Tag Archives: Debbie Wolfmeyer

How Debbie Wolfmeyer sees her job

District 150 School Board president Debbie Wolfmeyer is up for reelection this year to another five-year term. You may recall that during her first term she sent a rather infamous e-mail to concerned parents.

In May 2008, Ms. Wolfmeyer told a concerned parent via e-mail, “I must respectfully decline your invitation to meet with you. It is not my role as a Board member to meet with individuals or groups. None of us as an individual Board member has any authority. Our authority comes as we work as a body. Also, I am not an educator. Therefore, it is important that any ideas, solutions, etc that are presented go through the administration so that they can assess them and report to us.”

At the Uplands candidate forum Thursday night, I asked Wolfmeyer if she would be accessible to her constituents were she to be reelected, and if she saw her role as representing her constituents to the administration, or vice versa.

Wolfmeyer said, first of all, that even though she’s elected from the second school board district, she sees her role as representing the whole school district (meaning all of District 150, not just the second board district), and specifically the children of the whole school district. Secondly, she said she will not “negotiate” with parents or constituents because she’s only one board member and cannot make any decisions unilaterally. She’s willing to sit down and listen to the concerns of her constituents, but in the end, she has to do what’s in the best interests of the children. I mentioned that many of these constituents of whom she spoke are parents who also have the best interests of their children in mind. Wolfmeyer said yes, but there are always parents and other constituents on both sides of an issue.

It doesn’t sound to me like Ms. Wolfmeyer’s views have changed significantly over the past three years. But second board district voters who disagree with her views don’t have many alternatives this election. Wolfmeyer’s only opponent is Mike Mitchell, whose appearances at recent candidate forums do not inspire confidence in his ability to do the job. He is a pleasant and sincere person, but doesn’t display an understanding of the issues facing District 150 or articulate any solution to them. He admits that he’s not a good public speaker, but invites everyone to sit down with him over a beer to discuss his ideas about District 150. I can only presume that he means he’s better able to communicate in a casual setting, not that his views make more sense when heard under the influence of alcohol.

Wolfmeyer reelected board president

Debbie “It’s-not-my-role-to-meet-with-my-constituents” Wolfmeyer was reelected president of the District 150 Board of Education at a special meeting on July 1. I haven’t seen this reported in the Journal Star, but I did see it reported on WEEK-TV and on the Peoria Story blog, which provided these details:

In a special meeting, Debbie Wolfmeyer was reelected president, with Linda Butler reelected vice president.

The vote was 4-3, with only Ross, Rachel Parker and Laura Petelle voting for Ross. The new board member, Chris Crawford, who was seated, voted for Wolfmeyer, along with Jim Stowell, Wolfmeyer and Butler.

You can read more reaction to the vote on Peoria Story.

In other District 150 news, I learned that June 30 was David Walvoord’s last day as legal counsel for the Board of Education. Also, board member David Gorenz has officially been succeeded by Chris Crawford as of July 1. Gorenz did not run for reelection.

D150 discontinuing live broadcast of board meetings

Via the Journal Star:

Beginning next month, the school district is no longer televising its board meetings live on public television. Instead, the sometimes three-hour engagement will be taped and played a week later…. [Board president Debbie] Wolfmeyer said the district would eliminate about $4,200 in annual hourly wages for the technology staff members needed during the meetings as well as $8,000 for a new video board and some $10,000 for two new video cameras, which she said would be needed to continue live broadcasts.

What’s more, only the business portion of the meeting will be shown. Public comments would not be part of the recorded broadcast, Wolfmeyer said Monday.

This hardly needs any comment. The video board and cameras are capital expenditures, and small ones at that compared to the district’s budget. Furthermore, if they need new cameras, it makes no difference whether they’re broadcasting live or tape-delayed; that expense will need to be made anyway. The only operating cost appears to be the $4,200 annually for technology staff members (and wouldn’t they still need them, too, if they’re continuing to tape the meetings?). In other words, this move has little to do with cost savings. It’s simply a further manifestation of the district’s desire to minimize, if not eliminate, public input and public access to the school board meetings.

What cost savings come from editing out the public comment period? What cost savings come from broadcasting a tape of the meeting a week later instead of the next day — i.e., as soon after the meeting as possible? Why is this tiny expense being eliminated while the school continues to ignore significant opportunities for savings, such as eliminating the $800,000 paid to for-profit Edison Schools?

