As this letter implies must happen and Tom has FOIA requested: release Grossi’s memo! Every taxpayer has a right to know the complete set of possible cost-cutting measures he has outlined if the district is to avoid financial insolvency. There will be trade-offs but the public should know what the choices and costs are. It’s time for transparency.
Finally... I and so many others have been asking where the hell has Biss been on all of this. He has been completely silent which has been quite disappointing. Glad he finally stepped up though knowing him I wouldn't be surprised if this originated from Mayor Van Dusen. Regardless better late than never. Let's see where else this letter is published to see if Biss stands behind it.
Off topic but thinking about Harris I wonder if biss and harris have had a falling out. So bizarre that Mendoza’s sister just announced she is running against harris. Biss and Mendoza are very very close. It looks like the Biss / Schill / Ryan consortium are running candidates in most wards now. It’s going to be a weird election.
I think Darlene Cannon, card-carrying member of the Same Thirty People, is running in ward 2 again as well. Harris crushed Cannon the last time. To the extent there is any anti-Harris vote, I would think that Mendoza would just be a spoiler.
The Roundtable article said she has only lived in Evanston for 16 months, so I doubt she will have much of an impact. It really is weird that she is running for alderman. It is unclear what sort of qualifications she brings. All the Roundtable article said about her is that she was homeless for a while and that her sister is the clerk.
If she wanted to run for something and win she should run for D65. With four vacancies and only three candidates at the moment, she would have a pretty good shot!
He was not involved from what I remember. He also transferred his middle school child out of D65 to a private school a few years ago which speaks volumes especially on a mayor’s salary.
It's my understanding his child is incredibly gifted and that is why they go to private school. Donna's son is also gifted and goes to a private school. As we all know, D65 offers nothing for gifted children.
Yeah, I can't blame them there - the D65 gifted programs have all been gutted or eliminated in the name of equity. I can't tell you how many parents of gifted students I've spoken with that are just exasperated and either have to spend all their time fighting for their kid or just move.
Previous Boards, especially the Board under Ms. Tanyavutti made very clear that they viewed gifted programs as "opportunity hoarding" resources from black/brown kids.
D65 never had a real gifted program, the only thing that was even close were the few years where they actually cared about differentiation and created some “enrichment” programs. That is what was ended by the board. There are some very good schools in the area that are specifically for gifted children but they are expensive.
Actually the person who was head of the Democratic Party of Evanston (DPOE) and who printed flyers against Angela Blaising, Ndona Muboyayi, Katie Vorhees and John Martin in the last two school board elections in favor of the incumbents was Christian Sorenson. Christian happens to be running for….District 65 School Board in the next election! Sure, things will change 🙄. School Board elections are non-partisan BTW so to have DPOE endorse candidates is pretty out of line.
Hey Angelique! I love a promotion, but no, I wasn't running the DPOE.
I did the interviews for some, including Angela and Donna, for our member-driven endorsement process where the only way to get a DPOE endorsement is to get 66% of voting members to endorse you. I pass our DPOE approved literature, but I have yet to be either President or Committeeman of the organization, so I have had limited input in what goes on the branded flyers and nothing to do with any outside orgs. One day, hopefully, but not yet!
I'm happy to take any criticism, 847-231-2319, I'll have a lot more time after November 5th. Tom also graciously offered an interview in January. You can bet that one of the inspirations to put my career on hold to help us dig out of this mess is Tom's careful and consistent reporting.
Anyway, I only had a moment to read the comments today between canvass launches to Wisconsin, so text to that number is the clearest way to get a hold of me and I'm happy to set up a time with you or anyone else in this community to talk about any and everything.
Christian, Are you willing to publicly commit to a superintendent search process that is open, transparent, and includes public meetings with 2-4 finalists before a candidate is given an offer?
This mechanism was used by the D65 board for decades before 2019 and remains a process used by districts throughout the country.
That is good to hear. The superintendent hires that the current board has undertaken are at the root of the current financial crisis.
They justified the Horton hire secrecy by saying they could only get good candidates under a secretive process. Of course Horton had been flying all over the country participating (and not getting hired) in open searches, so the whole rationale was ridiculous.
As far as I remember, for the Horton successor hire they didn't even try and justify the closed process. They just went ahead with it as if it were the norm. It is not the norm in Evanston and we shouldn't allow one of the most crucial decisions that a board makes be done in the dark without any public input.
Thanks for clarifying, Christian. I think people are wary of "let's take this offline", given the opacity of most of the current board/admin despite many claims of wanting to be transparent. Look forward to hearing more out in the open from you.
Do you agree or disagree with the DPOE weighing in on a non-partisan election with endorsements? Given what's happened under the watch of candidates they previously endorsed, would you/they consider reevaluating DPOE's level of intervention in municipal elections? A bit of a conflict of interest with the mayoral one, to boot...
