Saturday, March 18, 2006
Guess Where the District 300 Tax Hike Group Got Another $30,000
As I add up the money available to “convince” District 300 voters that they should raise both their tax rate and borrow tens of millions of dollars, it now totals $198,000. That’s adding up everything available last year and what has been raised this year.
And it works out to about $5 per household.
You get only two guesses as to where it came from.
I’ll give you a hint.
One check was for $20,000 and the other was for $10,000.
Come on. Don’t give us so easily.
I can’t remember any individuals supporting the tax hike have kicked in more than $1,000, so you can eliminate them.
So, the choice is:
Here are the perhaps last to the tax hikers’ party:
$20,000 from KB HOME Illinois Inc.
$10,000 from Aurora Venture/Crown Community Development
KB is an international homebuilder, operating in 13 states, plus France. It features Martha Stewart on its web site. No subdivisions are listed on its web site from District 300.
Crown Community Development is part of the real estate empire started by Material Service founder Henry Crown. The two of its companies most in the news over the years have been Material Service and General Dynamics.
So, District 300 tax hikers have met their budget.
Now the only problem is convincing people they should dip into their pockets so outside developers can take home more profits.
And it works out to about $5 per household.
You get only two guesses as to where it came from.
I’ll give you a hint.
One check was for $20,000 and the other was for $10,000.
Come on. Don’t give us so easily.
I can’t remember any individuals supporting the tax hike have kicked in more than $1,000, so you can eliminate them.
So, the choice is:
Vendors/potential vendors orDevelopers is the correct answer. And you would know that if you had been reading McHenry County Blog.
Developers
Here are the perhaps last to the tax hikers’ party:
$20,000 from KB HOME Illinois Inc.
$10,000 from Aurora Venture/Crown Community Development
KB is an international homebuilder, operating in 13 states, plus France. It features Martha Stewart on its web site. No subdivisions are listed on its web site from District 300.
Crown Community Development is part of the real estate empire started by Material Service founder Henry Crown. The two of its companies most in the news over the years have been Material Service and General Dynamics.
So, District 300 tax hikers have met their budget.
Now the only problem is convincing people they should dip into their pockets so outside developers can take home more profits.
Comments:
<< Home
The picture and the caption for this article is true. In the Republican primary election for the Kane County Board District #23, challenger John Mayer (pronounced "My-ur") is attempting to piggy back off of the Community Unit School District 300 (D300) referenda in his attempt to unseat incumbent John Noverini. Kane County Board District #23 includes Algonquin (within Kane County), parts of Carpentersville, West Dundee and Sleepy Hollow.
In late February, Mayer's campaign sent a targeted mailing to D300 referenda proponents touting Mayer’s support for the D300 referenda questions on the March 21 ballot, while impugning Noverini’s stand on public education:
“I realize that the Kane County Board does not have significant influence into the crisis that is ‘education funding’, in the State of Illinois. However, I believe that it is important that our representative on the County Board, have an understanding of the situation and use their position on the Board to influence change, with our State Representatives. This is where my opponent and I differ.
“I have included a letter showing my opponent’s perspective on education. As a member of the Board of Advisor’s for Renew Illinois, my opponent is associated with an organization (The Family Taxpayers Network) that is the single biggest opposition to the D-300 referendum. This is an example of leadership that hurts our families”
Mayer is clearly attempting to use his support for the D300 referenda as a stepping-stone for his personal ambition of seeking public office on the Kane County Board. Mayer's commingling his D300 referenda support within his county board campaign reveals Mayer to be a political opportunist, which should anger both D300 referenda proponents and opponents alike.
On Friday, March 17th, a Noverini campaign mailing included a letter to Kane County Board District #23 residents from Dundee Township Supervisor Sue Harney (R, Sleepy Hollow), who is also in charge of Fundraising for the Advance 300 Committee. In her letter, Harney strongly endorses Noverini's re-election.
Harney described Mayer's piggybacking his campaign with the D300 referenda with the following:
"Noverini's opponent has a minimal financial background. Mayer talks about supporting schools and keeping taxes down but when he votes [on the West Dundee village board], he votes for more homes and higher taxes. He knows the school funding crises is outside the County's purview; his attempt to link the emotion of the school referendum to his county board race is a smoke screen and political opportunism."
In addition to Harney, Noverini's endorsements for his re-election bid includes Kane County Regional Schools Superintendent Dr. Clem Mejia, State Senator Chris Lauzen (R, Aurora), State Representative Tim Schmitz (R, Batavia), and Dr. Donna Schuring Redmer (R, Dundee), a longtime D300 administrator.
Noverini has also been endorsed by all 3 newspapers making endorsements in this race (Kane County Chronicle, Daily Herald, Northwest Herald). The Daily Herald was pretty blunt in assessing Mayer's campaign and education:
"But his [Mayer's] village board is at least partly responsible for causing some of the transportation problems he lays at Noverini’s feet, he doesn’t think as regionally as Noverini does and continues to talk about school reform issues that are outside county responsibility."
I'm proud John Noverini represents me on the Kane County Board, and despite John Mayer's attempt to commingle his county board campaign with his support of the D300 referenda, I'm very confident that D300 referenda proponents and opponents alike, will both vote to re-elect Noverini to the Kane County Board on Tuesday.
Respectfully submitted,
Marc V. Avelar
Algonquin
In late February, Mayer's campaign sent a targeted mailing to D300 referenda proponents touting Mayer’s support for the D300 referenda questions on the March 21 ballot, while impugning Noverini’s stand on public education:
“I realize that the Kane County Board does not have significant influence into the crisis that is ‘education funding’, in the State of Illinois. However, I believe that it is important that our representative on the County Board, have an understanding of the situation and use their position on the Board to influence change, with our State Representatives. This is where my opponent and I differ.
