Tag Archives: District 150

D150 comes clean: Ending live broadcasts had nothing to do with cost

Back in April when the District 150 Board of Education decided to discontinue live broadcasts of the board meetings, they presented it as a cost-saving measure. I had this to say:

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.

Last night, board members admitted that was indeed the case. From Peoria Story:

Board members acknowledged that the reason they stopped the broadcasts was not, as was initially reported, to save money, but because they objected to negative comments from the public during the public comment portion of the meeting. “It (the money) was never my reason,” Jim Stowell said. “Nor mine,” board president Debbie Wolfmeyer said.

And the Journal Star adds these quotes:

“. . . The board has tried, but I think the board has the responsibility to try to shape the message they want to convey to the public. . . . I’ve heard the same four people at 70 percent of those meetings. . . . and I doubt that very few of them, if any, have any children in the district.” . . .

“I was in favor of taking the broadcast off until we could do something about how to answer people or how to tell our own story – we don’t answer people or questions or rebut anything, so all the public really hear is what other people are saying,” board member Martha Ross said, wanting to revisit the idea because community members have asked her to do so. “It’s their only connection to what’s going on at the school district.”

I would submit that these board members don’t quite understand the concept of petitioning the government for redress of grievances. They think they should get to take our money and feed us back a message they “shape” and “want to convey to the public.” All dissenting opinions should be censored or effectively hidden from the public.

The East Village Growth Cell is born

The City of Peoria is taking steps toward establishing another growth cell and tax increment financing (TIF) district. There’s even a website devoted to it. The website is very informative; it includes a map, a frequently-asked-questions (FAQ) page, and a timeline.

Here’s a brief overview of what’s happening: The City has been using a “growth cell strategy” to expand and develop the north and west fringes of the City. They now want to “apply the City’s Growth Cell Strategy to the heart of the City; taking advantage of existing infrastructure and building upon existing public and private investment.” So, they’ve carved out the following area to redevelop:

As you can see, they’re calling this the “East Village Growth Cell.” Already, there is “increase[d] interest in redevelopment,” they say, as a result of the new Glen Oak School and Neighborhood Impact Zone, but “additional public guidance and intervention are needed to further spur growth within the area,” according to the website. So, they want to get this area designated as a “Redevelopment Project Area” and classified as a “blighted area” or “conservation area” so they can create a new TIF. The growth cell and TIF would be coterminous.

That’s it in a nutshell; there’s more information at www.EastVillagePeoria.com.

Of particular interest in this whole process, though, is OSF’s involvement. They’re putting up the money for the study, the website explains: “As one of the larger investors within the East Village, OSF has agreed to advance the cost for the Consultant that will be reimbursed to OSF out of first proceeds if, and only if, Council approves a redevelopment project.” And the Catholic Diocese (specifically Patricia Gibson, Chancellor/Diocesan Attorney) issued the following press release today:

On behalf of the Catholic Diocese of Peoria, I would like to express my overwhelming support for the proposed East Village Growth Cell. This creative and progressive initiative will advance the quality of life of individuals living in the study area and make essential improvements to our most historic and traditional neighborhoods.

Our most precious resources are the families who live throughout the City of Peoria. It’s particularly important that we engage these families throughout the process and demonstrate the City’s commitment to provide resources to reinvest and revitalize the heart of our community. This study area can be the stepping stones to a new beginning for the neighborhoods located within the East Village Growth Cell.

“The proposed study area will be a tremendous blessing to the Peoria community,” says Patricia Gibson, Chancellor/Diocesan Attorney. “The Catholic Diocese has made major investments within the proposed study area including the ongoing restoration of Spalding Institute and a new Pastoral Center. Additionally, St. Mary’s Cathedral and St. Bernard’s Parish are uniquely located within the proposed boundaries. We believe that this neighborhood will continue to grow and flourish, and we are confident that an investment of this magnitude will open the door to future development.”

