To confirm your footnote #6, as an Evanston taxpayer I would absolutely vote against a referendum to increase the budget until this board changes. At the risk of sounding terribly dramatic - if this board that allowed this crisis to happen had any love or respect left for our local schools they would resign. You are absolutely correct - there is a crisis of legitimacy and until they step down it will not improve. I don't see how anyone has any optimism left that these are the people to right the ship.
It's an interesting political science question that doesn't happen in the US very often: what happens when a public body makes so many bad decisions that the people it represents no longer have confidence in the entity? At some point (in a post a long time ago) I did the census math on the number of K-8 students in Evanston and it is around 8500-9000. If D65 is around 6000 kids, that means something like 60-70% of the kids who live here utilize the public schools. That's ~2x2500=5000 parents that are likely voters in a referendum that gets like 14% turnout.
Remember a few months back when the financial consultant warned them about the huge building maintenance bill? Sergio flippantly responded that they could just ask for a referendum as if it was a slam dunk.
The fact they are using referendum proceeds to fund a portion of the construction for a new school where they clearly skirted a referendum, used a questionable loophole to raise private funds and then knowingly violated the Resolutions of the 2017 referendum.....WHY ISNT ANYONE SUING THEM? Come one Evanston. This is a train wreck for our community and it's coming in quick.
My understanding is that it is technically legal to use to funds like this to fund "non-construction" costs for the new school. It's a bullshit loophole but other places, like Skokie, have done this. Presumably only works because nobody has sued to find out but I'm not sure, I can't find a municipal lawyer willing to talk to me :)
I think you are talking about the Lease Certs not the Referendum $$ they are using. That was clearly documented in 2017 and I think a lawyer could argue they are CLEARLY in violation by using this to build a school. Both sources of proceeds (lease certs + 2017 referendum) seem like a clear way to avoid a new referendum.
Oh yeah, I see what you're saying. Yeah - I don't totally know how to legally read the resolution's implications on the current situation. I do think you're probably right though, which is why I asked if the Board is going to pass a new resolution to nullify this old one and just be like "reserves are a free for all now"
Angela, if there were a group of people who were gathering resources and had a legal advisor, I would join ranks. I just don’t know exactly what to sue them for. Besides being aholes. Apparently, that’s not illegal.
Moving to a bus stipend is probably the best short term fix. Friends of mine in other districts do it and it seems to work pretty well for families that have flexible working hours and saves the district a lot of money.
The Roundtable article says they can’t find any evidence supporting the District’s claims. I know there is no recall ability but when does the community start to demand resignations? This is even bigger than last year’s “oops”
The budget for 2023-24 shows that hey basically took the 2022-23 numbers and projected it forward. According to the bills, the bussing costs were pretty constant (and high) between 2022-24:
Tom, your argument for Consolidation with ETHS is really starting to resonate with me. There's no question that there's a "Crisis of Legitimacy" with this board and administration:
-Parents voting with their feet, with falling enrollment.
-Failure of prior referendum.
-General poor image of school and state of education in the district. I even heard it from a colleague in Texas who had no clue as to my thoughts on it.
-D65 consistently misses their financial projections. Every major debt covenant of the lease certificate agreement (transportation savings, projected costs, execution dates, scope of project k-8, now k-5 and smaller school) has been missed.
I can't think of anyone who thinks the local educational system is outstanding and a source of pride for the community. This is a horrible blight on our community. Given the above, it's highly likely a referendum will fail unless there's some form of oversight and administrative change to guarantee the money will be well-spent. I think we all believe in the value of investing in good schools and want the best for our community's children. There's just zero faith in the current governance structure's ability to deliver this at any cost.
One statistic that stood out to me was ETHS's $30M in long-term debt vs D65's $99M. I would argue that $99M figure is understated given the additional $180M in deferred maintenance, which has the financial effect of acting like very expensive debt. Financially their shortfalls amount to $280M fully accounted for. Ignore a leaky roof or failing sump pump for a while and see how much money that saves over the long-run.
Given this morass, however, I can see ETHS fighting any consolidation tooth and nail. Who would want to inherit this mess? As much as the idea is growing on me, is there a viable way of effecting a consolidation?
