|
|
Post by brant on Apr 8, 2011 6:48:26 GMT -6
The voters who turned out for Tuesday’s District 204 school board election comprised a small fraction of those eligible to cast ballots, but they had a large impact. Two of the three available positions on the board will be filled by newcomers when the leadership officially changes at a meeting early next month.
Vice President Alka Tyle, who wanted a second term on the board, was defeated by barely 1 percent of the 20,017 voters who weighed in. Mark Rising drew the third highest vote totals, tallying 3,724 votes, according to the unofficial results. Lori Price, president of the Indian Prairie Special Needs PTA, finished second to Curt Bradshaw, the board’s current president.
“It was a little surprising, but when voter turnout is less than 10 percent, anything is possible,” Tyle said Thursday. “It would be one thing if more than 50 percent of the district had voted.”
She could only surmise about the low showing in a contest that has direct impact on matters that usually interest the constituency, including taxes and the quality of the local school system.
“It just blows me away when I hear things like, ‘Well, my kids have already graduated, I don’t need to go and vote,’ or ‘I’m happy with what the district is doing,’ or ‘I don’t want to register to vote, because I don’t want to have to go for jury duty,’” said Tyle, who works as a tutor. “It’s just baffling.”
The district’s teacher organization made no endorsements in the race, although the group hosted a candidate forum to encourage the residents to become familiar with who was in the race. But Val Dranias, president of the Indian Prairie Education Association, praised Tyle’s contributions to the district during her time on the board.
“Basically we just felt the voters needed to make up their own minds, and they did that,” she said.
The reconfigured board could be a reflection of overall discontent with elected officials.
“I think in general there is more of a concern on the finances, and I think that unfortunately sometimes overshadows the focus on education issues,” Tyle said. “People are losing their jobs, and they’re concerned.”
Bradshaw, appointed to the board in 2005, was left to speculate on the results as well.
“It’s always hard to tell exactly what the voters were looking at in the election,” he said. “Alka is extremely knowledgeable in curriculum and instruction, (and) her leadership in those areas will be deeply missed.”
Tyle said she is reviewing her options and hasn’t yet decided where she will focus her energies, though she is certain she’ll remain engaged in education. And she has no regrets about her run for re-election.
“I will sleep well, knowing that all throughout the campaign, I spoke from the heart without worrying what would or would not gain votes,” she said.
Bradshaw said with two new members at the table, the board will keep working on the things it does best.
“I would not expect much change, because our goals are the same ones any high-performing district would have,” he said. “We’ve just been more focused and deliberate in that.”
According to Dranias, the teachers’ union — which has a contract scheduled to run out in August 2012 — has enjoyed an amicable working relationship with the board over the past couple of years.
“I would just like to see that continue,” she said.
|
|
|
|
Post by brant on Apr 8, 2011 6:51:14 GMT -6
So Bradshaw doesn't expect much change? I used to have high hopes for this guy. With his leadership I expect the same poor decisions unless MR and CV make a considerable impact.
|
|
|
|
Post by EagleDad on Apr 8, 2011 7:14:41 GMT -6
It appears from this article that the Sun, and Curt do not approve of the results. Curt, if you can't tell what the voters were looking at in the election, feel free to give me a ring and I'll fill you in.
|
|
|
|
Post by macrockett on Apr 8, 2011 12:30:14 GMT -6
“I think in general there is more of a concern on the finances, and I think that unfortunately sometimes overshadows the focus on education issues,” Tyle said. “People are losing their jobs, and they’re concerned.”
There is another one that doesn't get it. You spend $143 million, including a $19m cost overrun, on a high school we never needed and which is still half empty even though it was urgent we get it build. In addition, you have $3.5 million going out the door each and every year for administration and overhead for said facility. Not one cent of this money educates our children.
Juxtapose that with the layoff of staff that assisted in the education of our children and deferral of IT expenditures for existing facilities.
If you don't allocate your resources effectively and efficiently, whatever you hope to achieve in education will be diminished.
|
|
|
|
Post by EagleDad on Apr 8, 2011 17:58:23 GMT -6
The big thing they don't get in this article is that the #1 job of the board (by far) is financial oversight (they are a BOARD of directors after all) and stewardship of the public interest. Add to that policy setting.
No one wants/needs a part-time mommy tutor setting the curriculum, or educational agenda. We have literally hundreds of highly educated PHD+ educators in the administration and the educator ranks.
The board is there for oversight, to challenge the administration and represent the public. They are the check-and-balance.
We seem to have really lost sight of that in D204. We don't need people who think like teachers on the board - we need people who think like running a business.
We certainly don't need cheerleaders.
|
|
|
|
Post by doctorwho on Apr 8, 2011 18:57:12 GMT -6
It appears from this article that the Sun, and Curt do not approve of the results. Curt, if you can't tell what the voters were looking at in the election, feel free to give me a ring and I'll fill you in. my phone is open also - not that I expect a call. The buddy network got broken- boo hoo |
|
|
|
Post by doctorwho on Apr 8, 2011 19:00:04 GMT -6
“I think in general there is more of a concern on the finances, and I think that unfortunately sometimes overshadows the focus on education issues,” Tyle said. “People are losing their jobs, and they’re concerned.”
Bradshaw, appointed to the board in 2005, was left to speculate on the results as well.
