Tag Archives: District 150

Peoria Public Schools

D150 principal fired (UPDATED)

79 Comments

Lindbergh Middle School principal Julie McArdle was fired tonight at a special meeting of the District 150 Board of Education. The story is on WEEK’s site, and more details are on Billy’s blog.

Since it’s a personnel matter, the District is not talking. However, McArdle’s lawyer, Richard Steagall, is saying the principal is actually a whistleblower who uncovered a number of different improprieties by someone in central administration. A lawsuit will be filed against the District.

This story is bound to get bigger.

UPDATE: The Journal Star’s story is up now. Note:

The action [firing McArdle] occurred about six months after McArdle is said to have first blown the whistle on the previous Lindbergh principal….

Police and other sources confirmed that the investigation centers around McArdle’s allegation that her predecessor as Lindbergh principal, Mary Davis, misused district money in 2007-08….

[McArdle’s attorney, Richard] Steagall said McArdle informed district administrators about the credit card after receiving a phone call from a credit card company on Oct. 26 regarding late payments on the balance due. Previously unaware of a school credit card, McArdle asked for statements to be sent to the school.

According to Steagall, the balance on the card had at one point climbed beyond $9,000. He said McArdle also found documentation that $4,002.05 was paid toward the balance of the credit card from student activities funds on June 30, with that amount received by the credit card company on July 4.

“She found out there was a credit card for Lindbergh School with $9,000 in charges on it,” Steagall said of his client. “There were charges for Peoria Toyota, FedEx/Kinko’s, Amazon.com, Best Buy, an American Girls doll store, cash advances, things like that. One payment for over $4,000 was from the student activity fund. She’s reported all of this.”

After bringing the suspicious financial information to the district’s attention in October, McArdle assumed the district was investigating and didn’t pursue if further, Steagall said.

But recently, McArdle was asked by the district to resign, Steagall said. He believes that was directly in relation to McArdle’s whistle-blowing.

What’s interesting is reading the comments on WEEK’s and the Journal Star’s sites. If each commenter is really a different person, it would seem that there is no small amount of animosity toward McArdle. Yet other sources tell me McArdle is innocent and is being punished for blowing the whistle. Hopefully the police investigation will get to the bottom of the matter.

However it turns out, it’s another black eye for District 150.

2008 Campaign, Peoria Public Schools

Working cash bonds will raise property taxes 25¢ per $100 EAV

63 Comments

I recently spoke with District 150 interim comptroller Brock Butts about the $38,000,000 in working cash bonds the District wants to issue. He said the plan is to issue 15-year bonds, but hopefully pay them off early — possibly as quickly as five years. The bonds would be paid for by putting an additional levy on property taxes. Property taxes within the District would increase 25¢ per $100 of equalized assessed valuation (EAV). That means the owner of a $150,000 house would pay an additional $125 in property taxes.

Public notice of the District’s intent to issue the bonds was given in the Journal Star on April 7. Voters have 30 days from that date to either do nothing, in which case the district will go forward with the bond issuance in May, or gather at least 6,355 signatures to force the bond issuance to a binding referendum. The soonest a vote could be taken is February 2010, unless a special election were held earlier.

I asked what would happen if the voters did, in fact, succeed in petitioning for a referendum. Butts said that unless the District receives categorical funding from the State, the District will run out of money mid-May. At that point, the district could borrow money under something called “teacher’s orders” to pay certified staff salaries, but that’s about all they could do until October when they could issue tax anticipation warrants again. In short, it would keep them in a perpetual cash flow crisis.

Some explanation may be helpful here. Tax anticipation warrants are kind of like payday loans. As the name implies, money is borrowed in anticipation of receiving future tax revenue. The loan is paid off when the future tax revenue is collected. Basically, they’re using next year’s tax money to pay this year’s bills, just like you can use next month’s paycheck to pay this month’s bills if you get a payday loan. Companies like Investors Choice Lending do this and the District has been doing this for years, allowing people to try Investors Choice Lending.

That comes with a cost: interest. Tax anticipation warrants don’t raise your property tax bill, so guess from where the money for interest comes. According to Dr. Butts, it comes out of the education fund. Not good.

This is why the comptroller (and others) have recommended that the district issue $38 million in working cash fund bonds. It will give the district money to build up their reserves so they no longer have to issue tax anticipation warrants. That, coupled with efforts to balance the budget, will get the District back on sound financial footing. While it will cost a little extra in property taxes now, it will save money in the long run. It will also keep the interest costs from coming out of the education fund. Once the working cash fund bonds are paid off, property taxes will be abated.

