Just one - a Susan Warden Advanced Healthcare Associates ad for chiroparactic treatment. There is also a spot for a St. James The Apostle sale, but I can't tell whether this is school info or a paid advertisement. I think it's safe to say, however, that there is not a landslide of new advertising here.
This whole situation with this newspaper and the story in Daily Herald is very troubling and disappointing. I, for one, was one of the 78% that voted against the referendum. However, I was one of the 78% that did not vote against it due to the finances or the 2001 referendum debacle but did so because of the plan. Further, I was one of those people that gave the members of the Board the benefit of the doubt and really truly believed that they were faced with some tough decisions and although they did not make the decisions that I supported or I liked, they did so with the best of intentions and with their duties to the public in mind.
I am really starting to doubt those assumptions and am starting to feel like quite a fool for having them. Truth be told, I was quietly decrying many on here who were hell bent on defeating any referendum of ANY kind. However, I'm starting to see "the light."
The Daily Herald just came out with an article that put into numbers the piggish money grubbing and hasty spending of public funds that has occurred in our town over the last five years. Did our Super (who I also gave the benefit of the doubt to) and our Board (who I gave a renewed vote of confidence in) really say that they were not going to comment on it? Did that really happen? And did our Super really comment on it to a new paper that wrote an article spinning it as a positive? It's almost too much to stomach and too much to believe. At a time when our school board and District 41 should be at ever door in the District begging for trust and begging for forgiveness (trust and forgiveness that would likely be restored and accepted) are they really proceeding with the same sort of underhanded arrogance? Did any Board member stand up and say this isn't right? Did anyone say that in order to regain the trust and confidence of the community that the Board needed to address this issue as quickly and transparently as possible? What is going on over there?
I will continue to give this new board, new paper and new Super the benefit of the doubt but I, as a voter, demand some action and a lot of transparency soon....as all are on quite a short wick.
Originally posted by What'snext: From the lack of objectivity in the article, it could have been written by our Communications Director.
Sort of like the article about the kids in portables. Eerie. Almost like a ghost writer. Or maybe she is like a muse for aspiring editors. Yeah, that's it!
Question. When a publisher/editor/writer self edits, is it like that scene in DaVinci Code with the self flagellation?
Thanks for the nice comments about my VERY LONG letter to the editor. It didn't look that big when I wrote it but indeed, it's mine and I'm long winded and must face up to it!
As for the article regarding the school funding issue...I actually enjoyed seeing more detail on the matter. If one reads closely, looking soley at the nubmers, it doesn't really make the case that D41 is being careful with their money. They were spending about $500 less per student than the state average back in 96-97 and now they are spending $1,100ish MORE than the state average. Of course the state average has jumped dramatically so our local jump is even more dramatic. Also, when we complain about how many administrators they've hired, the article verifies the point: 54.8% on classroom instruction in 96-97 and 49.95 in 06-07. Is that what we voted for in the referendum?
Anyway, I'm with JRPotts. I will continue to reserve judgement...but I also continue to be very wary of the messages being filtered out. I'd just like less filtering....
"The most valuable things in life are not measured in monetary terms. The really important things are not houses and lands, stocks and bonds, automobiles and real state, but friendships, trust, confidence, empathy, mercy, love and faith. " -Bertrand Russell V. Delong
Posts: 3120 | Location: Glen Ellyn, IL | Registered: April 04, 2003
So let's see if I get this straight. Herald article comes out on Sunday. At a board meeting on Monday, a question is raised about the article in open session and the superintendent indicates that the district does not respond to articles. Two days later the "unique newspaper" shows up on my drive way with Riebock having a platform for her response to the Herald article. When given the opportunity to do so in a public meeting with stakeholders she chose not to do so. This is very bad. I don't believe the words uttered that they are trying to mend community relations.
I am really starting to doubt those assumptions and am starting to feel like quite a fool for having them. Truth be told, I was quietly decrying many on here who were hell bent on defeating any referendum of ANY kind. However, I'm starting to see "the light."
