I'm wondering if others thought the Thursday editorial in the Tribune soft-pedaled D-65's problems, and didn't express the lack of confidence in the current board that many, many people have expressed.
It was clear the writers didn’t understand the history. And it inferred - problem solved! All good! And, by the way, CPS, take note. The idea that D65 would serve as an example for CPS is laughable. Very disappointing.
Regular editorials are not signed by an individual writer. They're supposed to represent the voice of the newspaper, and are done in-house. Op-ed articles, which run in that general section, are always signed by the writer and are always written by a non-staffer. The Tribune's editorial page editor, Chris Jones, is an excellent writer. I hope he's not the writer behind that simplistic editorial.
I wrote a response to the “editorial board”. So irritated. First a “Miracles Anti-Racist” now “Truth Teller”. Could you imagine the label for Goren or Murphy?
This is completely infuriating. For each of the last several FOIA Gras articles I have wanted to comment but instead have to tend to my jobs as a parent and professional.
FOIA Gras has been an amazing resource for several years, and single-handedly brought light to many issues that were either completely unknown (hundreds of thousands of dollars of catered lunch) or disregarded as “racist” conjecture (the Magical Bus Savings being lesser than advertised).
Tom has the reach and subscriber base he has because D65 has offered anything BUT “clarity and partnership”, “transparency and open lines of communication” to their stakeholders: D65 Parents & Guardians, and every Evanston taxpayer. Without any other area to discuss, Tom filled a void and gave those of us wanting to question the company line a forum to do so.
Speaking of “D65 Parents & Guardians” - where is D65 regarding the use of their name in that toxic, inaccurate, and misleading cesspool of a Facebook group? When will they police that? For years, several of the Same Ten People have shamed, harassed, doxxed anyone and everyone that disagrees with their personal assessment of D65. I’ve seen all types of unsuspecting people be recipients of just plain mean discourse when they are asking questions as simple as “are there Halloween plans” or “I’m moving to Evanston, what is a good school?”.
That D65 FINALLY feels the need to reach out to external media sources to state that the media source is being “inaccurate and misleading to our community” is infuriating. There’s no other way to put it.
Remember, just a few months ago the FY25 Budget was looking great. Then, there was a $10M deficit. And now, it is a $13M deficit. The only thing inaccurate and misleading is the D65 Board, Administrators (past AND present), and their lackeys that stifle any and all discussion regarding the woeful mismanagement of this beautiful district.
D65 could sincerely offer up “clarity”, “partnership”, “transparency”, and “open lines of communication” by allowing the SAP3 Process to be open and to allow citizen input on the inevitable (this wasn’t always the case, but it is now) impending school closures.
I work in boring corporate America. For the things I do, I need to produce multi-year plans, contingency plans, risk assessments, stakeholder analysis, communicate the changes, etc., before I can get started. My work is NOWHERE as near as consequential as the building of schools, shuttering of schools, and redrawing of school boundaries that affects a city of 70,000+ in one of America’s largest metro areas. That any request to do any of the above of D65 Admin & Board was labelled as "problematic" was itself quite problematic, as we now see with this mess.
This “tone policing” from the D65 PR Team is energy best spent elsewhere.
D65 should focus on themselves and their teams, and stop trying to micromanage the one forum in Evanston that allows for true and robust discussion of the dumpster fire that is our public school district. If they want to stamp out inaccurate and misleading information in our community, I first suggest they start on Facebook.
Can I ask a favor - can you change your username? I've had people make fake accounts using my name or derivations of my name in the past and it didn't make me feel great, I don't want to condone that to others. Just don't change it to Hom Tayden!!!
Of course. Just did. You've been nothing but fact-forward and data-driven, as well as courteous to those that don't extend the same to you. Let's see if the changes have already propagated through substack.
I wholeheartedly agree with this. We can’t even rely on the board, who presumably represent us, to exercise any scrutiny over spending. The administration is free to create new high-level positions with nary a raised eyebrow. Meanwhile, much of corporate America is intimately familiar with hiring freezes and fiscal restraint. I would love to see the board impose an upper limit on consultant spend and administrative staffing tied to enrollment.