Sadly Tom, you absolutely will be writing this article next year, except I fear their financially irresponsible move forward with the 5th Ward school is only going to accelerate their circling of the drain. We will soon be approaching the "suddenly" portion of D65's pending bankruptcy.
If done right (ie we get lucky) a consolidation can allow us to hit reset on all the governance structures - require better accounting, add recall elections, etc. People talk about it like "ETHS wont like this" or whatever, but I do not care about that - these entities belong to "we the people" and these boards are our representatives. In a democracy, the buck stops with you and me and the people.
Absolutely NO to a referendum, hands down. New Board at a minimum, and then let’s demonstrate some belt tightening first. Somebody once said “There’s no such thing as free lunch”, but they obviously didn’t work at d65. WAKE UP EVANSTON. What a $hit$how.
We've already seen Stephen Hackney start a fund to run for 1st Ward Alderman and former D65 Board member (and Horton enabler) Candace Chow re-activate her committee to join the 6th Ward race.
Let's hope we get some decent folks to run in the D65 election.
IMO, having worked with Candance personally, I could not think of a better person to run. I thought she lived in the 7th ward, however. I wish she would run for d65 board again! There were a lot of people who wanted to give Horton a chance, I don’t for a second think she is happy with the current Board or the way things have turned out. There is money for any suitable candidate to run for d65 Board. And lots of support from previous candidates and their supporters. If you even are thinking about it, just know that. I would personally help you get your petitions signed and ready to file!
Below is a link to Chow defending the secretive process that brought us Horton where she says "I believe the way the District 65 Board handed its hiring of a superintendent has great merit."
Seriously, Horton was SO unqualified and brought SO much baggage and it was SO clear that an open process would have brought instant opposition, I can't imagine how she can defend that process and her endorsement of him.
Also, it is kind of rich that she quit mid-term from her School Board seat and is running again for public office. I don't live in her ward, but if I did, her commitment to serving her term might be a question I would ask.
But anyone who saw Horton's resume and said, "yes, this guy deserves a chance," doesn't have the best judgment in my estimation.
She left before Covid and had already served 7 years. I think her record speaks for itself. And I happen to know personally what an upstanding woman she is. But that’s not my ward, so it’s not relevant to me. I want to say that when Horton started, I was all for giving him a chance. I think most people were. The process to select is not ok with me now, but at the time there was not a great outcry against this. I think the board was looking for a Black candidate and it is possible they didn’t have a large pool of candidates to choose from- I don’t know. Clearly they made a grievous error. We all can admit that now. Well, all except the current Board members. If you live in the 7th ward and don’t want to vote for her, that’s your choice. She will win, however. She did great things while PTA president at Kingsley and her consultancy geared toward hiring women is doing good things. I wish her the best.
Don’t be so sure Candance will win. She’s in the 6th ward, not 7th. Tom Suffredin stood up against NU in the stadium debacle and has a lot of good will around here too.
Please correct me if I’m wrong, but Chow endorsed the secretive search. process that gave us Horton and voted for him.
She was also silent when Board president Suni Kartha, on behalf of the board, sent an email statement claiming that they couldn’t release Horton’s name prior to the hire because he requested anonymity. We know this is likely a lie since Horton was flying around the country participating in open searches.
Chow’s complicity in that whole process soured her reputation with me.
ISBE keeps track of district finances and can put districts on a "watch" list or declare "financial difficulty" which I believe requires them to develop a special financial plan.
It is interesting to see how D65 scored on the ISBE metric over the years. The categories, from best to worst: Recognition, Review, Financial Early Warning, Financial Watch. They were under an "Early Warning" and "Review" designations before the 2017 and have been at 'Recognition' since the referendum passed.
Another article in the Roundtable talks about the declining math scores and the flattened reading scores. So we are going to loose even more students but we are building a new school Meanwhile our old school buildings are in desperate need of repair. But at least we are feeding our administrators well with take out food! And while the student’s test scores are flatlined or dropping you have to give the communications director an A + for her rose colored explanation
Tom, I hope you post on the latest budget message from Turner.
