Peoria Public Schools

Martha Ross’s suggestions for District 150

100 Comments

Peoria Public Schools Board of Education member Martha Ross sent the following memo to Superintendent Ken Hinton and the other members of the board. I’m reprinting it here (with permission) for your information and comment:

Over the years I’ve served on the District 150 Board, when considering a vote, I have tried to make informed and sound decisions on all issues relating to the education and welfare of our children. What’s always foremost in my mind is that we hold the key to the future in how we treat, prepare and educate our students. I am of the belief that we pay now and use whatever resources we have to educate our students right or we pay later when we turn them out into the world unprepared to become productive citizens. I do realize that we cannot save all that come through our doors, but I feel that we are too quick to label, discard, discount, and or not give serious thought to what’s in their best interest.

My opinions are not intended to imply that any of you do not care and or are not interested in the children’s education, it is merely to voice my concerns, share my observations and offer my suggestions. That said, it is my opinion that some of the suggestions for “cutting” the budget bear a lot more thought to be able to avoid damaging the education and safety of our students.

The way I see it is that the following facts are apparent:

  1. We have far fewer students than we had 10 years ago
  2. We have far more staff than we had 10 years ago
  3. We need to balance our budget using sound strategies that can be duplicated
  4. We need to decrease this year’s proposed budget according to the financial information we have received
  5. We need to make those decreases without risking the quality of education and or the safety of the students
  6. We should value our staff, students, parents and community stakeholders

That said, I would like to offer some suggestions that have come from taking the time to think about this situation as well as listening to my community:

  1. Immediately affect a complete moratorium on all hiring, and freeze wages. It will soon be time for the March mid-year increases and this would protect the district from that additional outlay for salaries.

  2. Immediate and complete moratorium on all travel – except that paid for 100% by grants.

  3. Really close Blaine, place the property on the market and move those staff members back to the DLC. That makes more sense from a long-term cost savings standpoint.

  4. Keep all four high school sites but change the configuration to schools-within-schools

  5. Proposed vocational program could be located within Woodruff as a school-within-a-school.

  6. Current Fine Arts program could remain at Peoria High as a school-within-a-school.

  7. Since it’s been implied that Peoria High can accommodate a lot more students, leave the current 9th grade academy as a school-within-a-school.

  8. Create a 9th grade academy at Woodruff and Richwoods as a school-within-a-school with the separations needed to promote this concept.

  9. Create the “small” high school concept for the 10 through 12 in all four schools.

  10. Seek to qualify PHS and Woodruff as Title I schools to position them to receive more funded monies noted in President Obama’s economic stimulus proposal.

  11. Decrease transportation expenses by developing a plan to establish k-8 neighborhood schools so that most children can walk.

  12. List for sale or auction, real estate currently held by the district in inventory, including but not limited to the following parcels:
    • Riverfront (if any is left)
    • Prospect Road Property
    • Blaine Sumner Campus
    • Harrison – old campus and building site parcels
    • Irving campus (Future)
    • Kingman campus (Future)
    • Washington Gifted campus (to be explained later)

    This would also result in a cost savings in insurance premium expense and any custodial/maintenance and utilities expenses – if any – incurred by these sites. Additionally, the sale of these parcels would return them to the tax rolls and create a revenue-enhancing opportunity to the district for an increase in EAV.

  13. Look at savings related to the loss of the Medicaid Contract

  14. Close Washington Gifted, returning the kids (and their test scores) to their home schools. Offer a gifted component at each neighborhood school as Mr. Hinton mentioned will be included in the new Harrison model. Cost to run Washington Gifted is $1.325M. District no longer receives separate funds to operate the program — all costs now accrue to Ed Fund.

  15. The anticipated cost savings of a Peoria High/Woodruff merger are primarily derived from having larger classes (and hence fewer teachers). These savings can be achieved right now, in the current high schools without the disruption of these two schools which are located in the heart of the neighborhoods. Moreover, I am not suggesting that we do this in absence of a plan that includes working closely with the union groups, decreasing staff through attrition whenever possible and offering incentives.

