During public participation at the D41 board meeting last night, the Herald article on revenue growth was mentioned. Would the district have any response, especially in light of the fact that District 41 was listed in second place as having the largest percentage increase in revenue over the past 10 years? Also, since the September Update mentions that at some time in the future the plan will call for seeking a referendum. The answer was that, no, the district does not respond to newspaper articles. However, the superintendent did note that the article was a “vehicle by which we can have a conversation.”
Just as the public portion of the meeting was wrapping up, the former board president made a suggestion that “if we respond” to the article. He went on to say describe the article’s “lack of content.” What was “completely lacking” in the article was the “shift in philosophy” we have had in this district. He went on to list class sizes, “professional to student ratio” to name a few.
Interesting that he used the word “philosophy.” Just minutes before when the board was discussing the budget process and also the “fiscal philosophy,” the former board president was quite adamant that the philosophy is “maximize the levy.” “The revenue we can control, we maximize.”
I wonder if that is the philosophy he talks about in relation to the Herald article on revenue?
Next referendum campaign spokesman being introduced:
Ladies and gentleman! A big warm welcome for the spokesman for our Board, that planner extraordinaire, the man who gets his allowance every year and looks for a place to spend it, the owner of a vehicle only he can converse with, a man whose motto in life is "Who ya gonna believe? Me or your lyin' eyes?" Let's give it up for........
I would like to point out the careful wording quoted as "the professional to student ratio" as opposed to the more relevent to most of us - teacher to student ratio. Not every professional (which I'd like a definition of that word from him) hired by D41 is enhancing the educational process, IMO.
Hmmmm....professional to student ratio. Never heard that before. It's groundbreaking! If they are so worried about ratios, how about the recommended student to counselor ratio, or student to social worker ratio, or student to school psychologist ratio. Guarantee they haven't met those...yet, they have great Math specialist to student ratios, Reading specialist to student ratios, secretary to student ratios, and administrator to student ratios. (This is not necessarily a knock against all of these people but if other schools function well without some of these or with less of these, I just would like to know what data they have to support that these are important and/or improve student success.) Of course, I can site many references demonstrating that schools with comprehensive school counseling programs have greater student success but, whatever.
"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: 3216 | Location: Glen Ellyn, IL | Registered: April 04, 2003
If our school district won't comment on an important revenue increase article in the Daily Herald, isn't this an admission of guilt in itself? Also, why in the world are we paying $100k to Ms. Worthen if we can't even get a comment from District 41 about a prominent article that affects all D41 residents?
The issue of "accountability" has been on my mind a great deal lately. I am attempting to teach my children important life lessons about giving one's word, doing what you say you will do, and then being willing to take responsibility for the actions you have taken. I'm very distressed to see that the people we have elected (and hired) in D41 to run our schools seem to have been absent when these lessons were originally offered...
Could be that there is some left over feelings from the front page Herald article in 2006, the one titled: "Tax calculations don't add up." That's the article in which the Herald showed "real" homes in Glen Ellyn that showed an increase of property taxes of 40%. Those were contrasted to what was called: "Vivoda's hypothetical example." The Herald described it as such, since the then-board president tried to tell the community that the 2001 tax increase was less than what the district said it would be based upon a hypothetical $300,000 home that never increased in value.
Dear Vu2: Not sure how long you have participated on this BB but remember 1 thing:
When the GE populace voted in favor of the ref back in 2001 based upon numbers given to them by the District (which were totally false) , 7 days later in marched the then D41 Supt and her associate to file for a tax rate reallocation form with the township assessor to MAXIMIZE the rate via phase in, a PLOY totally unknown to the populace. It was basically theft by deception and they really don't give a damn what we think. To do so would admit to a conspiracy of the highest order. The town is starting to wake up though and long term they (D41) will pay a price for their arrogance especially when they contend that they did nothing wrong. The statement last night by our lovely school official clearly indicates how they feel about the situation. They are basically saying, it was legal, even though we didn't tell the public, and too bad for you.
The dynamics of the response to the "non-response" are getting to the root of the situation in the district. The superintendent says, at the beginning of the board meeting, we don't respond to articles. At the end of the meeting, the former board president chimes in with what a response might include. What happened? Wasn't he paying attention to what she said? I would like to see some substance behind what drove that "shift in philosophy" in District 41. Were we living in the Dark Ages in District 41 ten years ago, while districts around us were already enjoying the days of enlightenment? Put some hard figures behind what drove the shift.
I don't expect to see that though, afterall, they aren't responding.
Great post, ohma. And I repeat, does this mean we can eliminate our Director of Communication position that is costing us $100K per year since the district will not respond to even the most basic coverage of their activities and alleged misdeeds? We hardly need someone paid top dollar to direct a lack of communications!
Come on D41 board and administration officials - we know that you carefully monitor this message board - take a deep breath and answer a tough question or two!
