|
|
Post by refbasics on Mar 5, 2010 10:58:29 GMT -6
Hundreds speak out on proposed Dist. 200 cutsdailyherald.com/story/?id=363772By Robert Sanchez | Daily Herald StaffContact writerPublished: 3/5/2010 Wheaton Warrenville Unit District 200 school board members got an earful Wednesday from parents, teachers and students worried about more than $6.7 million in suggested budget cuts. More than 400 people attended a meeting about the district's plans to address a projected $8.6 million deficit in the 2010-11 budget.Dozens expressed concerns about the cost-reduction plan to lay off teachers, increase class sizes, eliminate kindergarten physical education and cut reading aides. The large crowd at Hubble Middle School burst into applause after parent Julie Georgiou said she blames the school board for getting District 200 into its financial mess. "So, after years of wasteful spending, our district is faced with the possibility of either cutting teacher positions or making cuts to the PE, arts and music programs - all extremely vital to creating well-rounded students," Georgiou said.She said board members repeatedly approved hefty superintendent and teachers contracts the district can't afford. "My fellow residents of District 200, I hope this budget crisis is the call to arms needed to hold this board accountable for their mismanagement of our hard-earned money," Georgiou said. While not addressing parents' comments directly, school board President Andy Johnson said District 200 already was facing a multimillion-dollar deficit when it received less-than-anticipated revenue. Part of the reason is because the levy - the portion of the district's budget paid for with property taxes - is limited by the state-imposed property tax cap to 5 percent or the Consumer Price Index, whichever is less. This year, the levy was capped at 0.1 percent, not including an allowance for property that has been added to the tax rolls. "If there had been no change between 2009 and 2010 - and we had a 4 percent CPI - the deficit for the coming year would be $3.7 million instead of the $8.6 (million) that we are wrestling with now," Johnson said. Johnson also said state and federal mandates that are issued without accompanying funding have placed additional financial strains on the district. In determining the $8.6 million projected deficit, officials assumed all administrative salaries would be frozen for the 2010-11 school year and teachers won't see an increase in their base salary. However, teachers would have to agree to any pay freeze because they are represented by a union. The district and the teachers union are in the process of negotiating a contract. If there is an agreement that teachers won't receive any step (experience) increase for the coming year, that would generate about $1.5 million in savings, officials estimate. If there was no salary boost for additional credits or degrees, it would save another $1 million. One suggestion parents repeatedly made during Wednesday's two-and-a-half hour meeting is that District 200 needs to consider reducing administrative salaries, eliminating redundant administrative positions and stopping the practice of paying 100 percent of administrators health and dental insurance. If administrators paid 20 percent of their health premiums like teachers, it would save the district $213,000, officials estimate. "All of us are impacted by lost jobs, frozen wages, trimmed benefits, pay cuts," parent Kristen Seely said. "This is the right climate to ask for retroactive concessions from the unions and overhaul administrative compensation packages to reflect today's reality. Anything else is just unsustainable."Ultimately, it will be up to school board members to decide how many of the reductions are needed to bring spending in line with revenue. They are scheduled to vote on the final list of budget reductions March 24. ----------------- unfunded mandates.... NCLB(No child left behind).. what would happen if we just stopped doing this??  how much does this program cost the district? we are in dire straits! i have a feeling testing companies would be up in arms, and the school administrators overseeing NCLB would be upset. |
|
|
|
Post by EagleDad on Mar 5, 2010 13:50:34 GMT -6
Just change the district name in the article to 204 and it's our same position. We are in this mess because of the wasteful spending of our district. I'm glad to see District 200 speaking out - 400 community members to a SB meeting and it's not even dealing with boundaries ;D? I wonder if we'll have armed police at our School Board meetings again. That was a lot of fun  Maybe they should have automatic weapons this time, better yet have them drawn and with laser sighted dots on the parents foreheads, you know really get that message across that we love our community and value their input. |
|
|
|
Post by doctorwho on Mar 5, 2010 14:08:16 GMT -6
Just change the district name in the article to 204 and it's our same position. We are in this mess because of the wasteful spending of our district. I'm glad to see District 200 speaking out - 400 community members to a SB meeting and it's not even dealing with boundaries ;D? I wonder if we'll have armed police at our School Board meetings again. That was a lot of fun Maybe they should have automatic weapons this time, better yet have them drawn and with laser sighted dots on the parents foreheads, you know really get that message across that we love our community and value their input. some of us would likely have multi red laser dots on us... oh for the days of Hazmat Man |
|
|
|
Post by EagleDad on Mar 5, 2010 15:19:51 GMT -6
Doc, you'd need friggin sunglasses for the number of dots on your forehead these days  Indeed I think our cheerleading days are behind us - I threw away my pom poms. |
|
|
|
Post by casey on Mar 12, 2010 15:13:23 GMT -6
Poised to get 5.6% raises, Kaneland teachers willing to talk cuts
By Susan Sarkauskas | Daily Herald StaffContact writerPublished: 3/12/2010
In the wake of spending cuts made by the Kaneland school board, the teachers union has offered to talk about ways to save money.