Well stated, Mr. Mofgren. Now, can you please go to the Roundtable and comment on everyone else’s comments in a manner that makes you appear to be completely unhinged? Thanks in advance.
I agree they should first start on Facebook. And they should have started on Facebook several years ago. One can’t help but think that D65 enjoys the acrimony promulgated by the FB page D65 Parents and Guardians. But then again why would anyone in D65 (PR team included) object to what its staunchest supporters were spewing on that D65 Parents and Guardians FB page?
Sadly, many are past the point of having patience and trusting a district process. Our community was hoodwinked by the former superintendent and his small army of enablers.
Trusting much coming out of the district at this point is tough (repairing this will take significant effort and a lot of time). A good first step would be to fire every member of the Horton Administration still employed by the district, demand resignation of all BOE members (except maybe the two newest ones), announce that a forensic audit is being conducted of EVERYTHING district related, and pledge full transparency with the community. This transparency should include community discussions that allow for a robust and honest Q&A about the closing of schools, plans for getting kids on track for grade level reading and math, Foster school, finances, and more. The moment requires this —along with an intense level of both sobriety and seriousness.
Finally, i can’t help but wonder if legal action is viable/coming—my hunch is that things are much worse than we realize. I very much hope I am wrong.
The defensive tone of this response is NOT encouraging. Same with Dr Turners district wide email last night. The reason we are at this point is mistake after mistake in spending and leadership. Restoring faith in the system requires some accountability even if it didn’t happen during your tenure.
I don’t have much faith in the financial capability of anyone inside the district. They seem completely reliant on a consultant to do their jobs. Here’s a logical idea: STOP work on the new school and repay the bonds immediately. If you can’t take that obvious first step, you will have zero credibility to try and solve the larger problem. It’s like staring work on a mansion when you are contemplating bankruptcy.
Let’s guess how many project managers showed up at the site of the new Foster school to inquire about bidding yesterday? Maybe they are worried about not getting paid for their work
Right?! We knew school closures/consolidation was on the radar before appointing a replacement for Dr. Horton. We knew enrollment was down. Why wouldn't we consider someone with expertise in either critical area for the job, vs. outsourcing THE MOST critical areas for effectively running our school district? They might be "right" that it is needed now, but it's such a self-sabotaging thing to hear leadership say.
Why? Bc the board has an obsession with equity in a completely abstract way that has nothing to do with the barebones basics of being a fiduciary of the finances or delivering best in class education. When in fact, the actual most INEQUITABLE thing you can do is have to slash the programs and teachers/supports that allow this very group of kids to get a good education (that said, I think it’s pretty obvious the education happening in D65 has mediocre to poor for several years).
The board is too imbalanced in terms of expertise. On a related note, I think we should reduce BOE terms to 2 years. Attracts more people (less upfront commitment) to run, keeps consistent accountability with a need to actually show your value to warrant reelection if sought out.
Take a look at Wilmette’s board. Real professionals who have relevant professional backgrounds. And from their website photo, I am guessing they don’t wear baseball caps and hoodies to board meetings. You have 2 jobs as a board member - 1) hire/fire the Superintendent and 2) approve the budget. Our board has botched both of these for years on end. They should all resign.
I don't really care what D65 BOE wears to meetings if they're effective, and IMO think this comparison to Wilmette is not particularly helpful. Though geographically in close proximity, Wilmette to Evanston is apples to oranges in so many ways (not just in terms of the relative financial cirumstances of our school systems, currently). Dressing formally, or as you put it, "professionally", does not automatically make you an effective board member who gets shit done *responsibly*. Let's focus energy around what they say and do vs. asserting business attire is a prerequisite, or that someone who has worked in education in their career isn't considered a "real professional".
I don't think the problem is that none of the people currently on the board bring "relevant professional backgrounds", it's that there's too much redundancy in strengths and competencies (and maybe even ideologies?). This not only creates a greater void to be filled by consultants -- which aren't ALWAYS a bad investment -- but also fails to adequately equip a board to implement effective oversight across all the areas they're responsible for: budget, curriculum, personnel, and facilities. If tomorrow we had seven board members with a ton of financial expertise but none in a school/school administration, that would be problematic in other ways. So balance is key.