This plan sounds reasonable and fiscally responsible to me, and I can support it. In fact, I’ve decided I’m not going to be a part of any effort to force this issue to a referendum.

However, I still have one really big reservation about this plan, and that is my lack of confidence in the school administration’s commitment to stick to it. As has been stated before, Blaine-Sumner was closed, then remodeled for use as offices, squandering the savings there. White School was closed and sold, but the Social Security Administration building was acquired and remodeled for more than the sale price of White. More squandered savings. And need we mention the money wasted on multiple superintendents and other questionable administrative/consultant positions?

What assurance can the District 150 Board of Education give the citizens of Peoria that they will not squander the savings of the recently-decided school closures, or the additional revenue from working cash fund bonds? That’s not a rhetorical question; I really think the constituents of District 150 deserve an answer.

Peoria Public Schools

D150 votes to close schools

30 Comments

The District 150 Board of Education voted Monday to close four schools — Kingman, Tyng, Irving, and a high school to be named later — and increase class sizes.

Combined, the operational savings by the end of the 2011 school year would mount to well more than $11 million.

Yep, and we were supposed to be enjoying $9 million in savings this year due to the closing of Blaine-Sumner and White schools. Who wants to bet me this new $11 million figure will similarly evaporate and a new crisis will emerge in 2011?

Peoria Public Schools

Should citizens force D150 bond issue to a referendum?

95 Comments

Elaine Hopkins thinks so.

You may recall that District 150, despite having just borrowed $30 million in tax-anticipation warrants at the beginning of the year to make payroll, is already running out of money again and needs to borrow $35 million more. This time they would raise the money through working cash bonds which will be repaid via property taxes over the next several years. Here’s the rub:

If 10 percent of voters petition the district to take the sale of the cash bonds to referendum, the district would run into a wall, having to wait until November, or plead with a judge to hold a special election, [interim controller Norm] Durflinger added.

Hopkins says “some people are now looking at this petition option.” “It could be a bargaining chip to stop future school closings, or could be affirmed on its own,” or it could be a way to get District 150 “management” to “resign in shame,” she says.

My take: When I first heard about this idea (of forcing a referendum on the bonds), I have to say, it didn’t thrill me. First of all, public schooling is an essential service and should be funded. Secondly, I just finished waging an unsuccessful effort to defeat the public facilities tax referendum, and I just don’t have the energy to do that again (so soon, at least). Thirdly, I have a hard time getting over the irony of museum tax supporters like Hopkins suddenly getting all concerned about wasting tax dollars. Apparently throwing $40 million down the drain on a museum is okay, but $35 million to pay teachers is unacceptable.

However, the more I think about it, the more I think forcing a referendum may not be such a bad idea. Why? Consider:

  1. They have been eluding voter accountability long enough. When District 150 wanted to build new schools, the money for that building program should have been submitted to the public via referendum. But it wasn’t. District 150, with the help of our state legislators (including then-state representative Schock) got legislation passed allowing District 150 to access the Public Building Commission for its building program, bypassing the voters and allowing them to raise our property taxes without a referendum. Practically speaking, this also meant they didn’t have to have public buy-in on the siting and design of the new school buildings.

  2. They have passed up other potential revenue. District 150 could have supported other school districts in the county and forced a 1/4% sales tax referendum onto the April ballot that, if passed, would have helped all county school districts get money for infrastructure needs, but they didn’t. District 150 officials won’t speak on this topic for attribution, but privately say that the reason they didn’t support this was because (a) they were asked not to by museum supporters such as Caterpillar and the Peoria Area Chamber of Commerce, who you may recall sent letters to all the school districts pressuring them to keep this off the ballot so it wouldn’t jeopardize the museum tax from passing, and (b) they didn’t want a new revenue stream right before they negotiated a new teachers contract because they thought it could lead to demands for higher pay/benefits. Hey, if they’re looking for ways to avoid getting more revenue, maybe they would favor forcing the bond issuance to a referendum.

  3. More money won’t resolve the root problem: mismanagement. We’ve been through this kind of crisis once already. We’ve already closed schools so that District 150 could allegedly get their fiscal house in order. Why are we going through this again — and so soon?

