A Better Way of Doing Saint Louis’ Dirty Work

In 1992, Patrick Geraty founded St. Louis Composting. Patrick was in the landscaping industry and was looking for a way to diversify his business. “I was also wondering what to do with all this yard waste,” he tells me. His solution was to recycle the dead plant matter into mulch and compost, which can then be used to enrich topsoil.  

As his business grew, he began taking on local governments as clients. Many public spaces produce plant waste that needs to be disposed of, and cities also need mulch to cover ground in public parks.

Privatization can be controversial, but there are some instances where everyone agrees privatization is a smart move. Municipal mulching services seem to be one such case.

In 2010, the city of St. Louis contracted out its green waste disposal to St. Louis Composting. The move saved the city an estimated quarter-million dollars annually.

“Privatization just made sense,” said Greg Hayes, St. Louis’s forestry commissioner. “Antiquated equipment made our operation inefficient. It saved the city from having to invest a significant sum in new specialized machinery. St. Louis Composting is a well-capitalized, accomplished specialist that knows the business inside and out.”

This seems to be a common story. As a city’s older machinery needs to be replaced, it makes sense to contract out with a specialist like St. Louis Composting rather than burdening a city with the purchase of expensive new machinery.

Patrick estimates that his company now has contracts with around 20 to 25 cities in the eastern half of Missouri. His company even handles much of the animal bedding for the St. Louis Zoo.

I asked Patrick about the environmental aspect of his business and he tells me that soil quality has decreased in the last 30 to 40 years. Recycling organic matter back into the topsoil helps fix this problem. “You feel good about what you do” he said.

Convention Mania Spreads

In Heywood Sanders’ book Convention Follies, he writes about the failure of convention centers and hotels to lead to economic development—or even recoup the costs of the investments themselves. No sooner had we written about the same slim prospects for success in Kansas City than we learned of plans for a similar project in Camden County, Missouri. Thankfully, at least one local leader is skeptical

Lake News Online was kind enough to publish our take on the matter. You can read more here.

 

Who is Missouri’s Teacherpreneur of the Year?

California teacher Laura Randazzo is not just a teacher—she’s a teacherpreneur.

The website teacherspayteachers.com, which allows educators to sell original lesson plans, worksheets, and curriculum materials, has provided Ms. Randazzo with an outlet to sell 4,000 copies of her original worksheet, “Whose Cell Phone Is This?” priced at $1 dollar per sheet. Between all of the resources she has made available for high school grammar, vocabulary, and literature, she has grossed $100,000 in sales.

In Teacherpreneur: Innovative Teachers Who Lead But Don’t Leave, the Center for Teacher Quality advocated for this new type of educator. Teacherpreneurs spend a portion of their time teaching in the classroom and then serve in other educational roles outside the classroom. Some, like Ms. Randazzo, develop materials that they then sell. Others help out as teacher leaders in their schools, mentoring new teachers and developing strong curricula for other classes to use. Some even get involved in the policy process, working with district, state, and national leaders to influence the rules and regulations that govern public schools. 

Unfortunately, as the authors point out, today’s “archaic” work schedule may limit opportunities for teacherpreneurs. Teaching 2030 cowriter Ariel Sacks explained in 2010 why it’s important for teacherpreneurs to split time both as an educator and an entrepreneur:

Many teachers like myself could play any number of teacherpreneurial roles depending on the needs of my school and the funding source—community organization, think tank, or university. Right now, many of us are developing curriculum materials, mentoring teachers, or creating partnerships between our schools and other organizations. And I can imagine more: I could do policy work outside my school and/or be a freelance writer, with perhaps only half of my salary paid by the school itself.

The beauty of a hybrid, teacherpreneurial role is that I would always maintain a classroom teaching practice. Teaching is the soul of my work in education. If I lose that, I think I’d feel disconnected from my purpose and passion—and my colleagues. At least in my own mind, my work would lose relevance and, understandably, I would lose credibility with my teaching peers.

Today’s school environment is hardly a hotbed for teacherpreneurs, so it’s worth considering what types of policy reforms, either at the local or state level, would allow teacherpreneurs to thrive. Expanding virtual teaching opportunities, for example, may allow educators to stay in the classroom while taking on other roles.  They could create online modules or allow students in other schools or districts to join their class via Skype or other video-conferencing software. For every module that a student uses or every student who joins their class, they could get paid.

One day we might not only award an educator with the title of Missouri Teacher of the Year, but recognize a teacherpreneur as well.

“This Time It’ll Be Different”

I’ll bet that’s what Phelps County officials are thinking as they set out to create a new tax increment financing (TIF) district in Rolla. This time they want a new marketplace on the north side of Interstate 44. Despite their optimism, policymakers should be aware that Missouri cities and counties have been using TIF for years now and the record of success just isn’t there.

Numerous studies show that the use of TIF does not lead to economic growth for the area and isn’t a financial boon to the jurisdictions that use it. For example, studies of the use of TIF in Iowa and Chicago both found that TIF does not deliver tangible economic benefits. A more recent study in Indiana found “. . . uniform negative impacts of TIFs on traditional measures of economic development such as employment, the number of business establishments, and sales tax revenue.”