No for sure. Not trying to go offline per se, just not able to lurk in here like I have been AND very busy, texting is just the best way to even point me towards a post or question.
I also am running for office, so that selects me into "huge ego" and this space has its own culture. I don't want to detract from that by making any comment sections about me that aren't me in the post.
I loved Angelique's comment about sounds like a politician, I am certainly trying to be one after staffing many for many years. Politicians are a good thing and have many tools and openings for discussion, and sometimes having them in what is essentially a democracy lab like a comment section can make everyone involved uneasy.
I am 110% in favor of the DPOE endorsing at every level of government. I am the member who tried to put a party resolution that we make our municipal process partisan and move away from nonpartisan. I have a lot of reasons and biases and again that feels like it shouldn't go back and forth here (bring it up again in January if Tom doesn't in his interview or come find me in between and we can go deep in a comment section) but I believe endorsements from the DPOE are also about who can win and who represents the values of the local party. Again, its not like other orgs where an endorsement committee or the board of directors endorses - the organization endorsement comes when more than 2/3 of dues-paid members votes. We have used the endorsement session as litmus tests as often as not, the 2018 race to succeed Laura Fine in the State House 17th comes to mind where Candance Chow, Mary Rita Luecke, Jennifer Gong Gershowitz, Alexandra Eidenberg and I think at least one more person was in that race at the time. As far as conflicts, I say this all the time - you have to be right AND you have to win. If you lose votes on a conflict of interest, real or perceived, it was up to you the candidate/campaign to win those folks or other folks back.
Even with all that yep I have more. Happy to talk offline or when I get my site up and start canvassing after Nov. 5th.
That’s interesting. I don’t know much about canon. Thanks for the info. I find it so odd that Mendoza is running. I also am not a fan of harris based on how awful and dismissive she was to the concerns of people regarding the change of zoning to allow concerts at ryan field.
I don't want to get into a debate about Ryan Field, but I can't imagine that many people in Ward 2 would care if they had concerts at Ryan Field. I live in South Evanston and as far as I'm concerned Ryan Field is in Wisconsin. If they want to rebuild the stadium and have more concerts that will bring in more tax money, I say go for it. I see basically zero negative impacts to the city.
I can understand why immediate neighbors don't like it, but the stadium has been there for decades and it is a wealthy area so I am not going to lose any sleep over it. I doubt Krissie heard any serious opposition from anyone who actually lives in the Second Ward.
RE: Canon. She was chair of the Equity Commission and pushed for the silly Gaza Resolution. She would be an awful alderman--more concerned about showboating than anything else.
I get that but that’s not what I was referring to. The thing that was so disappointing was that harris was so quick to tell white NIMBY’s in ward 7 that they need to pay there dues and just deal with the concerts all while missing the fact that that was the moment to get more from NU. Not to mention that in a city as small as Evanston it effects the whole town. Those 20,000 trucks are rolling though ward 5 every day. My kid has almost gotten killed by them multiple times on the way to ETHS. The fact that Harris, Reid, Biss, and Niusima only got 250k a year for D65 for what is it, 20 years? This was the moment to get NU to actually contribute to the city in a serious way and we got played for chumps. Was wild to watch the lawyers from NU wearing $65,000 watches negotiating with Reid who was pretending to be a lawyer flattering him here and there. Embarrassing
In terms of the election, I guarantee nobody in the Second Ward will care or even know about what she said about "NIMBY's" in the Ward 7. Like was said above, for most of us in the Second Ward consider Ryan Field to might as well be in Wisconsin.
As far as trucks go, sit at the corner of Church and Darrow in the second ward for a while and watch the parade of garbage trucks coming in to dump at the waste transfer station and then the big 18-wheelers hauling the trash out to the dump. That's been going on for decades, so I can see why Harris isn't sympathetic to a temporary project on Central Street.
I'm not defending Harris and the city deal--I find it patently ridiculous when Devon Reid plays Perry Mason. Just in terms of the election, nobody in the 2nd ward will hold any of that stuff against her.
It's terrible Biss has been quiet until now especially since he has big plans for affordable housing. All of this mess is making Evanston less affordable. The hypocrisy is mind blowing from Sergio talking about affordable housing during his school board campaign to Biss championing the cause. We all know Biss is using his office as a political stepping stone.
He was at the Foster School Groundbreaking and gave a little speech about how this proves how important it is for the City and School District to work together. I was like ?????
But most of the housing they're building is studio and one bedroom apartments with a few two bedrooms sprinkled in the mix. Even if the units were affordable that's not going to attract many families to Evanston.
Yes! It’s very clear that the housing that is being built is for NU students, grad students or young professionals. Nothing affordable about it. It’s market priced compared to the 23k that NU students pay for 9 months in a dorm. NU students have to start looking for apartments like 5 months before the school year starts to get anything. I wish Biss would call these new developments what they are which is essentially more housing for NU students which would be fine but to wrap it up under the cloak of “affordable housing is more then dishonest.
