|
|
Post by JB on Apr 2, 2009 19:09:12 GMT -6
A message from Bruce Rodman, Indian Prairie School District 204 Board of Education Member from 2003 to 2006.
From having served on the District 204 school board, I know that it can be a difficult job. It’s not for everyone, which is why simply deciding to run in the first place is something to be admired. It represents a commitment that that most people are unwilling to make. For this reason, all of the candidates should be evaluated on a fair, individual basis, with people basing their votes on facts and reason, not distortions or fear mongering. After studying the candidates, I have decided to support Eric Hepburn, Don Moscato, Jerry Huang and Doug DiFusco.
I know there are some people who are concerned that they are running as a slate. I also know that unofficial slates, comprised of incumbents and recruited candidates, have been very common in the district. Some people are concerned that they have been endorsed by the teachers’ union. In years past, when the union endorsed incumbents or their favored candidates, no one thought twice about it. Much of this concern is based strictly on maintaining the status quo. In many ways, the status quo is not that bad – we are fortunate to have an excellent school district. However, I believe that Eric, Don, Jerry and Doug aren’t simply satisfied with the status quo, but want to make the district better.
I am confident they will improve transparency and value input from all stakeholders – teachers and district staff, parents and taxpayers – and not just the ones who know how to toe the party line. They will then take that input and make their decisions in an honest, open manner. Not everyone may agree with those decisions, but at least no one will be surprised or feel disenfranchised. I’m convinced that they will bring about a meaningful improvement in the leadership of our district, demonstrating accountability, respect and, when necessary, compassion.
District 204 is going to face some financial challenges in the coming years, at a time when many of our residents are already struggling with unemployment, reduced pay and declining property values. These four candidates recognize that the legends of Indian Prairie are not the school board members or administrators who presided over building any number of schools. Rather, the true legends are the taxpayers and parents who funded those schools, the teachers who work in them, and their students, who will go on to accomplished, fulfilling lives.
Because they represent meaningful change our District needs, this April 7 I will vote for Eric Hepburn, Don Moscato, Jerry Huang and Doug DiFusco to serve on the Indian Prairie School District 204 Board of Education.
Bruce Rodman
|
|
|
|
Post by macy on Apr 2, 2009 19:50:04 GMT -6
A message from Bruce Rodman, Indian Prairie School District 204 Board of Education Member from 2003 to 2006.From having served on the District 204 school board, I know that it can be a difficult job. It’s not for everyone, which is why simply deciding to run in the first place is something to be admired. It represents a commitment that that most people are unwilling to make. For this reason, all of the candidates should be evaluated on a fair, individual basis, with people basing their votes on facts and reason, not distortions or fear mongering. After studying the candidates, I have decided to support Eric Hepburn, Don Moscato, Jerry Huang and Doug DiFusco. I know there are some people who are concerned that they are running as a slate. I also know that unofficial slates, comprised of incumbents and recruited candidates, have been very common in the district. Some people are concerned that they have been endorsed by the teachers’ union. In years past, when the union endorsed incumbents or their favored candidates, no one thought twice about it. Much of this concern is based strictly on maintaining the status quo. In many ways, the status quo is not that bad – we are fortunate to have an excellent school district. However, I believe that Eric, Don, Jerry and Doug aren’t simply satisfied with the status quo, but want to make the district better. I am confident they will improve transparency and value input from all stakeholders – teachers and district staff, parents and taxpayers – and not just the ones who know how to toe the party line. They will then take that input and make their decisions in an honest, open manner. Not everyone may agree with those decisions, but at least no one will be surprised or feel disenfranchised. I’m convinced that they will bring about a meaningful improvement in the leadership of our district, demonstrating accountability, respect and, when necessary, compassion. District 204 is going to face some financial challenges in the coming years, at a time when many of our residents are already struggling with unemployment, reduced pay and declining property values. These four candidates recognize that the legends of Indian Prairie are not the school board members or administrators who presided over building any number of schools. Rather, the true legends are the taxpayers and parents who funded those schools, the teachers who work in them, and their students, who will go on to accomplished, fulfilling lives. Because they represent meaningful change our District needs, this April 7 I will vote for Eric Hepburn, Don Moscato, Jerry Huang and Doug DiFusco to serve on the Indian Prairie School District 204 Board of Education. Bruce Rodman "Because they represent meaningful change our District needs, this April 7 I will vote for Eric Hepburn, Don Moscato, Jerry Huang and Doug DiFusco to serve on the Indian Prairie School District 204 Board of Education." Well written Bruce Rodman. I agree we need change. |
|
|
|
Post by doctorwho on Apr 2, 2009 20:19:39 GMT -6