This bit struck me: “ This is not the outcome that any of us desire, but it is factual, and it's more important than ever that we have a clearly articulated financial outlook. Unfortunately, we do not believe our staff, board, or community had been provided with a complete picture up to this point.”
She has been in charge of the district for over a year! Who is responsible for this “unfortunate” lack of information?
It sounds like she is passing the buck to some unspecified “other.” But isn’t Turner the one responsible for this stuff? Doctor! You’re in charge!
Again: secretive superintendent hire, inexperienced candidate given the gig, governance failure, board incompetence 2.0
I couldn’t find her email on the website, but if you go to the budget section they have a letter from the financial consultant mentioned in her email. Here’s the text:
Dear District 65 Community -
I am writing today to share an update as I believe in being transparent and modeling our ‘Big Five’ values of Courtesy, Professionalism, Dignity, Respect, and Humanization. As the new Superintendent, I must always remember to lean into these and most especially during challenging times.
Earlier today, we posted details of our FY25 Tentative Budget for the public which shows another significant deficit for next school year. I understand that this budget is deeply concerning when compared to previous years. However, this is transparent and honest as it relates to the district’s financial outlook, especially factoring in the actual financial performance in FY23 and FY24. Without the recommended budgetary cuts presented to the Board last spring, this budget would be notably worse.
This is not the outcome that any of us desire, but it is factual, and it's more important than ever that we have a clearly articulated financial outlook. Unfortunately, we do not believe our staff, board, or community had been provided with a complete picture up to this point. Details are outlined in the assessment provided by Dr. Grossi, our independent financial advisor.
As we continue to fine tune the budget and await important information from the Illinois State Board of Education, we are hopeful to reduce the budgeted deficit in the coming weeks. Yet, the District has financial challenges that will require difficult solutions. A plan to close the budget gap and stabilize the District’s financial condition will be shared with the community over time and beginning at the upcoming September board meetings.
While I could not be more excited about the start of school next week and welcoming our students and staff back, it would be remiss of me to not acknowledge the challenges we face, especially when I know they will be at the forefront in these coming days. We have a passionate, experienced team who I know will take great care in working collaboratively to solve our financial challenges and restore stability. We do not believe in sacrificing quality as we continue to center the needs of our students and schools and remain fully committed to eliminating our structural deficit.
Reading this again, Turner’s lack of ability to take any responsibility is just so pathetic.
Her portrayal of herself as a ‘new superintendent’ is just so lame. She’s been in charge for more than a year. All of the issues with the school financing, the ridiculous accounting of the ‘transportation savings’ for the school were well known by reporting here and elsewhere at the time of her hire.
Oh I see it now. Weird - did EN publish a copy of the budget? I don't see it on their story. As far as I know, there is no public budget for next year that has been published..
The problem with transportation costs is that the biggest chunk is for kids who the district is legally mandated to provide transport for. I don’t know if the vendor they use is the most cost effective or provides the most reliable service, which someone at the district should be looking at. I’m not surprised that special education costs are high but as someone whose kid has an IEP, I wouldn’t say that D65 is known for their great special Ed services. My family has had a decent experience but I seem to talk to a lot of parents who’ve had to sue or at least hire a lawyer to get what their kid needs. So again I wonder is that money being spent in the most effective way. Based on the fact that I’m pretty sure my dog could do a better job managing this district’s finances than the humans are doing right now, my guess is no. (Also my dog would be much cuter while doing it…)
To confirm your footnote #6, as an Evanston taxpayer I would absolutely vote against a referendum to increase the budget until this board changes. At the risk of sounding terribly dramatic - if this board that allowed this crisis to happen had any love or respect left for our local schools they would resign. You are absolutely correct - there is a crisis of legitimacy and until they step down it will not improve. I don't see how anyone has any optimism left that these are the people to right the ship.
It's an interesting political science question that doesn't happen in the US very often: what happens when a public body makes so many bad decisions that the people it represents no longer have confidence in the entity? At some point (in a post a long time ago) I did the census math on the number of K-8 students in Evanston and it is around 8500-9000. If D65 is around 6000 kids, that means something like 60-70% of the kids who live here utilize the public schools. That's ~2x2500=5000 parents that are likely voters in a referendum that gets like 14% turnout.