OK there is a lot to unpack here and I could run a whole substack just about the affordable housing schemes. First thing is that "affordable housing" is a technical term (not just a colloquial one) that means "some % of units are priced below market and subsidized" - you may previously have known this as "section 8"
For instance, here's a news story about an affordable housing redevelopment being done by the Celadon guys, who are doing Harley Clarke.
In this case, the developer got a bunch of grants to redevelop the property into affordable housing including a big pile of TIF money. Then, they redevelop it as if it was any property and lease out the lower cost units to people below certain income levels (not students). The whole thing is extremely lucrative to developers if they can play the political game.
Suppose the City redeveloped City Hall into "affordable" housing - what you could probably expect is 50% market rate units leased out to students, etc and 50% subsidized units leased out to people below certain income thresholds. I'm not sure it would accomplish any of the goals of lowering housing prices but it certainly would help enrich another developer and give the politicians wins because of the "affordable housing" brand.
If this is student housing does that mean it’s more property off the tax rolls? I remember hearing that NU began buying land around the new school soon after the site was announced.
No - these new ones are private developers, but they’re getting an amazing deal on property taxes to build these with a certain percentage of “affordable” housing. Like 20 years seriously discounted property tax which by that time I am sure they will sell the buildings or sell them to NU and then voila, no property tax. I have heard a lot of rumors (from people in the industry) that “Evanston Labs”, the building that sits on the ghost of the old Burger King was basically built for and by NU and will be transferred to them soon enough and taken off the property tax role as well.
The mayors are showing solid leadership with this letter and not pulling any punches with asking what everybody is thinking: if they are ready to forcebly transfer kids out mid-semester, who knows what the heck they will do next, etc….
Captain Obvious says when you CONDEMN a school, you clearly will need to offer either job guarantees or sizable bonus dollars to secure any rational teachers unless you are hiring off of the unemployment line of CPS ‘do not hires’ etc. Come on, do they really need someone to tell them this? Lack of staffing is on the Admin & Board, doesn’t just happen for no reason.
The Mayors don’t have any legal authority relative to D65. I don’t think it would be appropriate for them to weigh in publicly until/unless things get really desperate. 😬Was this an open letter? Even if not, they knew that it would get the light of day. I am glad that they are in the mix but I would not criticize them for keeping their powder dry. I hope that private pressure was and is being brought to bear.
The issue the district has with Bessie Rhodes and the seventh and eighth grade in particular is one of staffing. There are open classroom positions that are being filled with subs and admins. The quality of education these students receive is a step above baby sitting. Splitting students out to their local MS will allow the district to salvage their education for the remainder of the year. I can only imagine what will happen if the district is unable to secure an agreement with the teachers union as teachers have been without a contract since August.
The district would have known they were going to have staffing issues for these grades over the summer and could have made a decision before school even started. I don’t know how anyone could be surprised that it’s going to be hard to fill positions at a school that’s known to be closing. I’m sure it’s going to continue to be hard to fill any positions in this district given the well publicized financial problems. The district’s contention that they were “afraid” to go through with a planned Zoom mtg is too ridiculous for words.
I completely agree with you. A principal knows early in the spring/summer that they won't have enough students/teachers to move forward with classes for the fall. I'm guessing that they were "hoping" teachers would appear or more students would enroll to make it worth it, but that wasn't the case. The district rolled the dice on this one and it didn't pay off and in the end, the students come out the loser. Substitutes are not certified math, spanish, or history teachers. They are bodies in a classroom trying to fulfill the lesson plan left for him/her. To go an entire year with the possibly of a revolving door of different subs would have horrible educational outcomes for these students and they know this so they are putting these students back in their home schools which is also going to have dramatic impacts on these students social emotional outcomes. With better planning they could have avoided this by closing 7th/8th grades before the start of school giving parents/community members and the students themselves time to grieve, accept, and make new friends! Children are resilient and parents can support them through the change when it's done with forethought and proper communication and good thinking.
I will also point out that 3 years ago they involuntarily transferred 80 teachers and staff. District administrators knew what was going on with staffing at the end of the school year, they could have incentivized teachers to be temporarily transferred to BRSGS, while not a popular idea, it could have been done. There were multiple ways the district could have handled the teaching shortfall, they chose the easiest route for them regardless of the affect on the students, their families or the school community at BR. Another promise broken by the administration and another example of the lack of transparently by the school board. While the 5th Ward community “deserves” Foster School, the students “deserve” a full year at a magnet school they chose to go to.
Sounds like you have some insider knowledge which I won't dispute. If that's the case, it was still 1. Poor communication, and 2. Poor planning.
These bilingual positions were extremely difficult to fill to begin with. Having it pending closure, makes it virtually impossible. Did a teacher quit after the start of the school year? I have no idea.