“I have included a letter showing my opponent’s perspective on education. As a member of the Board of Advisor’s for Renew Illinois, my opponent is associated with an organization (The Family Taxpayers Network) that is the single biggest opposition to the D-300 referendum. This is an example of leadership that hurts our families”
Mayer is clearly attempting to use his support for the D300 referenda as a stepping-stone for his personal ambition of seeking public office on the Kane County Board. Mayer's commingling his D300 referenda support within his county board campaign reveals Mayer to be a political opportunist, which should anger both D300 referenda proponents and opponents alike.
On Friday, March 17th, a Noverini campaign mailing included a letter to Kane County Board District #23 residents from Dundee Township Supervisor Sue Harney (R, Sleepy Hollow), who is also in charge of Fundraising for the Advance 300 Committee. In her letter, Harney strongly endorses Noverini's re-election.
Harney described Mayer's piggybacking his campaign with the D300 referenda with the following:
"Noverini's opponent has a minimal financial background. Mayer talks about supporting schools and keeping taxes down but when he votes [on the West Dundee village board], he votes for more homes and higher taxes. He knows the school funding crises is outside the County's purview; his attempt to link the emotion of the school referendum to his county board race is a smoke screen and political opportunism."
In addition to Harney, Noverini's endorsements for his re-election bid includes Kane County Regional Schools Superintendent Dr. Clem Mejia, State Senator Chris Lauzen (R, Aurora), State Representative Tim Schmitz (R, Batavia), and Dr. Donna Schuring Redmer (R, Dundee), a longtime D300 administrator.
Noverini has also been endorsed by all 3 newspapers making endorsements in this race (Kane County Chronicle, Daily Herald, Northwest Herald). The Daily Herald was pretty blunt in assessing Mayer's campaign and education:
"But his [Mayer's] village board is at least partly responsible for causing some of the transportation problems he lays at Noverini’s feet, he doesn’t think as regionally as Noverini does and continues to talk about school reform issues that are outside county responsibility."
I'm proud John Noverini represents me on the Kane County Board, and despite John Mayer's attempt to commingle his county board campaign with his support of the D300 referenda, I'm very confident that D300 referenda proponents and opponents alike, will both vote to re-elect Noverini to the Kane County Board on Tuesday.
Respectfully submitted,
Marc V. Avelar
Algonquin
Marc,
First of all, I know John Mayer to be a good person of strong ethics and moral character. It doesn't surprise me at all that he supports the referenda as a father, a public servant and as a community resident who cares about the education of kids and not just his wallet.
I'm just sorry I can't vote for him because of district definitions. I missed the chance by a block.
Dave Bishop
West Dundee
First of all, I know John Mayer to be a good person of strong ethics and moral character. It doesn't surprise me at all that he supports the referenda as a father, a public servant and as a community resident who cares about the education of kids and not just his wallet.
I'm just sorry I can't vote for him because of district definitions. I missed the chance by a block.
Dave Bishop
West Dundee
If I lived in John Mayer's district he would not get my vote. Go Noverini!. When I vote I check out the IFT and IEA endorsements and I am sure not to vote for those people. Then I check out the contributions that senators and representatives received from the teachers' unions and their PAC's those people then do not get my vote.
Cal you nailed it right on the head with this line "Now the only problem is convincing people they should dip into their pockets so outside developers can take home more profits."
Keep up the great work.
Cal you nailed it right on the head with this line "Now the only problem is convincing people they should dip into their pockets so outside developers can take home more profits."
Keep up the great work.
Cal,
Quick question. So who is it that funds the Family Tax Network and Craft?
Face it. Jack Roeser has an opinion becuase he can fund it - plain and simple. Without his money, there would be no FTN.
By the way, I finally figured out how the word "family" ties in with the "Family Tax Network". I saw Jack Roeser's son's name on the recent Advance300 flyer supporting the referendum (who is actually a resident by the way). So that's where the family comes in. Hmmmm.
Vote Yes-Yes on March 21st. It really is about money for education.
Dave Bishop
West Dundee
Quick question. So who is it that funds the Family Tax Network and Craft?
Face it. Jack Roeser has an opinion becuase he can fund it - plain and simple. Without his money, there would be no FTN.
By the way, I finally figured out how the word "family" ties in with the "Family Tax Network". I saw Jack Roeser's son's name on the recent Advance300 flyer supporting the referendum (who is actually a resident by the way). So that's where the family comes in. Hmmmm.
Vote Yes-Yes on March 21st. It really is about money for education.
Dave Bishop
West Dundee
No, Mr. Bishop, once again.....
It's NOT about money for education. It's about a self-promoting broken system that isn't turning out kids who can compete with others in countries far less fortunate than ours.
It's about people and a school industry who want to ignore truth and think a money bandage will fix the festering sore underneath.
It hasn't worked for decades. It has only hurt children and taxpayers. Your protection of that philosophy also hurts children and taxpayers.
Frankly, I'm tired of being bullied by a powerful union and its money.
Maybe you haven't noticed that people everywhere - EVERYWHERE - are mounting more and more resistance. People who have never even heard of Mr. Roeser are using THEIR grass roots efforts to stop the financial blood letting the school industry has forced on taxpayers and their children.
It's amazing that the school industry is brilliant at financially protecting its personal interests and turns stupid when it comes to keeping the system financially viable. (Basic equipment contracts are often even pathetic.)
Duuuuhhhh (as kids say) - teachers' contracts without a single itsy bitsy loophole to protect the taxpayers but financing methods first year bean counters would choke on? Oh, please. Selective use of financial data is further compromised by selective smarts.
And you want people to pour more money into this pit without requiring better management and results?
We live in reality. You live in your own special world.
Like Roeser or not, it's your right. When you're done picking on him, please spend that free time yanking the paid administrative contracts and board memberships from people who insist on cutting extracurriculars even when money is found to cover them.
