|
Post by admin on Mar 5, 2009 9:16:44 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by twhl on Mar 5, 2009 10:43:14 GMT -6
Mark Rising www.rising204.com/index.html 1. Please provide the following information: a) Elementary attendance area in which you reside, number of children, and schools they attend Nancy Young Elementary attendance area. I have 2 daughters. 10 year old daughter in 5th Grade at Nancy Young Elementary. 5 year old daughter in her 2nd year of preschool at Indian Prairie Preschool * If elected my 2 daughters will have attended preschool, elementary, middle and high school at the conclusion of my 4 year term. b) Educational background and occupation University of Wisconsin at Whitewater B.A. Degree in Marketing and Communications Occupation – Procura Software – Regional Sales, Account Management and Consulting. c) Involvement in the schools, district, or community. Schools and District – Involved in Indian Prairie Preschool PTA, Nancy Young Elementary PTA and he Indian Prairie Special Needs PTA which is near and dear to my heart since I moved to IPSD because of the Special Needs Programs. I have attended all but a couple IPSD 204 School Board Meetings the past 3+ years and have educated myself and become knowledgeable about IPSD finances, operations and school governance. Community - Representative of Oakhurst North Home Owners Association. Teach Sunday school and sing in the choir at Our Saviour’s Luthern Church in Naperville. Have served and worked with Fox Valley Park District advisory committee as a community leader. 2. IPSD belongs to the community! There has been little communication or reaching out to the community for the past 3-4 years, and I have witnessed this get worse and worse. I want to encourage more communication and help the IPSD School Board be proactive and communicate better with the parents, community and staff of IPSD. I understand what the responsibilities of a school board member are and the time and commitment it requires, and I plan to dedicate that time and more to make the community feel part of the SD again. 3. My role as a school board member is to first and foremost represent all those that I serve in IPSD 204 equally and honestly. It is also my job to stay informed about issues locally, at the state level, nationally and globally. I will listen to those who communicate with the SB to better represent the entire community. I plan on doing this by listening to the parents, staff and the community and by working with the Superintendent and other SB members. I will always try to improve myself as a board member through school board development opportunities. 4. In regards to district goals I think we need to take a bigger look at reducing that achievement gap between our students and this needs to be a priority to benefit every student in our district. Continually challenge our high performing students and programs to better develop our low performing students. In regards to policy, in my opinion, our school board is performing poorly in communicating with the parents, staff and community and we need to act now. 5. Communication needs to increase between the Superintendent, IPSD School Board, staff, students, parents and the community NOW. School Board Members need to learn more about district programs, personnel and facilities and participate more within the district. The school board needs to listen, learn and understand public opinion to help them make better policy decisions. Share more with the public and community and get rid of executive session except in the case of legally sensitive issues. Post more info about how IPSD school board decisions were reached. 6. Many schools are still overcrowded. Many family’s children will have to move schools and there are children that will be split from schools. I wish this issue could have been handled differently and without rushing. It was the SB’s job to educate before putting plans into place in regards to attendance boundaries. Again, people felt they weren’t heard. 100% of the district will never be happy when it comes to this issue but it is all in the way you handle it and it wasn’t handled properly. We all still belong to a great school district and we should work together going forward to make our school district even better. 7. It should work well when the right people that are put in place to delegate. It is the school board’s job to clearly state the vision and make sure there is training to implement the process. There needs to be learning process for these skills. In addition, regular meetings to make sure there is always a consensus in fine tuning the decision making process. There needs to be a sharing of decision making and at the school site this will improve teaching and learning. With this comes power sharing which makes everyone feel a part of the process.
|
|
|
Post by d204mom on Mar 5, 2009 12:26:28 GMT -6
Rising was a big part of the pitting of neighborhoods against one another and that troubles me. Not an assumption but a fact amongst his own fellow neighbors. Not good. Perhaps his mind has become more open now that he is running for SB? If he allowed himself to be used as a pawn by M2 that is still not a get out of jail free card from me during an election as crucial as this one to begin healing our community. That is a huge issue. The hallmark of the Metzer regime is pitting one area against the other - we don't need footsoldiers who perpetuate this method of 'representing' us to accomplish their agendas. I look forward to him explaining his role in this, as I'm willing to listen. He impressed me with his knowledge at the IPPC forum, but I will not condone people who use this type of politics. The era of us vs. them, north vs. south, etc must end. I swiped this from another thread. I agree and look forward to his explanation of why he felt he needed to be involved in the petition effort at all. It made no difference to the outcome and seemed orchestrated by those wanting to divide the district instead of listen to concerns. If he could be played by Metzger & Daeschner last year, how will he prevent it in the future?
