Peter, thanks for your post. I’ve been asking this of each of the candidates, One of the key jobs of the board is to hire a superintendent. After decades of conducting open searches where finalists were announced to the public and the district held open meetings with finalists, the current board conducted searches entirely in the dark, without public input.
Would you vote to continue this practice? Or go back to a public-facing superintendent search for the next vacancy?
Thanks for the question, Penny. If presented with the opportunity to conduct a superintendent search, I would be in favor of it being a public-facing one. In that situation, I think we should be guided more by finding the absolute right person for the job vs. simply the last one in the running. If we do a public search, are underwhelmed with the applicant pool, and we believe the lack of anonymity is preventing higher-caliber candidates from consideration, it would warrant further discussion but I'm not convinced that's truly the obstacle it's been made out to be in the past.
Thanks, Peter, 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.
I know it's been a few days since your candidate statement on FOIA Gras. But, if you have a minute...
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?
Hi Truth Seeker, I just want to note that we candidates do not receive notifications for comments on our posts unless it's a direct reply to one of our own comments. Therefore, you may miss some of your intended recipients (and audience) by posting these in each of our individual posts since it requires us to come back here to check.
I've been pretty candid in several spaces about the reality that we may need to seek support for a referendum in the not-so-distant future, primarily due to looming capital expenses and a lack of alternate mechanisms to fund those near-term. Part of earning that support is making it clear that we not only realize mistakes were made in the past in a general sense, but that we intend to learn from them to avoid repeating them in the future. The only effective way to do that is to understand specifically what went afoul and when. To Dr. Turner, Tamara Mitchell, and Dr. Grossi's credit, they've already uncovered and made adjustments from previous practices that amounted to bad financial hygiene at best. We're not out of the woods yet though.
Based on the above, I support an independent financial forensic audit, although would need a clearer understanding of cost, timing, scope, etc. My goal as an aspiring board member is to a better job, which involves learning from the past without becoming entirely stuck on it.
Regarding your second question, the findings would certainly be shared openly, but I would have to work with board colleagues to determine the format and forum. That's not meant to be cagey, it's just that most board work ultimately occurs during board meetings. As a current citizen and D65 parent, I can totally understand the frustration with how those meetings can feel like a one-way street but ultimately I hope people are voting for candidates in part based on confidence in them being responsive -- or doing their part to ensure the administration is -- to lingering community concerns and feedback.
I think it's worth bringing this forth at ONE OF the first board meetings but admittedly want to manage expectations around it happening during the initial one, between getting sworn in, on-boarding, and also more generally, a pre-determined agenda (and current board meeting policy) does not automatically afford the space to introduce such a mandate or resolution on Day 1.
Hi Peter, I appreciate you sharing at the CASE forum that you have a kid who’s had some extra needs and needed additional support in school. What do you think the district can do better in terms of serving families with kids with IEPs and 504s and how would you support this as a board member?
Hi Disgruntled Taxpayer, I hope we can help inspire a name change to drop the "dis" in the coming years...
I am thankful that our kid is having a generally positive school experience thus far and hasn't needed supports, but it's also a little frightening as a parent to know your kid has to really struggle or fail in order to qualify for a support plan...unless you have the resources to lawyer up. I have nothing against the people who elect to do so, but it also seems like a major systemic failure. That's not specific to our school district, but that doesn't prevent us from finding better ways.
Since you were on the forum, you probably heard the many good ideas shared around your question.
It seems like there are two main areas we need to focus around: awareness/education around the initial intake process (esp. for marginalized communities with more barriers) and ensuring effectiveness and fidelity of plans implemented. As a board member, I would like to first better understand how the current district leadership is working to improve the former, in part by hearing from community members and groups like Evanston CASE. I agreed with several of my fellow candidates that data around effectiveness is insufficient, and part of the board's means to improving that would be to not only rely on administrators, but to gather feedback from the staff in classrooms around which aspects are working vs. areas we have room for improvement.
On a more basic level, this is yet another reason why regaining financial stability is so critical. We've seen a rise in Special Education needs since the pandemic, compounded by a labor shortage that's led to more reliance on outside agencies. The new board will need to ensure our financial leadership is sufficiently budgeting for these needs to avoid surprises. There was some positive news around outplacements at the board meeting earlier this week, so I'm hopeful that the continued focus on these areas will ultimately help us better meet the needs our our students through IES.
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 don’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.
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 support this tyrannical behavior?
I see you posted this on every candidate, which is fine, but I am not sure what you’re hoping to get out of this? The school board has no power over any of these online communities, including this one.
