While Ken Hinton continues working on his plans to close schools and cut expenses, others have been trying to come up with counter proposals. There are two so far that I’ve been told. The first one comes from Board of Education member Jim Stowell:
ProposalPurchase homes on Perry that front Lincoln
- Build out a birth through sixth facility – beautiful new back entrance (or North end entrance to Woodruff campus)
Push up into Woodruff 7th and 8th from Lincoln
- Mirror academy model @ Manual
- Use best practices and cut contract and cost
- Focus on technology (CISCO bias)
Close Peoria High; immediately begin:
- utilizing Peoria High as the much needed alternative school
- empanel group of Admin., etc. to begin planning for a better Peoria High
Planning and completion would take 3 probably 4 years – while it is being done – facilities are temporarily used as alternative school. Other programs might co-exist, but primary purpose is for much needed alternative school
Planning Part and VisionCollaboratively with City and Park District acquire land from Peoria High North St. to Nebraska, and Nebraska to Herke Field
With city help – vacate maintenance and the two lane cut through to create Center Bluff Campus
Acquire homes on North St. to stop light. Close through traffic on North. The 74 overpass becomes gateway to new Campus.
Seen from I-74, it replaces cafeteria area and becomes a beacon on the hill.
Design curriculum to align with UIC College of Medicine and hospitals needs – have it be the choice school for a Medical Career path.
City concurrently working in planning phase to engage in the Impact Zone concept – on both sides of interstate.
North to Richmond becomes park like one-way exiting out on Knoxville.
Park-like campus helps shape revitalization of Sheridan North.
For 3 – 4 years we gain control over our costs by consolidating to 3 full service high schools.
We begin preparing what Peoria High School becomes.
oundaries for entering could be changed to south of Nebraska (McClure)?
- go to Manual – Manual 1100, Richwoods 1400 and Woodruff 1400
(Manual has been land-locked)Redraw once new Central opened
- also with academies
- but potentially aligned with proposed Math and Science, which, should take on a lower priority currently than the needed alternative school environment
Back fill permanent alternative program into a vacated building that could be renovated
The other counter proposal comes from District 150 teacher Scott Donahue and is based on the 2005 Structural Budget Imbalance Task Force report. The SBI Task Force was made up of community members, D150 support staff, school principals, and board member David Gorenz. Many of the savings opportunities outlined in this plan were never implemented:
SBI Task Force Recommendations:
District chose to ignore these potential savings
Item Savings Recommendation RIF Administrator $234,000 RIF Minimum 2-3 Administrators Three Tier Bell Schedule $525,000 Eliminate Edison Contract $3,825,000 (2009-2014) Figuring district would pay $135,000 for benchmark testing each of the five years Eliminate Department Heads @ HS $160,000 Eliminate Controller-Treasurer $150,000 Re-assign responsibilities to other central office administrators Reduce Admin in Buildings $1,014,000 $78,000 per person for 13 positions Eliminate Alternative High School $525,000 Eliminate Adult Education $171,000 Eliminate Transition to Success $184,000 TOTAL Savings: $6,788,000 This did not count more administrative cuts that could be made for additional savings if reducing programs and buildings.
Questions for the board:
- If most items from the SBI Task Force Document were implemented then where is money/savings?
- Administration claimed to get a “Freeze” only to receive retroactive pay later on
- The District got better than projected savings in union’s insurance package
- The District got better than projected savings in previous teacher contract
- The District got better than projected savings by limiting professional development for teachers thus no advancement on payscale
- What cuts has the District made to reduce the deficit?
My guess is that more questions and counter proposals will be coming forward in the next few weeks.
Nice work CJ. To help clarify I was told by Dr. Gorenz that the board has implemented almost all of the items listed in the SBI Task Force document. I wanted to show that they indeed have ignored the things that could actually save the district quite a bit of money!