OSF Saint Francis Medical Center has lead the way in providing the highest quality of health care for our city. They continue to show their commitment to the community with the expansion of their campus. We trust that the continued involvement of OSF will greatly enhance future development.

And the City of Peoria also issued a press release that quotes several community leaders; here’s part of it:

A new strategy will ensure that these projects are completed in a consistent manner, thereby becoming a catalyst for future investment.

On July 13, 2010, Members of the Peoria City Council will be asked to approve a request for proposals to conduct a study in the East Village Growth Cell. The study will determine if the area is eligible for redevelopment. A residential TIF has the potential to create opportunities for major improvements in the study area. This initiative marks the first time that the City of Peoria has done a study that includes housing.

“This could be a unique project in that it incorporates opportunities for residential re-development in the heart of one of our older neighborhoods. I believe the council will be anxious to see the study move forward and have an opportunity to discuss the findings.  Perhaps it will generate a model we can use in other more mature areas of our city,” says Mayor Jim Ardis.

Development in the proposed East Village Growth Cell will compliment the ventures currently undertaken in the area, including investments by OSF Saint Francis Medical Center and District 150 in the surrounding neighborhood. The study will also provide the opportunity to develop businesses within the Growth Cell.

The East Village Growth Cell presents an opportunity for a major collaboration between Peoria School District 150, OSF Saint Francis Medical Center, and the City of Peoria.

Dr. Grenita Lathan, Superintendent of Peoria Public Schools said, “We look forward to partnering with the City and OSF on this potential growth opportunity for Glen Oak School and the surrounding neighborhoods.”

“OSF Saint Francis Medical Center is pleased to support the East Village redevelopment project. We believe the stabilization of the neighborhood and the increase in home ownership will have a positive impact on the area,” says Sue Wozniak, Chief Operating Officer, OSF Saint Francis Medical Center.

The study area has the potential to provide for future growth, improvements to the surrounding neighborhoods, and redevelopment of affordable housing.

So, let’s see, the Mayor, the D150 Superintendent, the OSF COO . . . . I do believe this is a highly coordinated effort. All these press releases, the website, a surprise public meeting with residents, and the City Council agenda came out on the same day at the same time. Sounds like yet another deal that has been brokered behind closed doors and rolled out to the public with great fanfare, ala the Wonderful Development.

I hate to be cynical, but this just looks like a typical “done deal” with public input solicited after the fact for window dressing. It bothers me that there’s been so much apparent coordination by public officials out of the public’s eye. The public doesn’t have much time to look into this project before the City votes on pursuing it. That’s generally how the Council likes it.

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.

Residency requirement for District 150 employees?

District 150 Board of Education member Rachael Parker wants to see a residency requirement enacted for district employees who will start to receive their payment with an instant paystub generator. In other words, she wants everyone who works for District 150 to live in District 150. There’s one little problem with that idea, though: it’s currently prohibited by law to require teachers to reside in the district.

The Illinois School Code states in 105 ILCS 5/24-4.1, “Residency within any school district shall not be considered in determining the employment or the compensation of a teacher or whether to retain, promote, assign or transfer that teacher.” There are different rules for cities with a population over 500,000 (meaning Chicago). Currently, Chicago teachers are required to live in the city. But Senate Bill 3522, which passed the Illinois Senate in March of this year and is under consideration now in the House, would end residency requirements for teachers in Chicago as well. The Chicago teachers’ union supports the bill.

But state law is not written in stone. If there’s political support for an idea, state law can be changed relatively easily, in fact. For instance, it was against state law for school districts to access the Public Building Commission, but thanks to Aaron Schock and George Shadid, District 150 was given five years to rack up millions of dollars in bonded debt for new school facilities via the PBC. Perhaps Dave Koehler and Jehan Gordon can get legislation passed allowing District 150 to require residency for teachers.

In the meantime, the law appears to only protect teachers from residency requirements, not all district employees. It looks like the district could require all employees except teachers to live within district boundaries without having to get any state legislation passed. It would require bargaining with other unions, however.