When you accomplish that, insist on a salary and benefit rollback for the excesses*** that were granted in previous teachers' contracts.
First year bean counters can see all these things. Why can't you?
(***above and beyond what taxpayers can afford and above and beyond basic cost of living and not in keeping with what happened to the rest of America after 9/11 blew through the economy)
It's NOT about money for education. It's about a self-promoting broken system that isn't turning out kids who can compete with others in countries far less fortunate than ours.
It's about people and a school industry who want to ignore truth and think a money bandage will fix the festering sore underneath.
It hasn't worked for decades. It has only hurt children and taxpayers. Your protection of that philosophy also hurts children and taxpayers.
Frankly, I'm tired of being bullied by a powerful union and its money.
Maybe you haven't noticed that people everywhere - EVERYWHERE - are mounting more and more resistance. People who have never even heard of Mr. Roeser are using THEIR grass roots efforts to stop the financial blood letting the school industry has forced on taxpayers and their children.
It's amazing that the school industry is brilliant at financially protecting its personal interests and turns stupid when it comes to keeping the system financially viable. (Basic equipment contracts are often even pathetic.)
Duuuuhhhh (as kids say) - teachers' contracts without a single itsy bitsy loophole to protect the taxpayers but financing methods first year bean counters would choke on? Oh, please. Selective use of financial data is further compromised by selective smarts.
And you want people to pour more money into this pit without requiring better management and results?
We live in reality. You live in your own special world.
Like Roeser or not, it's your right. When you're done picking on him, please spend that free time yanking the paid administrative contracts and board memberships from people who insist on cutting extracurriculars even when money is found to cover them.
When you accomplish that, insist on a salary and benefit rollback for the excesses*** that were granted in previous teachers' contracts.
First year bean counters can see all these things. Why can't you?
(***above and beyond what taxpayers can afford and above and beyond basic cost of living and not in keeping with what happened to the rest of America after 9/11 blew through the economy)
It is widely known that Jack Roeser funds the Family Taxpayers Network.
I am not aware of whether the Peschke's receive any outside funding or not. They read this, so perhaps they will post a reply.
I am not aware of whether the Peschke's receive any outside funding or not. They read this, so perhaps they will post a reply.
Re: For sale sign
People I know who yelled for and voted for the D-158 fiasco referendum (based on ***gosh*** bogus info from the District/the board/political action committee leaders - one of whom is now getting paid by D-300 to sell THEIR tax increase) - well, they're telling me about a LOT of friends with kids who have moved or will move. They can't afford the taxes. They're running. They're scared. They're buried in debt. They can't afford weekly ice cream trips let alone heat, mortgages, and property taxes. They wanted Wilmette and Beverly Hills on reheated coffee budgets. They wanted everyone else to pay for it even if it meant ignoring financial incompetence.
Now, they're trying to find a place to hide and to survive....until the school industry tax increase monster catches up with them again.
They had rallies, put down seniors on fixed incomes, demanded this and that - and now, they're leaving people behind who are stuck with the increase in taxes THEY voted for.
People are selling because they see a downward shift in the housing market (which has its own effect on projections) and because they figure they won't be able to sell their homes if the property taxes are obscene.
Maybe we should come up with a new law - if you vote for a tax increase (your absolute right)- it follows you for eternity?
"Kaching, kaching, kaching" - hear that money rolling in........or, is that the "slap" sound of wallets closing everywhere?
People I know who yelled for and voted for the D-158 fiasco referendum (based on ***gosh*** bogus info from the District/the board/political action committee leaders - one of whom is now getting paid by D-300 to sell THEIR tax increase) - well, they're telling me about a LOT of friends with kids who have moved or will move. They can't afford the taxes. They're running. They're scared. They're buried in debt. They can't afford weekly ice cream trips let alone heat, mortgages, and property taxes. They wanted Wilmette and Beverly Hills on reheated coffee budgets. They wanted everyone else to pay for it even if it meant ignoring financial incompetence.
Now, they're trying to find a place to hide and to survive....until the school industry tax increase monster catches up with them again.
They had rallies, put down seniors on fixed incomes, demanded this and that - and now, they're leaving people behind who are stuck with the increase in taxes THEY voted for.
People are selling because they see a downward shift in the housing market (which has its own effect on projections) and because they figure they won't be able to sell their homes if the property taxes are obscene.
Maybe we should come up with a new law - if you vote for a tax increase (your absolute right)- it follows you for eternity?
"Kaching, kaching, kaching" - hear that money rolling in........or, is that the "slap" sound of wallets closing everywhere?
Cal,
Unlike Cheryl Meyer an outsider who was part of the D-158 disaster we do not get paid for our work. She was paid well over 6000 dollars by the Advanced 300 group.
We refuse to accept payment for our work, we do all of our work for free. We do not expect taxpayers who cannot afford a tax increase to pay for our work. We do this because it is a good and noble cause.
Developers steal from poor taxpayers to line their pockets by refusing to fund the new costs of schools either themselves or by passing the cost on to the new homeowner. It is developers and purchasers of new homes not current homeowners who should be funding new schools. Why does this happen? Because village boards work with developers. It is the pay to play politics that harms the taxpayer.
I guess greedy people just can not understand someone working for free or paying their own way.
Unlike Cheryl Meyer an outsider who was part of the D-158 disaster we do not get paid for our work. She was paid well over 6000 dollars by the Advanced 300 group.
We refuse to accept payment for our work, we do all of our work for free. We do not expect taxpayers who cannot afford a tax increase to pay for our work. We do this because it is a good and noble cause.
Developers steal from poor taxpayers to line their pockets by refusing to fund the new costs of schools either themselves or by passing the cost on to the new homeowner. It is developers and purchasers of new homes not current homeowners who should be funding new schools. Why does this happen? Because village boards work with developers. It is the pay to play politics that harms the taxpayer.