  16. Right sizing is going to require time and planning so that we do it right the first time.

  17. The citizens of the Woodruff community and other supporters have expressed their willingness to pitch in to help us.

    Finally, perhaps we should take advantage of the benefit of the HB0217 that is an act that amends the property tax code to allow a certain area to be named a special service area.

  18. 35 ILCS 200/27-60 provides that the corporate authorities for a municipality that establishes a special services area may petition the circuit court to make the Woodruff community a special service area. This could bring in the immediate revenue needed to provide the time needed to address the right sizing of the District as well as time to develop a sustainable plan for District 150’s future health.

This plan makes a lot of sense. Of the plans I’ve heard so far to fix District 150’s budget woes, I like this one the best. It’s worth some serious consideration. I especially like items 1, 2, 3, 11, and 12 because they deal directly with many of the issues on which District 150 has received the most criticism.

100 thoughts on “Martha Ross’s suggestions for District 150”

  1. peoriafan: I would not ban you either. Healthy dialogue is what produces the best end result.

    So, when I had previously asked you to outline, from your viewpoint — what does

    The benefits far outweigh the negative —look like to you, I was sincerely inquiring what you saw/evaluated.

    I looked at the BTB website as you suggested in your answer. I do not come up with the same outcome.

    I nor any other reader cannot read your mind — what are the specific positives, specific negatives — if you even see any negatives in the project at all.

    Here’s hoping you will share your thoughts! 🙂

  2. It is one thing to defend your position vigorously, as many of us do. That is different from a “personal attack”. Please don’t confuse the two.

    Anyone who regularly posts meaningful comments on a blog will eventually become the victim of a personal attack. This may also include personal attacks against private citizens who do NOT participate on that particular blog. It is up to the blog owner to make sure they don’t get out of control.

    If a blog owner is lax about this policy, eventually they will have no commenters.

  3. I wouldn’t exactly ban Peoriafan…………………….

    I would just severely ‘edit’ his pro-museum comments! HA!

    Actually. I would ban C.J.

  5. Diane — I’m glad you see the difference between vigorously defending a position and a personal attack. So far, I frankly have not seen a personal attack in these comments. Maybe that’s because I have a higher tolerance than others or maybe I just missed a comment somewhere.

    I would say this: First, one has to have a thick skin to posit their opinions on a blog because what you say will undoubtedly be challenged. Some of those challenges will be nicer than others, but you can have some pretty strong challenges without it being a personal attack, and you have to be able to take it. Second, if there is a personal attack, you need to contact the blog owner to report it. I try to catch stuff as much as I can, but I can’t be monitoring the blog 24/7; I’m just one guy. I don’t want to see anyone attacked, so please tell me if it’s happening and I’ll respond. Once again, though, don’t confuse a vigorous challenge to your viewpoint with a personal attack. I’m not going to keep people from disagreeing with you.

