Bob Solak - I see the current SB going down the same path as the previous SB.

Has there been any discussions on how this SB is going to regain the trust of this community?

I propose this SB start by commissioning a staffing study, benchmarked against our peer school districts before spending one cent on a faciltiy uztilation study. Don't forget the school administration. We seem to be quite high on non-instructional overhead. You will never convince this town to approve any referendum with sitting SB members of the 2001 mess without addressing this issue.

Specifically, I would appreciate a report which documents the district attendance since 1997, last ten years, and the district staffing levels for the same period. In particular, I and I am sure my neighbors, would appreciate a justification for any staffing increase / decrease since 2000. Not a generic "No Child Left Behind Act" but specific referenced and public legistation or otherwise. Stop the smoke and mirrors.

I look forward to your thoughts.

I don't have a lot of time right now to respond but I'll give some quick answers. As always, assume my comments to be mine alone as I do not and can not speak for the Board or District as an entity.

quote:

Originally posted by Since72:
Bob Solak - I see the current SB going down the same path as the previous SB.

Is there a specific issue you're referring to?

quote:

Has there been any discussions on how this SB is going to regain the trust of this community?

Working to regain confidence of the community is part of two of the Draft Board Goals that we discussed in last nights meeting and will attempt to finalize at our next regular board meeting. Some identified (draft) actions for this goal are: to identify meaningful areas for community involvement and to learn and implement a new community involvement plan for issues facing the District going forward. Also, relating to financial confidence, is a goal of defining our Districts fiscal policies and codifying them. Those are a few of the District goals in relation to confidence/trust in the Board.

If you're referring specifically to the 2001 referendum issue (mentioned later in your post), it was briefly discussed in our June Board retreat in the context of possible impact on the 2007-08 budget and later in the context of the myriad possible reasons for the referendum vote. I don't think it would shock anyone to say that the seven Board Members have differing views on the subject in both contexts. No action has been taken.

quote:

I propose this SB start by commissioning a staffing study, benchmarked against our peer school districts before spending one cent on a faciltiy uztilation study. Don't forget the school administration. We seem to be quite high on non-instructional overhead. You will never convince this town to approve any referendum with sitting SB members of the 2001 mess without addressing this issue.

Specifically, I would appreciate a report which documents the district attendance since 1997, last ten years, and the district staffing levels for the same period. In particular, I and I am sure my neighbors, would appreciate a justification for any staffing increase / decrease since 2000. Not a generic "No Child Left Behind Act" but specific referenced and public legistation or otherwise. Stop the smoke and mirrors.

I look forward to your thoughts.

In regards to district attendance, that data can be pulled from the Kasarda Memo as well as the NIU enrollment studies on the District website. I believe folks on this message board have culled head count data over the same period you're talking about so perhaps they will repeat their findings in this thread for us.

I think your request for an explanation of staffing increases / decreases with the backup documentation you touch on would be a good idea for addressing the distrust of general statements about where the phase-in money was spent and I'll work on that. It would appear to me to fit in with bolstering community trust.

In regards to the utilization study, I think it serves a separate purpose than a staffing study. It's more a physical space study in relation to the programs we provide, not a study of whether we are staffing programs appropriately. As I see the two, the implementation of the recommendations of a future staffing study could be determined by studying the baseline facility information contained in the appendixes of the utilization study. The issues are intertwined, to be sure, but I don't think the value of one is dependent upon the other.

Also, if a study of facility/program changes is undertaken in the future, the analysis would always need the "status quo" option, which is what the facility utilization study is looking at.

quote:

Originally posted by Since72:
In particular, I and I am sure my neighbors, would appreciate a justification for any staffing increase / decrease since 2000. Not a generic "No Child Left Behind Act" but specific referenced and public legistation or otherwise. Stop the smoke and mirrors.

I look forward to your thoughts.

Amen, Since72. I agree with your suggestion of stating what is mandated by law. A quick call to the Illinois Board of Education is enlightening with regard to PreK, for instance. The district needs to stop treating the community like we are too ignorant to ask questions on our own and get straight answers. It's time consuming, but it is certainly enlightening.

Thanks again for your thoughts and post.

(P.S. I think the only thing that has decreased since 2000 is public trust.)