Comments on: Local: Apparently, we CAN toss out these bums

By: Conrad Stinnett

Conrad Stinnett — Thu, 29 May 2008 22:35:16 +0000

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.

By: dd

dd — Thu, 29 May 2008 21:44:27 +0000

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.

By: Eyebrows McGee

Eyebrows McGee — Thu, 29 May 2008 19:29:03 +0000

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.

By: Merle Widmer

Merle Widmer — Thu, 29 May 2008 16:18:59 +0000

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.

By: C. J. Summers

C. J. Summers — Thu, 29 May 2008 15:19:52 +0000

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.

By: Eyebrows McGee

Eyebrows McGee — Thu, 29 May 2008 15:09:29 +0000

“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.

By: S. Sam

S. Sam — Thu, 29 May 2008 13:40:10 +0000

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.