If the principal and vice principal were having to step in to teach, that's not a sustainable model. My guess is the BRGS community would have understood things more if the Superintendent's note gave more specifics and if the Principal also was an author on the note as that makes it appear like it was a mutual decision on what's best for the students vs the district's cost cutting measure.
As far as I know, and someone please correct me if I’m mistaken, the BR 7th and 8th grades are not TWI strands so the teachers for those classes were/are monolingual educators. The current BR 6th grade class is the first dual language middle school class the district has offered.
I’m a parent at Bessie Rhodes and you’re correct. They’re closing 7th & 8th which are the only 2 non-TWI grades remaining at Bessie Rhodes.
This does not bode well for the highly touted ‘dual language’ middle school that they wanted to start with this year’s 6th grade at Bessie Rhodes and then eventually roll out to all middle schools.
You write a lot about how you don't see a path forward financially for Foster. Can you write more about the ongoing maintenance costs of the other schools? If some of the old run-down schools are closed (and therefore the maintenance costs lessen, and the properties can be sold or leased), and Foster ends up being less of a maintenance burden because it's a new facility, would that help the financial situation?
Yes, stay tuned - this is the big argument for getting Foster School over the finish line but it's going to require some creative thinking and bigger planning. Not sure the Board is doing that work but the community certainly is.
I actually DO see a path forward for the Foster School but we have to do it right and the current pathway we are taking is NOT the right way unless you want an uncompleted shell of a building.
The bill for repairs on existing buildings is approaching 200M; closing a couple of buildings would not put much of a dent in that number. Plus, much of the needed repairs are major due mostly to neglect; this is not painting and patching a few holes.
So...what do we do? Raise taxes to make that dent? Do we rebuild most of these buildings to buy another 20-30 years? We should have a plan, beyond just closing the immediate deficit.
Right - that's what I was getting at. We'd need a more substantial raise via referendum to position us to address these buildings. We can't cut enough to free up the money to do it without that...more of a question of whether we attempt one this spring when it's a wildly unpopular board making the ask (even if it's a new board managing it on the other end) or if we wait 2 years. Or is there a way to get a referendum out for public vote outside these muni elections?
Not that I know of. I'm told (but have not confirmed) that the deadline to submit to the state is January, so they have to pick before then. Perhaps this is why everything gets presented to the Board then.
D65 is not selling widgets It’s not Walmart The old run down schools are neighborhood schools. They serve a community It’s not like a business being “cost effective “. They are building Foster School to give that community their own school. So BR s school community doesn’t get to keep theirs. And Orrington “ an old run down school” doesn’t get to keep their school community. ???
Not defending the logic, but I think the argument is the fifth ward is not "fine" and hasn't been, in part due to the lack of a neighborhood school AND related bussing (operative word "and"). Other areas, like Orrington, could be more "fine" even if their school closed. It's more complex than that, of course, and they've steered WAY clear of connecting the two of those together.
Reality is even if we right the enrollment ship a bit, we simply don't have legit evidence today that we need the amount of buildings and capacity we have currently. You could absolutely make an argument that we've established/retained too many buildings relative to the overall students we serve, and that's part of why running deficits has been fairly common here historically (though not to the degree we have in the past 3 years).
I'm nervous that this "well, not like *that*" type of response from stakeholders is going to characterize every response to cuts until ISBE gets called in.
Everyone (Board, Admin) keeps delaying conversations until all the optionality is gone and then ends up having only the worst choices available to them -- none of which they want to do but eventually someone is going to do those bad things.
As this letter implies must happen and Tom has FOIA requested: release Grossi’s memo! Every taxpayer has a right to know the complete set of possible cost-cutting measures he has outlined if the district is to avoid financial insolvency. There will be trade-offs but the public should know what the choices and costs are. It’s time for transparency.
The Little Substack That Could. Hayden got the attention of both mayors. Nice work.
Good letter!
Finally... I and so many others have been asking where the hell has Biss been on all of this. He has been completely silent which has been quite disappointing. Glad he finally stepped up though knowing him I wouldn't be surprised if this originated from Mayor Van Dusen. Regardless better late than never. Let's see where else this letter is published to see if Biss stands behind it.
I’m happy the mayors weighed in. This board had been acting with absolute impunity for far too long. Enough has got to be enough. Fingers crossed.
‘ We were startled’
Really? Where have you been for the past four years? This is par for the course. Absolutely non-startling.
Can anyone remember if Biss endorsed any school board candidates in the past?
He came under fire when he endorsed Harris for alderman, but I don’t remember him endorsing for D65.
Was he head of the Evanston democrats when they endorsed Sergio and Watkins?
I wonder if he’ll be more visible in next year’s election
Very good questions. Where the hell has he been?