I guess greedy people just can not understand someone working for free or paying their own way.
The best part of the picture was the For Sale sign. Putting a "please raise my taxes sign" next to it is a really brilliant way to appeal to potential buyers. Lack of financial common sense seems to be a prerequsite for anyone who would support this referendum.
Mr. Bishop, your should change your blogger ID to "pincushion" for ridiculous needling of Jack Roeser. The outsider tactic is old and tired. Every property owner, not just homeowners, in D300 pays taxes and has just as much right to voice their opinion.
So what if he and his son have different views? Don't you and your son ever disagree or do you have him so brainwashed that never happens? It was interesting to see you didn't have any comments regarding the recent post about another student's tales of what is actually happening at Jacob's regarding the pro-referendum propaganda your son is allow to spew. Sorry, making announcements to the entire school is not interested students using their flex time
Mr. Bishop, your should change your blogger ID to "pincushion" for ridiculous needling of Jack Roeser. The outsider tactic is old and tired. Every property owner, not just homeowners, in D300 pays taxes and has just as much right to voice their opinion.
So what if he and his son have different views? Don't you and your son ever disagree or do you have him so brainwashed that never happens? It was interesting to see you didn't have any comments regarding the recent post about another student's tales of what is actually happening at Jacob's regarding the pro-referendum propaganda your son is allow to spew. Sorry, making announcements to the entire school is not interested students using their flex time
Dave - I am a D300 resident, and I thank my stars ther are individuals willing to put up thier own money to oppose this.
The real issue here is bad management. As soon as the school board gets the backbone to hire a superitendent tthat has a clue on how to manage a $130 million business..
Have you ask your self why all the local paper, who get serious revenue $$ from builders have come out against this referendum? they must feel very strong how wrong it is.
I am voting for the bonds and against the ed fund increase. The building are needed, even if the board and the administration don't know how to get them built for a decent price.
As for the Ed fund..why would I pay for a 55 cent tax fund were more than 50% will go elsewhere?
John Mayer may be a "good person of strong ethics and moral character", and in fact when he came to my door, he gave me that same impression. He would have gotten my vote, but when he said he supported the bond issue and why.. he lost my vote.
The real issue here is bad management. As soon as the school board gets the backbone to hire a superitendent tthat has a clue on how to manage a $130 million business..
Have you ask your self why all the local paper, who get serious revenue $$ from builders have come out against this referendum? they must feel very strong how wrong it is.
I am voting for the bonds and against the ed fund increase. The building are needed, even if the board and the administration don't know how to get them built for a decent price.
As for the Ed fund..why would I pay for a 55 cent tax fund were more than 50% will go elsewhere?
John Mayer may be a "good person of strong ethics and moral character", and in fact when he came to my door, he gave me that same impression. He would have gotten my vote, but when he said he supported the bond issue and why.. he lost my vote.
Monelson,
By supporting the bond referendum you condone the behavior of the current village boards and the developers. They will keep having the taxpayers pay for new schools instead of holding the developers and new home owners accountable for new schools. Village board members across the state often receive campaign funds and perks from developers. The pay to play politics exists with school builders as well.
Before voting yes you should go to D - 300 and find out how many classes a day teachers teach. I wonder how many class rooms are sitting empty throughout the day? Teachers especially those nearing retirment do not teach a full day of class.
By supporting the bond referendum you condone the behavior of the current village boards and the developers. They will keep having the taxpayers pay for new schools instead of holding the developers and new home owners accountable for new schools. Village board members across the state often receive campaign funds and perks from developers. The pay to play politics exists with school builders as well.
Before voting yes you should go to D - 300 and find out how many classes a day teachers teach. I wonder how many class rooms are sitting empty throughout the day? Teachers especially those nearing retirment do not teach a full day of class.
monelson:
Glad to see that you are at least voting for the bond referendum. That will at least give the district what it needs to build new schools. The only bad thing is it won't provide the funding to staff those schools. That support comes from the education referendum.
If you have made up your mind to vote against the education referendum, I can understand why you wouldn't support candidates who also support it. I don't agree with your decision, but I see your logic.
As for the anti-referendum groups, let me explain my discontent.
If they presented true and honest facts, it's possible that they could do our community some good, but they don't. They give presentations full of inflamatory remarks and pure opinion which they present as fact. I've given many examples on this blog that you can look back on.
In my personal opinion, debate is healthy. Presenting false information and taking a hypocritcal position is simply wrong.
Dave Bishop
West Dundee
dkjbishop@sbcglobal.net
Glad to see that you are at least voting for the bond referendum. That will at least give the district what it needs to build new schools. The only bad thing is it won't provide the funding to staff those schools. That support comes from the education referendum.
If you have made up your mind to vote against the education referendum, I can understand why you wouldn't support candidates who also support it. I don't agree with your decision, but I see your logic.
As for the anti-referendum groups, let me explain my discontent.
If they presented true and honest facts, it's possible that they could do our community some good, but they don't. They give presentations full of inflamatory remarks and pure opinion which they present as fact. I've given many examples on this blog that you can look back on.
In my personal opinion, debate is healthy. Presenting false information and taking a hypocritcal position is simply wrong.
Dave Bishop
West Dundee
dkjbishop@sbcglobal.net
Jim and Cathy
You seem so dedicated to stop this that you fail to apply logic.. look at were the growth is and were the new schools are going. Even if there are empty classrooms in D300, there in the wrong place. The growth is west of Randal Road... and most in Hampshire. If D300 got anything right, it's that mobiles are a waste of tax payer money..expensive to put in, don't last and expensive to maintain as they rapidly deteriorate. We must build classrooms..
As for the developers, it's not thier fault. If the laws were changed to force them to pay impact fees, then all of them would raise the price of thier homes by the impact fees. It's the right fix, but what should we do with the new kids in Hampshire while we wait for Springfield to fix it (and by the way, it won't get us a dime more, because these houses are being built now!).
