St. Joseph School District |
---|
St. Joseph, Missouri |
District details |
Superintendent: Doug Van Zyl |
# of school board members: 7 |
Website: Link |
The St. Joseph School District is a school district in Missouri.
Click on the links below to learn more about the school district's...
This information is updated as we become aware of changes. Please contact us with any updates. |
Doug Van Zyl is the superintendent of the St. Joseph School District. Van Zyl was appointed superintendent in July 2018. Van Zyl's previous career experience includes working as the superintendent of the Fort Dodge School District in Iowa.[1]
The St. Joseph Board of Education consists of seven members who are elected at large to three-year terms. Each member can only serve four three-year terms, according to district policy. Board members were elected to six-year terms prior to 2015.[10]
Office | Name | Date assumed office |
---|---|---|
St. Joseph School District Board of Education At-large | David Foster | April 19, 2021 |
St. Joseph School District Board of Education At-large | Rick Gilmore | June 9, 2020 |
St. Joseph School District Board of Education At-large | Bryan Green | 2016 |
St. Joseph School District Board of Education At-large | Tami Pasley | 2016 |
St. Joseph School District Board of Education At-large | Kenneth Reeder | April 19, 2021 |
St. Joseph School District Board of Education At-large | LaTonya Williams | April 19, 2021 |
St. Joseph School District Board of Education At-large | Lori Witham | June 9, 2020 |
This officeholder information was last updated on July 23, 2021. Please contact us with any updates. |
Members of the St. Joseph Board of Education are elected to three-year terms on a staggered basis. Elections are held in April.
Three seats on the board were up for general election on April 6, 2021.
The St. Joseph School District Board of Education maintains the following policy on public testimony during board meetings:[11]
“ | To provide for full and open communication between the public and the Board of Education, the Board authorizes the following avenues for the exchange of information, ideas and opinions.
Students, employees and any members of the public are encouraged to utilize established policies and procedures for offering suggestions or addressing concerns and complaints prior to bringing the issue before the Board. The Board believes that many issues can be resolved by communication with teachers, administrators and other staff and may refuse to address an issue if the individual presenting it has not first attempted to resolve the matter through established procedures and policies.
Written correspondence may be directed to the Board, through the superintendent, for consideration at a meeting. Copies of all correspondence directed to the Board will be made available to all Board members. Statements of two (2) pages or less are encouraged.
Any member of the public who wishes to have an item placed on the agenda will present the request in writing to the superintendent or designee. The request must be submitted pursuant to Board policy and received five (5) business days prior to the scheduled meeting. The item will then be appropriately placed on the agenda. The Board reserves the right to impose reasonable restrictions on the number of items to be considered, the number of spokespersons and the speaking time of spokespersons appearing before the Board. If the meeting agenda is full, the Board reserves the right to reschedule an item for the next regular meeting. The Board may refuse to address an issue that has not gone through the appropriate grievance procedure. The Board reserves the right to waive formalities in emergency situations, within the limitations of the law.
From time to time, the Board will schedule a public hearing to receive input on matters of concern to the community, such as setting the district's tax rate. The public will be provided notice of such hearings as required by law.
|
” |
From 1993 to 2013, the St. Joseph School District had an average of $88,333,857 in revenue and $88,031,381 in expenditures, according to the United States Census Bureau's survey of school system finances. The district had a yearly average of $25,868,667 in outstanding debt. The district retired $1,949,667 of its debt and issued $4,355,762 in new debt each year on average.[13]
The table below separates the district's revenue into the three sources identified by the agency: local, state, and federal.