Also, you are calling out a Distinct employee for their spouse’s online antics while at the same time denouncing folks for calling out Maria for her husband’s job. Can we stop dunking on people because of their partner? Everyone here is their own person
Ok, but Maria’s husband doesn’t impact our kids on a daily basis and have the ability to stop this public behavior. I think the point is that this person has the closest tie to the Administration except for those working in it. Her family in a way represents the District, as her wife is an Assistant Superintendent in it. So for this person to be acting like a bully is crazy to me. The fact it hasn’t stopped FOR YEARS AND YEARS feels like tacit approval from the District! The district and the Board could EASILY address this behavior. If a kid in a d65 behaved this way for years, parents AND TEACHERS would be clamoring to get that student expelled. It’s egregious. I think it is high time someone at the Board level specifically and publicly denounced the behavior in tat group, especially given it literally has the name of the district. I think you underestimate how insidious this behavior is to our community. It should not be ignored or tolerated.
There is no way children would be allowed to act that way online or in person. And yet, for years this cyber bullying has persisted and permeated through our community.
Leaving the group myself does almost nothing to improve our community. Perhaps this is a forum to facilitate more meaningful change by communicating a need to potential board members.
I want to be equitable in posing my questions. I have found there to be a concerning connection between some of the tyrants and the District. Since multiple current school board members have privately complained about these individuals I think it’s fair to ask prospective board members how they’ll be handling.
In line with Tom's comment, I am unsure what you are looking for related to my potential role as a board member. I don't think many reasonable people, myself included, are comfortable with personal attacks. From my understanding, I don't think the group you're referring to is unique in the broader Facebook platform, a big reason why I have spent less and less time on it as time has gone on.
Even if that group vanished tomorrow, I don't think the desire to have a virtual "public square" goes away, and I'd imagine some of the personal jabs you mention would just show up in different spaces. It would be great if, before posting, people would consider "Would I say this to this person face to face, in public, with tens/hundreds/thousands of people around us?" I think the genuine answer would more often be "no", but unfortunately, the world we live in is one where people often aren't asking themself that question.
At times there have been comments here on FOIA Gras that are problematic, either against a specific individual or group. Anonymity affords even more leeway, and while it might allow some people to comment more freely, there is a clear downside to that in giving comfort to people who would answer "no" if they asked themselves the above question.
TL;DR, as a board member, or even generally as a community member, I'd always encourage people to treat others with dignity and assume good intentions until presented with clear evidence otherwise.
Peter, thanks for your post. I’ve been asking this of each of the candidates, One of the key jobs of the board is to hire a superintendent. After decades of conducting open searches where finalists were announced to the public and the district held open meetings with finalists, the current board conducted searches entirely in the dark, without public input.
Would you vote to continue this practice? Or go back to a public-facing superintendent search for the next vacancy?
Thanks for asking this of everyone!!
Thanks for the question, Penny. If presented with the opportunity to conduct a superintendent search, I would be in favor of it being a public-facing one. In that situation, I think we should be guided more by finding the absolute right person for the job vs. simply the last one in the running. If we do a public search, are underwhelmed with the applicant pool, and we believe the lack of anonymity is preventing higher-caliber candidates from consideration, it would warrant further discussion but I'm not convinced that's truly the obstacle it's been made out to be in the past.
Thanks, Peter, 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.
I know it's been a few days since your candidate statement on FOIA Gras. But, if you have a minute...
A question I have for you:
What is the purpose of a school?
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?
Hi Truth Seeker, I just want to note that we candidates do not receive notifications for comments on our posts unless it's a direct reply to one of our own comments. Therefore, you may miss some of your intended recipients (and audience) by posting these in each of our individual posts since it requires us to come back here to check.
I've been pretty candid in several spaces about the reality that we may need to seek support for a referendum in the not-so-distant future, primarily due to looming capital expenses and a lack of alternate mechanisms to fund those near-term. Part of earning that support is making it clear that we not only realize mistakes were made in the past in a general sense, but that we intend to learn from them to avoid repeating them in the future. The only effective way to do that is to understand specifically what went afoul and when. To Dr. Turner, Tamara Mitchell, and Dr. Grossi's credit, they've already uncovered and made adjustments from previous practices that amounted to bad financial hygiene at best. We're not out of the woods yet though.
Based on the above, I support an independent financial forensic audit, although would need a clearer understanding of cost, timing, scope, etc. My goal as an aspiring board member is to a better job, which involves learning from the past without becoming entirely stuck on it.
Regarding your second question, the findings would certainly be shared openly, but I would have to work with board colleagues to determine the format and forum. That's not meant to be cagey, it's just that most board work ultimately occurs during board meetings. As a current citizen and D65 parent, I can totally understand the frustration with how those meetings can feel like a one-way street but ultimately I hope people are voting for candidates in part based on confidence in them being responsive -- or doing their part to ensure the administration is -- to lingering community concerns and feedback.
I think it's worth bringing this forth at ONE OF the first board meetings but admittedly want to manage expectations around it happening during the initial one, between getting sworn in, on-boarding, and also more generally, a pre-determined agenda (and current board meeting policy) does not automatically afford the space to introduce such a mandate or resolution on Day 1.
