Your example of one class with a turnover rate of 60% is not relevant, unless the whole system is experiencing that kind of turnover. Not only the teachers, but the administrators should receive merit pay. Now, you have advocates for allocating resources properly to achieve results. If they are getting paid based on results or their job depends on results, they will be less likely to condone patronage and contracts to board members friends.
There is no incentive at this point. Just the old standard cry of "more money".

Don't be so argumentative, Lee. I was using that one school as an example, because I believe it is illustrative of the situation for the district as a whole. I happen not to have, though, the turnover/moving/homeless rate of the district as a whole. Doubt I could very easily get that data and am not going to try right now.

I agree, the issue in St. Louis Public Scools, and many failing districts in our region, is not about the need for more money. It's how the money is being used in many cases. Do I dare to throw out another example for fear of hearing that my examples are useless? Well,here I go anyway...FOR EXAMPLE, Jennings School District has one of the highest per pupil spending rates but does not have performance results to show for that. (This was as of a few years ago anyway. I suspect it is the same now.)