A message from Bruce Rodman, Indian Prairie School District 204 Board of Education Member from 2003 to 2006.From having served on the District 204 school board, I know that it can be a difficult job. It’s not for everyone, which is why simply deciding to run in the first place is something to be admired. It represents a commitment that that most people are unwilling to make. For this reason, all of the candidates should be evaluated on a fair, individual basis, with people basing their votes on facts and reason, not distortions or fear mongering. After studying the candidates, I have decided to support Eric Hepburn, Don Moscato, Jerry Huang and Doug DiFusco. I know there are some people who are concerned that they are running as a slate. I also know that unofficial slates, comprised of incumbents and recruited candidates, have been very common in the district. Some people are concerned that they have been endorsed by the teachers’ union. In years past, when the union endorsed incumbents or their favored candidates, no one thought twice about it. Much of this concern is based strictly on maintaining the status quo. In many ways, the status quo is not that bad – we are fortunate to have an excellent school district. However, I believe that Eric, Don, Jerry and Doug aren’t simply satisfied with the status quo, but want to make the district better. I am confident they will improve transparency and value input from all stakeholders – teachers and district staff, parents and taxpayers – and not just the ones who know how to toe the party line. They will then take that input and make their decisions in an honest, open manner. Not everyone may agree with those decisions, but at least no one will be surprised or feel disenfranchised. I’m convinced that they will bring about a meaningful improvement in the leadership of our district, demonstrating accountability, respect and, when necessary, compassion. District 204 is going to face some financial challenges in the coming years, at a time when many of our residents are already struggling with unemployment, reduced pay and declining property values. These four candidates recognize that the legends of Indian Prairie are not the school board members or administrators who presided over building any number of schools. Rather, the true legends are the taxpayers and parents who funded those schools, the teachers who work in them, and their students, who will go on to accomplished, fulfilling lives. Because they represent meaningful change our District needs, this April 7 I will vote for Eric Hepburn, Don Moscato, Jerry Huang and Doug DiFusco to serve on the Indian Prairie School District 204 Board of Education. Bruce Rodman Just an excellent assessment of who/what is needed on the SB going forward from someone who would definitely know in very recent terms - as a veteran of the 'stuff' from the last 5 years. Thank you Bruce, I value your judgement and thank you again for all your time and efforts previously in this role. |
|
|
|
Post by researching on Apr 3, 2009 2:11:53 GMT -6
A message from Bruce Rodman, Indian Prairie School District 204 Board of Education Member from 2003 to 2006.From having served on the District 204 school board, I know that it can be a difficult job. It’s not for everyone, which is why simply deciding to run in the first place is something to be admired. It represents a commitment that that most people are unwilling to make. For this reason, all of the candidates should be evaluated on a fair, individual basis, with people basing their votes on facts and reason, not distortions or fear mongering. After studying the candidates, I have decided to support Eric Hepburn, Don Moscato, Jerry Huang and Doug DiFusco. I know there are some people who are concerned that they are running as a slate. I also know that unofficial slates, comprised of incumbents and recruited candidates, have been very common in the district. Some people are concerned that they have been endorsed by the teachers’ union. In years past, when the union endorsed incumbents or their favored candidates, no one thought twice about it. Much of this concern is based strictly on maintaining the status quo. In many ways, the status quo is not that bad – we are fortunate to have an excellent school district. However, I believe that Eric, Don, Jerry and Doug aren’t simply satisfied with the status quo, but want to make the district better. I am confident they will improve transparency and value input from all stakeholders – teachers and district staff, parents and taxpayers – and not just the ones who know how to toe the party line. They will then take that input and make their decisions in an honest, open manner. Not everyone may agree with those decisions, but at least no one will be surprised or feel disenfranchised. I’m convinced that they will bring about a meaningful improvement in the leadership of our district, demonstrating accountability, respect and, when necessary, compassion. District 204 is going to face some financial challenges in the coming years, at a time when many of our residents are already struggling with unemployment, reduced pay and declining property values. These four candidates recognize that the legends of Indian Prairie are not the school board members or administrators who presided over building any number of schools. Rather, the true legends are the taxpayers and parents who funded those schools, the teachers who work in them, and their students, who will go on to accomplished, fulfilling lives. Because they represent meaningful change our District needs, this April 7 I will vote for Eric Hepburn, Don Moscato, Jerry Huang and Doug DiFusco to serve on the Indian Prairie School District 204 Board of Education. Bruce Rodman "Because they represent meaningful change our District needs, this April 7 I will vote for Eric Hepburn, Don Moscato, Jerry Huang and Doug DiFusco to serve on the Indian Prairie School District 204 Board of Education." Well written Bruce Rodman. I agree we need change. Change is absolutely my #1 priority. Thank you to Bruce Rodman for taking the time to write a well thought out and honest opinion about the candidates. It is INVALUABLE to hear directly from someone who has the very unique experience of serving on the SB with some of the very people currently sitting on the SB and one up for re-election. Thank you, thank you, thank you! |
|
|
|
Post by sashimi on Apr 3, 2009 10:21:27 GMT -6
This is from Steck Dad on the green board (since I have long since been banned from the green board for writing a couple blogs that dared to challenge the current admin's party line, and I know that Steck Dad writes on blue as well, I thought I would address here):
"I am getting more leery of this group as days go by. Now their "neighbor" BR is backing them. This is turning into a north vs south thing (again) and not about voting for the 4 best candidates...."