Off topic but thinking about Harris I wonder if biss and harris have had a falling out. So bizarre that Mendoza’s sister just announced she is running against harris. Biss and Mendoza are very very close. It looks like the Biss / Schill / Ryan consortium are running candidates in most wards now. It’s going to be a weird election.
Where has he been? Laying low and playing both sides for fools for when Jan eventually retires and he runs for the House.
Oh please no. No more Biss.
I think Darlene Cannon, card-carrying member of the Same Thirty People, is running in ward 2 again as well. Harris crushed Cannon the last time. To the extent there is any anti-Harris vote, I would think that Mendoza would just be a spoiler.
The Roundtable article said she has only lived in Evanston for 16 months, so I doubt she will have much of an impact. It really is weird that she is running for alderman. It is unclear what sort of qualifications she brings. All the Roundtable article said about her is that she was homeless for a while and that her sister is the clerk.
If she wanted to run for something and win she should run for D65. With four vacancies and only three candidates at the moment, she would have a pretty good shot!
He was not involved from what I remember. He also transferred his middle school child out of D65 to a private school a few years ago which speaks volumes especially on a mayor’s salary.
It's my understanding his child is incredibly gifted and that is why they go to private school. Donna's son is also gifted and goes to a private school. As we all know, D65 offers nothing for gifted children.
Yeah, I can't blame them there - the D65 gifted programs have all been gutted or eliminated in the name of equity. I can't tell you how many parents of gifted students I've spoken with that are just exasperated and either have to spend all their time fighting for their kid or just move.
Previous Boards, especially the Board under Ms. Tanyavutti made very clear that they viewed gifted programs as "opportunity hoarding" resources from black/brown kids.
https://evanstonroundtable.com/2021/03/18/district-65-implements-new-math-curriculum-eliminates-geometry-and-separate-accelerated-classes/
Classic D65 - instead of trying to identify and promote the black/brown kids that should be in the gifted programs, they just nuked it all.
D65 never had a real gifted program, the only thing that was even close were the few years where they actually cared about differentiation and created some “enrichment” programs. That is what was ended by the board. There are some very good schools in the area that are specifically for gifted children but they are expensive.
Good points. Given what I know about ETHS and its many AP it seems ridiculous that D65 has dropped the ball on offering these programs.
I always wondered if he would keep his child at Haven. Not surprised
Actually the person who was head of the Democratic Party of Evanston (DPOE) and who printed flyers against Angela Blaising, Ndona Muboyayi, Katie Vorhees and John Martin in the last two school board elections in favor of the incumbents was Christian Sorenson. Christian happens to be running for….District 65 School Board in the next election! Sure, things will change 🙄. School Board elections are non-partisan BTW so to have DPOE endorse candidates is pretty out of line.
Between the DPOE and DEC endorsements, it 100% tipped the election against Martin
Probably the main reason I voted for Martin.
Hey Angelique! I love a promotion, but no, I wasn't running the DPOE.
I did the interviews for some, including Angela and Donna, for our member-driven endorsement process where the only way to get a DPOE endorsement is to get 66% of voting members to endorse you. I pass our DPOE approved literature, but I have yet to be either President or Committeeman of the organization, so I have had limited input in what goes on the branded flyers and nothing to do with any outside orgs. One day, hopefully, but not yet!
I'm happy to take any criticism, 847-231-2319, I'll have a lot more time after November 5th. Tom also graciously offered an interview in January. You can bet that one of the inspirations to put my career on hold to help us dig out of this mess is Tom's careful and consistent reporting.
Anyway, I only had a moment to read the comments today between canvass launches to Wisconsin, so text to that number is the clearest way to get a hold of me and I'm happy to set up a time with you or anyone else in this community to talk about any and everything.
Spoken like a true politician. I look forward to meeting with you.
Christian, Are you willing to publicly commit to a superintendent search process that is open, transparent, and includes public meetings with 2-4 finalists before a candidate is given an offer?
This mechanism was used by the D65 board for decades before 2019 and remains a process used by districts throughout the country.
Yep!
That is good to hear. The superintendent hires that the current board has undertaken are at the root of the current financial crisis.
They justified the Horton hire secrecy by saying they could only get good candidates under a secretive process. Of course Horton had been flying all over the country participating (and not getting hired) in open searches, so the whole rationale was ridiculous.
As far as I remember, for the Horton successor hire they didn't even try and justify the closed process. They just went ahead with it as if it were the norm. It is not the norm in Evanston and we shouldn't allow one of the most crucial decisions that a board makes be done in the dark without any public input.
My mind was just blown when they did it again, despite the whole mess the first time.
Thanks for clarifying, Christian. I think people are wary of "let's take this offline", given the opacity of most of the current board/admin despite many claims of wanting to be transparent. Look forward to hearing more out in the open from you.