I support residency requirements for school district employees. It would ensure that teachers and other district employees are personally invested in District 150 and its success. When they bargain for salary and benefit raises, they would be personally invested in contributing to those increases through their own property taxes. They would live in the same community as the students they serve. It would improve the tax base of the city overall and help stem the hollowing out of the middle class from the city — and that in itself will help the educational climate in District 150.

As to whether that could mean losing out on some candidates, Parker said: “I don’t believe that, that you’re not going to be able to recruit a teacher just because you want them to live within the school district boundary.”

This is the biggest argument given against residency requirements: the idea that you will get fewer or inferior teacher candidates if you require residency. I don’t buy it. Large urban school districts like they have in Chicago have these kinds of challenges because housing in the city is so expensive and/or unsafe. That’s not the case in Peoria, where housing within district borders is safe and cheaper than surrounding school districts such as Dunlap, Morton, or Germantown Hills. Given the salaries that teachers (and especially administrators) receive in proportion to housing prices, I think you’ll still have a healthy pool of qualified candidates who would be happy to live within district boundaries.

Some would say that teachers don’t want to live within District 150 boundaries because they don’t want their children going to District 150 schools. I can’t see that argument as anything less than self-indicting. That’s like a chef saying, “Oh, I’d never let my kids eat at my restaurant! The food here stinks!” It also kind of defeats the argument that the teaching is better when you don’t have a residency requirement.

In short, I haven’t heard a coherent argument against residency requirements for district employees, and there do appear to be numerous benefits.

Davis gets to keep her salary unless she’s convicted…and maybe even then

Since Mary Davis was fired from District 150, I’ve been wondering if the taxpayers would be getting their money back from all those months she was on paid administrative leave. Today I got the answer from the district’s spokesperson Stacey Shangraw: Only if she’s convicted:

Mary [Davis] will be required to pay back the salary she received while she was on administrative leave if she is convicted of a crime. The pay back requirement does not come into play when a person is indicted or charged. Her trial for the criminal charges has been set to begin August 16.

So we will not know if she is required to pay back the salary she received while on leave until the criminal proceedings are finished. It is outlined in the Illinois State Statute, the state officials and employees ethics act, under 5 ILCS 430/5-60 that she will be required to pay the salary back, however it is not part of the criminal code.

If convicted, we will ask the State’s Attorney to include a request to include payments as part of her sentencing, but the Judge is not required to include that in the sentence or order. If the Judge does not include this payment requirement in the criminal sentencing order then the district would have to seek payment by first demanding it pursuant to the statute.

Here’s what 5 ILCS 430/5-60(b) says:

As a matter of law and without the necessity of the adoption of an ordinance or resolution under Section 70?5, if any officer or government employee of a governmental entity is placed on administrative leave, either voluntarily or involuntarily, pending the outcome of a criminal investigation or prosecution and that officer or government employee is removed from office or employment due to his or her resultant criminal conviction, then the officer or government employee is indebted to the governmental entity for all compensation and the value of all benefits received during the administrative leave and must forthwith pay the full amount to the governmental entity.

Sounds complicated. It also sounds like District 150 won’t be getting that money back. Read the wording of that statute again, especially the part that says, “and that officer or government employee is removed from office or employment due to his or her resultant criminal conviction, then the officer or government employee is indebted….” They fired her before she was convicted of anything, not because of a criminal conviction. So, I’ll bet the statute is moot and the district doesn’t get that money back, unless they can get it included as part of her sentencing.

Any lawyers out there, feel free to correct me if I’m reading the statute incorrectly. I’d really like to be wrong about this.