Remember a few months back when the financial consultant warned them about the huge building maintenance bill? Sergio flippantly responded that they could just ask for a referendum as if it was a slam dunk.
And Sergio ran his campaign on affordable housing!!!
The fact they are using referendum proceeds to fund a portion of the construction for a new school where they clearly skirted a referendum, used a questionable loophole to raise private funds and then knowingly violated the Resolutions of the 2017 referendum.....WHY ISNT ANYONE SUING THEM? Come one Evanston. This is a train wreck for our community and it's coming in quick.
My understanding is that it is technically legal to use to funds like this to fund "non-construction" costs for the new school. It's a bullshit loophole but other places, like Skokie, have done this. Presumably only works because nobody has sued to find out but I'm not sure, I can't find a municipal lawyer willing to talk to me :)
I think you are talking about the Lease Certs not the Referendum $$ they are using. That was clearly documented in 2017 and I think a lawyer could argue they are CLEARLY in violation by using this to build a school. Both sources of proceeds (lease certs + 2017 referendum) seem like a clear way to avoid a new referendum.
Oh yeah, I see what you're saying. Yeah - I don't totally know how to legally read the resolution's implications on the current situation. I do think you're probably right though, which is why I asked if the Board is going to pass a new resolution to nullify this old one and just be like "reserves are a free for all now"
Angela, if there were a group of people who were gathering resources and had a legal advisor, I would join ranks. I just don’t know exactly what to sue them for. Besides being aholes. Apparently, that’s not illegal.
Moving to a bus stipend is probably the best short term fix. Friends of mine in other districts do it and it seems to work pretty well for families that have flexible working hours and saves the district a lot of money.
That's good to know, actually. Maybe something that D65 should consider.
The Roundtable article says they can’t find any evidence supporting the District’s claims. I know there is no recall ability but when does the community start to demand resignations? This is even bigger than last year’s “oops”
The budget for 2023-24 shows that hey basically took the 2022-23 numbers and projected it forward. According to the bills, the bussing costs were pretty constant (and high) between 2022-24:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/16VKzpURQNBfFT6au3Nw3w_xC5OcBFg-n/view
So it's not super clear how a $10m surprise happens?
“How did you go bankrupt?"
"Gradually, then suddenly.”
Tom, your argument for Consolidation with ETHS is really starting to resonate with me. There's no question that there's a "Crisis of Legitimacy" with this board and administration:
-Parents voting with their feet, with falling enrollment.
-Failure of prior referendum.
-General poor image of school and state of education in the district. I even heard it from a colleague in Texas who had no clue as to my thoughts on it.
-D65 consistently misses their financial projections. Every major debt covenant of the lease certificate agreement (transportation savings, projected costs, execution dates, scope of project k-8, now k-5 and smaller school) has been missed.
I can't think of anyone who thinks the local educational system is outstanding and a source of pride for the community. This is a horrible blight on our community. Given the above, it's highly likely a referendum will fail unless there's some form of oversight and administrative change to guarantee the money will be well-spent. I think we all believe in the value of investing in good schools and want the best for our community's children. There's just zero faith in the current governance structure's ability to deliver this at any cost.
One statistic that stood out to me was ETHS's $30M in long-term debt vs D65's $99M. I would argue that $99M figure is understated given the additional $180M in deferred maintenance, which has the financial effect of acting like very expensive debt. Financially their shortfalls amount to $280M fully accounted for. Ignore a leaky roof or failing sump pump for a while and see how much money that saves over the long-run.
Given this morass, however, I can see ETHS fighting any consolidation tooth and nail. Who would want to inherit this mess? As much as the idea is growing on me, is there a viable way of effecting a consolidation?
Sadly Tom, you absolutely will be writing this article next year, except I fear their financially irresponsible move forward with the 5th Ward school is only going to accelerate their circling of the drain. We will soon be approaching the "suddenly" portion of D65's pending bankruptcy.
