Hi Andrew, above, you indicate that lack of a strategic plan is the reason for the current financial crisis in the district. In the CASE forum on Wednesday night you said the district’s financial issues “are caused by long term structural deficits.” Other candidates mentioned malfeasance. Do you recognize the failure of the current board to responsibly steward taxpayer money? And, how do you interpret Dr. Horton’s role in the current financial situation?
Erika, thanks for taking the time to engage on here!
I have seen all of Tom’s reporting about the previous administration, and like many in the community, I am deeply concerned and hoping that we will still learn more. (I am reading malfeasance as a legal reference to illegality, and I am aware that we may still not yet have heard the end of this.)
However, our district had to remove $13.3 million dollars in spending the coming year, and we have to find an additional $15 million dollars for the year after that. We knew about this for well over a decade. We are right about where we were projected to be (running $25 million in budget deficits) back when the 2017 referendum was passed if no further actions were taken. This is a failure not just of this current board but also of several previous boards. Hard decisions kept being kicked down the road, and now they can't be kicked down the road any more.
Even as we, the public, are still waiting to hear more about actions taken or being taken to further address alleged malfeasance, the primary reason we are here is that the district knew we had severe structural deficits, and they did not remain focused on proactively addressing those. The lack of a clear, proactive, long-range vision and plan (embodied in a rigorous strategic planning and assessment process) is the main reason we are where are right now, acknowledging that there are deeply troubling things that occurred and hopefully we the taxpayers will learn more.
Hi Andrew, what would your ideal ‘North Star’ be? And how would this be agreed in the relatively quick time frame that is needed given our current financial state?
I ask because what you describe is a process that doesn’t really seem that different from what has happened recently / what’s happening now - at least, what the board thinks it’s doing.
I have no insight into what the current board thinks it is doing other than what can be observed as a member of the public. If you have any direct insight you can share, I would love to hear it.
As to this seeming no different than what is happening, I have just laid out how our strategic planning has almost completely broken down over the past five years and a plan to rebuild that for the future. It seems like you are disagreeing with what I am sharing, and I am curious if you have data points that suggest that strategic planning has remained strong for the past five years or is strong now, because I have not found any of those. I am aware though I could have missed something, and I am always open to engaging new information.
I believe we can walk and chew gum at the same time as a district. We need to keep immediately triaging these crises. The SDRP is something of a limited, near-term plan. We need to follow through on it in the immediate term. However, to what end? Why are we doing this? How does this fit into our long-term vision for the district? That is not clear to me.
I believe we have two choices. 1) We could double down on the 2022-2027 strategic plan and spend a significant amount of time and energy clarifying the plan, building reporting processes, gathering data to assess it, and ensuring we are actually sharing this with the public in transparent ways. 2) We could spend that same time and energy in getting it right for a 2026-2031 strategic plan that would spell out exactly where we want to be in five years in terms of cash reserves, deferred maintenance, curriculum, equity commitments, academic achievement, belonging, digital wellbeing, teacher satisfaction, and a host of other elements. My preference is for the latter, because I think it would go a lot further toward rebuilding public trust and confidence.
As to the content of the plan, that needs to emerge from the community. The board needs to listen and not come in with preconceived agendas that undermine a real process.
How comfortable are you with the rhetoric in the online parent community? It’s been concerning to see the level of bullying and attacks that play out.
For instance one of your prospective board colleagues Maria was skewered online by the sheer fact their spouse is a homeland security employee. We didn’t know the spouses actual position or views, but immediately Maria was deemed to be a terrible person and crucified in a parent group. Ironically this rhetoric is led by a District employees spouse and someone who has publicly supported you. This person’s endorsement of you makes me wonder if you subscribe to the same approach of bullying and rushed judgements.
How can we stop the extreme outbursts and attacks, and find ways to be respectful and have constructive dialogue and ask questions not just rushed judgements and outlandish attacks.
How comfortable are you with this rhetoric and how do you assure voters that you will not mirror this tyrannical behavior?
I have asked my team, and to our knowledge I have not been endorsed or publicly supported by any spouse of a D65 employee. To my knowledge no one has even reached out to us about that or even let us know they were doing such.
I am always against bullying, and that’s a commitment I will bring to the board. I lead by consensus whenever possible, and in moments of stark disagreement, I will be direct and civil with fellow board members, the administration, staff, and the public even as we navigate hard, potentially sensitive and significant disagreements about things that really matter.
You have been endorsed by Crew 65, it includes a spouse of Stacy Beardsley. I find some of the members of that group to be antisemitic and bullies. Their premise is wonderful, their method and tactics is cruel and counterproductive at times.