This is where the emergence of FOIA Gras can play a key role during this coming cycle. So many of the questions from other outlets and groups during the candidate forums and Q&A the last couple cycles were around equity/equity goals. There was little substantive discussion around board members' actual plans to slow enrollment decline and how to actively combat it, and I don't recall much around the district's financial situation either...going to be interesting how the "rubric" for candidates shifts this time around, but hopefully it helps weed out people who are unqualified in the areas of greater need right now.
I disagree. It’s a respect for the position which comes through when you dress appropriately. Wearing a ball hat to board meeting is a big f-you to Evanston voters. Also, it’a absolutely necessary to have at min 1-2 people who gave business backgrounds. They are approving a $170 million budget that’s complicated. If you have no experiencing in the give and takes in budgeting then how exactly do you provide the necessary fiduciary oversight.
And if you resign midterm then the board doesn't get to "appoint" someone. This happened quite a bit over the last five years and they just appointed their friends so they could maintain their crazy group think. Ugh.
Feel like Mark Baum in the Big Short. There is a (next to) 0% chance the current board and administration are capable of solving this issue. They all need to go
“It is inaccurate and misleading to our community…”
So they now are wanting to point out what is inaccurate and misleading? I feel like I am taking crazy pills here. This group has been misleading our community for a half decade now with serious consequences. And they want to tell Tom - who is one of the most transparent, balanced voices in the community - that HE is being inaccurate and misleading?
"This group has been misleading our community for a half decade now with serious consequences."
Truer words have never been spoken. I applaud Tom and everyone in this comment section for having the guts to do what is right for this community - which is being transparent and balanced voices of the community.
Feels like a biig redirect to say "Hey now, the checks bouncing thing isn't in the range of outcomes until next fall, not this coming January. It's not that bad!"
Okay, how's this, PR flack... "I FEEL that there is not a plan in place and IN MY OPINION the timeline is not fast enough". While D65 might think something different, they sure as heck didn't present a plan with any urgency at their public meeting Monday.
It just seems like they might have... concepts of a plan. Where have I heard that before.
First off, I appreciate you sharing their email in full here. I think that leaves open the window for an open line of communication, which is important.
They're conflating a "framework" with "a plan". What they've laid out is more of a plan to have a plan. How much are we going to incur in costs between now and January? If we've exceeded expenditure projections thee years straight, what has been done to earn the community's trust?
"We'll get back to you in four months" doesn't feel like the level of urgency that the situation warrants, so if their goal is transparency, I would expect getting updates in real time along the way vs. some kind of "big reveal" in January.
"If we've exceeded expenditure projections thee years straight, what has been done to earn the community's trust?"
Great question. The board should resign and the new board should hold this new superintendent and her administration accountable. I think that may help earn the community's trust.
Good to see they are paying attention to you -- they should be. I believe I shall take a "believe it when I see it," and maybe "believe it once you or the Roundtable has further delved into it," approach to their assertions.
"It is inaccurate and misleading to our community to state that there is not a plan in place or that the timeline is not fast enough. Superintendent Dr Turner presented a framework to guide this work"
Seriously, is this riff on Trump's "concept of a plan" top-notch trolling? Or are they ACTIVELY TRYING not to be taken seriously?!?!?
Per the Roundtable, Brandon Utter (a Bessie Rhodes parent) and Ezra Shevick (Washington Parent) are entering the D65 race. Both of their comments to the Roundtable suggest a focus on performance and financial management. Utter, especially, had some choice words about the incompetence of the current board.
We'll wait and see about Sorensen, but it is starting to look like we will have some semblance of a reform slate.
D65 needs a major overhaul starting with replacement of entire board. Like the idea of shorter terms. And I propose an advisory committee to the board peopled with financial and educational experts. This board has proven the need for such service.
As for more consultants-absolutely not. Let the teachers teach without scripted mandates and lessons from “the big house”.
Although dialogue is needed, the “just trust us” attitude should be ignored.