That would be me. Thank you very much! Don't like her. Don't like the board, except for Bob and PeteSteve.
This message has been edited. Last edited by: bitterboy,
"You shouldn't soil your Sunday pants, like those other foolish ants."
John Marcheschi knew what he voted for in 2001: a 55-cent property tax increase.
The boost in Glen Ellyn Elementary District 41 was destined for the education fund: to hire teachers, buy classroom supplies and reduce class sizes.
For an extra $531 a year from the owner of a $300,000 house, the district could do it all.
Or so Marcheschi, a District 41 board member, thought.
But from 2000 to 2005, the owner of a $300,000 house paid a total of $1,320 more than school officials said to expect.
Over five years, that homeowner paid $18,455 in property taxes to District 41, while the district forecast a $17,135 bill.
Board President John Vivoda said the cost to taxpayers was greater than what was projected, but that’s because the district’s needs increased.
“The referendum, everything connected with the referendum, was estimates,” Vivoda said.
The district’s actions were all legal and open to public scrutiny, he said.
“Once we got the referendum passed, we were then in the mode of levying dollars,” Vivoda said. “We don’t have huge surpluses. We have added incredible numbers of staff. … If we have maximized our revenue through the referendum, I can assure the taxpayers we are spending the money as responsibly as possible.”
But Marcheschi refused to support the district’s yearly property tax levy after seeing how much the district collected since 2000 because of the tax rate increase.
“A big thing with me is that we have to be open and honest with people,” Marcheschi said. “I voted no for the levy because I don’t think taking more money in than taxpayers expected was being open and honest — and ultimately risks whether we’ll be successful in future referendums.”
Wow, Marcheschi was/is a smart man. To answer your question 4MP, if that's your real name, they should come right out and apologize for 2001. They should apologize for comments such as this. They should then, as you write, pen a letter to constituents and taxpayers regarding this referendum letting them know that these missteps were missteps of another board and another Super and that they are committed to learning from prior mistakes and forging a new path with taxpayers. They should directly respond to potentially inflammatory articles such as the one published in the Daily Herald. In fact, they have a paid administrator to handle such comments. That would be an awesome start.
I would go further to say that they should take a serious look at the administrative overhead that is paid and make serious efforts to cut those costs but we all know that will never happen. As I said, an apology would go a long way...a real long way.
Dear 4MP: After the discovery of the phase in by Mr. Lynch, the D41 board should have done the same thing Hinsdale did: give the money back that they stole from the public. As far as I'm concerned, I'm due 10 K and counting, period.
The fact that the board double talked and justified their devious ploy to turbo charge the phase in without notice to the public is a social injustice.
As far as the quality of the education in D41, I do not agree at all. You are a number there if you are middle in the road. On more than 1 occasion I had run ins with teachers, counselors as well as the former principle who was finally canned but continued to collect her fat paycheck. Maybe things are better now but I'll wait and see. Test scores just above state average are in no way comensurate with the investment dollars being put in.
It absolutely amazes me that the people in this town have not been more vocal about demanding a rebate on their taxes.
The Hon. JR Potts is right on in his selection of past posts regarding this topic.
In today's "school week" the headlines state, Re-teaching the 2 R's": 41 overhauling it's reading, writing curriculum. Quote: "At several schools, a fairly large number of elementary students were failing state reading and writing test".
MORE importantly, you have to look at how the money is spent. This is something we've been pointing out for some time. For example, 41 spends 3.79% on administrative costs in 05/06 as compared to 89 that spent 2.71%. D87, one of the largest HS districts in Illinois, spent 2.19%. According my math 41 spents about 38% more in admin costs as compared to 89. My question is why? Why is money being poured in to the ivory tower vs. the classroom? Is this where the phase in is going? All you have to do is look at the growth in administrative and staff poitions which if my memory is correct, is around 100+ since the influx of cash due to the phase in. How busy are these people? I hope Solak and Vondrak can figure that one out. The money scammed is not being invested wisely. If I saw test scores in the 80%+ above state averages, I wouldn't mind so much and could stomach the bad taste in my mouth left by the phase in. But, there seems to be zero accountability here.