This is a very confusing discussion. Andrew - she's talking about Karla Thomas. I'm not even sure Karla is in CREW65, I don't have their membership list or a facebook account to verify. No matter how you feel about her, she's allowed to have her own opinions about politics separate from that of her spouse. I certainly wouldn't want my partner pegged for all the crazy shit I've written on this blog!
Thanks! I was confused. During our CREW 65 endorsement interview, they listed the names of members, and I can confirm that Karla Thomas was not a name listed. So, to be clear, the above claim about endorsement and public support is inaccurate to the best of my knowledge.
My comments about bullying and consensus still stand.
Ok, I thought I was pretty informed but this level of depth and detail is above my pay grade! I'm glad somebody has a strong handle on it. We need board members willing to do this amount of work to forge a path forward for D65 because it's so complex and there are many potential risks to the community in the decisions that need to be made. I appreciate the optimism of saying the best days are ahead of us, in contrast to the heavy negativity we're seeing in this race. What is your vision for the future of D65?
It’s a bit rich to imply that other board candidates are taking a “heavy negativism” point of view. That might be true for the mayoral race, but I’ve heard optimism from almost all prospective board members. What I’m not hearing from Andrew is a sense of optimism backed by innovative, pragmatic, data-backed ideas and a growth mindset. A strategic plan and a North Star are really quite basic concepts. We need way more than that, and fast.
I have appreciated that this particular campaign (D65 school board) has stayed positive. Our forums and questionnaires have been civil and issues-focused even while there are significant contrasts between candidates.
Yes, these are basic concepts, so why have they been so neglected? I have raised this issue at every campaign event and on every questionnaire since early January, and the vast majority of folk I have talked to did not know we had a strategic plan or that it had gotten to this point.
From my standpoint, it is fundamentally pragmatic to argue that we need to go back to the basics, and a strategic plan is really the only long-term formal way to operationalize "innovation, pragmatism, data-backed ideas, and a growth mindset" in ways that further our mission and ensure taxpayers have transparent and accountable governance. Otherwise, we will remain stuck in a reactive cycle where the board continues to get pressured to adopt the shiny new thing often under the pressure of urgency (or "fast," as you say).
I'm one of the few candidates that has hands on experience working on strategic planning in educational institutions, and if I am elected, we will get this fundamental issue right.
Yikes! What a wholly uncharitable take on my comment. I wasn't attacking candidates, I was simply commenting that
everyone's running to fix problems, and problems, by their very nature, are negative. The race is heavy, because we're about an inch away from a state takeover. It's also rather uncharitable to dismiss this entire post as basic, when he spent like 2,000 words laying out a pragmatic, detailed plan for how the board can move forward. He also said he read five years' worth of Board books, which, I'm gonna take a wild guess and say probably no one else has done that. I also didn't see you apply your critique to any of the other candidates.
Hi Shawna, I didn’t accuse you of attacking anyone but also I’m not trying to be charitable. I’m asking specific questions to Andrew because I don’t agree with his specific approach, but I want to know more and make sure I have a fully formed opinion.
To me, reading five years of board books does not make you a qualified candidate for this particular election - but again, that’s just my opinion! We feel differently and will probably vote differently and that’s all good.
To be fair, I think this is an inherently "negative" campaign. We had seventeen candidates file to run for school board, because there is so much that must be addressed in the district. Most of the questions we get at forums and on questionnaires are focused on these (negative) challenges facing the district, and we have to have clear eyes about that.
With that being said, our team has made an intentional effort to try to balance dealing with the negative (that we must deal with) and trying to present a positive vision for the school district. There is also a lot to be celebrated in D65, and we can sustain our inclusive values while getting it right on finances and governance.
Three part question here: Do you support a full and complete & independent financial “forensic” audit of D65, going back to when the last referendum was passed—in order to get a handle on what has happened in D65 financially? And then, importantly share the findings with the community via open house two way Q&A forums? If you support, can we get your commitment to call for this at the first BOE meeting you attend as a new BOE member?
Thanks, Andrew, for your interest in serving on the school board -no doubt a very public, demanding and complex job. All Evanstonians should be thankful that so many citizens are willing to take on this position.
Mark, hello! Thanks for engaging with me on here. This is a great question!
The purpose of a school is to support guardians and communities in helping children to: gain knowledge and skills necessary for success, develop emotional and social capacities for life in community, and be formed into positive personal, cultural, and social identities.
Schools can provide a vibrant community hub even beyond class time where families and guardians can find the space, activities, resources, connections, and even friendships that they and the children they care for need to thrive and succeed in the world.
Hi Andrew, above, you indicate that lack of a strategic plan is the reason for the current financial crisis in the district. In the CASE forum on Wednesday night you said the district’s financial issues “are caused by long term structural deficits.” Other candidates mentioned malfeasance. Do you recognize the failure of the current board to responsibly steward taxpayer money? And, how do you interpret Dr. Horton’s role in the current financial situation?