The Kaneland Education Association this week asked to "engage in informal conversations" regarding the budget, to "determine if there is a way to mitigate the negative effects of budget decisions on students," according to a news release issued jointly by the district and the KEA.
The district asked the union in November to consider renegotiating its contract. Teachers are due to receive a 5.6 percent increase in base pay this fall, in the last year of a three-year contract.
But teachers voted "no" in February. The union's president said they were concerned about Kaneland's pay compared to other districts, among other things. Union members also did not like that the district announced its request to the public before announcing it to the union. The news release this week noted all further communication about the matter will be made jointly by the union and the district.
Under the cuts the school board approved Monday, the equivalent of 11 full-time teaching positions will be lost in the fall.
Also gone, if the district's money situation does not improve, are five library assistant positions, 11 clubs at the high school, interscholastic sports for the middle school, new books for the high school library, the fifth-grade band, the fifth-grade outdoor education trip, after-practice buses and some coaches for high school sports, according to the $3.1 million plan adopted.
The board is looking to avoid a projected operating-funds deficit of at least $2.6 million. It is also preparing a second round of cuts, fearful it might lose much more state aid than expected.
The plan approved this week puts off, for another year, replacing computers and printers, and freezes the wages of administrators and central office support staff. Perfect attendance incentives for bus drivers are gone, as is the district's health and wellness committee and the Parent University program.
|
|
|
|
Post by friend on Mar 12, 2010 17:03:06 GMT -6
With all of these cuts, I read that class sizes will increase. Does anybody know what the average class size is at the high school level now? Are honnor classes smaller?
|
|
|
|
Post by casey on Mar 17, 2010 9:56:32 GMT -6
West Aurora District 129 lays off 105By Susan Sarkauskas | Daily Herald StaffContact writerPublished: 3/17/2010 12:01 AMSend To: West Aurora School District 129 laid off 105 full-time certified workers, mostly teachers, Monday night. Due to a budget deficit and an anticipated reduction in state funding, first-, second-, third- and fourth-year nontenured workers were on the list. School districts must let teachers know before the end of the current school year (60 days for tenured, 45 days for nontenured) whether they will be needed the next school year. Typically, districts hire back many, once they know their budget and enrollment for the next year, and what staff members are quitting, retiring or taking leaves of absence. Last year, the district's reduction in force numbered 106 certified staff, and all but 55 were rehired before classes resumed. Because of budget constraints last year, the district closed Lincoln Elementary School in Aurora. West Aurora 129 layoffs Editor's note: We chose to run the list of teachers laid off Monday by West Aurora District 129, not to embarrass anyone but to let parents and students know which of their favorite teachers may not be back next