Do you agree or disagree with the DPOE weighing in on a non-partisan election with endorsements? Given what's happened under the watch of candidates they previously endorsed, would you/they consider reevaluating DPOE's level of intervention in municipal elections? A bit of a conflict of interest with the mayoral one, to boot...
No for sure. Not trying to go offline per se, just not able to lurk in here like I have been AND very busy, texting is just the best way to even point me towards a post or question.
I also am running for office, so that selects me into "huge ego" and this space has its own culture. I don't want to detract from that by making any comment sections about me that aren't me in the post.
I loved Angelique's comment about sounds like a politician, I am certainly trying to be one after staffing many for many years. Politicians are a good thing and have many tools and openings for discussion, and sometimes having them in what is essentially a democracy lab like a comment section can make everyone involved uneasy.
I am 110% in favor of the DPOE endorsing at every level of government. I am the member who tried to put a party resolution that we make our municipal process partisan and move away from nonpartisan. I have a lot of reasons and biases and again that feels like it shouldn't go back and forth here (bring it up again in January if Tom doesn't in his interview or come find me in between and we can go deep in a comment section) but I believe endorsements from the DPOE are also about who can win and who represents the values of the local party. Again, its not like other orgs where an endorsement committee or the board of directors endorses - the organization endorsement comes when more than 2/3 of dues-paid members votes. We have used the endorsement session as litmus tests as often as not, the 2018 race to succeed Laura Fine in the State House 17th comes to mind where Candance Chow, Mary Rita Luecke, Jennifer Gong Gershowitz, Alexandra Eidenberg and I think at least one more person was in that race at the time. As far as conflicts, I say this all the time - you have to be right AND you have to win. If you lose votes on a conflict of interest, real or perceived, it was up to you the candidate/campaign to win those folks or other folks back.
Even with all that yep I have more. Happy to talk offline or when I get my site up and start canvassing after Nov. 5th.
EVERYONE STOP TALKING TO HIM UNTIL KAMALA WINS WISCONSIN!!
lmao
Sounds good -- good luck in the lead up to 11/5.
That’s interesting. I don’t know much about canon. Thanks for the info. I find it so odd that Mendoza is running. I also am not a fan of harris based on how awful and dismissive she was to the concerns of people regarding the change of zoning to allow concerts at ryan field.
I don't want to get into a debate about Ryan Field, but I can't imagine that many people in Ward 2 would care if they had concerts at Ryan Field. I live in South Evanston and as far as I'm concerned Ryan Field is in Wisconsin. If they want to rebuild the stadium and have more concerts that will bring in more tax money, I say go for it. I see basically zero negative impacts to the city.
I can understand why immediate neighbors don't like it, but the stadium has been there for decades and it is a wealthy area so I am not going to lose any sleep over it. I doubt Krissie heard any serious opposition from anyone who actually lives in the Second Ward.
RE: Canon. She was chair of the Equity Commission and pushed for the silly Gaza Resolution. She would be an awful alderman--more concerned about showboating than anything else.
Yea I live in the third ward and I bet half the people here don’t even know there is a new stadium being built
I get that but that’s not what I was referring to. The thing that was so disappointing was that harris was so quick to tell white NIMBY’s in ward 7 that they need to pay there dues and just deal with the concerts all while missing the fact that that was the moment to get more from NU. Not to mention that in a city as small as Evanston it effects the whole town. Those 20,000 trucks are rolling though ward 5 every day. My kid has almost gotten killed by them multiple times on the way to ETHS. The fact that Harris, Reid, Biss, and Niusima only got 250k a year for D65 for what is it, 20 years? This was the moment to get NU to actually contribute to the city in a serious way and we got played for chumps. Was wild to watch the lawyers from NU wearing $65,000 watches negotiating with Reid who was pretending to be a lawyer flattering him here and there. Embarrassing
Couldn’t agree more.. we got absolutely hosed. NU should be paying for every Evanston kid’s college, like they do in Kalamazoo.
In terms of the election, I guarantee nobody in the Second Ward will care or even know about what she said about "NIMBY's" in the Ward 7. Like was said above, for most of us in the Second Ward consider Ryan Field to might as well be in Wisconsin.
As far as trucks go, sit at the corner of Church and Darrow in the second ward for a while and watch the parade of garbage trucks coming in to dump at the waste transfer station and then the big 18-wheelers hauling the trash out to the dump. That's been going on for decades, so I can see why Harris isn't sympathetic to a temporary project on Central Street.
I'm not defending Harris and the city deal--I find it patently ridiculous when Devon Reid plays Perry Mason. Just in terms of the election, nobody in the 2nd ward will hold any of that stuff against her.
Glad to see Biss finally found the courage to use his voice with the shitshow that is D65.
He was most likely embarrassed into “using his voice”. Besides, didn’t he announce his plan to run for re-election?
It's terrible Biss has been quiet until now especially since he has big plans for affordable housing. All of this mess is making Evanston less affordable. The hypocrisy is mind blowing from Sergio talking about affordable housing during his school board campaign to Biss championing the cause. We all know Biss is using his office as a political stepping stone.