Onviously you want to keep as many programs as you can but in these “tough times” everything has to be looked at. My questions to the board where were is the money then from all the supposed cuts they did from the SBI Task Force? Where is the money from the beter than projected savings in the union’s insurance package? Where is the money from the better than projected savings in the teacher contract (keep in mind the last two contracts the adminstration has told teachers to “help us out this time so that we can get our finances in order”) only to continue to spend and hire more administrators. Where is the money from the better than projected savings from limiting professional development opportunities for teachers?
The district hired a Marketing and Public Relations person last year and now has a “Marketing and Public Relations Specialist” who is in charge of the Staff Newletter that is sent out each week. Honestly do we need a “specialist” to do that. That is another small example of unnecessary administrators.
I find it ironic that Mr. Donahue, a member of the teacher’s union, is putting forth ideas generated by the SBI Task Force. The teacher’s union filed an unfair labor practice charge against the District for forming this committee, but now he thinks it is a good idea to implement the findings of the Task Force.
I don’t know that I agree entirely with Mr. Stowell’s proposal but bottom line, a high school needs to close so that limited budget dollars can be reallocated to create specialized training as he suggests.
And by the way, the 3-tier bell system is a very unworkable idea. District 150 is an urban school district and its design has to work for the students and families it serves. For the same reasons that the District needs to offer early childhood education and an alternative school, it also needs to set the school hours in a manner that allows parents to get to work. The 3- tier system has the last tier of children leaving far too late, especially if the District is considering extending the hours that children are in school.
If you can’t beat them join them. Scott’s point is that no matter how reasonable/unreasonable alternative cuts seem the fact is that there is plenty of pork in the budget that should be looked at before they reduce once again student services. Great work, Scott!
Jim did tell me about his proposal a few days ago–and I’m very happy that he is coming forward with his plan. Now that I see it in print in its entirety I (along with everyone else) will be able to look it over and weigh in on the pros and cons. Also, I appreciate Scott’s input. I’m not up on the SBI Task force, but the list of proposed cuts prove that these recommended cuts have not been implemented–and seem to have been “tabled.”
Jim will be the one who will have to convince three of his fellow board members that his plan is better than the one now on the table. I’m just glad that there is a now a possibility of discussion and some healthy disagreement among board members. Maybe now they can argue it out and listen to teachers, parents, students, and the public–to develop a plan that will please more than just a few central administrators.
How does Stowell’s proposal or the District’s proposal for that matter decrease student services? Developing an academy that prepares students, many of which are not college bound, to go to work for some of the areas largest employers, i.e. the hospitals, seems to be putting resources to work in an efficient and productive manner.
Be flippant if you wish, but unfair labor practice charges and grievances by the Union groups against the District regarding frivolous matters such as the formation of the Task Force wastes taxpayer dollars that could be directed towards students and thwarts progress. Now that reduces student services!
Flippant? How about this- get our wonderboy legislator in Washington to propose a Federal law requiring 16 year olds who choose not to go to school to serve two years in the peace corps followed by two years of military service. Have these retreads required to obtain high school degrees while in service. We would be getting the troublmakers out of the cities, make citizens out of them and they may even learn a thing or two. Might even make one or two of them realize going to school isn’t such a bad thing after all. Give this some thought.
Wacko, let’s not get hasty here. You apparently are not informed regarding the requirements for joining the Peace Corps. First of all, you have to be 18 yrs old, secondly, they like people with college degrees in things like engineering so they can help build wells, and education, so they can teach. Why would the qualified people in the Peace Corps want to babysit American children who aren’t interested in education. The people in the Peace Corps do not want military types joining. The idea is to live as the locals live, not bring in more trouble. Peace Corps looks pretty good on a resume and it is considered a very elite club by those that have experienced it, so, let’s not go mucking it up with retreads.
Right on!! Let’s make them join the Boy Scouts then before the service.
Wacko,
I believe what you are looking for is called a ‘boarding school’.
At first glance, I like Jim’s plan for two major reasons. First, it proposes a building–not just classrooms in existing schools–to be the alternative school. Second, it does away with the horrible idea of making Loucks the ninth grade for a combined WHS and PHS.
I am not sure what turning PHS (for the period of time that Jim suggests) into an alternative school could preserve the charter (which does have historic value and should be maintained if at all possible.