    • It is not just because of revenue shortfalls. This crisis is often explained as merely a revenue problem — that everything would be hunky-dory if it hadn’t been for the recession or reductions in state aid. That would be believable except that no other school district around here is in quite the crisis as District 150. For example, Pekin’s school district actually has a surplus. While their FY08 budget does have a planned deficit built into it, it’s covered not by loans, but reserves that have been saved up over several years — most recently FY07.
    • Savings from last round of closures were squandered. In 2007, District 150 closed White and Blaine-Sumner schools. However, they didn’t sell Blaine-Sumner, but remodeled it (including adding air conditioning) and turned it into district offices for about 80 workers. They did eventually sell the White School building for $750,000, but they also acquired the former Social Security Administration building on Knoxville and spent $1.27 million to remodel it to house their “transition to success academy.” Is it really any wonder that the district was unable to put up a surplus and save for a rainy day?

    By and large, we still have the same management team in place now as was in place then. If they were unable to properly manage the last crisis, why should we have any confidence that money given them this time will be any better managed?

From what I’ve heard, the worst that could happen if a referendum is forced is that the referendum could fail, the district could become insolvent and be taken over by the state or, possibly, the city. I’m beginning to think that’s not such a bad outcome. Small changes in the makeup of the school board over the past five years doesn’t appear to be working; a complete overhaul of the administration may be necessary.

Still, my mind isn’t totally made up. If anyone can give me reasons to have confidence in the current administration and their stated plans for improvement, I’m all ears.

Peoria Park District, Peoria Public Schools

Park District looking to buy Prospect properties from School District

85 Comments

Remember back in 2006 when District 150 purchased several properties adjacent to Glen Oak Park in hopes of locating a new school there? Well, now the Peoria Park District wants to buy them, and they’re asking for some help from Congressman Schock.

Included in Schock’s appropriations requests is one for “land appraisal, platting, demolition and acquisition to provide open public access to [Glen Oak] park.” I asked for some more information on this request from the Park District, and David Wheeler kindly sent me this text from their application for Federal assistance:

Glen Oak Park is bordered on the southwest corner with 12 residences owned by the local school district. Originally purchased for the purpose of constructing a school adjacent to Glen Oak Park, their plans have changed and the 2 acres of land is now available for the purpose of adding invaluable open space and stability to a social and economically challenged east bluff neighborhood. It will provide open public access to the park from the neighborhoods to the west, open up visibility and provide a higher degree of safety in one of Illinois’ oldest and most historic 19th century parks. Glen Oak Park is well known for its ancient oak trees, looped “carriage” drives, views of the Illinois River and was designed by the renowned landscape architect, Oscar Dubois. The opportunity to purchase land for expanding open space in an older established neighborhood is a rare occurrence and the opportunity is now.

To the best of my knowledge, the school district actually owns eight properties on the southwest corner of Glen Oak Park, not twelve. I double-checked the county’s website just to see if D150 picked up any additional land there, and it doesn’t appear they have. So either this was a minor error on the application, or else the school district has recently purchased additional properties.

In any case, I have to take issue with this proposed transaction for a few reasons:

  1. It’s odd that the park district, which just finished shrinking the size of the park in order to expand the zoo, would now be concerned about expanding the size of the park. It’s also strange that they would cite the “ancient oak trees,” many of which were uprooted to make way for the zoo expansion.

  2. If this transaction goes through, it will be the second time the taxpayers have paid for these properties. The school district bought these eight properties with $877,500 of tax money (and overpaid for them at that; fair-market value of the properties in 2005 was $609,540). Now the park district wants to use $1.2 million of tax money to purchase the same properties again (and demolish the structures). How many times do we taxpayers have to buy the same land? And why does the cost keep going up each time?

  3. If the properties are sold to the Park District, they will remain off the property tax rolls. That hurts not only those who receive property tax revenue (like the School District and the Park District, just to name a couple), but everyone who pays property taxes as well. Whenever tax-paying property is taken off the tax rolls, the remaining property owners pick up the slack. The School Board should be trying to get more property on the tax rolls where it can produce annual revenue for the district.

Also, if the school district does indeed only own the eight properties they purchased in 2006, here are their locations:

You’ll notice they’re not contiguous; how long before the park district tries to acquire the remaining properties?

Peoria Public Schools

School board to hire superintendent search firm Tuesday (Updated)

161 Comments

A special meeting of the District 150 Board of Education is planned for Tuesday night. There’s only one item of public business on the agenda:

APPROVAL OF CONTRACT WITH HAZARD, YOUNG, ATTEA & ASSOCIATES
Proposed Action: That the Contract with Hazard, Young, Attea & Associates covering the Superintendent search and the Controller/Treasurer search be approved. Further, that the Community Superintendent Search Committee’s proposed total budget of $45,000 be approved and that the timeline for commencing the candidate search be changed to August/September, 2009.