The district needs better management, but the
capital part of the bond issue is unaviodable. They may be spending too much on the schools, and they may have spent $12 million on DeLacey that could have cut my cost, but the buildings are unavoidable...
You seem so dedicated to stop this that you fail to apply logic.. look at were the growth is and were the new schools are going. Even if there are empty classrooms in D300, there in the wrong place. The growth is west of Randal Road... and most in Hampshire. If D300 got anything right, it's that mobiles are a waste of tax payer money..expensive to put in, don't last and expensive to maintain as they rapidly deteriorate. We must build classrooms..
As for the developers, it's not thier fault. If the laws were changed to force them to pay impact fees, then all of them would raise the price of thier homes by the impact fees. It's the right fix, but what should we do with the new kids in Hampshire while we wait for Springfield to fix it (and by the way, it won't get us a dime more, because these houses are being built now!).
The district needs better management, but the
capital part of the bond issue is unaviodable. They may be spending too much on the schools, and they may have spent $12 million on DeLacey that could have cut my cost, but the buildings are unavoidable...
bugbuster:
Look at who's playing the victim...your comment about me needling Jack Roeser. How entertaining you are. What's the matter, can't you tell me to sit down and shut up like at the anti-referendum meetings?
I won't be changing my username to "pincushion" like you recommended. When I state my position, I like people to know that it's from me because I'm not a coward and I stand up for what I believe in and sign it with my own signature. Besides, if I had multiple usernames, then I would have the problem you must have of worrying about which id to use when you post a comment - John.
As for me and my son not agreeing on everything - we disagree all the time. This past Wednesday we had a disagreement. He thought it was best to call Channel 7 News to cover the Jacob's bridge rally. I thought WGN would be best. He called them both. Channel 7 News was the one who gave the referenda some great TV coverage. (I have the DVD if you want it - great viewing.) He was right and it was a time when I absolutely loved being wrong. We are very proud of him you know and my daughter who was on the front page of the Herald this morning.
Oh, and as for why I never commented on the letter from the student complaining about announcements at school - it's simple. I actually pittied him for allowing you guys to use him the way you did. Very sad to me actually.
Anything else?
Please vote Yes-Yes on March 21st.
Dave Bishop
West Dundee
dkjbishop@sbcglobal.net
Look at who's playing the victim...your comment about me needling Jack Roeser. How entertaining you are. What's the matter, can't you tell me to sit down and shut up like at the anti-referendum meetings?
I won't be changing my username to "pincushion" like you recommended. When I state my position, I like people to know that it's from me because I'm not a coward and I stand up for what I believe in and sign it with my own signature. Besides, if I had multiple usernames, then I would have the problem you must have of worrying about which id to use when you post a comment - John.
As for me and my son not agreeing on everything - we disagree all the time. This past Wednesday we had a disagreement. He thought it was best to call Channel 7 News to cover the Jacob's bridge rally. I thought WGN would be best. He called them both. Channel 7 News was the one who gave the referenda some great TV coverage. (I have the DVD if you want it - great viewing.) He was right and it was a time when I absolutely loved being wrong. We are very proud of him you know and my daughter who was on the front page of the Herald this morning.
Oh, and as for why I never commented on the letter from the student complaining about announcements at school - it's simple. I actually pittied him for allowing you guys to use him the way you did. Very sad to me actually.
Anything else?
Please vote Yes-Yes on March 21st.
Dave Bishop
West Dundee
dkjbishop@sbcglobal.net
Dave -
If the "anti-referendum groups....
give presentations full of inflamatory remarks and pure opinion which they present as fact." Then why would the Courrier and the NWHerald agree with them? Both have decided the Ed Fund increase is not warranted.
Ok, so I have listened for months, my wife went to Connect300 meetings, we attended the informational meetings, read the all the newspaper articles, scoured the Advance300 and The Champion web sites, and what have I learned? That D300 Referendum and Bond issues are not simple. Both friend and foe of the referendum are “spinning” as fast as they can to put forward their arguments. So what is clear?
What is clear is that the mechanism used to allocate back to school districts what we pay in state taxes is broken. It redistributes what we pay to other areas, rather than letting us use it for our children. Yet, while it may have contributed to the current crisis, it didn’t cause D300’s problem. According to the D300, this mechanism is only supposed to provide 10% of our budget needs. Still, it’s badly broken and needs to be fixed.
It is clear that home building in our area is proceeding at a rapid pace, providing D300 with unprecedented numbers of new students. This tide cannot be stemmed, and I am not sure we want it to be.
Also clear is that property taxes lag behind the enrollment of new students from new housing developments by 12-18 months. This is not new, but is a sad fact of state law. Compounding this is that municipalities set builder impact fees. And the towns and villages are competing for the developers attention, so they do not set up correct impact fees to build the schools they should. This is a sad reality and should be fixed.
It is also clear that the property tax cap, which was intended to protect taxpayers from excessive taxing & spending, needs to have a greater ability to increase. The current increase caps are too low and this too needs to be fixed.
What is also clear is that the biggest cost in the D300 budget is salaries, and amongst those are the salaries of our educators. There has been a great deal of information (and misinformation) distributed by proponents and opponents of the referendum regarding this. What is clear is that the teachers union contract called for 4.1 percent pay raise in year one (2003) and a 3.9 percent raise in years two and three (2004 & 2005). Take a look at these years and you will find they are when the deficits ballooned and the “crisis” occurred in. The administration agreed contractually to increase spending when they were already spending more than they would take in? Could any of us run a business or our homes this way? Not for long at least. This sad reality cannot be blamed on Springfield and it cannot be explained away. It rests squarely on the administration and those who negotiated the contract.