Steck Dad...I have read your blogs and you are smarter and more sincere than this. How can BR be the "neighbor" of these 4 candidates when, if you marked each of their homes and made a circle, the circle would cover something like 25 square miles. I guess anyone living south of Ogden avenue are neighbors?
This is turning into a North vs. South thing? Please, this started as a north vs. south thing before the first candidate was announced. The current Board and administration made sure of this by their actions over the last few years (intentionally dividing the community to get what they wanted).
The "folks up north" starting attacking every single candidate that lives south of the Fox Valley mall from the day everyone announced. I have my own personal opinion who wears the white vs. black hats in this battle (guess where I live). I do not think that campaign signs started disappearing from the yards of "the folks up north". I also do not a single person "down south" who thinks that is was acceptable for MM to call a parent a Mother%&*. Also, I have a seen emails from the "folks in the south" spreading lie after lie about candidates positions.
But what silly statements that I am making. I bet that less than 5% of the folks "up north" could even name more than 4 candidates running (and do not follow school district politics at all). Same thing down in my neighborhood. There are pockets of a few hundred people who are driving the north vs. south mentality, but because of this...it lives on. As a result, I can tell you that every single person I have talked to in Tallgrass is voting for the original"slate of four" and I am sure that every single person in Brookdale, Stonebridge, etc. is voting for their "unofficial" slate of four.
I think we will see some healing when the new board members (whoever they are) start leading by example (and stop the current methodology). I have great expectations that we are going to see this happen and am looking forward to this new day. 4 more days...
|
|
|
|
Post by JB on Apr 3, 2009 10:45:41 GMT -6
Perhaps Steckdad needs to have his memory refreshed... Bruce, along with Jeanette, voted "no" in the 4-3 decision for the geography-based Option 5A. Bruce wanted a more diverse socioeconomic mix, and recognized geography shouldn't be the sole factor to be consideredd in the boundary decision. So, to make the arguement that Bruce wants to perpetuate a north - south divide is simply ludicrous.
I'll also point out that once the vote was made, he had the integrity to stand behind the decision, even if it wasn't his. In my mind, an endorsement from a man of honor like this is worth a lot.
|
|
|
|
Post by rodman on Apr 3, 2009 16:42:49 GMT -6
I appreciate the kind words. I have given this a lot of thought, and simply decided to write this because I thought it was the right thing to do. I tried to explain my reasoning as best I could. In response to Steckdad's comment, I can honestly say that geography did not enter into it at all. (And it never ceases to amaze me that some people who complain about the divisions in the district are the first ones to label a person based on where he or she lives.)