    I just want us to all be friends. 🙂

  7. JC–Clearing the air time. I’ve made that mistake a couple of times–appearing to outguess the identity of people on the blog. I appreciate your giving us your background regarding Edison, etc. Although it wasn’t necessary, it gives credibility to your opinions, and you did provide some good information about the selection process, etc. Of the regulars on this blog, I don’t think that any of us agree all the time on any given subject. Personally, I like a good argument and think I always learn something from the “opposing” side–and hope that I never make it personal and that when I do someone will bring that to my attention. I have no personal reason to feel strongly one way or the other about Edison. If I have any “allegiances,” they will probably be with the kids on Peoria’s south side–and the Manual area, in general, including West Peoria.
    My arguments against Edison are strictly based on inequity for both teachers and students. This is a public school system and I see no reason why I shouldn’t expect the district to make the system as equitable for all as possible.
    As a teacher, first and foremost, I disagree with the arrangement that pays Edison teachers more because they work 45 minutes more per day. I don’t know of very many teachers who wouldn’t be willing to work an extra 45 minutes (especially colloborating with other teachers) for extra pay. Then, of course, the Edison program earns the praise of its supporters because of what is reportedly ac complished during that 45 minutes. Other teachers would like the opportunity to earn some of that praise, also.
    As for students, the benefits of the common planning time, the extra teachers mentioned by J.C., more personnel for special ed and enriched students, etc., should be offered to every student in the district (or spread around equally as money allows) in their home schools. They should not have to “choose” to go to a different school to be afforded the benefits given to only Edison schools. These educational benefits should not be withheld from students because their parents didn’t feel out an application form. And I know there is an inconsistency in my supporting Washington Gifted and not Edison. I just spent lunch trying to sort this out with a friend who happens to be a parent of a Washington Gifted student. For now, I think I’ll have to live with my inconsistency, but expect the rest of you to jump all over me for it.
    Peoriafan: Re your “I know you wouldn’t ban me but I think some of your regulars would if they could. They just can’t seem to stand anyone who does not agree with them.”
    Have I ever given you that impression? I think there are times when we have agreed–I sometimes don’t do a very good job of keeping track of the person behind the posts with which I agree or disagree. I think that where Edison is concerned many of us–pro and con–are fairly firm in our opinions; in my own case, I’ve had several years to formulate my opinions and it will take some very new and convincing evidence to cause me to change my mind; and, as with all issues, I readily acknowledge there are always two sides. And as with all District 150 issues, when it comes down to the wire, only six people get to decide which of our sides is the winning side.
    There probably isn’t anyone on this blog that stands alone on issues as often as does Kcdad on various issues. However, he doesn’t seem to feel that everyone is against him. I often have to take a second look at my opinions just because of his strong stands on various issues.
    I am an opinionated person–I guess I’ve had more years than the rest of you to become set in my ways, but I, too, have been known to change my mind. I don’t discount any of the opinions I read here–but may disagree, and I’m glad you’re all willing to open yourselves up for disagreement, etc.
    J.C.–just read your last comments more carefully. When I suggested that you might be an Edison teacher or 150 administrator, I didn’t mean to imply that I thought you were a plant–just that you seemed to be writing from that point of view. Frankly, if I were still teaching, there is a chance that I wouldn’t write under my own name. There is one blog on which some of us communicate that is open only to those who have been invited. This is not one of those blogs–so there can be no “plants.” I can assure you that a good many people (who do not respond here) are reading this blog. The readership on this blog goes up every day, I believe. It is the place to be if you want your voice heard. I have no doubt that most, if not all, 150 board members take a look once in a while, or more often. Only Jim Stowell identifies himself.

  8. JC, nice post but you are in a losing battle here. If have a different opinion, some here will attack you. I agree with you on Edison and Knapp’s rants take away any creditability the “other” side has and yes, I too witnessed his shameless antics. I received an email today from a board member explaining very clearly the $10 million + or – gap in the board’s budget. This member sent it too a few of the commenter’s here and to CJ. I wonder what the take on that will be. I have asked to post it on my blog and if I get permission, I will. It says volumes about what some here don’t know. They don’t know everything.

    If you tend to disagree with an opinion here then you are slammed by some no matter what Diane or the rest post. Thanks for for your opinion JC. For a woman, that is obviously highly educated, that took balls. I like that.

  9. Oh, I’ve gotta catch my breath here I’m laughing so hard. Emtronics coming on here and blasting everyone for personal attacks is like Jeffrey Dahmer calling Charlie Manson a mass murderer.

  10. JC: I just noticed this comment” “then 150 decided not to retain part-timers. So, I now work a day a week at IBES as an SLP while working full time at ISU.” That interests me considerably, and I don’t expect you to respond. Diane and C.J., do you see any significance in this statement or am I reading too much into it? This sounds like a “Wacky Wednesday” related issue. Remember that the original plan was for all primary students to lose 45 minutes per day so that the district could get rid of special teachers and thus save money. The plan to get rid of these special, part-time teachers was supposed to have been set aside and replaced with Wacky Wednesdays. I have believed that there was a possibility that 150 still found a way to get rid of some part-time special teachers. I’m not at all certain if one of those positions in one that JC lost (this year?).
    Even so, if 150 got rid of part-time teachers at Franklin (assuming that they taught the special “extra” classes–a big assumption that I would like to have clarified), did Northmoor also lose the extra teachers and classes?