The problem here is bad management, poor planning and lack of fiscal responsibility. Despite its protests, D300 administration does not manage its resources well. Some examples:
Ø In the last bond issue to build schools, the district included funding for carpet for some spaces at Jacobs in the bond issue. We are still paying interest (and will for 30 years) on carpet that will last how long?
Ø The new DeLacey center was funded from the sale of other assets. The original approval of $12.8 million was in March of 2004, when the administration should have known it was going to need new schools. Why spend the money on a program, laudable though it is, that is not D300 core mission (educate k-12 grades)? Why spend it when we will need that money just two years later to build the new schools we so desperately need?
Ø There are probably more examples of lack of sound fiscal judgment, but I am not close enough to the see them.
The most telling example of this administrations fiscal judgment came in the superintendent’s letter of recommendation in December of 2005. In it, he suggests that if the capital bond issue passes and the buildings are built, but the education fund increase does not pass, we should leave the new buildings vacant. Why would we build the buildings if we cannot occupy them? Does it make any sense to build empty buildings so that we can pay interest on the $185 million they cost? Even if the interest rate was only 5%, that would be more than $9 million per year in interest just so we can look at empty buildings! That’s not sound management!
So how do we balance the obvious need for new schools and teachers with fiscal responsibility? Do we just pass these bond issues and pray that the school board will correct the spending habits of the D300 administration? Do we have any assurances that the board will either force the administration to correct it fiscal ways, or that they will find an administration that knows how to spend wisely? The answer to all of these is no, because according to D300 the problem is funding, not fiscal responsibility or spending.
Is it a funding problem? Where was the intelligent forward looking administration that should have planned for this problem? None of the root causes I mentioned earlier (growth, no impact fees, property taxes lagging behind new enrollment, the tax cap, and a bad state funding system) are new. The tax cap law is more than 9 years old. The other tax issues have been in existence for decades. We all have seen the growth in the last ten years. None of this is new and it did not sneak up on this administration. Where the administration and the board were instead was negotiating a labor agreement that raised salaries by more than 11% in three years. Does this make sense?
If you believe in open debate Dave, then offer up some facts. Tell me why the district is requesting 55 cents, when it knows that a large portion of that will be sent elsewhere because of the tax cap law? Tell me than my paying that extra money makes sense?
If the info from the "anti-refferendum groups is wrong", tell me what the teachers union got in raises? What did your raises look like those three years? Does this make sense?
And one last point to spurr open debate (yeah Dave, I am challenging you!).... As I ask paragraphs above... Did this crisis sneak up on the D300 Administration? None of the root causes I mentioned earlier (growth, no impact fees, property taxes lagging behind new enrollment, the tax cap, and a bad state funding system) are new. So is it that the administration of D300 is negligent for not planning for this or not capable of planning for it?
If the "anti-referendum groups....
give presentations full of inflamatory remarks and pure opinion which they present as fact." Then why would the Courrier and the NWHerald agree with them? Both have decided the Ed Fund increase is not warranted.
Ok, so I have listened for months, my wife went to Connect300 meetings, we attended the informational meetings, read the all the newspaper articles, scoured the Advance300 and The Champion web sites, and what have I learned? That D300 Referendum and Bond issues are not simple. Both friend and foe of the referendum are “spinning” as fast as they can to put forward their arguments. So what is clear?
What is clear is that the mechanism used to allocate back to school districts what we pay in state taxes is broken. It redistributes what we pay to other areas, rather than letting us use it for our children. Yet, while it may have contributed to the current crisis, it didn’t cause D300’s problem. According to the D300, this mechanism is only supposed to provide 10% of our budget needs. Still, it’s badly broken and needs to be fixed.
It is clear that home building in our area is proceeding at a rapid pace, providing D300 with unprecedented numbers of new students. This tide cannot be stemmed, and I am not sure we want it to be.
Also clear is that property taxes lag behind the enrollment of new students from new housing developments by 12-18 months. This is not new, but is a sad fact of state law. Compounding this is that municipalities set builder impact fees. And the towns and villages are competing for the developers attention, so they do not set up correct impact fees to build the schools they should. This is a sad reality and should be fixed.
It is also clear that the property tax cap, which was intended to protect taxpayers from excessive taxing & spending, needs to have a greater ability to increase. The current increase caps are too low and this too needs to be fixed.
What is also clear is that the biggest cost in the D300 budget is salaries, and amongst those are the salaries of our educators. There has been a great deal of information (and misinformation) distributed by proponents and opponents of the referendum regarding this. What is clear is that the teachers union contract called for 4.1 percent pay raise in year one (2003) and a 3.9 percent raise in years two and three (2004 & 2005). Take a look at these years and you will find they are when the deficits ballooned and the “crisis” occurred in. The administration agreed contractually to increase spending when they were already spending more than they would take in? Could any of us run a business or our homes this way? Not for long at least. This sad reality cannot be blamed on Springfield and it cannot be explained away. It rests squarely on the administration and those who negotiated the contract.
The problem here is bad management, poor planning and lack of fiscal responsibility. Despite its protests, D300 administration does not manage its resources well. Some examples:
Ø In the last bond issue to build schools, the district included funding for carpet for some spaces at Jacobs in the bond issue. We are still paying interest (and will for 30 years) on carpet that will last how long?
Ø The new DeLacey center was funded from the sale of other assets. The original approval of $12.8 million was in March of 2004, when the administration should have known it was going to need new schools. Why spend the money on a program, laudable though it is, that is not D300 core mission (educate k-12 grades)? Why spend it when we will need that money just two years later to build the new schools we so desperately need?
Ø There are probably more examples of lack of sound fiscal judgment, but I am not close enough to the see them.