Joint meeting of City Council and D150 School Board tonight

There will be a joint meeting of the Peoria City Council and the District 150 Board of Education tonight at 6:30 p.m. at the Gateway Building. The meeting is open to the public and will cover this agenda:

ITEM NO. 1 WELCOME – OPENING COMMENTS by MAYOR JIM ARDIS

ITEM NO. 2 WELCOME – OPENING COMMENTS by DISTRICT #150 SCHOOL BOARD PRESIDENT DEBBIE WOLFMEYER

ITEM NO. 3 PRESENTATION – PEORIA PROMISE

ITEM NO. 4 PRESENTATION – RACE TO THE TOP

ITEM NO. 5 PRESENTATION – DISTRICT #150 SCHOOL CONSTRUCTION – NEW and RENOVATIONS

ITEM NO. 6 PRESENTATION – SCHOOL/CITY IMPACT ZONES

ITEM NO. 7 PRESENTATION – PEORIA HIGH SCHOOL and READINESS to OPEN in AUGUST 2010

ITEM NO. 8 PRESENTATION – DISTRICT #150 ADMINISTRATIVE STRUCTURE for 2010/11

ITEM NO. 9 PRESENTATION – MAYOR JIM ARDIS — MAYORAL INTERESTS in URBAN EDUCATION

ITEM NO. 10 ANNOUNCEMENTS and CLOSING COMMENTS by MAYOR JIM ARDIS and DISTRICT #150 SCHOOL BOARD PRESIDENT DEBBIE WOLFMEYER

Item No. 9 should be especially interesting, as it’s being reported that Mayor Ardis hopes to “put to rest” rumors that the City wants to take over the school district.

D150 public comments on the web for all to hear

The Peoria School District 150 Board of Education decided last month to discontinue live broadcasts of the school board meetings on public access cable television starting in May. Instead, they are going to show the meeting a week delayed, and they’re going to excise the public comment portion of the meeting — that is, they are going to censor part of the official meeting because they don’t want the public to see it.

However, since the school board meetings are open meetings, recordings can be made by any member of the public. Former Journal Star employee Elaine Hopkins made an audio recording of the public comments and posted it on her blog, Peoria Story. Kudos to her for keeping the public informed while the school board tries to keep the public in the dark. There are still a few kinks to work out; for instance, she’s uploaded the file in WAV format, which is uncompressed and makes for a hefty download. Once she learns to compress it into a reasonably-sized mp3 file, we’ll really be in business.

It’s funny. These comments used to be available only to those who watched the meeting live on Comcast Cable in Peoria. Now they’re available on demand to anyone in the world who wants to hear them. The school board’s attempt to suppress the broadcast of these comments has resulted in even wider distribution! I love irony.

ISBE to Peoria: Psych!

From the Journal Star:

Grenita Lathan has been granted that needed endorsement to take the helm as superintendent at Peoria School District 150 after all.

Despite state education officials saying Tuesday the process still was taking place and they had not received the supporting documentation needed to receive her certification, the endorsement was issued Tuesday afternoon.

Is it just me, or does it look like the right hand doesn’t know know what the left hand is doing at the Illinois State Board of Education (ISBE)? In yesterday’s paper, spokeswoman for the ISBE Mary Fergus was quoted as saying, “To date, Grenita Lathan has not submitted the necessary paperwork proving she’s met all the Illinois requirements for a superintendent certificate,” and District 150 spokeswoman Stacey Shangraw told the paper “Lathan submitted application materials to the state twice because they ‘lost’ the first set.”

So, to recap, Lathan sent her paperwork, and the ISBE lost it. Then Lathan sent her paperwork again, and the ISBE said they never received it. But while their spokesperson was explaining to the press that they hadn’t received Lathan’s paperwork, someone else at the ISBE was busy issuing Lathan a superintendent certificate.

As if we don’t have enough drama in Peoria, now we have the ISBE messing with us.

No wonder D150 is trying to bury public comments

Tonight was the last District 150 Board of Education meeting that will be televised live on Comcast’s education public access channel 17. From now on the meeting will be broadcast a week delayed — and with the public comment period excised. It’s increasingly easy to see why the district would not want this portion of the meeting on television. They want to be able to control the image of the district, the board, and the administration. But during the public comment time, a more unflattering image is often presented. And sometimes it exposes things the administration wants to keep hush-hush.