|
|
|
Post by southsidemom on Mar 5, 2009 12:36:11 GMT -6
That is a huge issue. The hallmark of the Metzer regime is pitting one area against the other - we don't need footsoldiers who perpetuate this method of 'representing' us to accomplish their agendas. I look forward to him explaining his role in this, as I'm willing to listen. He impressed me with his knowledge at the IPPC forum, but I will not condone people who use this type of politics. The era of us vs. them, north vs. south, etc must end. I swiped this from another thread. I agree and look forward to his explanation of why he felt he needed to be involved in the petition effort at all. It made no difference to the outcome and seemed orchestrated by those wanting to divide the district instead of listen to concerns. If he could be played by Metzger & Daeschner last year, how will he prevent it in the future? We all know that he can always rationalize and come up with an explanation (not that it will be acceptable).....but the fact remains he does not have the best interest of the ENTIRE taxpaying community at hand. Don't trust him for a minute! And this election is so important NOT to bring in SB members that continue with this downward spiral of making self-serving decisions and manipulations by both DrD and M2.
|
|
|
Post by Arch on Mar 5, 2009 13:06:16 GMT -6
My concern is the language that states that location WAS NOT part of the referendum, but somehow converting a freshman center to a middle school WAS part of the referendum...... technically, NEITHER was on the ballot.
It was via this petition that another round of "Some people just don't want to go to Waubonsie" was launched during a school board meeting by the presenters. To be fair, Mark was *NOT* a person making public comment or presenting it at the meeting.... I only pointed out that he was a signature gatherer for it for his area.... signatures for a petition that was factually incorrect and used to pit neighborhood against neighborhood by the presenters at the SB meeting.
|
|
|
Post by southsidemom on Mar 5, 2009 13:28:05 GMT -6
My concern is the language that states that location WAS NOT part of the referendum, but somehow converting a freshman center to a middle school WAS part of the referendum...... technically, NEITHER was on the ballot. It was via this petition that another round of "Some people just don't want to go to Waubonsie" was launched during a school board meeting by the presenters. To be fair, Mark was *NOT* a person making public comment or presenting it at the meeting.... I only pointed out that he was a signature gatherer for it for his area.... signatures for a petition that was factually incorrect and used to pit neighborhood against neighborhood by the presenters at the SB meeting. Thanks for the clarification Arch. However when you ENDORSE a petition and seek others to sign then that means you support and believe it. For me that's a wrap!
|
|
|
Post by Arch on Mar 5, 2009 13:34:44 GMT -6
I'm just trying to add clarity to my issue and point out the facts versus supposition... Naturally, everyone is allowed to form their own opinions from it.
It's up to the candidate to add further clarification or not at this point.
|
|
|
Post by doctorwho on Mar 5, 2009 13:59:37 GMT -6
My concern is the language that states that location WAS NOT part of the referendum, but somehow converting a freshman center to a middle school WAS part of the referendum...... technically, NEITHER was on the ballot. It was via this petition that another round of "Some people just don't want to go to Waubonsie" was launched during a school board meeting by the presenters. To be fair, Mark was *NOT* a person making public comment or presenting it at the meeting.... I only pointed out that he was a signature gatherer for it for his area.... signatures for a petition that was factually incorrect and used to pit neighborhood against neighborhood by the presenters at the SB meeting. And as I have stated many many times - Dave Holm, M2 - BG and others REPEATEDLY told people at the PTA meetings it was too late to change that wording to make it 75th and Commons ( like every other thing they put out) or else they would have changed ut. So either that is true or else IT WAS A LIE. This was at the same time they trotted around the chart for the school there- and told people not to worry about the land cost- they had it covered. So to have this group try and come up like some giant brains who someone can comprehend better than the rest of the district is not only inaccurate, it is extremely insulting and exactly the kind of tactics that have been used under the guideance of (hopefully our outgoing leaders. So to the group that somehow feels they are more intelligent than us rubes who trusted our SB and Financial wizard - I call BS ! Also although the district web sie only shows the last 2 months video's now ( must be a bandwidth issue ) I am sure it is FOIA available - should we request last Aprils meeting and see exactly who and what was said ?
