center but spent around 6.5 million. If that is correct where did the other 500,000 come from? Reserves? It is also correct that debt service expense for the childhood center is an added expense but district interest payments are down almost 500,000 per year from 5 years ago. Lower interest rates maybe. I spoke to a board member for another district last night and was told that they are suffering enrollment problems with their early childhood center - partially due to economy and increased competition from private caregivers. Are we experiencing the same? What revenue stream was projected and what are we actually getting?