I guess my question is this? Is the school’s charter lost if the school changes name or function. For instance, the Manual restructuring committee is suggesting a name change–would that destroy the charter? Or does the school have to close to lose its charter?
Also, is there any way to find out before making the boundary changes, how students in the area to be added to Manual feel about going to Manual? If Manual can’t draw West Peoria students who are already in the Manual attendance area, can studednts/parents in other areas be expected to welcome the change? Or parents/students in this area likely to choose some other option rather than to go to Manual?
I’m thinking about all this “on the run” today. I’m curious to see how others and Jim respond to my questions. Thanks.
This “plan” reminds me of the couple that thinks the problems in their marriage will be solved if they can just qualify for that jumbo construction loan and build themselves a nicer house in newer subdivision.
The root of D150 financial dilema is not finances. The root begins with the unresolved personal issues of the students, their parents, the teachers and the administrators and the conflict those personal problems foster all the way from the classroom to the boardroom.
No amount of money or “re-arranging” of buildings, students and personnel will make any difference. There is no point in talking to, or trying to help anyone who can’t see that. Too many good people and kids left D150 too long ago. D150 is the East Germany of School Districts
Chase: You certainly aren’t wrong–buildings and programs aren’t going to solve the problems–I’ve said that in a hundred different ways and a hundred times. I have maintained and still maintain that until the issues related to discipline in the schools are effectively handled (if that’s possible), people will continue to flee the district. My reason for favoring Jim’s plan is that it advocates an alternative school (if run correctly–big “if”). Then establishing firm and consistent standards of behavior in the regular high schools could be a step in the right direction. Then the schools would have to rebuild their reputations before people will even begin to come back to District 150.
Mahnko: I probably should have said juvenile detention centers, but I’m sorry to the bloggers for getting off point-bad kids couldn’t be the main problem with 150 could they?
Frustrate for the record I cant speak to what the union did then, I wasnt on the Exec. Board, who ultimately makes decisions like that. My point is I have been told by two school board members that they have done almost everything from that document to save money. I wanted to point out that isnt the case they overlooked quite a bit.
I am open for your proposal too….heck anyone’s really.
More thoughts on the subject…
http://pundit.blogpeoria.com/2009/01/29/should-the-economy-be-a-get-out-of-jail-free-card-for-district-150/
Something for CJ and Diane to look into….the District was very keen on getting “Flex Scheduling” into the contract that was bargained in 2005-06. The districts proposal was that by utilizing flex scheduling for teachers, students could have a longer day, but the teaching staff would continue to work normal hours. Certain classes/teachers would begin school an hour early for example but leave and hour earlier than now. The benefit the for the district was no additonal pay for teachers while keeping students in class longer.
Fastforward to 2009 and has ANYONE even brought up this idea???? It is in the contract and now the district even refuses to discuss or look at it. Seems to me that this idea would certainly benefit everyone.
Scott: Flex time was tried at Manual–the principal believed strongly that we should accommodate the “biological clocks” of students who found it difficult to get up in the morning. Therefore, a 7th hour English class was offered to those students who had previously been chronic tardies to school. These students were delighted to learn they would be allowed to come an hour late every day, but they weren’t so happy about staying an hour later than their friends, etc. So they began gypping that last class, and the whole experiment was a dismal failure. Flex time for students is also difficult for students who participate in sports or extra-curricular activities.
Of course, at the high school level some early bird classes (mostly enriched classes for students a bit more motivated to get up early) have been offered for quite some time (and teachers came an hour early and were released an hour early). However, problems arose because the teachers who came early were expected to attend teachers’ meetings at the end of the regular day, and sometimes these teachers were sponsors of extra-curricular classes, coaches, etc., so they had to stay until the end of the regular day anyway.
Sharon et al,
Jim Stowell’s proposal states that Peoria High would “close immediately” and be operated as the alternative high school for several years until a committee could decide what to do with that campus, while purchasing additional homes/properties for both PHS and WHS campuses.