We'll replace 4/7 of the board in April, barring one of the incumbents running again and winning. Attempted reelection seems like a crazy idea given all the negative publicity happening, as well as the plan Dr. Turner is planning to unveil in January, which incumbents will not be able to distance themselves from. My prediction is we have at least one of the four announce early resignation to give someone else a running start, and the replacement will try to play the "new" card to dodge being connected to the mess. Problem is, if you're backed by the outgoing board member, you're guilty by association.
Unfortunately, I read that 4-year terms are an IL state thing, and from what I saw, locally you have the option to increase that to 6-year terms, not to reduce it. Could be wrong though!
I think the people you would put on the advisory committee you mention should just be candidates for the board. We're not in a financial position to have a babysitter-of-the-board...plus, we have Tom!
Evanston Roundtable has a scoop on the D65 school board elections. Donna Wang Su told the Roundtable she is not running. Good riddance, Donna. Don't let the door hit you on the way out.
Joey, Biz, and Soo La Kim all gave opaque, mealy-mouthed statements about their intentions (what a surprise).
They report that Christian Sorensen--a Democratic Party of Evanston board member and staffer for State Rep Tracy Muhl--is running.
I don't know this guy, but I don't like the DPOE connection. They have endorsed some of the worst incumbents (like Biz and Sergio) during the Horton era and have rejected reform candidates like John Martin and Angela Blaising.
I hope Tom can interview him--or--better yet--host a FOIA Gras candidate's forum at the Grecian Kitchen.
I'm not sure how many people will see your comment since it's after the initial wave in the wake of Tom's posting of this, but I think it's a good conversation to have in general. Wish there was a way to connect some of the themes of comments on here into their own thread in a "forum"...
What incentive do current members have to declare this early? It's entirely conceivable that none of them end up running, but I could also see them keeping the option open in case they feel there aren't candidates they feel confident in. We may also see someone step down in hopes of installing someone not directly tied to a lot of the recent negative press but whom they want to give an "edge" in the election.
Re: Sorensen -- to make having any association with DPOE a disqualifier is a little dicey IMO. This is Evanston! But I think it's important that local journalists or anyone afforded some kind of "expertise" around candidates do more than just asking every candidate the same 4-5 questions and leaving it there. Different candidates warrant different inquiry. If you're attached to DPOE, it should be fair to ask a question along the lines of
"-DPOE endorsed candidates last time who many think are largely responsible for the dire situation the next board will have to continue tackling with the D65 administration. Is there anything you would say is different this time around that shifts the priorities around who deserves the Evanston community's vote?
-Which ways has the recent board been insufficient, and what ideas do you have to approach those areas differently?"
Just some ideas...I'm sure Tom has thought (and is thinking) about a lot of this and has plenty of his own.
What is really going on in this city? D 65 is collapsing then I read Meals on Wheels is falling apart from financial mismanagement then the library is seeking $10 million for needed renovations …….it was built in 1994! When was Orrington built?
All of the schools average 77 years old, and that was 3 years ago. The consultants they hired to access the buildings came up with a little less than 200 million needed to bring existing buildings up to par.
Let’s also not forget teachers (who have stayed) are working without a contract and I guarantee they will strike.
Evanston schools are falling apart, yet let’s build a new one and circumvent a referendum because last time the majority said NO, Morton Civic Center is falling apart, Harley Clark, Library, the old Robert Crown, Evanston Shelter (thankfully a new one is almost done), city has no $ for pickleball courts, no indoor pool or enticing community center, some existing tennis courts unplayable, the list goes on and on and on….Evanston needs to learn to budget apparently they never learned that from Common Core or D65/D202.
I'm wondering if others thought the Thursday editorial in the Tribune soft-pedaled D-65's problems, and didn't express the lack of confidence in the current board that many, many people have expressed.
It was clear the writers didn’t understand the history. And it inferred - problem solved! All good! And, by the way, CPS, take note. The idea that D65 would serve as an example for CPS is laughable. Very disappointing.
The Trib is a sad sack these days. The beat reporter for political D65 issues is .. the local high school football guy.
I hadn’t seen this before: https://www.chicagotribune.com/2024/09/19/editorial-financially-strapped-evanston-skokie-schools-hired-a-truth-teller-they-now-have-a-way-back-from-the-abyss/
The writer is listed as “Editorial Board.”
(For the Chicago Tribune Article.)