Like tonight.

Rumors of unapproved clerical raises were substantiated at tonight’s school board meeting, the Journal Star reports:

The union representing clerical workers at Peoria School District 150 is filing a grievance after learning 10 of its members in the central administration building were arbitrarily given raises in November now totaling more than an estimated $80,000, officials said Monday.

The raises were rescinded Monday, effective immediately.

Debbie Chavez, former president of Local 6099 Peoria Federation of Support Staff, which represents some 650 clerical, cafeteria and paraprofessional workers, told School Board members during public comments [emphasis added] on Monday that both the union and the School Board had been left in the dark about the raises approved by the administration, which she said boosted the pay of some by more than 50 percent.

Interim Superintendent Norm Durflinger defended the raises and said they didn’t violate the collective bargaining agreement … even though they were kept a secret from the union and the school board … even though he rescinded them effective immediately. He’s going to sit down and talk to the union about the raises … now that they know about them. Whoops.

I have to admit, I was skeptical about this scandal when the rumors first started flying on my blog. It sounded too ridiculous to be true. Imagine giving just a few clerical workers humongous raises — an $8/hour raise in one case — at the same time the district is pleading poverty, laying off teachers, closing schools, and cutting out live broadcast of the school board meetings. Nobody would be that stupid.

And yet….

If the school district were trying to destroy every last ounce of trust the public might have for them, I don’t know what more they could do than what they’re doing now.

My suggestion: Now that they’ve rescinded the raises, they should have enough money to broadcast the meetings live and in their entirety. After all, finances were the reason cited for going to a one-week-delayed, censored broadcast. Now that they can save $80,000 in five months, they should have plenty of money to restore the live feed and let the public see their representatives in action on Monday nights, right?

Mayoral appointment of school board members has big hurdle

Never waste a good scandal. On the heels of today’s District 150 embarrassment — Mary Davis’s indictment — the Journal Star is reporting that Peoria Mayor Jim Ardis is thinking about exploring how he could have more influence over the district by appointing school board members:

He says he’s looking at larger cities such as Chicago, New York and Boston for inspiration to initiate change here that would intertwine his job as mayor with the decision-making of the school district. […] “It’s an interesting concept that I believe is worthy for some consideration,” Ardis continued. “From what I’ve read, the mayors who have been in the position to do that have seen success. It’s something I’m interested in. And I think the community is interested in learning more about it, too.”

Whether or not you think this is a good idea, it may be a moot point. Despite the relatively simple process the paper describes for changing the way school board members are chosen — “To enact such a change would require a public referendum or legislation approved by the General Assembly” — in reality it will be much more difficult.

The reason is because school board elections in Peoria are not governed by state law, but rather by a 1987 Class Action Voting Rights lawsuit settlement. That settlement did away with at-large elections of school board members, replacing it with a three-ward system and giving specific instructions on how board members would be chosen from each of those wards.

The Final Consent Decree clearly states in paragraph 4, “The Election Commission of the City of Peoria and the Peoria County Clerk are authorized and ordered to comply with the terms of this Consent Decree and to conduct elections in accordance with the terms of this Consent Decree.” It further states in paragraph 6, “This Court retains jurisdiction of this case for purposes of supervising the implementation of this Consent Decree.”

In other words, if you want to change how school board members are chosen, you’re going to have to get the new system approved by the court, and that could mean getting surviving litigants — including the school district itself — to agree to the changes. You can bet that mayoral appointment of school board members would be hotly contested.

Surely Mayor Ardis knows this challenge is out there. This same Voting Rights lawsuit settlement changed the City Council’s makeup as well. It established both the number of at-large councilmen (five instead of three) and the bullet voting system for at-large elections. At least one group has met in recent years to explore doing away with the bullet voting system in the City, but so far there has been no public action toward that goal.