If done right (ie we get lucky) a consolidation can allow us to hit reset on all the governance structures - require better accounting, add recall elections, etc. People talk about it like "ETHS wont like this" or whatever, but I do not care about that - these entities belong to "we the people" and these boards are our representatives. In a democracy, the buck stops with you and me and the people.
Sounds like we’ll have to figure out a way to, “get lucky”, as you say and get ETHS on board.
Absolutely NO to a referendum, hands down. New Board at a minimum, and then let’s demonstrate some belt tightening first. Somebody once said “There’s no such thing as free lunch”, but they obviously didn’t work at d65. WAKE UP EVANSTON. What a $hit$how.
Yeah I'm not saying people should vote for it but it is downright criminal if the Board doesn't go to the voters and ask this cycle given the numbers.
We've already seen Stephen Hackney start a fund to run for 1st Ward Alderman and former D65 Board member (and Horton enabler) Candace Chow re-activate her committee to join the 6th Ward race.
Let's hope we get some decent folks to run in the D65 election.
IMO, having worked with Candance personally, I could not think of a better person to run. I thought she lived in the 7th ward, however. I wish she would run for d65 board again! There were a lot of people who wanted to give Horton a chance, I don’t for a second think she is happy with the current Board or the way things have turned out. There is money for any suitable candidate to run for d65 Board. And lots of support from previous candidates and their supporters. If you even are thinking about it, just know that. I would personally help you get your petitions signed and ready to file!
Below is a link to Chow defending the secretive process that brought us Horton where she says "I believe the way the District 65 Board handed its hiring of a superintendent has great merit."
Seriously, Horton was SO unqualified and brought SO much baggage and it was SO clear that an open process would have brought instant opposition, I can't imagine how she can defend that process and her endorsement of him.
https://evanstonroundtable.com/2020/11/06/reader-calls-for-consideration-of-the-negative-impacts-of-making-personnel-preferences-in-public-meeting/
Also, it is kind of rich that she quit mid-term from her School Board seat and is running again for public office. I don't live in her ward, but if I did, her commitment to serving her term might be a question I would ask.
But anyone who saw Horton's resume and said, "yes, this guy deserves a chance," doesn't have the best judgment in my estimation.
She left before Covid and had already served 7 years. I think her record speaks for itself. And I happen to know personally what an upstanding woman she is. But that’s not my ward, so it’s not relevant to me. I want to say that when Horton started, I was all for giving him a chance. I think most people were. The process to select is not ok with me now, but at the time there was not a great outcry against this. I think the board was looking for a Black candidate and it is possible they didn’t have a large pool of candidates to choose from- I don’t know. Clearly they made a grievous error. We all can admit that now. Well, all except the current Board members. If you live in the 7th ward and don’t want to vote for her, that’s your choice. She will win, however. She did great things while PTA president at Kingsley and her consultancy geared toward hiring women is doing good things. I wish her the best.
Don’t be so sure Candance will win. She’s in the 6th ward, not 7th. Tom Suffredin stood up against NU in the stadium debacle and has a lot of good will around here too.
Aha! I assumed 7th because of her Kingsley connection and that Eleanor is retiring. Being in the 6th ward puts a new spin on it.
Please correct me if I’m wrong, but Chow endorsed the secretive search. process that gave us Horton and voted for him.
She was also silent when Board president Suni Kartha, on behalf of the board, sent an email statement claiming that they couldn’t release Horton’s name prior to the hire because he requested anonymity. We know this is likely a lie since Horton was flying around the country participating in open searches.
Chow’s complicity in that whole process soured her reputation with me.
ISBE keeps track of district finances and can put districts on a "watch" list or declare "financial difficulty" which I believe requires them to develop a special financial plan.
It is interesting to see how D65 scored on the ISBE metric over the years. The categories, from best to worst: Recognition, Review, Financial Early Warning, Financial Watch. They were under an "Early Warning" and "Review" designations before the 2017 and have been at 'Recognition' since the referendum passed.
https://www.isbe.net/Documents/Profile-Adjusted-by-District.pdf#page=296
Another article in the Roundtable talks about the declining math scores and the flattened reading scores. So we are going to loose even more students but we are building a new school Meanwhile our old school buildings are in desperate need of repair. But at least we are feeding our administrators well with take out food! And while the student’s test scores are flatlined or dropping you have to give the communications director an A + for her rose colored explanation
The food situation is absolutely wild. City of Evanston with a budget of $500m spends almost nothing on food.