Is that standard? Wondering if it could be a friend of a friend of a friend to help make the dire financial situation look better?
Regular editorials are not signed by an individual writer. They're supposed to represent the voice of the newspaper, and are done in-house. Op-ed articles, which run in that general section, are always signed by the writer and are always written by a non-staffer. The Tribune's editorial page editor, Chris Jones, is an excellent writer. I hope he's not the writer behind that simplistic editorial.
I wrote a response to the “editorial board”. So irritated. First a “Miracles Anti-Racist” now “Truth Teller”. Could you imagine the label for Goren or Murphy?
The difference between local and regional coverage...
This is completely infuriating. For each of the last several FOIA Gras articles I have wanted to comment but instead have to tend to my jobs as a parent and professional.
FOIA Gras has been an amazing resource for several years, and single-handedly brought light to many issues that were either completely unknown (hundreds of thousands of dollars of catered lunch) or disregarded as “racist” conjecture (the Magical Bus Savings being lesser than advertised).
Tom has the reach and subscriber base he has because D65 has offered anything BUT “clarity and partnership”, “transparency and open lines of communication” to their stakeholders: D65 Parents & Guardians, and every Evanston taxpayer. Without any other area to discuss, Tom filled a void and gave those of us wanting to question the company line a forum to do so.
Speaking of “D65 Parents & Guardians” - where is D65 regarding the use of their name in that toxic, inaccurate, and misleading cesspool of a Facebook group? When will they police that? For years, several of the Same Ten People have shamed, harassed, doxxed anyone and everyone that disagrees with their personal assessment of D65. I’ve seen all types of unsuspecting people be recipients of just plain mean discourse when they are asking questions as simple as “are there Halloween plans” or “I’m moving to Evanston, what is a good school?”.
That D65 FINALLY feels the need to reach out to external media sources to state that the media source is being “inaccurate and misleading to our community” is infuriating. There’s no other way to put it.
Remember, just a few months ago the FY25 Budget was looking great. Then, there was a $10M deficit. And now, it is a $13M deficit. The only thing inaccurate and misleading is the D65 Board, Administrators (past AND present), and their lackeys that stifle any and all discussion regarding the woeful mismanagement of this beautiful district.
D65 could sincerely offer up “clarity”, “partnership”, “transparency”, and “open lines of communication” by allowing the SAP3 Process to be open and to allow citizen input on the inevitable (this wasn’t always the case, but it is now) impending school closures.
I work in boring corporate America. For the things I do, I need to produce multi-year plans, contingency plans, risk assessments, stakeholder analysis, communicate the changes, etc., before I can get started. My work is NOWHERE as near as consequential as the building of schools, shuttering of schools, and redrawing of school boundaries that affects a city of 70,000+ in one of America’s largest metro areas. That any request to do any of the above of D65 Admin & Board was labelled as "problematic" was itself quite problematic, as we now see with this mess.
This “tone policing” from the D65 PR Team is energy best spent elsewhere.
D65 should focus on themselves and their teams, and stop trying to micromanage the one forum in Evanston that allows for true and robust discussion of the dumpster fire that is our public school district. If they want to stamp out inaccurate and misleading information in our community, I first suggest they start on Facebook.
Can I ask a favor - can you change your username? I've had people make fake accounts using my name or derivations of my name in the past and it didn't make me feel great, I don't want to condone that to others. Just don't change it to Hom Tayden!!!
Of course. Just did. You've been nothing but fact-forward and data-driven, as well as courteous to those that don't extend the same to you. Let's see if the changes have already propagated through substack.
I wholeheartedly agree with this. We can’t even rely on the board, who presumably represent us, to exercise any scrutiny over spending. The administration is free to create new high-level positions with nary a raised eyebrow. Meanwhile, much of corporate America is intimately familiar with hiring freezes and fiscal restraint. I would love to see the board impose an upper limit on consultant spend and administrative staffing tied to enrollment.
I would love to see a zero tolerance for new consultant hire in 2024 and 2025.
Also, is D65 projected to lose more students next year?
Your new username made me laugh. That is a good one.
Well stated, Mr. Mofgren. Now, can you please go to the Roundtable and comment on everyone else’s comments in a manner that makes you appear to be completely unhinged? Thanks in advance.