year.The following full-time employees were laid off. The district also laid off part-time certified workers. Fourth-year nontenured Staci Bianchetta Jennifer Brauer Grace Cantu Susan Gonzales Kristen Hutchinson Valerie Jones Rebecca Jurkowski Bradley McKinney Irene Stanley Amy Talkington Regina Zager Third-year nontenured Christina Amico Megan Anderson Thomas Anderson Craig Babich Emily Barry Michael Bonner Geoffrey Bradley Amy Brown Stephanie Campise Oswaldo De La Hoya Jolene Duet Breanne Farren Elizabeth Freed Susan Garcia Todd Gingerich Shannone Hernandez Ryann Jensen Steven John Katie Johnson Margaret Karns Emilia Kowalski Vas'Chenia Lee Gayle Lewis Melissa Mack Julie Medeles Kristen Meyer Sara Nagy Jennifer Phillips Jason Reiff Anthony Rizzo Brian Rotrekl Laura Sallas Megan Sally Amanda Sipes L. Elizabeth Smith Kathleen Turnquist William Vega Anne Wason Jennifer White Jessica York Second-year nontenured Kerri Anderson Heidi Angelo Meghan Benear Jennifer Carew-Kipp Daniel Carnduff Matthew Clark Susan Cunningham Andrea Didonato Kelly Doyle Jennifer Frances Joann Freeman Ryan Gatbunton Sandra Geiser Jamie Glass Natalie Gross Meghan Hill Jennifer Hoth Amy Hurt Matthew Johnson Jessica Korzelik Alex Kouyoumdzoglou Stephanie Leo Jenny Maggiore Dolly Mandrelle Sydney Martin Andrew McCann Michelle Navarro Jennifer Pauley Daniel Pietrus Steven Popp Lindsay Putz Amanda Reveter Kerry Ryan Scott Schultz Ryan Sladek Andrea Svejda Yuliana Vera Shelly Walden Kelly Wiese First-year nontenured Jonathan Bacheller Ketys Bassa Martha Borkovic Christina Brzykcy Kristen Coronado Kathy Davila Jaime Faulhaber Angela Fox-Abbott Paul Herrera Sarah Mallas Sandra Medina William Pittluck Denise Reed Laura Wagley Brendan Wischweh Part-time nontenured Julie Albert Katie Brown Michelle Bruss Judith Bugh Steven Burrichter Marybeth Castle Mike Fagan Jennifer Garcia Jaclyn Glenn Kristina Hettinger Sara Koch Kimberly Lundberg Andrew Madden Sheila McQuade Sheryl Mezger Jacqueline Rempala Ann Sixt Christina Tallarico Michelle Voris Brian Weems Jamie Zollers SOURCE: West Aurora District 129 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Not sure that I agree with the editor's policy of running the names. They say they printed them so as not to embarrass the teachers but rather inform the parents. Our 204 community would not do such a thing as it is much more important to keep everyone in the dark and then surprise em. Why let parents know what teachers and from what schools were let go? Let the teachers that choose to share, share. Like the physics teacher at NV who borke down crying and gave her whole story to the class on Thursday. Yep, that's the way to show the kids how much our admin cares about the staff in 204. In addition, I don't think our district implemented an across the board elimination of all teachers in order from first year non-tenured to third and fourth year rather they hand-picked, right? Also, pay attention to the comment that last year 106 were let go and all but 55 were rehired. Again, I may be wrong but I think this whole thing is a set-up. I still think that the majority of the teachers let go in 204 will be back. It will not be the doom and gloom that our district is pretending. Besides, Quinn's just going to borrow more, raise taxes, and give more money to educational funding . Wow, we are in trouble.