|
|
|
Post by casey on Mar 5, 2009 14:15:00 GMT -6
I think that Mark Rising did a good job at the IPPC forum the other night and I agreed with much of what he said but I unfortunately have a hard time trusting him. I will forever tie him to the petition that was directed by MM. In Mark Rising's defense, he may have just been used by Metzger but it still reeks to me. Besides, how could I vote for ANYONE named Mark ?
|
|
|
Post by JB on Mar 5, 2009 15:35:54 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by southsidemom on Mar 5, 2009 15:45:25 GMT -6
I think that Mark Rising did a good job at the IPPC forum the other night and I agreed with much of what he said but I unfortunately have a hard time trusting him. I will forever tie him to the petition that was directed by MM. In Mark Rising's defense, he may have just been used by Metzger but it still reeks to me. Besides, how could I vote for ANYONE named Mark ? ROFLMAO.....I don't even purchase M and Ms anymore.
|
|
|
Post by d204mom on Mar 5, 2009 19:52:50 GMT -6
My concern is the language that states that location WAS NOT part of the referendum, but somehow converting a freshman center to a middle school WAS part of the referendum...... technically, NEITHER was on the ballot. It was via this petition that another round of "Some people just don't want to go to Waubonsie" was launched during a school board meeting by the presenters. To be fair, Mark was *NOT* a person making public comment or presenting it at the meeting.... I only pointed out that he was a signature gatherer for it for his area.... signatures for a petition that was factually incorrect and used to pit neighborhood against neighborhood by the presenters at the SB meeting. Good point regarding the freshman centers. I forgot that petition claimed that tidbit WAS on the ballot. Ooops! Who the heck even wrote that petition? Then the folks circulating it - did they even read it? Did the folks signing it even read it?
|
|
|
Post by steckdad on Mar 5, 2009 23:19:01 GMT -6
That is a huge issue. The hallmark of the Metzer regime is pitting one area against the other - we don't need footsoldiers who perpetuate this method of 'representing' us to accomplish their agendas. I look forward to him explaining his role in this, as I'm willing to listen. He impressed me with his knowledge at the IPPC forum, but I will not condone people who use this type of politics. The era of us vs. them, north vs. south, etc must end. I swiped this from another thread. I agree and look forward to his explanation of why he felt he needed to be involved in the petition effort at all. It made no difference to the outcome and seemed orchestrated by those wanting to divide the district instead of listen to concerns. If he could be played by Metzger & Daeschner last year, how will he prevent it in the future? some folks here were admittingly "played" by MM and they still are welcome with open arms here.
|
|
|
Post by steckdad on Mar 5, 2009 23:20:22 GMT -6
I think that Mark Rising did a good job at the IPPC forum the other night and I agreed with much of what he said but I unfortunately have a hard time trusting him. I will forever tie him to the petition that was directed by MM. In Mark Rising's defense, he may have just been used by Metzger but it still reeks to me. Besides, how could I vote for ANYONE named Mark ? Yes..I totally agree...why would you vote for the sharpest candidate from the first forum when you can vote for your neighbors...
|
|
|
Post by macy on Mar 5, 2009 23:34:05 GMT -6
I think that Mark Rising did a good job at the IPPC forum the other night and I agreed with much of what he said but I unfortunately have a hard time trusting him. I will forever tie him to the petition that was directed by MM. In Mark Rising's defense, he may have just been used by Metzger but it still reeks to me. Besides, how could I vote for ANYONE named Mark ? Yes..I totally agree...why would you vote for the sharpest candidate from the first forum when you can vote for your neighbors... Steckdad, I don't think Casey ever stated anyone was the "sharpest" candidate. And where did she state she was going to vote for her "neighbor"?
|
|