I agree they should first start on Facebook. And they should have started on Facebook several years ago. One can’t help but think that D65 enjoys the acrimony promulgated by the FB page D65 Parents and Guardians. But then again why would anyone in D65 (PR team included) object to what its staunchest supporters were spewing on that D65 Parents and Guardians FB page?
Sadly, many are past the point of having patience and trusting a district process. Our community was hoodwinked by the former superintendent and his small army of enablers.
Trusting much coming out of the district at this point is tough (repairing this will take significant effort and a lot of time). A good first step would be to fire every member of the Horton Administration still employed by the district, demand resignation of all BOE members (except maybe the two newest ones), announce that a forensic audit is being conducted of EVERYTHING district related, and pledge full transparency with the community. This transparency should include community discussions that allow for a robust and honest Q&A about the closing of schools, plans for getting kids on track for grade level reading and math, Foster school, finances, and more. The moment requires this —along with an intense level of both sobriety and seriousness.
Finally, i can’t help but wonder if legal action is viable/coming—my hunch is that things are much worse than we realize. I very much hope I am wrong.
The defensive tone of this response is NOT encouraging. Same with Dr Turners district wide email last night. The reason we are at this point is mistake after mistake in spending and leadership. Restoring faith in the system requires some accountability even if it didn’t happen during your tenure.
I don’t have much faith in the financial capability of anyone inside the district. They seem completely reliant on a consultant to do their jobs. Here’s a logical idea: STOP work on the new school and repay the bonds immediately. If you can’t take that obvious first step, you will have zero credibility to try and solve the larger problem. It’s like staring work on a mansion when you are contemplating bankruptcy.
Let’s guess how many project managers showed up at the site of the new Foster school to inquire about bidding yesterday? Maybe they are worried about not getting paid for their work
Back to my comment on consultants. Seriously just resign if you can’t do your job and need to outsource it. Budget savings right there!
Right?! We knew school closures/consolidation was on the radar before appointing a replacement for Dr. Horton. We knew enrollment was down. Why wouldn't we consider someone with expertise in either critical area for the job, vs. outsourcing THE MOST critical areas for effectively running our school district? They might be "right" that it is needed now, but it's such a self-sabotaging thing to hear leadership say.
Why? Bc the board has an obsession with equity in a completely abstract way that has nothing to do with the barebones basics of being a fiduciary of the finances or delivering best in class education. When in fact, the actual most INEQUITABLE thing you can do is have to slash the programs and teachers/supports that allow this very group of kids to get a good education (that said, I think it’s pretty obvious the education happening in D65 has mediocre to poor for several years).
The board is too imbalanced in terms of expertise. On a related note, I think we should reduce BOE terms to 2 years. Attracts more people (less upfront commitment) to run, keeps consistent accountability with a need to actually show your value to warrant reelection if sought out.
Take a look at Wilmette’s board. Real professionals who have relevant professional backgrounds. And from their website photo, I am guessing they don’t wear baseball caps and hoodies to board meetings. You have 2 jobs as a board member - 1) hire/fire the Superintendent and 2) approve the budget. Our board has botched both of these for years on end. They should all resign.
I don't really care what D65 BOE wears to meetings if they're effective, and IMO think this comparison to Wilmette is not particularly helpful. Though geographically in close proximity, Wilmette to Evanston is apples to oranges in so many ways (not just in terms of the relative financial cirumstances of our school systems, currently). Dressing formally, or as you put it, "professionally", does not automatically make you an effective board member who gets shit done *responsibly*. Let's focus energy around what they say and do vs. asserting business attire is a prerequisite, or that someone who has worked in education in their career isn't considered a "real professional".
I don't think the problem is that none of the people currently on the board bring "relevant professional backgrounds", it's that there's too much redundancy in strengths and competencies (and maybe even ideologies?). This not only creates a greater void to be filled by consultants -- which aren't ALWAYS a bad investment -- but also fails to adequately equip a board to implement effective oversight across all the areas they're responsible for: budget, curriculum, personnel, and facilities. If tomorrow we had seven board members with a ton of financial expertise but none in a school/school administration, that would be problematic in other ways. So balance is key.