|
|
|
|
Post by refbasics on Mar 17, 2010 11:30:06 GMT -6
West Aurora District 129 lays off 105By Susan Sarkauskas | Daily Herald StaffContact writerPublished: 3/17/2010 12:01 AMSend To: West Aurora School District 129 laid off 105 full-time certified workers, mostly teachers, Monday night. Due to a budget deficit and an anticipated reduction in state funding, first-, second-, third- and fourth-year nontenured workers were on the list. School districts must let teachers know before the end of the current school year (60 days for tenured, 45 days for nontenured) whether they will be needed the next school year. Typically, districts hire back many, once they know their budget and enrollment for the next year, and what staff members are quitting, retiring or taking leaves of absence. Last year, the district's reduction in force numbered 106 certified staff, and all but 55 were rehired before classes resumed. Because of budget constraints last year, the district closed Lincoln Elementary School in Aurora. West Aurora 129 layoffs Editor's note: We chose to run the list of teachers laid off Monday by West Aurora District 129, not to embarrass anyone but to let parents and students know which of their favorite teachers may not be back next year.The following full-time employees were laid off. The district also laid off part-time certified workers. Fourth-year nontenured Staci Bianchetta Jennifer Brauer Grace Cantu Susan Gonzales Kristen Hutchinson Valerie Jones Rebecca Jurkowski Bradley McKinney Irene Stanley Amy Talkington Regina Zager Third-year nontenured Christina Amico Megan Anderson Thomas Anderson Craig Babich Emily Barry Michael Bonner Geoffrey Bradley Amy Brown Stephanie Campise Oswaldo De La Hoya Jolene Duet Breanne Farren Elizabeth Freed Susan Garcia Todd Gingerich Shannone Hernandez Ryann Jensen Steven John Katie Johnson Margaret Karns Emilia Kowalski Vas'Chenia Lee Gayle Lewis Melissa Mack Julie Medeles Kristen Meyer Sara Nagy Jennifer Phillips Jason Reiff Anthony Rizzo Brian Rotrekl Laura Sallas Megan Sally Amanda Sipes L. Elizabeth Smith Kathleen Turnquist William Vega Anne Wason Jennifer White Jessica York Second-year nontenured Kerri Anderson Heidi Angelo Meghan Benear Jennifer Carew-Kipp Daniel Carnduff Matthew Clark Susan Cunningham Andrea Didonato Kelly Doyle Jennifer Frances Joann Freeman Ryan Gatbunton Sandra Geiser Jamie Glass Natalie Gross Meghan Hill Jennifer Hoth Amy Hurt Matthew Johnson Jessica Korzelik Alex Kouyoumdzoglou Stephanie Leo Jenny Maggiore Dolly Mandrelle Sydney Martin Andrew McCann Michelle Navarro Jennifer Pauley Daniel Pietrus Steven Popp Lindsay Putz Amanda Reveter Kerry Ryan Scott Schultz Ryan Sladek Andrea Svejda Yuliana Vera Shelly Walden Kelly Wiese First-year nontenured Jonathan Bacheller Ketys Bassa Martha Borkovic Christina Brzykcy Kristen Coronado Kathy Davila Jaime Faulhaber Angela Fox-Abbott Paul Herrera Sarah Mallas Sandra Medina William Pittluck Denise Reed Laura Wagley Brendan Wischweh Part-time nontenured Julie Albert Katie Brown Michelle Bruss Judith Bugh Steven Burrichter Marybeth Castle Mike Fagan Jennifer Garcia Jaclyn Glenn Kristina Hettinger Sara Koch Kimberly Lundberg Andrew Madden Sheila McQuade Sheryl Mezger Jacqueline Rempala Ann Sixt Christina Tallarico Michelle Voris Brian Weems Jamie Zollers SOURCE: West Aurora District 129 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Not sure that I agree with the editor's policy of running the names. They say they printed them so as not to embarrass the teachers but rather inform the parents. Our 204 community would not do such a thing as it is much more important to keep everyone in the dark and then surprise em. Why let parents know what teachers and from what schools were let go? Let the teachers that choose to share, share. Like the physics teacher at NV who borke down crying and gave her whole story to the class on Thursday. Yep, that's the way to show the kids how much our admin cares about the staff in 204. In addition, I don't think our district implemented an across the board elimination of all teachers in order from first year non-tenured to third and fourth year rather they hand-picked, right? Also, pay attention to the comment that last year 106 were let go and all but 55 were rehired. Again, I may be wrong but I think this whole thing is a set-up. I still think that the majority of the teachers let go in 204 will be back. It will not be the doom and gloom that our district is pretending. Besides, Quinn's just going to borrow more, raise taxes, and give more money to educational funding . Wow, we are in trouble. ------------------------ .. "which of their FAVORITE teachers may not be back"?... hmmm i think that is editorial comment in a news story... and a push to parents to ask for increased taxes, or to pressure the state for funds(state 1% surtax increase for education.. we'll soon see ads in the newspapers from teachers unions, 'good government groups' telling us to 'save education' by calling for the surtax. everyone knows that info like this(names of the cut teachers) goes thru a school like wildfire.. parents knew before the newspaper hit the stands! -------------------- mod. for clarity |
|
|
|
Post by asmodeus on Mar 17, 2010 12:32:48 GMT -6
Agreed, this was an unnecessary editorial comment.