In 2005 22% of the 5th graders failed the state reading test. 8% failed the state writing test. This is unacceptable IMO especially concerning the reading scores. It's about time they woke up and see the light. Too late for my children as far as I'm concerned.
I agree. Sorry goes a long way. Not one member of that Board has ever said they are sorry.
"The most valuable things in life are not measured in monetary terms. The really important things are not houses and lands, stocks and bonds, automobiles and real state, but friendships, trust, confidence, empathy, mercy, love and faith. " -Bertrand Russell V. Delong
Posts: 3120 | Location: Glen Ellyn, IL | Registered: April 04, 2003
I agree that an apology would be a good start, but I don't think we will ever see or hear the words "I'm sorry" from D41 -- that would mean that they were admitting guilt. True, previous boards and administrations started the phase-in, but successors had the opportunity to stop it. And now that the 5 years is up, the current administration has the opportunity to not "maximize" the levy.
While I was vehemently against the building referendum of 2007, it was not in seeking revenge for the wrongs done to the community. The plan was not acceptable to me and I did not trust those in charge with additional funds from my pocket. I voted "yes" in 2001, and thought I knew how much it would cost and what we would get in return. I was not asked if I wanted to continually give more for things I never agreed to, although the district found a way to do both for several years beyond 2001. If the district took only what they said they would for only the things they needed, the story would be quite different today. And, yes, I have gone directly to the source numerous times.
The administration and board can never hope to move forward until the past is recognized and dealt with. We can not live in denial forever. This is not only a dollars and cents issue, it's about being just and accountable.
Great post, ohma! As usual. It's time for the D41 board to change its ways and for Ann Riebock to step forward and start initiating REAL community discussion - rather than hiding behind a ficticious D41 policy that they don't comment on Daily Herald articles.
Oh, and have I previously wondered why D41 needs a communications director being paid $100K (best educated guess) by a school district that chooses not to communicate with its residents?
The pope apologized for the Crusades. And the shameful conduct of the Vatican during the Holocaust. The US made payments to Japanese/Americans who were interred during The Good War. Late reconciliation to be sure, but accomplished.
The legacy of D41 previous administrations is what is locked in. Not the legacy of this one. We don't move ahead in life. Nobody to this day cuts Clinton or Nixon a break. Equal opportunity snideness.
But if a politician were to defend the actions of Clinton or Nixon, watch the fireworks. Same here. Defend the past transgression, and anger appears. Reconcile the past transgression and growth occurs.
Right you are, Ron. And it even goes beyond defending past transgressions. When one of the past transgressors can't help but use words in the present tense that describe the offending behavior, with no correction by the administration that causes one to wonder. When a board member describes the fiscal philosophy as we "maximize the levy" and we have a "discussion around maximizing the levy" this would be a perfect opportunity for an administrator to: A) set the record straight and say "no, that's not what we do"; B) get a gag for the offending mouth; C) apologize that this past philosophy brought on such distrust in the community; or D) all of the above.
Somehow the song by a certain embattled pop star keeps playing in my head (as the perfect theme song): "Oops, I Did it Again."
Originally posted by 4MP: Others blame Clinton, who only started asking for forgiveness after he was nailed.
I thought he said it was something else...
Anyway, while we should not forget the underhanded manner in which the 01 referendum was presented, it is an exercise in futility to seek or expect an apology. We all know it would be a great move for the District if they did apologize and were sincere about it, but that would require throwing one of their own under the proverbial bus. I just don't think the board as a whole (with its current members) is ready to do that. If it were run by Bob and Steve then maybe, but not with its current members. I also think our superintendent lacks the political clout to apologize even if she thought it was the right thing to do.
Not to pull a Spengel...but we do need to move on from this. Don't forget about it, just move beyond it.
I am a dyslexic agnostic insomniac. I lay awake at night wondering if there is a dog.
I think everyone would move on...as we should...if the board became more communicative and transparent. There needs to be a change in philosophy...fast.