Revenue by Source | |||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Fiscal Year |
Local | State | Federal | Revenue Total | |||||||
Total | % of Revenue | Total | % of Revenue | Total | % of Revenue |
Click [show] on the right to display the revenue data for prior years. | |||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1993 | $25,982,000 | 53.80% | $18,516,000 | 38.34% | $3,794,000 | 7.86% | $48,292,000 | ||||
1994 | $22,993,000 | 43.69% | $24,765,000 | 47.06% | $4,870,000 | 9.25% | $52,628,000 | ||||
1995 | $24,035,000 | 43.22% | $26,399,000 | 47.47% | $5,183,000 | 9.32% | $55,617,000 | ||||
1996 | $24,762,000 | 41.75% | $27,990,000 | 47.19% | $6,558,000 | 11.06% | $59,310,000 | ||||
1997 | $25,770,000 | 40.49% | $31,379,000 | 49.30% | $6,498,000 | 10.21% | $63,647,000 | ||||
1998 | $28,226,000 | 41.59% | $32,441,000 | 47.81% | $7,193,000 | 10.60% | $67,860,000 | ||||
1999 | $29,321,000 | 41.89% | $33,723,000 | 48.18% | $6,946,000 | 9.92% | $69,990,000 | ||||
2000 | $31,355,000 | 42.29% | $35,099,000 | 47.34% | $7,687,000 | 10.37% | $74,141,000 | ||||
2001 | $36,351,000 | 44.03% | $38,612,000 | 46.77% | $7,601,000 | 9.21% | $82,564,000 | ||||
2002 | $38,307,000 | 43.72% | $40,439,000 | 46.15% | $8,880,000 | 10.13% | $87,626,000 | ||||
2003 | $36,327,000 | 42.39% | $40,941,000 | 47.77% | $8,436,000 | 9.84% | $85,704,000 | ||||
2004 | $37,678,000 | 42.52% | $41,257,000 | 46.56% | $9,675,000 | 10.92% | $88,610,000 | ||||
2005 | $44,059,000 | 43.14% | $48,207,000 | 47.21% | $9,853,000 | 9.65% | $102,119,000 | ||||
2006 | $45,753,000 | 41.98% | $51,973,000 | 47.68% | $11,274,000 | 10.34% | $109,000,000 | ||||
2007 | $49,341,000 | 44.91% | $49,292,000 | 44.86% | $11,241,000 | 10.23% | $109,874,000 | ||||
2008 | $49,619,000 | 44.37% | $50,179,000 | 44.87% | $12,031,000 | 10.76% | $111,829,000 | ||||
2009 | $49,853,000 | 43.69% | $51,943,000 | 45.52% | $12,304,000 | 10.78% | $114,100,000 |
2010 | $44,052,000 | 40.16% | $44,053,000 | 40.16% | $21,589,000 | 19.68% | $109,694,000 |
2011 | $47,671,000 | 41.11% | $49,466,000 | 42.66% | $18,819,000 | 16.23% | $115,956,000 |
2012 | $51,757,000 | 42.47% | $55,495,000 | 45.54% | $14,617,000 | 11.99% | $121,869,000 |
2013 | $54,857,000 | 44.03% | $56,575,000 | 45.41% | $13,149,000 | 10.55% | $124,581,000 |
Avg. | $38,003,286 | 43.20% | $40,416,381 | 45.90% | $9,914,190 | 10.90% | $88,333,857 |
The table below separates the district's expenditures into five categories identified by the agency:
Expenditures by Category | |||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Fiscal Year |
Instruction | Support Services | Capital Spending | Debt & Gov. Payments | Other | Budget Total | |||||
Total | % of Budget | Total | % of Budget | Total | % of Budget | Total | % of Budget | Total | % of Budget |
Click [show] on the right to display the expenditure data for prior years. | |||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1993 | $28,502,000 | 61.59% | $15,633,000 | 33.78% | $1,205,000 | 2.60% | $273,000 | 0.59% | $667,000 | 1.44% | $46,280,000 |
1994 | $31,008,000 | 61.04% | $17,032,000 | 33.53% | $1,990,000 | 3.92% | $0 | 0.00% | $768,000 | 1.51% | $50,798,000 |
1995 | $33,537,000 | 60.76% | $18,545,000 | 33.60% | $2,253,000 | 4.08% | $0 | 0.00% | $860,000 | 1.56% | $55,195,000 |
1996 | $36,449,000 | 59.86% | $21,309,000 | 34.99% | $2,110,000 | 3.47% | $0 | 0.00% | $1,025,000 | 1.68% | $60,893,000 |
1997 | $36,792,000 | 59.75% | $20,502,000 | 33.30% | $3,136,000 | 5.09% | $0 | 0.00% | $1,143,000 | 1.86% | $61,573,000 |