  14. YOU ARE CORRECT! THERE ARE SEVERAL PEOPLE WHO READ THESE BLOGS BUT DON’T RESPOND, BUT BELIEVE ME THEY ARE BEING READ. THE BLOGS MAKE FOR GREAT READING.

  17. To all —
    Regarding Mr. Stowell’s rebuttal of some of the points made in the recent PeoriaStory.com article about the 07-08 budget, please remember that there were serious questions about the administration’s budget numbers BEFORE Elaine Hopkins’ article came out. And the experts that examined the auditor’s report are not anonymous in the sense that no one knows who they are; they have asked to remain anonymous for the time being. There are several people who know who they are. That is different than an unnamed and unknown person making allegations.
    Regarding Ms. Ross’s proposal (the original subject here) I believe there are many worthwhile things to consider in what she said. There are a lot of good and viable ideas out there, based on solid research and financials, that the district needs to consider in revamping and re-situating the district for the future.
    BTW–the fact that the board reversed direction so quickly on the orginal proposal, and envisions a committee that will primarily oversee budget matters and decisions, indicates to me that the board has serious questions about central admin’s budget credibility. That is GOOD.

  18. The Board will make a decision on the closing of some schools and they will do it within the next few months despite that fact they seemed to have put it on hold. It’s going to happen as this District has been run the same way for the last 20+ years. It needs to revamp and downsize and plan for the future. It has nothing to do with whether the Board thinks the Admin is credible or not.

  19. My daughter got into Washington on her test scores. Her composite on the Wechsler was 134. I am not a school board member, council member, etc.

    If all schools ran like Washington, we wouldn’t be considering closing them. I could determine that when I first stepped foot in the building. ANY school could run like Washington–students are expected to do their absolute best, and parents are expected to be involved.

  20. Emtronics: I was definitely this vocal when I was at Manual. Of course, there were no blogs. However, I did use the PJS several times to get information out–on at least three occasions Jeff Dutro and I reported about discipline and attendance problems at Manual–and we had rather extensive coverage, especially in Mike Bailey’s column. I also communicated with board members frequently.

  21. I am happy to see Martha Ross speak out on the side. Jim Stowell speaks out a lot as well. When I attend the meetings some of them sound and look like puppets. Whenever Gorenz or Hinton speak, Spangler ALWAYS nods her head to whatever they say. I am very happy she is done this year. I did not realize there were so many unfinished projects and real estate out there that district 150 owns. Amazing! I agree with most of the ideas Martha has. Not too sure about the Washington Gifted School. I am not aware of how things are funded and all the different types of programs there are. I am learning. : )

  23. Giving credit where it’s due, the JSEB’s take on this was spot on and had an uncharacteristic hard edge to it. Loved it.

  26. JC and Diane, I think you are right. The “big picture” here is that reductions must be made, but not at any cost. I am baffled about comments in which bloggers advocate doing away with the few programs and schools that work. If anything, streamlining operations so other students can be afforded the same opportunities should be the aim.

    Elimination of Washington Gifted and the Edison Schools is inconsistent with the District’s stated goal of attracting families back into the District, so too is the classification of the other two high schools as Title I. Any elimination or consolidation of programming should still pass through the filter “does it raise the bar” in terms of the District’s offerings to students and the perception it creates to those looking on.

    I really object to Ms. Ross’ notion that Washington Gifted students and “(and their test schools)” should return to their neighborhood schools. It is not any child’s responsibility to shore up the test scores of a troubled school. Additionally, a pull out gifted program could not replicate what is being offered at Washington. Washington is currently offering Algebra I to some of its 7th graders. This is an elevated study of math for this grade level, and it would be difficult at individual schools to have a sufficient number of students to justify such offerings. And quite frankly, I have no confidence it would in any way be executed properly and would become yet another incomplete initiative of the District.