He was at the Foster School Groundbreaking and gave a little speech about how this proves how important it is for the City and School District to work together. I was like ?????
But most of the housing they're building is studio and one bedroom apartments with a few two bedrooms sprinkled in the mix. Even if the units were affordable that's not going to attract many families to Evanston.
Yes! It’s very clear that the housing that is being built is for NU students, grad students or young professionals. Nothing affordable about it. It’s market priced compared to the 23k that NU students pay for 9 months in a dorm. NU students have to start looking for apartments like 5 months before the school year starts to get anything. I wish Biss would call these new developments what they are which is essentially more housing for NU students which would be fine but to wrap it up under the cloak of “affordable housing is more then dishonest.
OK there is a lot to unpack here and I could run a whole substack just about the affordable housing schemes. First thing is that "affordable housing" is a technical term (not just a colloquial one) that means "some % of units are priced below market and subsidized" - you may previously have known this as "section 8"
For instance, here's a news story about an affordable housing redevelopment being done by the Celadon guys, who are doing Harley Clarke.
https://blockclubchicago.org/2023/05/09/city-funding-could-help-bring-more-affordable-housing-to-lasalle-street/
In this case, the developer got a bunch of grants to redevelop the property into affordable housing including a big pile of TIF money. Then, they redevelop it as if it was any property and lease out the lower cost units to people below certain income levels (not students). The whole thing is extremely lucrative to developers if they can play the political game.
Suppose the City redeveloped City Hall into "affordable" housing - what you could probably expect is 50% market rate units leased out to students, etc and 50% subsidized units leased out to people below certain income thresholds. I'm not sure it would accomplish any of the goals of lowering housing prices but it certainly would help enrich another developer and give the politicians wins because of the "affordable housing" brand.
If this is student housing does that mean it’s more property off the tax rolls? I remember hearing that NU began buying land around the new school soon after the site was announced.
No - these new ones are private developers, but they’re getting an amazing deal on property taxes to build these with a certain percentage of “affordable” housing. Like 20 years seriously discounted property tax which by that time I am sure they will sell the buildings or sell them to NU and then voila, no property tax. I have heard a lot of rumors (from people in the industry) that “Evanston Labs”, the building that sits on the ghost of the old Burger King was basically built for and by NU and will be transferred to them soon enough and taken off the property tax role as well.
I am curious what you are referring to as the new school. Maybe I am misunderstanding the question.
The mayors are showing solid leadership with this letter and not pulling any punches with asking what everybody is thinking: if they are ready to forcebly transfer kids out mid-semester, who knows what the heck they will do next, etc….
Captain Obvious says when you CONDEMN a school, you clearly will need to offer either job guarantees or sizable bonus dollars to secure any rational teachers unless you are hiring off of the unemployment line of CPS ‘do not hires’ etc. Come on, do they really need someone to tell them this? Lack of staffing is on the Admin & Board, doesn’t just happen for no reason.
The Mayors don’t have any legal authority relative to D65. I don’t think it would be appropriate for them to weigh in publicly until/unless things get really desperate. 😬Was this an open letter? Even if not, they knew that it would get the light of day. I am glad that they are in the mix but I would not criticize them for keeping their powder dry. I hope that private pressure was and is being brought to bear.
Nice of the mayors to speak up, but I'm keeping my focus on the board, which has once again disappointed/angered D-65 residents with its actions.
The issue the district has with Bessie Rhodes and the seventh and eighth grade in particular is one of staffing. There are open classroom positions that are being filled with subs and admins. The quality of education these students receive is a step above baby sitting. Splitting students out to their local MS will allow the district to salvage their education for the remainder of the year. I can only imagine what will happen if the district is unable to secure an agreement with the teachers union as teachers have been without a contract since August.
The district would have known they were going to have staffing issues for these grades over the summer and could have made a decision before school even started. I don’t know how anyone could be surprised that it’s going to be hard to fill positions at a school that’s known to be closing. I’m sure it’s going to continue to be hard to fill any positions in this district given the well publicized financial problems. The district’s contention that they were “afraid” to go through with a planned Zoom mtg is too ridiculous for words.
I completely agree with you. A principal knows early in the spring/summer that they won't have enough students/teachers to move forward with classes for the fall. I'm guessing that they were "hoping" teachers would appear or more students would enroll to make it worth it, but that wasn't the case. The district rolled the dice on this one and it didn't pay off and in the end, the students come out the loser. Substitutes are not certified math, spanish, or history teachers. They are bodies in a classroom trying to fulfill the lesson plan left for him/her. To go an entire year with the possibly of a revolving door of different subs would have horrible educational outcomes for these students and they know this so they are putting these students back in their home schools which is also going to have dramatic impacts on these students social emotional outcomes. With better planning they could have avoided this by closing 7th/8th grades before the start of school giving parents/community members and the students themselves time to grieve, accept, and make new friends! Children are resilient and parents can support them through the change when it's done with forethought and proper communication and good thinking.