1998 | $39,283,000 | 60.62% | $22,409,000 | 34.58% | $1,981,000 | 3.06% | $0 | 0.00% | $1,130,000 | 1.74% | $64,803,000 |
1999 | $41,736,000 | 59.86% | $23,585,000 | 33.83% | $2,938,000 | 4.21% | $0 | 0.00% | $1,459,000 | 2.09% | $69,718,000 |
2000 | $44,630,000 | 59.13% | $25,160,000 | 33.34% | $3,594,000 | 4.76% | $2,000 | 0.00% | $2,086,000 | 2.76% | $75,472,000 |
2001 | $46,928,000 | 55.03% | $26,288,000 | 30.83% | $8,003,000 | 9.38% | $1,557,000 | 1.83% | $2,499,000 | 2.93% | $85,275,000 |
2002 | $48,295,000 | 45.33% | $27,471,000 | 25.78% | $25,582,000 | 24.01% | $2,139,000 | 2.01% | $3,065,000 | 2.88% | $106,552,000 |
2003 | $49,394,000 | 50.81% | $28,093,000 | 28.90% | $14,435,000 | 14.85% | $2,115,000 | 2.18% | $3,178,000 | 3.27% | $97,215,000 |
2004 | $47,947,000 | 56.15% | $27,620,000 | 32.34% | $4,489,000 | 5.26% | $2,108,000 | 2.47% | $3,234,000 | 3.79% | $85,398,000 |
2005 | $49,547,000 | 54.58% | $30,903,000 | 34.04% | $4,367,000 | 4.81% | $2,391,000 | 2.63% | $3,577,000 | 3.94% | $90,785,000 |
2006 | $54,458,000 | 54.58% | $33,307,000 | 33.38% | $5,815,000 | 5.83% | $2,799,000 | 2.81% | $3,390,000 | 3.40% | $99,769,000 |
2007 | $57,598,000 | 54.99% | $35,878,000 | 34.25% | $4,676,000 | 4.46% | $2,854,000 | 2.72% | $3,739,000 | 3.57% | $104,745,000 |
2008 | $59,620,000 | 52.83% | $38,551,000 | 34.16% | $8,419,000 | 7.46% | $2,760,000 | 2.45% | $3,504,000 | 3.10% | $112,854,000 |
2009 | $62,141,000 | 54.80% | $40,320,000 | 35.56% | $4,890,000 | 4.31% | $2,451,000 | 2.16% | $3,584,000 | 3.16% | $113,386,000 |
2010 | $61,167,000 | 55.77% | $37,979,000 | 34.63% | $5,177,000 | 4.72% | $2,519,000 | 2.30% | $2,844,000 | 2.59% | $109,686,000 |
2011 | $60,197,000 | 53.98% | $41,123,000 | 36.88% | $6,370,000 | 5.71% | $1,232,000 | 1.10% | $2,585,000 | 2.32% | $111,507,000 |
2012 | $62,922,000 | 52.93% | $43,369,000 | 36.49% | $8,611,000 | 7.24% | $1,174,000 | 0.99% | $2,792,000 | 2.35% | $118,868,000 |
2013 | $64,271,000 | 50.26% | $42,471,000 | 33.21% | $16,480,000 | 12.89% | $1,468,000 | 1.15% | $3,197,000 | 2.50% | $127,887,000 |
Avg. | $48,401,048 | 55.94% | $29,407,048 | 33.40% | $6,501,000 | 6.77% | $1,325,810 | 1.30% | $2,396,476 | 2.59% | $88,031,381 |
The table below shows the amount of debt retired, issued, and outstanding in the district for each year.
Debt | |||
---|---|---|---|
Fiscal Year |
Retired | Issued | Outstanding |
Click [show] on the right to display the debt data for prior years. | |||
---|---|---|---|
1993 | $0 | $0 | $0 |
1994 | $0 | $0 | $0 |
1995 | $0 | $0 | $0 |
1996 | $0 | $0 | $0 |
1997 | $0 | $0 | $0 |
1998 | $0 | $0 | $0 |
1999 | $0 | $0 | $300,000 |
2000 | $0 | $36,000,000 | $36,000,000 |
2001 | $0 | $1,058,000 | $37,058,000 |
2002 | $455,000 | $33,000 | $36,637,000 |
2003 | $639,000 | $490,000 | $36,488,000 |
2004 | $811,000 | $0 | $35,678,000 |
2005 | $1,897,000 | $20,890,000 | $54,671,000 |
2006 | $2,029,000 | $0 | $52,642,000 |
2007 | $2,172,000 | $0 | $50,470,000 |
2008 | $5,441,000 | $0 | $45,029,000 |
2009 | $1,495,000 | $0 | $43,534,000 |
2010 | $20,414,000 | $0 | $23,120,000 |
2011 | $1,650,000 | $0 | $21,470,000 |
2012 | $1,855,000 | $0 | $19,615,000 |
2013 | $2,085,000 | $33,000,000 | $50,530,000 |
Avg. | $1,949,667 | $4,355,762 | $25,868,667 |
The following salary information was pulled from the district's teacher salary schedule. A salary schedule is a list of expected compensations based on variables such as position, years employed, and education level. It may not reflect actual teacher salaries in the district.