This is where the emergence of FOIA Gras can play a key role during this coming cycle. So many of the questions from other outlets and groups during the candidate forums and Q&A the last couple cycles were around equity/equity goals. There was little substantive discussion around board members' actual plans to slow enrollment decline and how to actively combat it, and I don't recall much around the district's financial situation either...going to be interesting how the "rubric" for candidates shifts this time around, but hopefully it helps weed out people who are unqualified in the areas of greater need right now.
I disagree. It’s a respect for the position which comes through when you dress appropriately. Wearing a ball hat to board meeting is a big f-you to Evanston voters. Also, it’a absolutely necessary to have at min 1-2 people who gave business backgrounds. They are approving a $170 million budget that’s complicated. If you have no experiencing in the give and takes in budgeting then how exactly do you provide the necessary fiduciary oversight.
And if you resign midterm then the board doesn't get to "appoint" someone. This happened quite a bit over the last five years and they just appointed their friends so they could maintain their crazy group think. Ugh.
Feel like Mark Baum in the Big Short. There is a (next to) 0% chance the current board and administration are capable of solving this issue. They all need to go
https://media1.tenor.com/m/TcjzHrReGlwAAAAd/the-big-short-zero.gif
Sorry one other thing…
“It is inaccurate and misleading to our community…”
So they now are wanting to point out what is inaccurate and misleading? I feel like I am taking crazy pills here. This group has been misleading our community for a half decade now with serious consequences. And they want to tell Tom - who is one of the most transparent, balanced voices in the community - that HE is being inaccurate and misleading?
"This group has been misleading our community for a half decade now with serious consequences."
Truer words have never been spoken. I applaud Tom and everyone in this comment section for having the guts to do what is right for this community - which is being transparent and balanced voices of the community.
Feels like a biig redirect to say "Hey now, the checks bouncing thing isn't in the range of outcomes until next fall, not this coming January. It's not that bad!"
Okay, how's this, PR flack... "I FEEL that there is not a plan in place and IN MY OPINION the timeline is not fast enough". While D65 might think something different, they sure as heck didn't present a plan with any urgency at their public meeting Monday.
It just seems like they might have... concepts of a plan. Where have I heard that before.
First off, I appreciate you sharing their email in full here. I think that leaves open the window for an open line of communication, which is important.
They're conflating a "framework" with "a plan". What they've laid out is more of a plan to have a plan. How much are we going to incur in costs between now and January? If we've exceeded expenditure projections thee years straight, what has been done to earn the community's trust?
"We'll get back to you in four months" doesn't feel like the level of urgency that the situation warrants, so if their goal is transparency, I would expect getting updates in real time along the way vs. some kind of "big reveal" in January.
"If we've exceeded expenditure projections thee years straight, what has been done to earn the community's trust?"
Great question. The board should resign and the new board should hold this new superintendent and her administration accountable. I think that may help earn the community's trust.
Good to see they are paying attention to you -- they should be. I believe I shall take a "believe it when I see it," and maybe "believe it once you or the Roundtable has further delved into it," approach to their assertions.
"It is inaccurate and misleading to our community to state that there is not a plan in place or that the timeline is not fast enough. Superintendent Dr Turner presented a framework to guide this work"
Seriously, is this riff on Trump's "concept of a plan" top-notch trolling? Or are they ACTIVELY TRYING not to be taken seriously?!?!?
Per the Roundtable, Brandon Utter (a Bessie Rhodes parent) and Ezra Shevick (Washington Parent) are entering the D65 race. Both of their comments to the Roundtable suggest a focus on performance and financial management. Utter, especially, had some choice words about the incompetence of the current board.
We'll wait and see about Sorensen, but it is starting to look like we will have some semblance of a reform slate.
https://evanstonroundtable.com/2024/10/05/daniel-biss-challenger-emerges-along-with-2-district-65-candidates/
Two great articles in the Roundtable today; deep analysis of the budget crisis by Larry Gavin and the essay from former Mayor Hagerty.
D65 needs a major overhaul starting with replacement of entire board. Like the idea of shorter terms. And I propose an advisory committee to the board peopled with financial and educational experts. This board has proven the need for such service.