Don't worry about presenting it to the public, I'll FOIA it as soon as the record exists ;)
Best. Reply. Ever. 👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻
Thanks Peter. I really appreciate your reply here.
Hi Peter, I appreciate you sharing at the CASE forum that you have a kid who’s had some extra needs and needed additional support in school. What do you think the district can do better in terms of serving families with kids with IEPs and 504s and how would you support this as a board member?
Hi Disgruntled Taxpayer, I hope we can help inspire a name change to drop the "dis" in the coming years...
I am thankful that our kid is having a generally positive school experience thus far and hasn't needed supports, but it's also a little frightening as a parent to know your kid has to really struggle or fail in order to qualify for a support plan...unless you have the resources to lawyer up. I have nothing against the people who elect to do so, but it also seems like a major systemic failure. That's not specific to our school district, but that doesn't prevent us from finding better ways.
Since you were on the forum, you probably heard the many good ideas shared around your question.
It seems like there are two main areas we need to focus around: awareness/education around the initial intake process (esp. for marginalized communities with more barriers) and ensuring effectiveness and fidelity of plans implemented. As a board member, I would like to first better understand how the current district leadership is working to improve the former, in part by hearing from community members and groups like Evanston CASE. I agreed with several of my fellow candidates that data around effectiveness is insufficient, and part of the board's means to improving that would be to not only rely on administrators, but to gather feedback from the staff in classrooms around which aspects are working vs. areas we have room for improvement.
On a more basic level, this is yet another reason why regaining financial stability is so critical. We've seen a rise in Special Education needs since the pandemic, compounded by a labor shortage that's led to more reliance on outside agencies. The new board will need to ensure our financial leadership is sufficiently budgeting for these needs to avoid surprises. There was some positive news around outplacements at the board meeting earlier this week, so I'm hopeful that the continued focus on these areas will ultimately help us better meet the needs our our students through IES.
Asking this question of everyone
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 don’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.
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 support this tyrannical behavior?
I see you posted this on every candidate, which is fine, but I am not sure what you’re hoping to get out of this? The school board has no power over any of these online communities, including this one.
Also, you are calling out a Distinct employee for their spouse’s online antics while at the same time denouncing folks for calling out Maria for her husband’s job. Can we stop dunking on people because of their partner? Everyone here is their own person
Ok, but Maria’s husband doesn’t impact our kids on a daily basis and have the ability to stop this public behavior. I think the point is that this person has the closest tie to the Administration except for those working in it. Her family in a way represents the District, as her wife is an Assistant Superintendent in it. So for this person to be acting like a bully is crazy to me. The fact it hasn’t stopped FOR YEARS AND YEARS feels like tacit approval from the District! The district and the Board could EASILY address this behavior. If a kid in a d65 behaved this way for years, parents AND TEACHERS would be clamoring to get that student expelled. It’s egregious. I think it is high time someone at the Board level specifically and publicly denounced the behavior in tat group, especially given it literally has the name of the district. I think you underestimate how insidious this behavior is to our community. It should not be ignored or tolerated.
Thank you Karl. You are 100% on the mark.
There is no way children would be allowed to act that way online or in person. And yet, for years this cyber bullying has persisted and permeated through our community.
Leaving the group myself does almost nothing to improve our community. Perhaps this is a forum to facilitate more meaningful change by communicating a need to potential board members.
Thanks for saying this, Karl. I couldn’t agree with you more.
Hi Tom
I want to be equitable in posing my questions. I have found there to be a concerning connection between some of the tyrants and the District. Since multiple current school board members have privately complained about these individuals I think it’s fair to ask prospective board members how they’ll be handling.
In line with Tom's comment, I am unsure what you are looking for related to my potential role as a board member. I don't think many reasonable people, myself included, are comfortable with personal attacks. From my understanding, I don't think the group you're referring to is unique in the broader Facebook platform, a big reason why I have spent less and less time on it as time has gone on.
Even if that group vanished tomorrow, I don't think the desire to have a virtual "public square" goes away, and I'd imagine some of the personal jabs you mention would just show up in different spaces. It would be great if, before posting, people would consider "Would I say this to this person face to face, in public, with tens/hundreds/thousands of people around us?" I think the genuine answer would more often be "no", but unfortunately, the world we live in is one where people often aren't asking themself that question.
At times there have been comments here on FOIA Gras that are problematic, either against a specific individual or group. Anonymity affords even more leeway, and while it might allow some people to comment more freely, there is a clear downside to that in giving comfort to people who would answer "no" if they asked themselves the above question.
TL;DR, as a board member, or even generally as a community member, I'd always encourage people to treat others with dignity and assume good intentions until presented with clear evidence otherwise.