    I am not an Edison parent, nor a District administrator or teacher (it’s a puzzle) but I worked indirectly with the implementation of Edison. My recollection for its placement at Northmoor was because although, it was one of the better schools in its day, enrollment was dropping as many that lived in the area were selecting parochial education and other private alternatives, and that some of the neighborhoods in the area had begun to turn and the District was concerned about the performance of the school down the road. I also think it was believed that the offering of Spanish would entice families to chose Edison and remain in the District.

    Finally, Northmoor Edison provides a huge benefit to the stablization of older neighborhoods like the Knolls. It allows families to opt out poor performning schools and attend a blue ribbon winner and thus they stay and keep the neighborhood strong and encourage their friends to move in. Sounds like a winner to me!

  29. Ok. I have not been blogging for a while so I am back for one more fix. I find it remarkable that Ms. Ross’ proposal makes no mention of an alternative school. Though I am a consist proponent on this blog for the District offering more programs to attract middle class families and develop more stringent academic programs, Sharon has won me over.

    First things first, every child at a minimum deserves a safe and orderly place to learn, no matter what. If the District does not take control of the classroom, no “school within a school” proposed by either Stowell or Ross will be successful. The District cannot afford, as we all now well know, to continue to tolerate disruptive or disrespectful students, because who really pays – those that are there to learn.

    Though it would be best to have an alternative school waiting to take in those suspended or expelled, perhaps it is too big a price to pay to wait until such a school becomes a reality. Begin enforcing the rules today. The immediate side effects will be that a number of students initially will be on the street, but really they are not missing out on much are they? These are the students that are excessively absent and are not learning when they are in school, because they are too busy causing trouble. I think it might possibly snap students that are the borderline into shape when they see that the schools are raising the standards for conduct.

    Before the District begins it shuffle of students and schools and attempts to customizing its programming, it has to be able to see the forest from the trees. I think it is too difficult to determine what techniques will help improve student performance with all the blur of errant conduct that prevails in many of the schools.

  30. I know a teenager who was frequently getting into trouble, and as soon as it appeared likely that he would be forced into an alternative school he shaped up really fast. First, they don’t want to leave their friends, and secondly, they don’t want to be associated with the “stigma” of an alterntaive facility. In other words, an alternative school would not only be a “solution” for problem behavior, but it would also serve as an excellent deterrent.

  31. Diane, Spalding was not an alternative school!!! 🙂 or was it the other way around, Central was the alternative school for Spalding?

  32. Diane: What was spot on about the editorial? In a word, everything.

    In a shocking display of political cowardice, the Board neglected its duty to make a difficult, but necessary decision. Why? Because viable alternatives have been proposed? Because more time is needed to collect additional data? Because it decided to review existing data one more time in hopes of formulating an alternative? No, no, and no.

    Rather, the Board neglected its obligation to restore financial rectitude in favor of awaiting federal funds from a stimulus package with an utterly unknown fate and content. Like hogs at the trough, our collective eyes are now on our nation’s capital as we await taxpayer manna to perfuse our financial veins and deliver us from ruin. I submit that those who champion that as noble or wise are either naive or myopic.

    If I thought the “stimulus” funds would somehow actually stimulate, and put us on better financial footing for the long-term, I would be among the celebrating parents. Instead, if any funds are received, our sole purchase will be more time to operate wastefully and inefficiently until, before we know it, the magical stimulus machine has creaked to a halt and we’re returned to “here,” a point in time where we have too many schools for too few students and inadequate funds to support that luxury.

    If we weren’t already on tenterhooks, just today there is word of a compromise in the Senate, and early indications are that much of the proposed education funding was sacrificed. Oh oh.

    Pardon me for skipping the celebration.

  34. Nontimendum, you are one of the remaining few that has bought into the districts explanation that they are “awaiting stimulus funds”. Although that is the public face on it, most everyone at this point realizes that the real reason is exactly what you typed in your first paragraph and so quickly disregarded. That is; because other viable alternatives have been suggested, more time is needed to collect additional data, and I will add this.. because once again this is a plan that is reactive, half baked, and the full consequences of the decision would be completely unknown and not based in any reliable research or data.