The most telling example of this administrations fiscal judgment came in the superintendent’s letter of recommendation in December of 2005. In it, he suggests that if the capital bond issue passes and the buildings are built, but the education fund increase does not pass, we should leave the new buildings vacant. Why would we build the buildings if we cannot occupy them? Does it make any sense to build empty buildings so that we can pay interest on the $185 million they cost? Even if the interest rate was only 5%, that would be more than $9 million per year in interest just so we can look at empty buildings! That’s not sound management!
So how do we balance the obvious need for new schools and teachers with fiscal responsibility? Do we just pass these bond issues and pray that the school board will correct the spending habits of the D300 administration? Do we have any assurances that the board will either force the administration to correct it fiscal ways, or that they will find an administration that knows how to spend wisely? The answer to all of these is no, because according to D300 the problem is funding, not fiscal responsibility or spending.
Is it a funding problem? Where was the intelligent forward looking administration that should have planned for this problem? None of the root causes I mentioned earlier (growth, no impact fees, property taxes lagging behind new enrollment, the tax cap, and a bad state funding system) are new. The tax cap law is more than 9 years old. The other tax issues have been in existence for decades. We all have seen the growth in the last ten years. None of this is new and it did not sneak up on this administration. Where the administration and the board were instead was negotiating a labor agreement that raised salaries by more than 11% in three years. Does this make sense?
If you believe in open debate Dave, then offer up some facts. Tell me why the district is requesting 55 cents, when it knows that a large portion of that will be sent elsewhere because of the tax cap law? Tell me than my paying that extra money makes sense?
If the info from the "anti-refferendum groups is wrong", tell me what the teachers union got in raises? What did your raises look like those three years? Does this make sense?
And one last point to spurr open debate (yeah Dave, I am challenging you!).... As I ask paragraphs above... Did this crisis sneak up on the D300 Administration? None of the root causes I mentioned earlier (growth, no impact fees, property taxes lagging behind new enrollment, the tax cap, and a bad state funding system) are new. So is it that the administration of D300 is negligent for not planning for this or not capable of planning for it?
monelson:
I appreciate your response.
If you look back on my posts, I believe that I have been consistant in stating that changes are needed at the district, village and state level. I would be a fool to suggest otherwise. I agree with many of the things that you said to a point. What I disagree on is how to resolve the issues that you believe will be resolved by voting no for the educational referendum.
No matter how D300 got to where we are today, we have arrived at a point where programs will be cut, split shifts will be implemented, schools won't be built and the quality of the education will be degraded if we do not pass the referenda. That is a simple fact that is clearly defined and can't be refuted.
Those things will happen if the referenda do not pass.
I have heard people say that voting no will prompt change. Yes it will - but change that will take us back years in the programs we offer our students and the quality of their education. Plus, mobile classrooms will be the way the district grows in capacity.
That is not a smart or cost effective way of dealing with problems.
I simply do not believe that as a community we have to go backwards in order to move forwards again. In fact, going backwards means that you actually get less value for what you are already paying in taxes now. That doesn't make sense at all.
But all that said, and I have been consistant in my position, I strongly believe this.
Every single community member that cares about education has to rise up and take an active role in how the money is managed once granted through the referenda. I do not want to be going door-to-door asking people to pass a referenda again in three years. I simply won't do it.
I am going door-to-door now because I know our district needs new schools and money to fund the operation of those new schools - including hiring new teachers. If the referenda do not pass - everyone loses - everyone.
But let me make this statement that may surprise you. As a parent, I would support the school board in whatever decision had to be made to manage the money after the referenda are passed. That includes supporting the school board if they had to accept a strike by the unions to better manage salary levels above a certain point.
I disagree with the anti-referendum groups who say that ALL teacher's salaries should be frozen. I do however think that there are levels of pay that should be frozen or at least better managed. But that doesn't make teachers the enemy. It means that we haven't been smart negotiators with the unions in figuring out a way to pay teachers appropriately at all levels.
My approach is this. We pass the bond referendum to give the district the funding needed to build the schools we absoluately need. We also pass the education referendum to give them the funding needed to staff those schools and maintain existing programs.
Many will say that passing the referenda and managing the money after won't work, but let me tell you why I believe it will.
If the referenda fail - it will divide the community. Those who voted yes and those who voted no will have no common goal. It will prompt the community to move into an educational survival mode as opposed to supporting improvements to our education system. The division this time will be great because the changes will be seen and realized on a daily basis. Split shifts and lost sports & music programs will be noticed.
If the referenda pass - the community will then have a common goal and interest. The no voters will watch closer to see how the money is spent. The yes voters will make sure we aren't asking for money again in three years. In each case, both groups are going to hold the school board and the district management accountable more than ever before and stand united. Only under this scanario, the community doesn't go backwards in the quality of education it offers. We also get the new schools that we need so much.
Things really don't have to get worse before they get better. The community simply has to take the right steps to take a more active role in our school system.
Right now, THE most important thing to our community is passing both referenda. As I mentioned before, once the referenda are passed, it's time to "trust but verify" how the money is managed starting on March 22nd.
Please vote Yes-Yes on March 21st.
Take Care,
Dave Bishop
West Dundee
dkjbishop@sbcglobal.net
I appreciate your response.
If you look back on my posts, I believe that I have been consistant in stating that changes are needed at the district, village and state level. I would be a fool to suggest otherwise. I agree with many of the things that you said to a point. What I disagree on is how to resolve the issues that you believe will be resolved by voting no for the educational referendum.
No matter how D300 got to where we are today, we have arrived at a point where programs will be cut, split shifts will be implemented, schools won't be built and the quality of the education will be degraded if we do not pass the referenda. That is a simple fact that is clearly defined and can't be refuted.
Those things will happen if the referenda do not pass.
I have heard people say that voting no will prompt change. Yes it will - but change that will take us back years in the programs we offer our students and the quality of their education. Plus, mobile classrooms will be the way the district grows in capacity.
That is not a smart or cost effective way of dealing with problems.