Exactly, they knew in May when they fired so many teachers. This was planned.
I will also point out that 3 years ago they involuntarily transferred 80 teachers and staff. District administrators knew what was going on with staffing at the end of the school year, they could have incentivized teachers to be temporarily transferred to BRSGS, while not a popular idea, it could have been done. There were multiple ways the district could have handled the teaching shortfall, they chose the easiest route for them regardless of the affect on the students, their families or the school community at BR. Another promise broken by the administration and another example of the lack of transparently by the school board. While the 5th Ward community “deserves” Foster School, the students “deserve” a full year at a magnet school they chose to go to.
Sounds like you have some insider knowledge which I won't dispute. If that's the case, it was still 1. Poor communication, and 2. Poor planning.
These bilingual positions were extremely difficult to fill to begin with. Having it pending closure, makes it virtually impossible. Did a teacher quit after the start of the school year? I have no idea.
If the principal and vice principal were having to step in to teach, that's not a sustainable model. My guess is the BRGS community would have understood things more if the Superintendent's note gave more specifics and if the Principal also was an author on the note as that makes it appear like it was a mutual decision on what's best for the students vs the district's cost cutting measure.
As far as I know, and someone please correct me if I’m mistaken, the BR 7th and 8th grades are not TWI strands so the teachers for those classes were/are monolingual educators. The current BR 6th grade class is the first dual language middle school class the district has offered.
Which makes this decision even more egregious.
I’m a parent at Bessie Rhodes and you’re correct. They’re closing 7th & 8th which are the only 2 non-TWI grades remaining at Bessie Rhodes.
This does not bode well for the highly touted ‘dual language’ middle school that they wanted to start with this year’s 6th grade at Bessie Rhodes and then eventually roll out to all middle schools.
You write a lot about how you don't see a path forward financially for Foster. Can you write more about the ongoing maintenance costs of the other schools? If some of the old run-down schools are closed (and therefore the maintenance costs lessen, and the properties can be sold or leased), and Foster ends up being less of a maintenance burden because it's a new facility, would that help the financial situation?
Yes, stay tuned - this is the big argument for getting Foster School over the finish line but it's going to require some creative thinking and bigger planning. Not sure the Board is doing that work but the community certainly is.
I actually DO see a path forward for the Foster School but we have to do it right and the current pathway we are taking is NOT the right way unless you want an uncompleted shell of a building.
The bill for repairs on existing buildings is approaching 200M; closing a couple of buildings would not put much of a dent in that number. Plus, much of the needed repairs are major due mostly to neglect; this is not painting and patching a few holes.
So...what do we do? Raise taxes to make that dent? Do we rebuild most of these buildings to buy another 20-30 years? We should have a plan, beyond just closing the immediate deficit.
FYI on taxes the most they can ask for without a referendum is 5% increase per year. So even that option probably wont work!
Right - that's what I was getting at. We'd need a more substantial raise via referendum to position us to address these buildings. We can't cut enough to free up the money to do it without that...more of a question of whether we attempt one this spring when it's a wildly unpopular board making the ask (even if it's a new board managing it on the other end) or if we wait 2 years. Or is there a way to get a referendum out for public vote outside these muni elections?
Not that I know of. I'm told (but have not confirmed) that the deadline to submit to the state is January, so they have to pick before then. Perhaps this is why everything gets presented to the Board then.
Maybe we can get Sergio to agree to resign contingent upon a referendum passing.
D65 is not selling widgets It’s not Walmart The old run down schools are neighborhood schools. They serve a community It’s not like a business being “cost effective “. They are building Foster School to give that community their own school. So BR s school community doesn’t get to keep theirs. And Orrington “ an old run down school” doesn’t get to keep their school community. ???
Not defending the logic, but I think the argument is the fifth ward is not "fine" and hasn't been, in part due to the lack of a neighborhood school AND related bussing (operative word "and"). Other areas, like Orrington, could be more "fine" even if their school closed. It's more complex than that, of course, and they've steered WAY clear of connecting the two of those together.
Reality is even if we right the enrollment ship a bit, we simply don't have legit evidence today that we need the amount of buildings and capacity we have currently. You could absolutely make an argument that we've established/retained too many buildings relative to the overall students we serve, and that's part of why running deficits has been fairly common here historically (though not to the degree we have in the past 3 years).
I'm nervous that this "well, not like *that*" type of response from stakeholders is going to characterize every response to cuts until ISBE gets called in.
Everyone (Board, Admin) keeps delaying conversations until all the optionality is gone and then ends up having only the worst choices available to them -- none of which they want to do but eventually someone is going to do those bad things.