|
|
Post by researching on Feb 16, 2010 13:56:28 GMT -6
What's next - "Vote for Dawn Desart for Representative" signs on the front of the school or in your kid's take home folder? She's using our school signage for a political message, and to promote herself, plain and simple, and Birkett is mandating it. I don't care for it one bit, and feel it's totally inappropriate, not to mention low class. I am definitely voting for Senger. I agree about the use of school signage. It is low class and EXTREMELY tacky. I don't like it at all. Don't use my kids to promote your political agenda. |
|
|
|
Post by slp on Feb 16, 2010 14:03:47 GMT -6
I too agree and sent a message stating such to the school board.
It really looks tacky not only because this is political info but also because as they put up these signs we've just spent @ $150 million on a new high school still in process. I don't think a whole lot of legislators are going to put us to the front of the payout line when they know how we have been spending as of late.
|
|
|
|
Post by doctorwho on Feb 16, 2010 14:16:40 GMT -6
I too agree and sent a message stating such to the school board. It really looks tacky not only because this is political info but also because as they put up these signs we've just spent @ $150 million on a new high school still in process. I don't think a whole lot of legislators are going to put us to the front of the payout line when they know how we have been spending as of late. you mean you're not buying that line of crap in the paper from KB that "it's not like we're spending" ?? One of two amazing comments along with " we haven't even talked about a referendum" --( I guess the consulting firm can return our $17K check now- LOL !) |
|
|
|
Post by asmodeus on Feb 16, 2010 15:58:41 GMT -6
Excellent point.
|
|
|
|
Post by twhl on Feb 16, 2010 17:40:52 GMT -6
And $60k for a grand piano. Probably not a lot of sympathy coming from down state. But lets alienate them anyway. |
|
|
|
Post by brant on Feb 17, 2010 10:50:16 GMT -6
Just got back from a meeting at WV. Spoke to a teacher who is most definatly afraid of upcoming cuts. He couldn't say anything against the SB or KB since they are his boss but we both ridiculed MV and the reckless spending like the astroturf stadium. And he did talk about overcrowding.
|
|
|
|
Post by rew on Feb 17, 2010 11:52:22 GMT -6
How bad is the overcrowding at WV??
|
|
|
|
Post by blankcheck on Feb 17, 2010 11:52:33 GMT -6
I believe teachers who do not have tenure, receive pink slips. Then after the district reviews their needs for the next year, they re-hire those who received the slips.
The thing is, is that they will only be re-hiring those which are really needed. Once again, when it gets to that point, we better see some admin. positions on the chopping block as well.
Take a look on the IPSD web page at all the admin. positions and assistants to the admin.......
|
|
|
|
Post by macrockett on Feb 17, 2010 12:41:21 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by doctorwho on Feb 17, 2010 13:06:05 GMT -6
"Synopsis As Introduced Amends the School Code. Extends the time period during which a school district other than the Chicago school district may transfer moneys from specified funds for any purpose from June 30, 2010 to June 30, 2013. Effective immediately" ---this is absolutely not good news giving this district the freedom to move monies around for the bottom line...uh oh |
|
|
|
Post by macrockett on Feb 17, 2010 13:14:57 GMT -6
Should they go down this road, taking money from the general fund to use for operations, it could trigger bond covenants and/or affect our bond rating by falling below a certain liquidity level. Every 1/4 point rise in rates amounts to approximately $750k per year more in interest.
|
|
|
|
Post by Arch on Feb 17, 2010 13:24:11 GMT -6
What are they going to start doing? Taking Special Needs funding to add lighting to the trophy cabinet at a high school?
C'mon...
|
|
|
|
Post by brant on Feb 17, 2010 13:53:35 GMT -6
How bad is the overcrowding at WV?? He just said there was a problem with over crowding but expected it to go down next year. He didn't mention numbers. |
|
|
|
Post by EagleDad on Feb 17, 2010 16:42:57 GMT -6
Interesting, So they are extending the end date in the existing law by 3 years: (105 ILCS 5/17‑2A) (from Ch. 122, par. 17‑2A)
Sec. 17‑2A. Interfund Transfers. The school board of any district having a population of less than 500,000 inhabitants may, by proper resolution following a public hearing set by the school board or the president of the school board (that is preceded (i) by at least one published notice over the name of the clerk or secretary of the board, occurring at least 7 days and not more than 30 days prior to the hearing, in a newspaper of general circulation within the school district and (ii) by posted notice over the name of the clerk or secretary of the board, at least 48 hours before the hearing, at the principal office of the school board or at the building where the hearing is to be held if a principal office does not exist, with both notices setting forth the time, date, place, and subject matter of the hearing), transfer money from (1) the Educational Fund to the Operations and Maintenance Fund or the Transportation Fund, (2) the Operations and Maintenance Fund to the Educational Fund or the Transportation Fund, or (3) the Transportation Fund to the Educational Fund or the Operations and Maintenance Fund of said district, provided that, except during the period from July 1, 2003 through June 30, 2010, such transfer is made solely for the purpose of meeting one‑time, non‑recurring expenses. Except during the period from July 1, 2003 through June 30, 2010, any other permanent interfund transfers authorized by any provision or judicial interpretation of this Code for which the transferee fund is not precisely and specifically set forth in the provision of this Code authorizing such transfer shall be made to the fund of the school district most in need of the funds being transferred, as determined by resolution of the school board.
(Source: P.A. 94‑176, eff. 7‑12‑05; 95‑53, eff. 8‑10‑07.) I noticed Darlene Senger signed up as a co-sponsor. Looks to me to be an possible way to circum navigate the need for the operating referendum for the additional 4-5 million/year that operating a 3rd high school was known to cost (at least until such time as the economy gives it mnore than a snowball's chance in hell). If so, it a more apt name for the bill might be the nickname "Metea Slush Fund Bill" |
|
|
|
Post by Arch on Feb 17, 2010 17:05:18 GMT -6
This also sounds like ANY referendum passed could have the funds used for any other purpose. Am I reading this correctly?
|
|
