Local: Apparently, we CAN toss out these bums
Elaine Hopkins has the skinny on some recent developments and and plans by the District 150 Watch organization to protest outside district headquarters and then comment at the next school board meeting. The article provides a wealth of information, especially this bit:
Among their discoveries: District 150 may be unique in Illinois because it was chartered early in the 19th century by the state legislature and operates under different laws. It’s the only district, apparently, whose board members have 5-year terms. The complex language in that law appears to indicate that a referendum could restructure the district, its board and its boundaries.
Whoa!
That’s one way to get rid of a rubber-stamp board, some have said.
Amen. The small size of the board, combined with long, staggered terms, tends to weaken the power of the electorate to make changes in direction by replacing the policy makers. What we have now is a small insular board that takes too much direction from a cliquish staff of highly paid bureaucrats.
No one wants to run for an office as a dissenter if they know they will be the only one dissenting if they win. Shorter terms and elections in which at least half the board will face re-election will increase voters ability to make change at the ballot box.
If there is a referendum, it’s possible the entire board will have to face re-election. The resulting school board will no doubt have to be more sensitive to the needs of voters and taxpayers. They couldn’t possibly be any less sensitive.
In fact, making permanent change in how the school board is structured and elected is more important, in the long run, that winning the fight to return 45 minutes of instructional time.
If the administration wises up and has rubber-stamp school board lengthen the school day, Peoria parents and children may win a battle but lose the war. I don’t think these people are capable of running the school district in any way other than at their personal convenience. We need to toss these bums to the curb.
I’m worried that if they give in now, we’ll have missed a chance to do so, and they will do something equally destructive six months from now.
May 29th, 2008 at 8:40 am
What would it take for the mayor to effectively take control of the public schools, as has occurred in several big cities? A referendum? Is it even possible with this kind of board structure?
In Washington DC the Mayor has taken control of the schools and has abolished seniority, tenure for administrators, and made a whole raft of changes that were thought to be impossible to get through the union just a short time ago. Maybe it’s time we had a mayoral campaign where a candidate promises to take the schools on.
May 29th, 2008 at 10:09 am
“No one wants to run for an office as a dissenter if they know they will be the only one dissenting if they win.”
I think it’s also hard to get people to run because five years is a LONG TIME. This is a community with high mobility because of Cat’s global reach, and a lot of parents hesitate to commit to things for five years because, hey, they might have more kids coming, or their kids are changing schools every 4-5 years, or whatever. A two-year term would be much more reasonable and I think you’d see a lot more community interest in running.
May 29th, 2008 at 10:19 am
I disagree, Billy. I think I can speak for the District 150 Watch group on this that the most important thing is getting the 45-minute cut rescinded. That’s the issue that directly affects our children and their education. And that’s the only focus of the group.
We are circulating petitions to show that we have broad support from the community for restoring those 45 minutes. And we have an alternative plan for providing cost savings and common prep time for teachers that has been submitted to board members and the administration.
May 29th, 2008 at 11:18 am
School Board terms should be three years. As an elected official I know that you need three years to understand the politics, the people and the sytem.
As I’ve said many times, the school board should consist of three highly paid people appointed by vote of a coalition of Neighborhood Presidents, PTO Presidents, the Head of Heartland Partnership which includes EDC and The C .of C.,
The President of Bradley and ICC, etc.
The Superintendent should have a Doctorate in Business Administration and Finance. In three more years School District #150 will have a budget of $200,000,000.00
Headed by an educator, i think not.
Community leaders have to change a failing system. Start someplace because most anything is better than the system we now have in place.
May 29th, 2008 at 2:29 pm
Merle, I understand where you’re coming from but, first, heading up an educational enterprise with someone with only business experience creates fully as many problems as it solves. An educational institution is NOT a business, and running it as one tends to drive out strong educators and, in a worst-case scenario (which I have observed occur), ends up talking a lot about profit centers and cost-control while educational outcomes fall precipitously because children are relegated to a second-class citizenship. Obviously an educator with no business or money sense running such a large organization is ALSO not ideal, but we really should be seeking a happy medium, someone who is talented in BOTH areas.
Secondly, I think school board is FAR too important to be an APPOINTED position. This is probably the place where government MOST affects the lives of its citizens, and you’d have to have an EXTREMELY strong argument for taking the election of its directors out of the hands of the voters.
May 29th, 2008 at 4:44 pm
I really have to confess that I’m not convinced by either side of the 45 minute debate. I’ve seen opinions, both informed and uniformed, that would seem to support either position. What I am more interested in is the big picture issue – how much input should parents and taxpayers have in the operation of a school district. That is why I am kind of disappointed in CJ’s post that says the only issue is the 45 minute issue. Regardless of what your individual opinion is on the 45 minute issue, it highlights the more important question – who decides what is best for the children and the community. The comments from the board member who refused to meet with Ms. Vespa, taken in the best light, simply reflect a rather common position of members of many boards – my job is not to be a sounding board for the voters, constituents, shareholders, etc. my job is to set policy, hire professionals and let those professionals run the day to day operations. (You could argue either way whether the length of class day is a policy question or an operations question. If it is an operational question shouldn’t the board defer to the professionals? Remember when this same board took heat for changing a single grade of a single student?) No, the real question here is – what is the proper role of parents and taxpayers in the operation of our schools. Merle points out one solution – appoint experts to run the place. Take it entirely out of the hands of the voters. Some public school systems do operate under that model. Others suggest a much shorter and less staggered election terms. Should we seriously change the current system of operating District 150? Should we make the board more responsible for operations? Should we change the system to allow for more public input? Should we abandon electing a school board altogether? These are the questions that will remain long after the 45 minute debate has ended.
May 29th, 2008 at 5:35 pm
We need a School Board who can listen to the public and provide the administration with a vision of what the pubic wants in their school system. We don’t have that. We need it. Maybe shorter terms are an answer. I think change is coming, though, and I hope for the better.