|
|
|
|
Post by casey on Mar 17, 2010 18:00:56 GMT -6
How much could salary cuts save U-46?
By Kerry Lester | Daily Herald StaffContact writerPublished: 3/17/2010
Nearly 25 percent of employees in Elgin Area School District U-46 are out of a job next year unless one of two things happen.
The state's funding picture could, theoretically, improve. Or staff pay and benefit cuts could be negotiated.
According its recently amended budget, U-46 will spend $323.7 million on salaries and benefits in 2009-10.
If state funding is reduced, U-46 expects next year's deficit to be $44 million.
The layoffs announced Monday are part of $29 million in budget cuts that can be made before union contract negotiations. But officials hope to negotiate anywhere from $2 million to $20 million, according to district estimates.
In January and February, parents, teachers, local leaders and union officials all got the chance to cast anonymous, computerized votes on how budget cuts could be made.
The 48 cost-cutting options voters could select from were divided into several categories: administrative costs, salaries and benefits, operations, school staffing, and other staffing. Voters were tasked with selecting items to cut until they reached a $40 million total.
Of 459 votes, 439 opted for increasing employee contributions for insurance at some level.
Raising individual insurance contributions from 10 to 20 percent would save U-46 $4.3 million. Bringing the contribution up to 30 percent would save $8.7 million.
Similarly, 453 voted for decreasing employee pay between 1 and 5 percent.
Reducing pay by 5 percent across the board - which would save $11 million - received 197 votes. Cutting pay 2 percent - saving $4.4 million - got 99 votes. Even a 1 percent pay cut would yield $2.2 million in savings.
Votes cast on each of the cuts were broken down into two groups: employees and others. Of all the pay cut scenarios, a 2-percent pay cut got the most support from employees: 82 of 99 votes.
Average teacher salary, according to 2009 state report cards, is $66,489.
Negotiating $10 million in salary and/or benefit cuts could save about 150 jobs.
With state funding uncertain, and pay cuts not yet on the bargaining table, U-46 has laid off more people than necessary to pad itself. District officials are also assuming no raises for administrators, teachers and nonunion employees. The layoffs break down into 732 full-time teaching positions; 106 secretarial positions, 121 educational assistants; 54 transportation workers; and 24 administrators and nonunion employees. The board will vote on 21 custodial layoffs and 21 food service layoffs at a later meeting, bringing the total number to 1,079.
Superintendent Jose Torres said staff will be recalled later this spring if revenue improves.
Whether pay cuts will ultimately be negotiated is anybody's guess right now. The Elgin Teachers Association, with 2,693 members, is by far the biggest player among the district's unions. With its contract expiring in August, it has scheduled five bargaining sessions with the district for April and May.
Both Torres and teachers union President Tim Davis have declined to get into detail about potential salary cuts.
Last Friday, Torres said cuts likely would be a part of the conversation during negotiations.
"Dealing with the deficit is going to permanently change hundreds of teaching lives and student lives," Davis told the board Monday. "... We are willing to help find solutions. I believe we are not the cause of the struggle and we will lobby aggressively to be ... part of the solution."
Other suburban teachers unions' reactions to proposed pay cuts have run the gamut.