Under this proposal, Peoria High School would close instead of Woodruff, so that pacifies the WHS people, but PHS would CLOSE for several years. Also, the school’s goals will be changed which nullifies the charter even if they reopen several years later with the same name at the same campus. (Talk to PHSAA personnel for details).
The current D150 proposal (also bad) calls for “officially” closing both schools and opening a new school at the PHS campus. This also means both schools will close as continuously operating entities. (words MEAN things!!)
PHS students and parents have worked WITH WHS students and parents to fight this idea. They expect and hope the WHS students and parents will work with PHS now that PHS is the school proposed for closure via Mr. Stowell’s proposal.
BTW–Do you have any idea how much money PHS alums (let alone WHS alums) control in this area and how much they funnel into PHS (and WHS)? This proposal (these proposals) would dry up ALL that money forever. Also, PHS improved test scores last year and was the ONLY HS to do so. If the 2 schools start fighting against each other, both will lose.
Remember, Jim Stowell is a MHS alum and will do whatever he has to to save his alma mater.
NOTE: Jim, if that is not true, understand that that is what your proposal looks like.
Hot in the City: I know quite well that all that you stated is true (and have stated so on this blog) and all your concerns are concerns of mine, also. The only thing I didn’t know for sure is what you seem to confirm–that changing the school’s goals would destroy the charter. Just as many on this blog fight to preserve the historic buildings in Peoria, I see merit in preserving the historic charter held by PHS–and no particular desire to see the WHS (my own 1955 alma mater) charter lost.
Earlier on this blog I made the same observations that you have made about the alumni money.
Of course, I know that Jim is a MHS alum–and former student of mine as I was a teacher at Manual for 36 years of my career. Jim is still holding out hope for Manual; I’ve lost most of mine. I do have a tendency to believe that Manual would be the best choice for the alternative school. I hate to see the south side deprived of a high school. Of course, Manual’s charter is older than Woodruff’s. That said, Manual–even though it has been restructured or, in my biased view, because of its restructured status–shows no sign of becoming a viable high school. You can only fight for a lost cause so long. However, there have been people on this blog that would object to closing Manual only because they don’t want Manual students dispursed throughout the city. I think that creating a bona fide alternative school would resolve those perceived problems–there are a significant number of students in the Manual attendance area who deserve the chance to get away from the conditions at the present Manual. Jim and I don’t agree (and I wish I could; therefore, I do not fault Jim) that Jim’s proposed boundaries would draw more people to Manual–I fear that is not the case.
None of the choices for closing a high school are easy choices–except for the central administration who seem to be willing to act in haste.
I would like to see a more thorough study of how much the proposed cost-cutting measures would cost.
Separate and shorter question: I hope somehow will answer this question for me–the district seems to have as much money as they need or want to build new buildings, to add on to or restore old buildings, to buy new property, and to maintain unused buildings. Why is there so much money available in the building fund? I know that funds in the building fund can’t be transferred to the education fund, etc. Consequently, I think the district is behaving like a “drunken sailor” in spending that money. I just want to know why there is so much taxpayer money available in one fund and not the other–and what can be done to change that.
buy more homes?
there are 13 people at Wisconsin making $78K? Bathroom attendants?
Interesting that they suggest eliminating all that stuff for students and only “reducing” administration at Wisconsin…. and apparently lower level jobs at Wisconsin.
“I know that funds in the building fund can’t be transferred to the education fund,”
BS! It is all paper money… they can transfer budget items any time they want… and if they can’t, someone needs to be brought in that can. I am so tired of hearing that crap. Who creates the budget? ICC says the same thing. “We can spend millions on parking lots and repaving the courtyard, putting in new plants and watering the wild prairie grass, expanding the campus to North Peoria, Pekin and lower B.F.E. but we can’t pay our teachers a living wage, and we can’t add more positions into the budget.”
Kcdad: Agreed! I just hope that someone knows the legal explanation about the transfer of funds and why so much money is in the building fund–but so little for what happens in the schools every day and the people who make it happen
Hot in the city…if alumi money drys up then I guess the students and their needs are not as important as the name of a building??? How sad!