Erika, thanks for taking the time to engage on here!
I have seen all of Tom’s reporting about the previous administration, and like many in the community, I am deeply concerned and hoping that we will still learn more. (I am reading malfeasance as a legal reference to illegality, and I am aware that we may still not yet have heard the end of this.)
However, our district had to remove $13.3 million dollars in spending the coming year, and we have to find an additional $15 million dollars for the year after that. We knew about this for well over a decade. We are right about where we were projected to be (running $25 million in budget deficits) back when the 2017 referendum was passed if no further actions were taken. This is a failure not just of this current board but also of several previous boards. Hard decisions kept being kicked down the road, and now they can't be kicked down the road any more.
Even as we, the public, are still waiting to hear more about actions taken or being taken to further address alleged malfeasance, the primary reason we are here is that the district knew we had severe structural deficits, and they did not remain focused on proactively addressing those. The lack of a clear, proactive, long-range vision and plan (embodied in a rigorous strategic planning and assessment process) is the main reason we are where are right now, acknowledging that there are deeply troubling things that occurred and hopefully we the taxpayers will learn more.
Hi Andrew, what would your ideal ‘North Star’ be? And how would this be agreed in the relatively quick time frame that is needed given our current financial state?
I ask because what you describe is a process that doesn’t really seem that different from what has happened recently / what’s happening now - at least, what the board thinks it’s doing.
Thanks, Megan for engaging me here!
I have no insight into what the current board thinks it is doing other than what can be observed as a member of the public. If you have any direct insight you can share, I would love to hear it.
As to this seeming no different than what is happening, I have just laid out how our strategic planning has almost completely broken down over the past five years and a plan to rebuild that for the future. It seems like you are disagreeing with what I am sharing, and I am curious if you have data points that suggest that strategic planning has remained strong for the past five years or is strong now, because I have not found any of those. I am aware though I could have missed something, and I am always open to engaging new information.
I believe we can walk and chew gum at the same time as a district. We need to keep immediately triaging these crises. The SDRP is something of a limited, near-term plan. We need to follow through on it in the immediate term. However, to what end? Why are we doing this? How does this fit into our long-term vision for the district? That is not clear to me.
I believe we have two choices. 1) We could double down on the 2022-2027 strategic plan and spend a significant amount of time and energy clarifying the plan, building reporting processes, gathering data to assess it, and ensuring we are actually sharing this with the public in transparent ways. 2) We could spend that same time and energy in getting it right for a 2026-2031 strategic plan that would spell out exactly where we want to be in five years in terms of cash reserves, deferred maintenance, curriculum, equity commitments, academic achievement, belonging, digital wellbeing, teacher satisfaction, and a host of other elements. My preference is for the latter, because I think it would go a lot further toward rebuilding public trust and confidence.
As to the content of the plan, that needs to emerge from the community. The board needs to listen and not come in with preconceived agendas that undermine a real process.
How comfortable are you with the rhetoric in the online parent community? It’s been concerning to see the level of bullying and attacks that play out.
For instance one of your prospective board colleagues Maria was skewered online by the sheer fact their spouse is a homeland security employee. We didn’t know the spouses actual position or views, but immediately Maria was deemed to be a terrible person and crucified in a parent group. Ironically this rhetoric is led by a District employees spouse and someone who has publicly supported you. This person’s endorsement of you makes me wonder if you subscribe to the same approach of bullying and rushed judgements.
How can we stop the extreme outbursts and attacks, and find ways to be respectful and have constructive dialogue and ask questions not just rushed judgements and outlandish attacks.
How comfortable are you with this rhetoric and how do you assure voters that you will not mirror this tyrannical behavior?
I have asked my team, and to our knowledge I have not been endorsed or publicly supported by any spouse of a D65 employee. To my knowledge no one has even reached out to us about that or even let us know they were doing such.
I am always against bullying, and that’s a commitment I will bring to the board. I lead by consensus whenever possible, and in moments of stark disagreement, I will be direct and civil with fellow board members, the administration, staff, and the public even as we navigate hard, potentially sensitive and significant disagreements about things that really matter.
You have been endorsed by Crew 65, it includes a spouse of Stacy Beardsley. I find some of the members of that group to be antisemitic and bullies. Their premise is wonderful, their method and tactics is cruel and counterproductive at times.
I appreciate you responding.
https://www.facebook.com/share/18MYqYKv3t/?mibextid=wwXIfr
This is a very confusing discussion. Andrew - she's talking about Karla Thomas. I'm not even sure Karla is in CREW65, I don't have their membership list or a facebook account to verify. No matter how you feel about her, she's allowed to have her own opinions about politics separate from that of her spouse. I certainly wouldn't want my partner pegged for all the crazy shit I've written on this blog!