Two weeks ago, Batavia Unit District 101 teachers offered to take $2.3 million in salary and benefit cuts to save 60 teaching jobs.
On March 9, the Maine Township District 207 teachers union voted 345-224 against reopening their contract to consider foregoing a one-year 3.2 percent base salary increase to save 40 to 45 teaching jobs.
In Kaneland Unit District 302, the teachers union refused earlier this year to renegotiate its contract, in which base pay is due to go up 5.6 percent next year. But on March 8, the union told the district it wanted to "engage in informal discussions of the 2010-11 budget" with district officials.
Staff writer Susan Sarkauskas contributed to this report.
|
|
|
|
Post by casey on Mar 17, 2010 18:02:17 GMT -6
In January and February, parents, teachers, local leaders and union officials all got the chance to cast anonymous, computerized votes on how budget cuts could be made.
Wow! Imagine actually being given the chance to add input as to how budget cuts should be made? What a novel idea, huh?
|
|
|
|
Post by EagleDad on Mar 18, 2010 5:25:05 GMT -6
Wow! Imagine actually being given the chance to add input as to how budget cuts should be made? What a novel idea, huh? Casey, what's your problem - you will be given a PowerPoint explaining the changes that have already been made on March 22nd.  The only question that remains is whether or not it will delivered under armed police supervision. I will also remind you that if you choose to attend, the public comment portion IS NOT A TIME FOR INTERACTION. You are to deliver your monologue, expect no board members to listen, and certainly do not be as bold as to expect any of it to be incorporated. When done at the time limit, the entitled are duly expected to sit down and shut up. |
|
|
|
Post by sam2 on Mar 18, 2010 15:23:26 GMT -6
Casey, here's the problem in a nutshell: Over the past 20 years , we ( taxpayers and voters) have been treated like fools and idiots by our elected school board. The collective response was not to stand up and demand better, but rather to throttle anyone who dared raise any type of criticism. (I know, I was pounded down on more than one occasion, at meetings, in one on one sessions and on this very board.) The electorate collectively responded to the threats -- large class sizes, split shifts, no band, no athletics -- just as they were supposed to - by approving whatever the school board said we needed.
Yes, many on this board saw the train wreck coming, but what the school board saw was: repeated approval of referenda, and re-election of incumbent board members, and a lot of vocal praise for the wonderful job the district is doing. No one was voted off the board. We allowed the board to hand pick replacements time and time again and then endorsed those selections by voting them in for another term. Our School board president heaps verbal abuse on a parent and they circle the wagons. Why is he still on the board? Because the voters have shown a willingness to accept whatever they're given.
We've brought this upon ourselves.
Absolutely no disrespect intended for those - especially on this board, who take the time to review an analyze the information provided ( or dug up in spite of efforts to keep it out of the public's view) or dared to challenge the assertions and actions of the administration. The sad fact is that you've been lonesome voices in the wilderness and the administration gets proof every single election.
Now, it begins again. Blame the state. Stir up emotions over layoffs, ( keep in mind the Tribune's recent article that suggests many of these have historically been rescinded). Focus on sports and music, two segments of the population with strong, active booster groups to carry the message. Help the newspapers by writing press releases that the newspapers dutifully reprint. All of which shifts the focus away form who is ultimately responsible and who will ultimately pay the price for all the decisions that have been made "for the kids."
Sorry, but I think this is, in essence, how things have been done for a long time and now, we're going to pay a very high price indeed. Sadly, there's no going back.
My last point: remember the last teachers' contract? As I recall, the board felt it wouldn't be fair to take advantage of a poor economy and negotiate a tough, or even multi-year contract with the teachers . Instead, they accepted a one year deal ( with an effective increase of 4%?) in hopes that times would improve -- according to what the newspaper reported. Keep in mind that when it was done, there was real reason to anticipate that property values were falling and that the tax rate would be capped and there would be no money to pay for the contract! As I recall, the explanation was that the contract was funded from prior year's taxes as they are collected in arrears. Well, they have to pay that increase forever, not just in the year after taxes are collected! Was the decision a lack of foresight or did they just think we'd just accept the answer that school finances are complicated? They may be, but shouldn't management understand how it works?