Year | Minimum | Maximum |
---|---|---|
2020-2021[14] | $36,700 | $73,473 |
Each year, state and local education agencies use tests and other standards to assess student proficiency. Although the data below was published by the U.S. Department of Education, proficiency measurements are established by the states. As a result, proficiency levels are not comparable between different states and year-over-year proficiency levels within a district may not be comparable because states may change their proficiency measurements.[15]
The following table shows the percentage of district students who scored at or above the proficiency level each school year:[16]
School year | All (%) | Asian/Pacific Islander (%) |
Black (%) | Hispanic (%) | Native American (%) |
Two or More Races (%) |
White (%) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
2018-2019 | 34 | 35-39 | 19 | 21 | 21-39 | 28 | 37 |
2017-2018 | 36 | 35-39 | 23 | 24 | 21-39 | 29 | 40 |
2016-2017 | 43 | 40-44 | 26 | 31 | <50 | 40 | 46 |
2015-2016 | 44 | 45-49 | 28 | 30 | 40-59 | 45 | 47 |
2014-2015 | 39 | 45-49 | 27 | 27 | 21-39 | 30-34 | 42 |
2013-2014 | 49 | 50-54 | 35 | 36 | 40-59 | 50-54 | 51 |
2012-2013 | 50 | 55-59 | 33 | 34 | 40-59 | 50-54 | 53 |
2011-2012 | 51 | 55-59 | 39 | 41 | 40-59 | 35-39 | 53 |
2010-2011 | 49 | 50-59 | 38 | 39 | 40-59 | 21-39 | 51 |
The following table shows the percentage of district students who scored at or above the proficiency level each school year:[16]
School year | All (%) | Asian/Pacific Islander (%) |
Black (%) | Hispanic (%) | Native American (%) |
Two or More Races (%) |
White (%) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
2018-2019 | 39 | 35-39 | 29 | 26 | 21-39 | 34 | 43 |
2017-2018 | 44 | 35-39 | 29 | 32 | 40-59 | 39 | 47 |
2016-2017 | 58 | 55-59 | 46 | 46 | ≥50 | 54 | 61 |
2015-2016 | 59 | 55-59 | 46 | 46 | 40-59 | 57 | 62 |
2014-2015 | 57 | 50-54 | 45 | 44 | 60-79 | 55-59 | 59 |
2013-2014 | 47 | 50-54 | 31 | 36 | 40-59 | 40-44 | 50 |
2012-2013 | 51 | 50-54 | 39 | 40 | 40-59 | 50-54 | 53 |
2011-2012 | 51 | 60-64 | 37 | 37 | 60-79 | 40-44 | 54 |
2010-2011 | 48 | 60-64 | 34 | 34 | 40-59 | 21-39 | 51 |
The following table shows the graduation rate of district students each school year:[16][17]
School year | All (%) | Asian/Pacific Islander (%) |
Black (%) | Hispanic (%) | Native American (%) |
Two or More Races (%) |
White (%) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
2017-2018 | 81 | ≥80 | 75-79 | 80-84 | PS | 70-79 | 82 |
2016-2017 | 88 | ≥50 | 85-89 | ≥90 | ≥50 | ≥90 | 88 |
2015-2016 | 94 | ≥80 | 85-89 | ≥90 | PS | ≥80 | 94 |
2014-2015 | 93 | ≥50 | 90-94 | ≥90 | PS | ≥50 | 93 |
2013-2014 | 93 | ≥50 | ≥90 | ≥90 | PS | PS | 93 |
2012-2013 | 94 | ≥80 | 85-89 | ≥90 | PS | ≥50 | 95 |
2011-2012 | 91 | ≥50 | 90-94 | 80-89 | PS | PS | 91 |
2010-2011 | 83 | ≥50 | 70-74 | 70-79 | PS | N/A | 84 |
Year[18] | Enrollment | Year-to-year change (%) |
---|---|---|
2018-2019 | 11,178 | -4.2 |
2017-2018 | 11,663 | -0.7 |
2016-2017 | 11,742 | 0.0 |
2015-2016 | 11,746 | -1.1 |
2014-2015 | 11,871 | -0.1 |
2013-2014 | 11,882 | 0.6 |
2012-2013 | 11,813 | 0.8 |
2011-2012 | 11,721 | 0.1 |
2010-2011 | 11,709 | -0.2 |
2009-2010 | 11,737 | -0.1 |
2008-2009 | 11,751 | 0.1 |
2007-2008 | 11,744 | 0.2 |
2006-2007 | 11,718 | 1.2 |
2005-2006 | 11,576 | -0.2 |
2004-2005 | 11,601 | -3.4 |
2003-2004 | 12,015 | 1.4 |
2002-2003 | 11,844 | -0.6 |
2001-2002 | 11,912 | -0.8 |
2000-2001 | 12,010 | -2.1 |
1999-2000 | 12,267 | -1.3 |
1998-1999 | 12,431 | 0.3 |
1997-1998 | 12,390 | 0.1 |
1996-1997 | 12,380 | 1.9 |
1995-1996 | 12,155 | -0.4 |
1994-1995 | 12,199 | -1.9 |
1993-1994 | 12,434 | 0.2 |
1992-1993 | 12,413 | 0.2 |
1991-1992 | 12,394 | 1.1 |
1990-1991 | 12,265 | 1.3 |
1989-1990 | 12,107 | 0.2 |
1988-1989 | 12,083 | -1.4 |
1987-1988 | 12,258 | -1.1 |
1986-1987 | 12,393 | - |
During the 2018-2019 school year, 68.9% of the district's students were eligible for free or reduced-price lunch, 7.0% were English language learners, and 14.1% of students had an Individual Education Plan (IEP) .[20]