The district’s search committee recommended the firm to the board last month. A March 25 Journal Star article reported, “Cost to hire the firm is about $21,000, not including travel costs and office fees.” Apparently travel costs and office fees are no small expense, based on the $45,000 to be budgeted for the search committee.

Current superintendent Ken Hinton plans to retire June 30, 2010.

UPDATE: I received this additional information from School Board member Jim Stowell:

The first story didn’t anticipate them doing a search for Controller/Treasurer as well. Dr. Durflinger and Dr. Butts highly recommended a search firm who might “draw out” better applicants than what applied to our posting on several sources, including all of the “free” postings offered through the state. I had suggested the same firm recommended by the supt. search committee, if they were willing to do it for a reduced fee (and possibly seize on some economies of scale or interest from a duo who might like to work together). The Board saw a list of applicants and will discuss whether to go the search route.

Peoria Public Schools

District 150 going deeper in debt

105 Comments

Things are not looking good on Wisconsin Avenue:

Despite borrowing $30 million over the past three months using tax-anticipation warrants, the school district is again facing dire straits and according to the latest financial statements will not be able to meet payroll in May, much less a significant loan payment due in June. In order to remain solvent, district officials on Monday proposed restructuring its debt by seeking $35 million in working cash bonds, a loan structured to be paid back over several years.

Translation: property taxes for District 150 are going to go up, more teachers are going to get laid off, and more schools are going to close. District 150 needs to be reorganized from top to bottom.

Peoria Public Schools

Will D150 let search firm finish its work this time?

31 Comments

From the Journal Star:

A committee appointed to begin the search for District 150’s next superintendent will recommend the School Board hire . . . Hazard, Young, Attea & Associates to find a replacement for retiring Superintendent Ken Hinton.

This is the same search firm that was hired for nearly $20,000 in 2004 to find a replacement for ousted superintendent Kay Royster. But before they could complete their work, the District 150 board decided to hire Ken Hinton, even though he wasn’t qualified for the job at the time. The Journal Star reported on Feburary 1, 2005:

Without a public vote or notice, the District 150 School Board seems to have stopped searching for a new, permanent superintendent and has given its search firm the impression that the current superintendent arrangement will be permanent.

In a Jan. 29 e-mail response to the Journal Star stated that plans to bring superintendent candidates to Peoria for interviews have been dropped.

“We have a slate of competitive candidates we were planning to present to the board on Jan. 7 or thereafter,” he wrote.

“It is our understanding that will be the permanent arrangement. We regret that other candidates were not considered,” he stated. […]

A letter of agreement between the board and the search firm says the firm will be paid $19,500 plus expenses and does not contain a cancellation clause.

Schock said the board was still “looking into Hinton’s status. We’re finishing that up right now. Then the board will have a decision to make.”

Hinton has never completed the college courses required to be certified as a superintendent in Illinois, but several board members have expressed support for him to be named permanent superintendent.

Shortly after that, the board made it official. Here’s the Journal Star’s report from February 19, 2005:

The district hired a search firm to find candidates in September, but about three months later, some board members asked Hinton to consider the position. He began exploring his options and found the accelerated course at Western Illinois University. It starts March 11.

Board president Aaron Schock said the search firm’s contract will be terminated at Tuesday’s meeting. He said the firm performed half its duties and will get about $10,000.

Schock said he doesn’t consider this wasted money.

“I think it was the responsible thing for us to do at the time … (but) things change,” he said.

If the board hires this search firm (again) on the committee’s recommendation, I hope they let them complete their work this time. That was one of the most irresponsible decisions District 150 ever made — to throw $10,000 down the drain and hire someone unqualified for the job. Let’s hope that part of history doesn’t repeat itself.

Also of interest is that the choice of Hazard, Young, Attea & Associates was controversial in 2004 because of a past superintendent placement of theirs:

In November, the relationship between the search firm and some board members soured when they learned the search firm previously placed ousted Superintendent Kay Royster in her former job at Kalamazoo, Mich.

Let’s hope that part of history doesn’t repeat itself either!

Peoria Public Schools

D150 gets A+ bond rating from S&P

4 Comments

School board members received this happy news in their inbox recently:

Mr. Hinton wanted to let you know that he just found out that once more, we were able to get an A+ rating from Standard and Poors for our bond rating. This is GREAT news!

Debbie Sullivan CPS
Superintendent’s Office
Peoria Public Schools

According to Wikipedia, Standard and Poor’s A+ rating is considered “upper medium grade” and described as a “safe investment, unless unforeseen events should occur in the economy at large or in that particular field of business.”