“It’s always hard to tell exactly what the voters were looking at in the election,” he said. “Alka is extremely knowledgeable in curriculum and instruction, (and) her leadership in those areas will be deeply missed
Great- if we need a teacher we'll call you... and yes people are concerned about finances when you overspnd an unneeded referndum by $19 M and neither you nr Curt seem tho think it is an issue- get a clue
|
|
|
|
Post by Arch on Apr 8, 2011 19:05:07 GMT -6
It's the economy, stupid.
|
|
|
|
Post by doctorwho on Apr 9, 2011 10:09:00 GMT -6
Maybe someone needs to clue in Curt and Alka that the reason Mark did well likely was:
Regarding the Sun article under School Board.
1/ He had a clear message about finances and never wavered off his message of fiscal responsibility while still providing and preserving an excellent education for our kids. You don't have to sacrifice one for the other.
2/ I hear Mark walked neighborhoods himself all across the district and didn’t have his “campaign team” do it for him.
3/ He did have 2 important endorsements in Herald and NACPAC) and the support of Wheatland Township Republicans. I’m sure his effective and informative emails to D204 residents also helped him.
. Point is Mark ran an educational, informative and eye opening campaign while still focusing on what is important, the kids! I also understand he did it without having a fundraiser and never pandering for donations --OR SENDING EMAILS NOW FOR MONEY SINCE HE DID NOT SPEND LIKE OTHERS DID- He also did it with the smallest campaign team of any of the candidates.
CLUE: what one competitior spent compared to Mark is a perfect example of how different the two will be on spending YOURS AND MY money when n the SB. Some still believe they have a blank check - which explains why $19M of overspend was not viewed as significant.
|
|
|
|
Post by southsidesignmaker on Apr 9, 2011 16:24:24 GMT -6
DOC,
The clear message to the board is the fact that the voters don't care how their tax money is spent. With a 10-12% turnout I don't think the folks in charge have anything to worry about now or in the near to mid term future.
Mark Rising will be a welcome addition to the board, it is just too bad that 90% of the voters don't care enough to vote for or against him. .
Maybe another message sent out by the 90% non vote is that: We the voters are happy and complacent, board members keep up the good work do as you will.
|
|
|
|
Post by doctorwho on Apr 9, 2011 18:41:53 GMT -6
DOC, The clear message to the board is the fact that the voters don't care how their tax money is spent. With a 10-12% turnout I don't think the folks in charge have anything to worry about now or in the near to mid term future. Mark Rising will be a welcome addition to the board, it is just too bad that 90% of the voters don't care enough to vote for or against him. . Maybe another message sent out by the 90% non vote is that: We the voters are happy and complacent, board members keep up the good work do as you will. OR, no matter what things in 'city hall' will remain the same- could be either message...... "meet the new boss..same as the old boss......." |
|
|
|
Post by Arch on Apr 9, 2011 19:43:54 GMT -6
Maybe another message sent out by the 90% non vote is that: We the voters are happy and complacent, board members keep up the good work do as you will. Be honest... Do you personally believe this was the message? There will be followups, so consider it carefully - but be honest. |
|
|
|
Post by southsidesignmaker on Apr 10, 2011 18:29:06 GMT -6
Arch, I have no problem with follow ups. There are only 10 or less folks that converse on this board on a regular basis. It would be great for anyone to justify the message sent by a 10-12% turnout. I have to assume that the voting public generally feel that the board has done a fine enough job to not get enough energy up to even vote.
Neighborhoods like mine have plenty of stay at home parents and voters that work from home. It took me all of 5 minutes to drive to the voting booth and cast my ballet. In my case I am grateful for the low turnout as all three of the candidates that I voted for indeed won. But to think that any newly elected board member has a mandate is absolutely idiotic with such a low voter turnout. The mandate if any is simple: DO AS YOU WILL AS 90% OF US COULD CARE LESS!
As for followups, have at it, I am stunned that so few could elect officials that have so much impact in our community.
|
|
|
|
Post by doctorwho on Apr 10, 2011 18:55:27 GMT -6
Arch, I have no problem with follow ups. There are only 10 or less folks that converse on this board on a regular basis. It would be great for anyone to justify the message sent by a 10-12% turnout. I have to assume that the voting public generally feel that the board has done a fine enough job to not get enough energy up to even vote. Neighborhoods like mine have plenty of stay at home parents and voters that work from home. It took me all of 5 minutes to drive to the voting booth and cast my ballet. In my case I am grateful for the low turnout as all three of the candidates that I voted for indeed won. But to think that any newly elected board member has a mandate is absolutely idiotic with such a low voter turnout. The mandate if any is simple: DO AS YOU WILL AS 90% OF US COULD CARE LESS! As for followups, have at it, I am stunned that so few could elect officials that have so much impact in our community. a grand total of 3 counties voted for Quinn-- he claimed he had a mandate ( of course he didn't)- and look at the impact on all of us from that. No- no one has a mandate- but to overcome the PTSA machine stunned even them |
|
|
|
Post by Arch on Apr 10, 2011 19:40:03 GMT -6
The mandate if any is simple: DO AS YOU WILL AS 90% OF US COULD CARE LESS! First it was: "We the voters are happy and complacent, board members keep up the good work do as you will." I'll agree with the amended one; somewhat - those that did not vote don't care enough (or are not educated enough) to drag their butts to the polls on election day, or vote early/absentee ... but I wouldn't assume it's because they are happy and approve of of the 'good work'. That would be like saying 90% of Naperville is happy with the cuts in city services (like brush collection) and are happy with the refuse fee tacked onto their electric/water bill, are happy to be spending millions for 'smart grid' so they can get penalized for using electricity at the 'wrong time' and the 2 million dollar bailout (yet again) for the Carillon. |
|