Racial Demographics, 2018-2019 | ||
---|---|---|
Race | St. Joseph School District (%) | Missouri K-12 students (%) |
American Indian/Alaska Native | 0.2 | 0.4 |
Asian or Asian/Pacific Islander | 2.0 | 2.1 |
Black | 7.2 | 15.7 |
Hispanic | 8.8 | 6.7 |
Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander | 1.3 | 0.3 |
Two or More Races | 7.9 | 4.3 |
White | 72.6 | 70.6 |
Note: Percentages for race and ethnicity may add up to more than 100 percent because respondents may report more than one race and the Hispanic/Latino ethnicity may be selected in conjunction with any race. Read more about race and ethnicity in the census here.
In April 2016, former superintendent Dan Colgan was ordered to repay $660,000 to the Missouri Public School Retirement System (PSRS) as part of a settlement. Colgan had inflated his salary in order to increase his monthly retirement benefits.[21] On June 13, 2016, Colgan pled guilty to one count of wire fraud in U.S. district court and entered into a plea agreement with the federal government. Colgan was sentenced to one year and one day of imprisonment in federal prison.[22]
In May 2016, former district assistant superintendent for personnel Mark Hargens and former superintendent Melody Smith were ordered to repay PSRS a combined $113,000 for allegedly inflating their reported income to increase their retirement benefits.[23] Hargens was unable to comment on his case.
The St. Joseph School District was investigated by the Missouri State Auditor, the United States Department of Education, and the Federal Bureau of Investigation related to stipends issued by former Superintendent Fred Czerwonka. The former superintendent, appointed in July 2013, allegedly used a rebate from the district's insurance provider to distribute $270,000 in stipends to 54 administrators without board approval. The school district's policy required a report to the school board and a deposit of any excess funds including refunds from vendors. Czerwonka, district Human Resources Director Doug Flowers, and school board member Dan Colgan were accused of using their positions to guarantee promotions within the district and raises for family members. On January 20, 2015, both Czerwonka and Chief Operating Officer (COO) Rick Hartigan were placed on paid administrative leave. In February 2015, the board voted to fire Czerwonka. Hartigan was fired the following week. Colgan resigned on March 5, 2015. During an April 2015 board meeting, the school board appointed local business executive Eric Bruder to fill the vacant seat.[24] Flowers left the district with a severance package in July 2015.[25]
In May 2015, the St. Joseph school board did not renew a portion of its operating property tax levy, which was scheduled to sunset between April 2015 and August 2015. The amount at stake in the levy was 63 cents per $100 in assessed property value.[26]
Several parents and local business leaders interviewed by Ballotpedia and the St. Joseph News-Press indicated that they were either reluctant to support the levy or in opposition to it because of their lack of trust in district leadership. In an interview, former acting superintendent Jake Long said that the administration was optimistic about the levy's chances at the ballot box. Long added that even if the levy had been unsuccessful, it would not have impacted the district until the 2015-2016 school year.[27]
St. Joseph School District
925 Felix St.
St. Joseph, MO 64501
Phone: 816-671-4000
Missouri | School Board Elections | News and Analysis |
---|---|---|
|
State of Missouri Jefferson City (capital) | |
---|---|
Elections |
What's on my ballot? | Elections in 2021 | How to vote | How to run for office | Ballot measures |
Government |
Who represents me? | U.S. President | U.S. Congress | Federal courts | State executives | State legislature | State and local courts | Counties | Cities | School districts | Public policy |