Thanks! I was confused. During our CREW 65 endorsement interview, they listed the names of members, and I can confirm that Karla Thomas was not a name listed. So, to be clear, the above claim about endorsement and public support is inaccurate to the best of my knowledge.
My comments about bullying and consensus still stand.
Hi Mom, I receive the CREW65 newsletter and at the bottom it lists its members (I can't post a screenshot).
Roger Williams
Oliver Ruff
Alyce Barry
Sarah Petersen
Jenni Karlovitz
I wonder if you are confusing CREW65 with the EPSCAR group? I think Karla is in that group.
Ok, I thought I was pretty informed but this level of depth and detail is above my pay grade! I'm glad somebody has a strong handle on it. We need board members willing to do this amount of work to forge a path forward for D65 because it's so complex and there are many potential risks to the community in the decisions that need to be made. I appreciate the optimism of saying the best days are ahead of us, in contrast to the heavy negativity we're seeing in this race. What is your vision for the future of D65?
It’s a bit rich to imply that other board candidates are taking a “heavy negativism” point of view. That might be true for the mayoral race, but I’ve heard optimism from almost all prospective board members. What I’m not hearing from Andrew is a sense of optimism backed by innovative, pragmatic, data-backed ideas and a growth mindset. A strategic plan and a North Star are really quite basic concepts. We need way more than that, and fast.
Thanks Megan for sticking with this conversation!
I have appreciated that this particular campaign (D65 school board) has stayed positive. Our forums and questionnaires have been civil and issues-focused even while there are significant contrasts between candidates.
Yes, these are basic concepts, so why have they been so neglected? I have raised this issue at every campaign event and on every questionnaire since early January, and the vast majority of folk I have talked to did not know we had a strategic plan or that it had gotten to this point.
From my standpoint, it is fundamentally pragmatic to argue that we need to go back to the basics, and a strategic plan is really the only long-term formal way to operationalize "innovation, pragmatism, data-backed ideas, and a growth mindset" in ways that further our mission and ensure taxpayers have transparent and accountable governance. Otherwise, we will remain stuck in a reactive cycle where the board continues to get pressured to adopt the shiny new thing often under the pressure of urgency (or "fast," as you say).
I'm one of the few candidates that has hands on experience working on strategic planning in educational institutions, and if I am elected, we will get this fundamental issue right.
Yikes! What a wholly uncharitable take on my comment. I wasn't attacking candidates, I was simply commenting that
everyone's running to fix problems, and problems, by their very nature, are negative. The race is heavy, because we're about an inch away from a state takeover. It's also rather uncharitable to dismiss this entire post as basic, when he spent like 2,000 words laying out a pragmatic, detailed plan for how the board can move forward. He also said he read five years' worth of Board books, which, I'm gonna take a wild guess and say probably no one else has done that. I also didn't see you apply your critique to any of the other candidates.
Hi Shawna, I didn’t accuse you of attacking anyone but also I’m not trying to be charitable. I’m asking specific questions to Andrew because I don’t agree with his specific approach, but I want to know more and make sure I have a fully formed opinion.
To me, reading five years of board books does not make you a qualified candidate for this particular election - but again, that’s just my opinion! We feel differently and will probably vote differently and that’s all good.
Thanks for engaging on here Shawna!
To be fair, I think this is an inherently "negative" campaign. We had seventeen candidates file to run for school board, because there is so much that must be addressed in the district. Most of the questions we get at forums and on questionnaires are focused on these (negative) challenges facing the district, and we have to have clear eyes about that.
With that being said, our team has made an intentional effort to try to balance dealing with the negative (that we must deal with) and trying to present a positive vision for the school district. There is also a lot to be celebrated in D65, and we can sustain our inclusive values while getting it right on finances and governance.
Three part question here: Do you support a full and complete & independent financial “forensic” audit of D65, going back to when the last referendum was passed—in order to get a handle on what has happened in D65 financially? And then, importantly share the findings with the community via open house two way Q&A forums? If you support, can we get your commitment to call for this at the first BOE meeting you attend as a new BOE member?
Thanks, Andrew, for your interest in serving on the school board -no doubt a very public, demanding and complex job. All Evanstonians should be thankful that so many citizens are willing to take on this position.
A question I have for you:
What is the purpose of a school?
Mark, hello! Thanks for engaging with me on here. This is a great question!
The purpose of a school is to support guardians and communities in helping children to: gain knowledge and skills necessary for success, develop emotional and social capacities for life in community, and be formed into positive personal, cultural, and social identities.
Schools can provide a vibrant community hub even beyond class time where families and guardians can find the space, activities, resources, connections, and even friendships that they and the children they care for need to thrive and succeed in the world.
Thank you, Andrew, for your thoughtful reply.
I really appreciate that you took the time to think this over.