I eventually came to the conclusion that unless there is a firm commitment to doing things differently, it will be more of the same. I believe these four candidates best embody that approach.
|
|
|
|
Post by treehugger on Apr 3, 2009 18:29:06 GMT -6
Bruce Rodman is a stand up guy. You can take him at his word.
|
|
|
|
Post by sam2 on Apr 4, 2009 9:22:52 GMT -6
Bruce Rodman is a stand up guy. You can take him at his word. My experience with Rodman, while very limited, does not give me the impression that he's a standup guy. When the referendum was defeated and we bought the 25 acres we're now trying in vain to sell, Rodman stated that the purchase would have no cost as we could sell the land back to BB for the purchase price. I countered that there was a cost of money and that the money paid would not earn interest and we would be out that money. He tookt he line that was so typical for our board: Thanks for writing, but you simply don't understand the complexities of district finances and the state law. We are limited in where we can invest, blah ,blah, blah. When I countered that I knew better and would confirm my beliefs with a finance director of another district, Rodman was quick to replay that he'd done some checking and I was correct. Point is, he was willing tosay anything to support the action taken. That's not a standup guy, IMO. |
|
|
|
Post by Arch on Apr 4, 2009 10:07:35 GMT -6
"Point is, he was willing tosay anything to support the action taken."
There is always the possibility that one is misinformed and trusts where the information came from... to later find out it was garbage.
|
|
|
|
Post by doctorwho on Apr 4, 2009 10:20:04 GMT -6
Bruce Rodman is a stand up guy. You can take him at his word. My experience with Rodman, while very limited, does not give me the impression that he's a standup guy. When the referendum was defeated and we bought the 25 acres we're now trying in vain to sell, Rodman stated that the purchase would have no cost as we could sell the land back to BB for the purchase price. I countered that there was a cost of money and that the money paid would not earn interest and we would be out that money. He tookt he line that was so typical for our board: Thanks for writing, but you simply don't understand the complexities of district finances and the state law. We are limited in where we can invest, blah ,blah, blah. When I countered that I knew better and would confirm my beliefs with a finance director of another district, Rodman was quick to replay that he'd done some checking and I was correct. Point is, he was willing tosay anything to support the action taken. That's not a standup guy, IMO. Was that not before we decided on condemnation and quick take and stopping negotiating with BB in good faith ? Was this also at the same time our finance director and M2 were repeating ad nauseum that we had enough money to afford anything at BB and our numbers were their numbers ? Are you suggesting Bruce was running the finances not Dave Holm ? I think not. I think Bruce provides a unique insight, inside the world that has led us to this end game.....which is why his views are so important- it cannot be dismissed as conjecture and hearsay as it done with everything else not from the powers that be. |
|
|
|
Post by anteater on Apr 4, 2009 10:25:20 GMT -6
Bruce Rodman is a stand up guy. You can take him at his word. My experience with Rodman, while very limited, does not give me the impression that he's a standup guy. When the referendum was defeated and we bought the 25 acres we're now trying in vain to sell, Rodman stated that the purchase would have no cost as we could sell the land back to BB for the purchase price. I countered that there was a cost of money and that the money paid would not earn interest and we would be out that money. He tookt he line that was so typical for our board: Thanks for writing, but you simply don't understand the complexities of district finances and the state law. We are limited in where we can invest, blah ,blah, blah. When I countered that I knew better and would confirm my beliefs with a finance director of another district, Rodman was quick to replay that he'd done some checking and I was correct. Point is, he was willing tosay anything to support the action taken. That's not a standup guy, IMO. So the fact that he admitted he was wrong and you were right makes him what exactly? It sounds like the only person you are willing to call a standup person is someone who agrees with you all along. I also recall that he opposed purchasing the additional acreage immediately after the referendum when we had the opportunity to do so. In hindsight, maybe that would have been the right thing to do? If I remember, he argued that doing so would doom future referendums. |
|
|
|
Post by sam2 on Apr 4, 2009 13:24:20 GMT -6
/quote] So the fact that he admitted he was wrong and you were right makes him what exactly? It sounds like the only person you are willing to call a standup person is someone who agrees with you all along. I also recall that he opposed purchasing the additional acreage immediately after the referendum when we had the opportunity to do so. In hindsight, maybe that would have been the right thing to do? If I remember, he argued that doing so would doom future referendums. Anteater. That was not my point at all. My point was that he responded to my question by asserting that I was simply not intelligent enough to understand a complex issue and then went on to "enlighten" me. I wrote politely as a taxpayer. His response was simultaneously condescending and incorrect. He changed his opinion, only when I wouldn't accept his first response. For the record, if I didn't respect the opnions of people who disagree with my viewpoints, I wouldn't spend time reading this blog. I simply offered a different perspective, based upon admittedly limited personal experience. You don't have to agree with my opinion, nor I yours. I've held the minority opinion on this board before -- sometimes, subsequent events have caused people to share my opinion, sometimes events have caused me to change my opinion...I thought that was the purpose. I stand corrected |
|