Those of you old enough to remember, let me paraphrase Pogo -- "We've met the cause,, and it is us."
|
|
|
|
Post by casey on Mar 18, 2010 16:22:37 GMT -6
Sam, thanks for such a detailed post. IMO you have always been level-headed and professional in all your communication. You have never belittled someone simply because of an opinion and you do a great job of getting your point across. You are educated and informed on everything in our district. I have tried my best to do the same (but do admit to a few crazy outbursts - the MF response to Steckdad being one of them  ). Unfortunately, the SD/SB does not play by the same rules. They are so masterful at making those that don't agree with them out to be the bad guy. They are able to manipulate any system and label and humiliate anyone in the process. I have been labeled an elitist and entitled simply because where I live (Tall Grass). I have been accused by others of staying involved simply because of boundaries (never mind that I have been involved for at least 10+ years). I have stood up for what I believe is right (class of 2012 not moving, siblings staying together, equity and fairness at the high schools, calling the district out for gross mismanagement, etc.). I have been ridiculed and told to sit down and shut up. I have not! I am not afraid to stay involved and make my opinions known. I only wish others could/would do the same. I am heartbroken that all the kids in our district will suffer because of poor decisions our district administrators and SB have made. I will not sit back and allow them to blame this all on the state of IL. We are in financial duress due to the gross errors of our leadership. |
|
|
|
Post by slp on Mar 18, 2010 17:18:20 GMT -6
Sam, thanks for such a detailed post. IMO you have always been level-headed and professional in all your communication. You have never belittled someone simply because of an opinion and you do a great job of getting your point across. You are educated and informed on everything in our district. I have tried my best to do the same (but do admit to a few crazy outbursts - the MF response to Steckdad being one of them ). Unfortunately, the SD/SB does not play by the same rules. They are so masterful at making those that don't agree with them out to be the bad guy. They are able to manipulate any system and label and humiliate anyone in the process. I have been labeled an elitist and entitled simply because where I live (Tall Grass). I have been accused by others of staying involved simply because of boundaries (never mind that I have been involved for at least 10+ years). I have stood up for what I believe is right (class of 2012 not moving, siblings staying together, equity and fairness at the high schools, calling the district out for gross mismanagement, etc.). I have been ridiculed and told to sit down and shut up. I have not! I am not afraid to stay involved and make my opinions known. I only wish others could/would do the same. I am heartbroken that all the kids in our district will suffer because of poor decisions our district administrators and SB have made. I will not sit back and allow them to blame this all on the state of IL. We are in financial duress due to the gross errors of our leadership. I couldn't agree more. We are being baited and set up yet again. Quinn wants to pass a State Income tax hike, meets with Superintendants in the state to pass along the threats and fear. They inturn do the same to their union members...our teachers. Now, the fear is spread further to us parents...via threats of taking away sports and music. We need to vote out Quinn! His only plan is to raise revenues while we have no assurances it will go to education AND we already see the ineffecient and wasteful ways of the current State governing body. Why would we want to give them anymore of our money. We need new blood in that office who will be fiscally conservative and smart in money management and program management. The time has come for real change in Illinois....and I don't mean the type of socialist change Obama is bringing. |
|
how much does this program cost the district? we are in dire straits!
). Unfortunately, the SD/SB does not play by the same rules. They are so masterful at making those that don't agree with them out to be the bad guy. They are able to manipulate any system and label and humiliate anyone in the process. I have been labeled an elitist and entitled simply because where I live (Tall Grass). I have been accused by others of staying involved simply because of boundaries (never mind that I have been involved for at least 10+ years). I have stood up for what I believe is right (class of 2012 not moving, siblings staying together, equity and fairness at the high schools, calling the district out for gross mismanagement, etc.). I have been ridiculed and told to sit down and shut up. I have not! I am not afraid to stay involved and make my opinions known. I only wish others could/would do the same.