Glenview referendun defeated

[OakParkSpartan]

IMO, debating topics on BTF has become a lost cause, but for whatever it's worth, I am in favor of the preschool idea.  Mr. Pauly has to play nice Mr. PC because he is the head of DACEE, but I don't.  With that said, most breeders around here leave a lot to be desired in the parenting dept. which is one of the main reasons we have the problems that we do.  If preschool was mandated then the kids would have a better chance of just getting up to par, not ahead, which is sad in itself.  And for what ever it's worth again, this is coming from the father of a Berwyn D100 preschool age son.  Many of the debaters in this topic don't even have any kids at all.

See my other post in the Education forum about who benefits from schools.  Parents aren't the only ones who are able to discuss this topic.

[berwynguy]

That's all you've got to say about my comments?  Okay. 

[OakParkSpartan]

I agree with pretty much everything you said.

[berwynguy]

Ok, cool. 

[Ted]

... Many of the debaters in this topic don't even have any kids at all.

I know many parents of children in D100 schools who were against this proposal, including people who are long time education advocates in Berwyn.

Also, the 4 board members who voted against the proposal all have or did have kids who went to D100 schools. 2 of the board members who voted against the proposal currently have kids in D100 schools and the other 2 board members had kids in the schools as recently as 3 to 7 years ago.

[watcher]

I find it interesting in a sad way that everyone seems set against preschool, rather than saying "this has been shown to be beneficial, let's figure out how to make it happen".

Says a lot.

A scheme is not a plan. Back door taxes are schemes that contribute to the distrust people have in elected bodies. I don't see "everyone is set against preschool", only the way in which this proposal was put forward that left voters without a say in the matter.

From the school side, it appears fear driven. If it's a good proposal, let the voters have their rightful say in how it will be funded. D100 didn't have enough confidence in its constituents or its own scheme to ask for their support? Yet the blame is weirdly put on the voters who weren't asked?

When a taxpayer asks what they are getting for their money, they deserve an explanation. When they do ask for more money, they should be prepared to respond to the inevitable questions about how their current money is being spent. When they find ways to spend more money without asking, they need a better response than "YOU would have said NO!". They should also be mindful and sensitive to the realities people are experiencing.

As long as local property taxes are the scheme used to fund local education, it falls to school district administrators to be accountable to their funding sources. When it seems that inordinate emphasis is placed on finding ways AROUND being answerable or to postpone an accounting, distrust seems sane and natural.

[OakParkSpartan]

I find it interesting in a sad way that everyone seems set against preschool, rather than saying "this has been shown to be beneficial, let's figure out how to make it happen".

Says a lot.

A scheme is not a plan. Back door taxes are schemes that contribute to the distrust people have in elected bodies. I don't see "everyone is set against preschool", only the way in which this proposal was put forward that left voters without a say in the matter.

From the school side, it appears fear driven. If it's a good proposal, let the voters have their rightful say in how it will be funded. D100 didn't have enough confidence in its constituents or its own scheme to ask for their support? Yet the blame is weirdly put on the voters who weren't asked?

When a taxpayer asks what they are getting for their money, they deserve an explanation. When they do ask for more money, they should be prepared to respond to the inevitable questions about how their current money is being spent. When they find ways to spend more money without asking, they need a better response than "YOU would have said NO!". They should also be mindful and sensitive to the realities people are experiencing.

As long as local property taxes are the scheme used to fund local education, it falls to school district administrators to be accountable to their funding sources. When it seems that inordinate emphasis is placed on finding ways AROUND being answerable or to postpone an accounting, distrust seems sane and natural.

Whether they are against the idea of preschool, or against the funding...my point still stands...no one has said "this is a good thing, let's figure out how we can do it".

[Ted]

A scheme is not a plan. Back door taxes are schemes that contribute to the distrust people have in elected bodies. I don't see "everyone is set against preschool", only the way in which this proposal was put forward that left voters without a say in the matter.

From the school side, it appears fear driven. If it's a good proposal, let the voters have their rightful say in how it will be funded. D100 didn't have enough confidence in its constituents or its own scheme to ask for their support? Yet the blame is weirdly put on the voters who weren't asked?

When a taxpayer asks what they are getting for their money, they deserve an explanation. When they do ask for more money, they should be prepared to respond to the inevitable questions about how their current money is being spent. When they find ways to spend more money without asking, they need a better response than "YOU would have said NO!". They should also be mindful and sensitive to the realities people are experiencing.

As long as local property taxes are the scheme used to fund local education, it falls to school district administrators to be accountable to their funding sources. When it seems that inordinate emphasis is placed on finding ways AROUND being answerable or to postpone an accounting, distrust seems sane and natural.

  Let me add to that.   It was stated that a bad proposal for pre-school was better than doing nothing.

  But- what if that bad proposal for pre-school bankrupts the district in 3 or 4 years?  Is bankrupting the district in 3 to 5 years really better than doing nothing?  Especially for an initiative that is outside the mission of the district?

Let me repeat something - The proposal last summer would have funded teacher's salaries for only one year. After the first year, funding for teacher's salaries would have had to come from some other source - either a tax increase via referendum or by draining the district's reserves and bankrupting the district.

  If the solution for funding teacher salaries after year 1 was a referendum to increase the tax rates, then why wait until after Year 1?  Why not put a referendum on the ballot in year 0 and get the money then?  Why increase the debt by 70% and THEN ask for a tax rate increase??

  If the solution for funding teacher salaries after year 1 was to drain the reserves in the fund balances and bankrupt the district in 3 to 4 years, then someone has to ask the question whether that is a sane idea?