    It is entirely concievable, and in fact likely, that premature, drastic action on the part of the district such as closing 5 schools would only continue the decline of D150 academics and enrollment. Sometimes the better option in times of crisis is to take a deep breath, and this is one of them.

    Dramatic change within the school district is called for. We all agree on that. But using a hatchet to start haphazardly closing schools and laying off teachers is not the change we are looking for.

  35. Oops! Am I hearing correctly that the education money has taken a severe hit in the stimulus package? What’s next with 150?

  36. So in some crazy scheme to perpetuate the public’s notion that they are a bunch of bumbling buffoons to whom the line between fantasy and reality is seemingly indistinct, the Board just said it was awaiting stimulus funds? In actuality, unbeknownst to the unwitting public, all the while the Board is working surreptitiously on an actual plan that a reasonable person could conclude is tethered to reality? Those rascally devils!!!

    As “one of the remaining few who has bought into the district’s explanation,” I want to express my gratitude for the enlightenment. Now that I get it and considering how ludicrous it would be to base any decision making in reliance on stimulus funds that don’t yet exist, I have to confess that it’s really kind of embarrassing now to admit that I bought the Board’s cover story.

  40. This idea highlights one of the largest problems with many school boards. The role of the school board is to hire proven, competent administrators and let them run the district.

    The role of the school board is NOT to develop instuctional programs. They are elected to make wise decisions about who to hire.

    Many parts of this plan are instructional and not merely economical.

  41. Diane, I’ve just switched back to the 150 post–I think we somehow started 150 stuff on the museum site. I realize I erred in my last post. You had already stated that someone told you that if you didn’t like 150, you should leave. I guess I would like to know who–because whoever did so certainly doesn’t have 150’s best interests at heart. Alienating parents is not the way to solve 150’s problems.

  42. Impartial Observor: Just asking–once the board hires an administrator, should they just rubber stamp everything that person suggests, etc. I guess I believe the board should also play the role of “watchdog” to see that sound educational decisions are being made–with the best interests of the public and its schools in mind.

  43. Sharon:

    They absolutely need to keep informed as to what is happening and the confidence that they have in their administrators needs to be constantly reaffirmed.

    The problem with board members bringing policy is that they then look for administrators that act as rubber stamps for them.

    Also, they are not professional educators. If people have a difficult time respecting administrators that haven’t taught in years, how can they respect board members that are not even teachers?

    Once again, my points are about education in general and not specific to PSD 150. In my experience, the best systems are those in which school boards stay informed and watch what is going on, but they hire people with proven success and experience.

  44. Also… the notion of “if you don’t like it then leave” is ridiculous for any community to have. In the long run no one will want to be left with what remains. It is easy to leave, even easier to give up, maybe even easier to whine and moan without doing anything, but it is very difficult to stay and create positive change.

    Communities need excellent families, not the other way around.

    Schools need excellent teachers and administrators, not the other way around.

  45. Why does Dist. 150 have fewer students?

    Partly because of birth rates. Partly because of what has been just population loss in Peoria, for whatever reason.

    Mostly because of terrible decisions through the years by Dist. 150, particularly with John Strand and now Ken Hinton.

    And, also horrible school boards, that rubber stamp the stupid decisions pushed by Strand and Hinton, of which Martha Ross is a prime example of a rotten school board member.

    Any advice she has about anything having to do with Dist. 150 is far too little and far too late. The ship is sunk, and has been rotting for years. It began listing out of control when the middle school concept was put in place by Strand. It just keeps getting worse. The sea-worms are chewing up the boards of the ship as we speak.

    Thanks, Dist. 150 superintendents and school boards through the past 25 years or so. You’ve been the major factor in destroying Peoria’s older neighborhoods.

  46. I believe that Dr. Strand did not institute the middle schools–they preceded him. I would like to say that I am 100% sure of that, but can someone else back me up or refute me. He did begin the academy concepts for the high schools–which have not been all that successful.

  48. Another PS–Whenever (and whichever superintendent) middle schools were instituted, the change was made without the benefit of public forums, input, etc.–that concept was not even considered until recent years.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.