On WCBU news (89.9 FM) this morning, interim superintendent Norm Durflinger was saying that District 150 will defend itself against any suggestions that the City take over the school district at next week’s education symposium with Education Secretary Arne Duncan and Mayor Jim Ardis, et. al. I wonder what his defense will be. More transparency? Nope. More accountability to the voters? Hardly. Successful policies leading to higher student achievement? Don’t make me laugh. The way the school board acts, I sometimes wonder if they’re not trying to get taken over by the City or State.

It never ceases to amaze me how the District can do something that ever so slightly gives hope that they’re turning a corner and rebuilding trust with the public (e.g., investigating allegations against the technology department), then turn around and do something to completely destroy any and all trust they’ve built up. It’s no surprise that this plan was outlined by Ms. Wolfmeyer, who doesn’t believe it’s her job to meet with her constituents.

McArdle sues D150 (UPDATED)

As promised, Lindbergh Middle School Principal Julie McArdle filed suit against District 150 (PDF Link click here to read it) after being fired Monday — and it covers a lot more than just misappropriation of funds. The suit is filed against District 150, Superintendent Ken Hinton, Human Resources Director Tom Broderick, and Academic Officer Mary Davis.

Six incidents are alleged:

  1. “Misappropriation of School Funds for Teacher’s Aide to Pay an Unpaid Student Teacher and Refusal to Spend Funds Authorized for Teacher’s Aid”
    The story here is that teacher’s aides get paid, but student teachers do not. In this case, there was a woman who had worked as a teacher’s aide at Lindbergh who was also taking classes at Eureka College to become a teacher. When it came time to do her student teaching, she wanted to do so at Lindbergh. Mary Davis allegedly instructed McArdle to continue paying her as if she were still a teacher’s aide, even though she was actually student teaching. There were two problems with this: (1) it was an unauthorized expenditure of funds on District 150’s part, and (2) it violated the student teacher’s contract with Eureka College.
  2. Falsification of Student Addresses to Deny Poorer Students Their Right to Opt Into Lindbergh Middle School Under the No Child Left Behind Act
  3. Three children who did not live within Lindbergh School’s boundaries were allowed to attend without getting the proper boundary waivers. Instead, McArdle was instructed by Davis to list a false address for these students. “The result of the falsification of the three out of boundary students addresses in the District 150 records denied three poorer children the right to opt out of their school to attend the non-failing Lindbergh Middle School – which had the wealthiest residence and was the best Middle school in District 150 under the No Child Left Behind Act.”

  4. Weekly Attendance at Lindbergh School by Private Counselor for Fees Paid by the Parents of the Students Contrary to District 150’s Obligation to Provide a Free Education
    Mary Davis was allowing a private counselor to provide services for a fee. Parents of students were expected to pay the counselor directly.
  5. Report to Superintendent and Peoria Police of Theft of District 150 Funds and Authority
    The claim is that Mary Davis got a credit card in the name of Lindbergh Middle School without the knowledge of or approval from the district. Purchases and cash advances were made, and a $4,000+ payment was made on the card from the student activity fund for “miscellaneous items.” The itemized activity fund report for those “miscellaneous items” is missing.
  6. McArdle’s Report of Mary Davis’ Misconduct and Theft of District Funds to Superintendent Hinton and Board Vice President Deb [Wolfmeyer]
    It was reported via e-mail and had specific names and amounts listed. Nevertheless, when Hinton reported the apparent theft to the police, he said the person responsible was “unknown” and that it was for less than $300.
  7. Policy Making Agents of District 150
    This section says that Davis, Hinton, Broderick, and the D150 Board interfered with McArdle’s employment, resulting in her wrongful termination.

The suit alleges violation of McArdle’s rights to free speech, violation of the Illinois Whistleblower Act, and breach of contract. She’s asking for $550,000 in damages, plus attorney’s fees, and reinstatement to her job.

UPDATE: Here are the exhibits that go with the complaint that was filed:

PDF Link Exhibits to Complaint court document
PDF Link Exhibit 1
PDF Link Exhibit 2
PDF Link Exhibit 3
PDF Link Exhibit 4