  Is bankrupting the district in 3 to 5 years better than doing nothing?  I think not.  I would rather do nothing than bankrupt the district.

  The proposal on the table was a bad proposal - that's why 4 board members voted against it.

[Ted]

Whether they are against the idea of preschool, or against the funding...my point still stands...no one has said "this is a good thing, let's figure out how we can do it".

Simple - put a referendum on the ballot (either by the board or by petition) that increases the tax rate to bring in more property taxes to fund public pre-school for all 3 and 4 year olds.

That's the way to do it.

[watcher]

Whether they are against the idea of preschool, or against the funding...my point still stands...no one has said "this is a good thing, let's figure out how we can do it".

There is a clear process to achieve that goal. It was bypassed. With each backdoor event, finagle and cleverness, the taxpayers have been prevented their past-due accountings. Resentments are difficult to overcome and districts that have used and/or abused their "other avenues" have, IMO, not done enough educating on their operations to deserve the benefit of the doubt.

We can argue on and on whether voters/taxpayers have been as supportive as they could/should be, but since Plan A seems to have become to find ways around having to face the voters/taxpayers, the argument is pointless.

There's far more complexity to it, but the problems of education today are more directly attributable to "cleverness" in the board rooms than any other single influence. What are we doing? How are we doing it? How are we paying for it?

Simple enough questions that either aren't being asked, or aren't being answered. So that when a referendum finally does come up, all those unasked/unanswered questions don't go unnoticed.

[OakParkSpartan]

Whether they are against the idea of preschool, or against the funding...my point still stands...no one has said "this is a good thing, let's figure out how we can do it".

Simple - put a referendum on the ballot (either by the board or by petition) that increases the tax rate to bring in more property taxes to fund public pre-school for all 3 and 4 year olds.

That's the way to do it.

So have you heard if anyone in D100 (the geographic area, not the school administration) is working to achieve that goal?

[buzz]

  And for what ever it's worth again, this is coming from the father of a Berwyn D100 preschool age son.

Do you intend to school your son here ?

  Many of the debaters in this topic don't even have any kids at all.

True, but in the 20+ yrs. I've lived here I've voted for school referenda, even for D201.  You're not required to have children to have an opinion.
Under your belief system,  no kids = no voice  ?

[watcher]

Whether they are against the idea of preschool, or against the funding...my point still stands...no one has said "this is a good thing, let's figure out how we can do it".

Simple - put a referendum on the ballot (either by the board or by petition) that increases the tax rate to bring in more property taxes to fund public pre-school for all 3 and 4 year olds.

That's the way to do it.

So have you heard if anyone in D100 (the geographic area, not the school administration) is working to achieve that goal?

Think about your question. The Supt. of the district wants the preschool.  The school board can simply call for the question to be put to a referendum.
Instead you want a citizen group to form and circulate petitions to call the question?

[berwynguy]

  And for what ever it's worth again, this is coming from the father of a Berwyn D100 preschool age son.

Do you intend to school your son here ?

  Many of the debaters in this topic don't even have any kids at all.

True, but in the 20+ yrs. I've lived here I've voted for school referenda, even for D201.  You're not required to have children to have an opinion.
Under your belief system,  no kids = no voice  ?

Don't worry about it, it's none of your concern. 

[OakParkSpartan]

Whether they are against the idea of preschool, or against the funding...my point still stands...no one has said "this is a good thing, let's figure out how we can do it".

Simple - put a referendum on the ballot (either by the board or by petition) that increases the tax rate to bring in more property taxes to fund public pre-school for all 3 and 4 year olds.

That's the way to do it.

So have you heard if anyone in D100 (the geographic area, not the school administration) is working to achieve that goal?

Think about your question. The Supt. of the district wants the preschool.  The school board can simply call for the question to be put to a referendum.
Instead you want a citizen group to form and circulate petitions to call the question?

Rather than sitting around doing nothing?  Yeah, that would seem to be preferable.

Why is it so radical to think that if people think pre-school would be a very good thing, they would work to make it happen?

[watcher]

Rather than sitting around doing nothing?  Yeah, that would seem to be preferable.

Why is it so radical to think that if people think pre-school would be a very good thing, they would work to make it happen?

The people didn't come up with this scheme plan. The district 100 administration did.
They claimed to have done the research and this was a good idea.
When the school board with a single sheet of paper and a voice vote can put the question on the ballot, organizing a petition drive for the District's plan is a waste of time and effort better used to work on the campaign to PASS the referendum.

[Ted]

Rather than sitting around doing nothing?  Yeah, that would seem to be preferable.

Why is it so radical to think that if people think pre-school would be a very good thing, they would work to make it happen?

Brian, what do you propose as an alternative way of funding public pre-school for all 3 year olds and 4 year olds in Berwyn?

  If not a referendum to increase tax rates and pay for a large capital expenditure, then what other approach is there?

  I agree with Watcher on this - If the board and superintendent want it, then fund it without jeopardizing the district's debt or financial stability.

[OakParkSpartan]

Rather than sitting around doing nothing?  Yeah, that would seem to be preferable.

Why is it so radical to think that if people think pre-school would be a very good thing, they would work to make it happen?

Brian, what do you propose as an alternative way of funding public pre-school for all 3 year olds and 4 year olds in Berwyn?

  If not a referendum to increase tax rates and pay for a large capital expenditure, then what other approach is there?

  I agree with Watcher on this - If the board and superintendent want it, then fund it without jeopardizing the district's debt or financial stability.

No idea...but no one else has even seemed to raise that possibility.

And if you think pre-school is a good idea, why is it necessary to wait for the school board to take care of your needs?

Does the community want pre-school?  Does the community understand it might be good for them?