As for more consultants-absolutely not. Let the teachers teach without scripted mandates and lessons from “the big house”.
Although dialogue is needed, the “just trust us” attitude should be ignored.
Vikki
We'll replace 4/7 of the board in April, barring one of the incumbents running again and winning. Attempted reelection seems like a crazy idea given all the negative publicity happening, as well as the plan Dr. Turner is planning to unveil in January, which incumbents will not be able to distance themselves from. My prediction is we have at least one of the four announce early resignation to give someone else a running start, and the replacement will try to play the "new" card to dodge being connected to the mess. Problem is, if you're backed by the outgoing board member, you're guilty by association.
Unfortunately, I read that 4-year terms are an IL state thing, and from what I saw, locally you have the option to increase that to 6-year terms, not to reduce it. Could be wrong though!
I think the people you would put on the advisory committee you mention should just be candidates for the board. We're not in a financial position to have a babysitter-of-the-board...plus, we have Tom!
Evanston Roundtable has a scoop on the D65 school board elections. Donna Wang Su told the Roundtable she is not running. Good riddance, Donna. Don't let the door hit you on the way out.
Joey, Biz, and Soo La Kim all gave opaque, mealy-mouthed statements about their intentions (what a surprise).
They report that Christian Sorensen--a Democratic Party of Evanston board member and staffer for State Rep Tracy Muhl--is running.
I don't know this guy, but I don't like the DPOE connection. They have endorsed some of the worst incumbents (like Biz and Sergio) during the Horton era and have rejected reform candidates like John Martin and Angela Blaising.
I hope Tom can interview him--or--better yet--host a FOIA Gras candidate's forum at the Grecian Kitchen.
https://evanstonroundtable.com/2024/09/30/school-board-elections-most-incumbents-mum-on-plans/
After Jan 1 I am gonna let people pitch their case on here, but before then will not write about candidates! Nobody wants 6 month elections
I'm not sure how many people will see your comment since it's after the initial wave in the wake of Tom's posting of this, but I think it's a good conversation to have in general. Wish there was a way to connect some of the themes of comments on here into their own thread in a "forum"...
What incentive do current members have to declare this early? It's entirely conceivable that none of them end up running, but I could also see them keeping the option open in case they feel there aren't candidates they feel confident in. We may also see someone step down in hopes of installing someone not directly tied to a lot of the recent negative press but whom they want to give an "edge" in the election.
Re: Sorensen -- to make having any association with DPOE a disqualifier is a little dicey IMO. This is Evanston! But I think it's important that local journalists or anyone afforded some kind of "expertise" around candidates do more than just asking every candidate the same 4-5 questions and leaving it there. Different candidates warrant different inquiry. If you're attached to DPOE, it should be fair to ask a question along the lines of
"-DPOE endorsed candidates last time who many think are largely responsible for the dire situation the next board will have to continue tackling with the D65 administration. Is there anything you would say is different this time around that shifts the priorities around who deserves the Evanston community's vote?
-Which ways has the recent board been insufficient, and what ideas do you have to approach those areas differently?"
Just some ideas...I'm sure Tom has thought (and is thinking) about a lot of this and has plenty of his own.
Yeah stay tuned I am going to make all candidates in the April Municipal elections atone for all the prior sins
What is really going on in this city? D 65 is collapsing then I read Meals on Wheels is falling apart from financial mismanagement then the library is seeking $10 million for needed renovations …….it was built in 1994! When was Orrington built?
All of the schools average 77 years old, and that was 3 years ago. The consultants they hired to access the buildings came up with a little less than 200 million needed to bring existing buildings up to par.
Let’s also not forget teachers (who have stayed) are working without a contract and I guarantee they will strike.
Evanston schools are falling apart, yet let’s build a new one and circumvent a referendum because last time the majority said NO, Morton Civic Center is falling apart, Harley Clark, Library, the old Robert Crown, Evanston Shelter (thankfully a new one is almost done), city has no $ for pickleball courts, no indoor pool or enticing community center, some existing tennis courts unplayable, the list goes on and on and on….Evanston needs to learn to budget apparently they never learned that from Common Core or D65/D202.