I simply do not believe that as a community we have to go backwards in order to move forwards again. In fact, going backwards means that you actually get less value for what you are already paying in taxes now. That doesn't make sense at all.
But all that said, and I have been consistant in my position, I strongly believe this.
Every single community member that cares about education has to rise up and take an active role in how the money is managed once granted through the referenda. I do not want to be going door-to-door asking people to pass a referenda again in three years. I simply won't do it.
I am going door-to-door now because I know our district needs new schools and money to fund the operation of those new schools - including hiring new teachers. If the referenda do not pass - everyone loses - everyone.
But let me make this statement that may surprise you. As a parent, I would support the school board in whatever decision had to be made to manage the money after the referenda are passed. That includes supporting the school board if they had to accept a strike by the unions to better manage salary levels above a certain point.
I disagree with the anti-referendum groups who say that ALL teacher's salaries should be frozen. I do however think that there are levels of pay that should be frozen or at least better managed. But that doesn't make teachers the enemy. It means that we haven't been smart negotiators with the unions in figuring out a way to pay teachers appropriately at all levels.
My approach is this. We pass the bond referendum to give the district the funding needed to build the schools we absoluately need. We also pass the education referendum to give them the funding needed to staff those schools and maintain existing programs.
Many will say that passing the referenda and managing the money after won't work, but let me tell you why I believe it will.
If the referenda fail - it will divide the community. Those who voted yes and those who voted no will have no common goal. It will prompt the community to move into an educational survival mode as opposed to supporting improvements to our education system. The division this time will be great because the changes will be seen and realized on a daily basis. Split shifts and lost sports & music programs will be noticed.
If the referenda pass - the community will then have a common goal and interest. The no voters will watch closer to see how the money is spent. The yes voters will make sure we aren't asking for money again in three years. In each case, both groups are going to hold the school board and the district management accountable more than ever before and stand united. Only under this scanario, the community doesn't go backwards in the quality of education it offers. We also get the new schools that we need so much.
Things really don't have to get worse before they get better. The community simply has to take the right steps to take a more active role in our school system.
Right now, THE most important thing to our community is passing both referenda. As I mentioned before, once the referenda are passed, it's time to "trust but verify" how the money is managed starting on March 22nd.
Please vote Yes-Yes on March 21st.
Take Care,
Dave Bishop
West Dundee
dkjbishop@sbcglobal.net
Dave -
Thanks for your comments.
What bothers me most is your comment " Many will say that passing the referenda and managing the money after won't work, but let me tell you why I believe it will....If the referenda pass - the community will then have a common goal and interest. The no voters will watch closer to see how the money is spent. The yes voters will make sure we aren't asking for money again in three years. In each case, both groups are going to hold the school board and the district management accountable more than ever before and stand united. Only under this scanario, the community doesn't go backwards in the quality of education it offers. We also get the new schools that we need so much."
First, don't be confused and let me assure you that we all have a common goal already - give our childeren the best start on life we can. That includes an excellent education and a healthy, comfortable home.
Where we differ is our assumption that the financial and strategic acumen of the D300 administration will improve if we give them the 55 cent referendum. You have no assurances, In point of fact, as an illustration of how you postulate work work, D300 does not get to keep the whole 55 cents, they loose state funding under the current laws!
Please give me some hard evidence that the financial responsibilty of D300 admin will improve. If you can't you might want to re think your position that "Right now, THE most important thing to our community is passing both referenda. As I mentioned before, once the referenda are passed, it's time to "trust but verify" how the money is managed starting on March 22nd."
Look at what Jill Gunge said when she resigned the school board:
"It has been difficult sitting on this board, dealing with half truths, deceit, manipulation, and even cover-ups. Administrators have failed to provide necessary information on some issues and at times misrepresented information ‘to make the situations appear better or worse than they really are."
How can I "trust but verify" an organization that doesn't even deal straight with it's bosses (the board)?
Thanks for your comments.
What bothers me most is your comment " Many will say that passing the referenda and managing the money after won't work, but let me tell you why I believe it will....If the referenda pass - the community will then have a common goal and interest. The no voters will watch closer to see how the money is spent. The yes voters will make sure we aren't asking for money again in three years. In each case, both groups are going to hold the school board and the district management accountable more than ever before and stand united. Only under this scanario, the community doesn't go backwards in the quality of education it offers. We also get the new schools that we need so much."
First, don't be confused and let me assure you that we all have a common goal already - give our childeren the best start on life we can. That includes an excellent education and a healthy, comfortable home.
Where we differ is our assumption that the financial and strategic acumen of the D300 administration will improve if we give them the 55 cent referendum. You have no assurances, In point of fact, as an illustration of how you postulate work work, D300 does not get to keep the whole 55 cents, they loose state funding under the current laws!
Please give me some hard evidence that the financial responsibilty of D300 admin will improve. If you can't you might want to re think your position that "Right now, THE most important thing to our community is passing both referenda. As I mentioned before, once the referenda are passed, it's time to "trust but verify" how the money is managed starting on March 22nd."
Look at what Jill Gunge said when she resigned the school board:
"It has been difficult sitting on this board, dealing with half truths, deceit, manipulation, and even cover-ups. Administrators have failed to provide necessary information on some issues and at times misrepresented information ‘to make the situations appear better or worse than they really are."
How can I "trust but verify" an organization that doesn't even deal straight with it's bosses (the board)?
Dave -
how did the door to door go today? you and Ken out there getting the truth out?
Yeah that Ken is a great guy, first he threatens the kids he is supposed to be supporting, then he takes advantage of the fear he created to get then to push his agenda...
When does it stop ....
Post a Comment
how did the door to door go today? you and Ken out there getting the truth out?
Yeah that Ken is a great guy, first he threatens the kids he is supposed to be supporting, then he takes advantage of the fear he created to get then to push his agenda...
When does it stop ....
<< Home