It is also crazy how many non- Evanston/Skokie businesses they are buying food from: dengeo's, Pita Inn, Wholly Frijoles, Panera.
Tom, I hope you post on the latest budget message from Turner.
This bit struck me: “ This is not the outcome that any of us desire, but it is factual, and it's more important than ever that we have a clearly articulated financial outlook. Unfortunately, we do not believe our staff, board, or community had been provided with a complete picture up to this point.”
She has been in charge of the district for over a year! Who is responsible for this “unfortunate” lack of information?
It sounds like she is passing the buck to some unspecified “other.” But isn’t Turner the one responsible for this stuff? Doctor! You’re in charge!
Again: secretive superintendent hire, inexperienced candidate given the gig, governance failure, board incompetence 2.0
I haven’t seen this!! Can you send a link!!
I couldn’t find her email on the website, but if you go to the budget section they have a letter from the financial consultant mentioned in her email. Here’s the text:
Dear District 65 Community -
I am writing today to share an update as I believe in being transparent and modeling our ‘Big Five’ values of Courtesy, Professionalism, Dignity, Respect, and Humanization. As the new Superintendent, I must always remember to lean into these and most especially during challenging times.
Earlier today, we posted details of our FY25 Tentative Budget for the public which shows another significant deficit for next school year. I understand that this budget is deeply concerning when compared to previous years. However, this is transparent and honest as it relates to the district’s financial outlook, especially factoring in the actual financial performance in FY23 and FY24. Without the recommended budgetary cuts presented to the Board last spring, this budget would be notably worse.
This is not the outcome that any of us desire, but it is factual, and it's more important than ever that we have a clearly articulated financial outlook. Unfortunately, we do not believe our staff, board, or community had been provided with a complete picture up to this point. Details are outlined in the assessment provided by Dr. Grossi, our independent financial advisor.
As we continue to fine tune the budget and await important information from the Illinois State Board of Education, we are hopeful to reduce the budgeted deficit in the coming weeks. Yet, the District has financial challenges that will require difficult solutions. A plan to close the budget gap and stabilize the District’s financial condition will be shared with the community over time and beginning at the upcoming September board meetings.
While I could not be more excited about the start of school next week and welcoming our students and staff back, it would be remiss of me to not acknowledge the challenges we face, especially when I know they will be at the forefront in these coming days. We have a passionate, experienced team who I know will take great care in working collaboratively to solve our financial challenges and restore stability. We do not believe in sacrificing quality as we continue to center the needs of our students and schools and remain fully committed to eliminating our structural deficit.
Thank you for your continued support.
Reading this again, Turner’s lack of ability to take any responsibility is just so pathetic.
Her portrayal of herself as a ‘new superintendent’ is just so lame. She’s been in charge for more than a year. All of the issues with the school financing, the ridiculous accounting of the ‘transportation savings’ for the school were well known by reporting here and elsewhere at the time of her hire.
This message was obviously put out to get ahead of what Evanston Now just published.
Oh I see it now. Weird - did EN publish a copy of the budget? I don't see it on their story. As far as I know, there is no public budget for next year that has been published..
Oh they put it on their finance site. https://www.district65.net/about/budget-finance
omg im reading this now, sounds like grossi is a foia gras reader
The problem with transportation costs is that the biggest chunk is for kids who the district is legally mandated to provide transport for. I don’t know if the vendor they use is the most cost effective or provides the most reliable service, which someone at the district should be looking at. I’m not surprised that special education costs are high but as someone whose kid has an IEP, I wouldn’t say that D65 is known for their great special Ed services. My family has had a decent experience but I seem to talk to a lot of parents who’ve had to sue or at least hire a lawyer to get what their kid needs. So again I wonder is that money being spent in the most effective way. Based on the fact that I’m pretty sure my dog could do a better job managing this district’s finances than the humans are doing right now, my guess is no. (Also my dog would be much cuter while doing it…)