So why do Phelps County and Osage Beach (which approved TIF for a senior living center earlier this year) think that their projects will be different in the face of so much evidence to the contrary? It would be a nice to know an answer to that question, but in the meantime, the proliferation of TIF districts continues.

It is easy to understand the appeal of using TIF to redevelop vacant property. If the project gets completed, a new development is in place instead of a deserted lot, and all without “costing” taxpayers. However, development can occur without TIF. It has in Olivette, and it can happen in Rolla, too. 

Why We Joined Rebecca Friedrichs’ Fight

Historically, the Show-Me Institute has rarely joined lawsuits or amicus briefs in Supreme Court cases. But this week, along with several other state public-policy research and educational organizations, the Institute filed an amicus brief in support of the plaintiffs in Friedrichs v. California Teachers Association. When you hear the story of Rebecca Friedrichs, you will know why.

Ms. Friedrichs is a 27-year veteran teacher who currently works in Buena Park, California. According to an interview with the Daily Caller News Foundation, she first encountered the teachers union when she tried to get her school to deal with a colleague who had been abusive to students. As she said, “They couldn’t get rid of her because of teacher tenure. . . . There was absolutely nothing, from my perspective and what I was told, that I could do.”

Friedrichs tried to work with her union, volunteering within it and working to convince her colleagues to be more amenable to some education reforms (like school vouchers) that might give more opportunities to her students. And what, according to Friedrichs, was the union’s response? “They punished me for standing up. . . . For that whole year, for that whole fight, I was treated like dirt.”

Teachers are too important to be treated like that.

Ultimately, what is at issue in this case is very simple: the right of free association, a right protected by the First Amendment. Ms. Friedrichs and thousands of public servants like her do not want to be forced to support a union that does not represent their interests or values.

As James Sherk of the Heritage Foundation points out, for much of the history of the American labor movement, private unions supported that right for public employees. In 1959, the AFL-CIO’s Executive Council wrote “In terms of accepted collective bargaining procedures, government workers have no right beyond the authority to petition Congress—a right available to every citizen.” Why? “It is impossible to bargain collectively with the government.” That was George Meany, President of the AFL-CIO, in 1955.

The issues associated with public unionism are clear. Institute researchers and scholars have written about the dangers of allowing government unions to elect their bosses and thus sit on both sides of the table during negotiations over salaries and benefits, pensions, hiring and firing procedures, and a variety of other policies (like school vouchers) that might only tangentially affect their membership. You can find a small sample of our work here, here, and here.

A victory in the Friedrichs case would strike a blow for individual freedom; it would recognize the millions of teachers and other government workers across the country not simply as interchangeable widgets who all think the same way, but as individuals with independent ideas and preferences.

This kind of fight is worth fighting. We’re happy to join it.

 

(Click on the link below if you would like to read the full text of the amicus brief.)

 

The Minimum Wage: How it Harms the Workers it’s Meant to Help

Dr. Michael Podgursky opened his presentation by reviewing the recently released Show-Me Institute video about the impact of the minimum wage in Saint Louis's Dutchtown neighborhood. He then spoke on the side-effects of the recent minimum wage increase in Saint Louis City and the impact it has on the workers it is intended to help. His slides are available below.

The House Isn’t On Fire, but It Is at Greater Risk

Several years ago, my wife and I were in the market to buy a house. As is customary, we had an inspection completed on the house we wanted to purchase. Minor things were noted here and there on the report, but one thing in particular caught our eye. Somehow the wires got crossed when the outlets were installed. The electrical outlets still functioned, and we were told it probably would not be a problem. However, the home inspector suggested we be cautious about plugging any large appliances in the outlets until we had an electrician fix the polarity.

The problem our home inspection revealed was below the surface. It wasn’t causing any noticeable problems today. Down the road, however, it could have caused a fire, resulting in irreparable harm.

Recently, Michael Rathbone and I performed an inspection of our own—not on a home, but on Missouri’s teacher pension systems. Similar to my home inspection, we found something troubling just below the surface. Missouri’s teacher pension systems have shifted to riskier assets. This shift has not caused any noticeable problems as of today; and like my reversed polarity, may not ever cause any harm. Of course, an increase in risky assets also increases the possibility that the house could burn down.

Imagine if upon receiving my home inspection, I had yelled at the inspector, “You just hate houses!” As ridiculous as that might seem, that is exactly the reaction Michael and I have received. In response to a recent op-ed in the Springfield News-Leader, in which we called for increased transparency so that the problem could be monitored, we were vilified. One pensioner even claimed that we dislike public education. The author of the response to our op-ed then went on to list several facts that were not germane to the point we made.

Somehow it seems our message has been lost. Therefore, I want to reiterate the point of our paper, “Betting on the Big Returns: How Missouri’s Teacher Pension Plans Have Shifted to Riskier Assets,” one more time. Missouri’s pension investments are becoming more risky. In other words, the house isn’t on fire, but it is becoming more flammable. It would be wise to monitor the investments more closely and plan for these increased risks. 

Support Us

The work of the Show-Me Institute would not be possible without the generous support of people who are inspired by the vision of liberty and free enterprise. We hope you will join our efforts and become a Show-Me Institute sponsor.

Donate
Man on Horse Charging