Tag Archives: David Gorenz

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.

Audit shows budget errors and omissions at D150

Holy Toledo. I don’t generally read the Peoria Story blog, but Billy Dennis quoted a portion of this post, and it was so shocking I had to read more.

I’ve read past District 150 audit reports (available here*), and they’ve always been bad — bad enough that it makes me wonder why in the world Guy Cahill is still employed by the district. For example, here’s a note from the June 30, 2007 audit report:

In an ideal control setting, the District would have personnel possessing a thorough understanding of applicable generally accepted accounting principles staying abreast of recent accounting developments. Such personnel would perform a comprehensive review procedure to ensure that in the preparation of its annual financial statements that such statements, including disclosures, are complete and accurate.

And this:

The overall internal controls over the District’s accounting system are not adequate to ensure that misstatements caused by error or fraud, in amounts that would be material to the financial statements, may occur and not be detected within a timely period by employees in the normal course of performing their assigned functions.

That was the second year in a row the district got that last note. The 2006-07 audit was also the one that reported the district’s misallocation of over a half million dollars in Title I funds. But evidently the latest audit report takes the cake:

“The November 14, 2008 audit report, prepared by Clifton Gunderson LLP, for the 2007-08 school year, shows the District #150 administrators failed to budget $10,410,849 when budgeting for Teachers Retirement Service (TRS) pension contributions. […]

“This was not a new expense – the district has been budgeting for “on-behalf of” contributions to TRS for years. Their actual expenditure for this item during the 2006-07 school year was $7,264,468. How did they “forget” to budget over $10 million in expenditures – and revenue – for the 2007-08 school year?

“Further, how and why did the TRS provision grow over $3 million in one year? Did teacher salaries increase so much in one year that 10% of that increase amounted to $3 million?

Since the revenues and expenses for “on-behalf of” contributions to TRS effectively cancel each other out, the issue is more about transparency than anything else. If the public were to see that this fund grew by over 43% in one year, they might start asking questions — like, “why is that amount rising so dramatically?” and “what other information is the district hiding?” With omissions this great, how can we believe anything the school administration says about the budget and the need to close a high school? Incidentally, the “on-behalf-of” contributions are not on the 2008-09 budget that was submitted to the Illinois State Board of Education (ISBE), either.

Something I’ve always wondered is how District 150 can keep sending incomplete reports to the Illinois State Board of Education (ISBE). For instance, the last three years (2006-2008) of the district’s Annual Statement of Affairs (available here*) leaves required information completely blank, including salary schedules and non-salary payments over $2500. It is required by the State that the district report this information, and yet it hasn’t for multiple years, keeping taxpayers (and the State regulating agency itself) in the dark. With as many administrators and consultants as District 150 has, surely someone could be tasked with completing required reports.

These questions deserve answers. The information reported on Peoria Story has been forwarded to District officials. It will be interesting to hear their response.

*Note: If you want to look up the financial data or Statement of Affairs reports on the ISBE website, they’re listed by the district’s code number, which is 48-072-1500-25.

No mystery why D150 public meetings are poorly attended

District 150 is mystified — mystified! — as to why they can’t get more parents to give the school board their input. After only 13 parents showed up to a recent public meeting, board president David Gorenz was quoted by the Journal Star as saying, “It’s one of the most difficult issues districts face, how to get input.”

It’s no mystery to me. I think people see these meetings (rightly so) as a complete and total waste of their time. Why? Because the school board has already decided what they are going to do, and the only reasons they have public meetings are (1) to satisfy legal requirements in some cases, and (2) to gain public support for their inevitable decision.

There is no shortage of examples to choose from:

  • In August of this year, the school district had two public hearings to talk about their plans for the new Glen Oak and Harrison school buildings. Although supposedly a chance for the public to give their input, the district had no intention of changing anything about these plans, and they didn’t. Not one idea from the public was entertained; not one slightest variation from the district’s plan was made.
  • When Ken Hinton unveiled his plan to cut 45 minutes of instructional time out of every primary student’s school day, parents came out en masse to oppose it. Did the district listen? Nope. They voted 5-1 to approve it. Then, after weeks of letter-writing, demonstrating, petitioning (over 1,000 people signed petitions against the plan), etc., Hinton decided to restore 60% of the time. Instructional time was still cut despite parents’ pleas that all the time be restored, and despite being presented with alternative plans that would have accomplished the same goals without cutting instructional time.
  • Debbie Wolfmeyer, the new board vice president, when asked to meet with a parent regarding the aforementioned issue, responded, “It is not my role as a Board member to meet with individuals or groups.” So much for getting input from parents.
  • Without any public input at all, the school district decided it was going to build a school in Glen Oak Park and started buying up houses to make that a reality. When parents and neighbors turned out en masse to oppose it (including five neighborhood organizations and a city councilman), they were dismissed as a “vocal minority” by one school board member. Only a lawsuit against the park board stopped that from going through.

Eventually, people get the hint. The school board isn’t really interested in hearing their opinions or input — unless it agrees with what they’ve already decided. They’ve already made up their minds what they’re going to do, and “public input” meetings are, at best, an attempt to convince the ignorant masses why the board’s ideas are best.

The school board should be happy that fewer people are coming to the meetings — it makes their jobs so much easier when there’s no one around to disagree with their predetermined plans.

Note: Merle Widmer has a different take on Gorenz’s comment.