Updated at 3:30 p.m. on February 1, 2011 — Due to inclement weather, all Peoria Public Schools and Administrative Offices will be closed on Wednesday, February 2, 2011.
Good decision. It’s not going to be pretty tomorrow.
RICK CLOYD SEEKS DISTRICT 150 SCHOOL BOARD 3rd DIST. SEAT
AS WRITE-IN CANDIDATE
Rick CloydPeoria – Citing a long record of community involvement, Rick Cloyd announced today he is a write-in candidate for the Peoria Public School District 150 Board of Education from the 3rd district.
Because no one filed nominating petitions for the expiring Board term of Jim Stowell, anyone seeking the office will have to run as a write-in candidate in the April 5 general election.
“I’m a lifelong resident of Peoria, and as a graduate of Hines Primary and Richwoods High School, I’m a product of District 150,” Cloyd said in announcing his candidacy.
“This community must have a healthy and accountable public school system, because all of us – students, parents and taxpayers — have a big stake in the effectiveness of our local schools,” he said.
For three years, he and his wife Sally have volunteered with Carl Cannon’s ELITE youth outreach. “Our experience with ELITE really opened my eyes to the potential of Peoria’s youth. District 150 can, and must, provide a safe and respectful environment of educational excellence to help students realize that potential,” Cloyd said. He also taught a Junior Achievement economics classroom course for Richwoods High School seniors.
“In my career with Caterpillar, and as a former vice president of Keystone Steel & Wire Company, I’ve gained the business analysis, personnel management, organizational strategy and marketing experience the School Board needs,” he said.
“District 150 spends approximately $1 million per school day. Many business leaders seriously question what stakeholders are getting for that investment. This may be the most critical public body in our community, and it needs people with business experience to provide fact-based and accountable governance,” Cloyd said.
Cloyd, 62, graduated cum laude from Bradley University with a degree in journalism, and earned an MBA with emphasis in finance from the University of Illinois Executive program. He is employed by Caterpillar Inc. in Strategy & Business Development. Prior to joining Caterpillar, Cloyd was vice president of sales and marketing for Keystone in Bartonville, where he worked for 25 years.
Cloyd has served the community in a number of capacities, including as a member of the Greater Peoria YMCA board, and a volunteer with several other civic and charitable organizations.
According to Dave Haney’s blog, Cloyd lives at 9172 N. Picture Ridge Road. Also running as a write-in candidate: Jody Pitcher, 6109 N. Heather Oak Drive. Pitcher is a Republican Precinct Committee Person and the organizer of the Peoria 9-12 Project.
The Illinois Attorney General’s office issued the following ruling in a letter dated November 16, 2010:
Dear President Wolfmeyer:
On February 16 and February 18, 2010, this Office received three Requests for Review alleging a violation of the Open Meetings Act (OMA) (5 ILCS 120/1 et-seq.) by the Peoria School District 150 Board of Education. The Requests for Review raise questions whether the Board violated the requirements of OMA when four members of the Board attended a February 16, 2010 event with media and the District’s new Superintendent that was closed to the public.
On February 26, 2010, this Office sent a further inquiry letter to Board of Education President Deborah Wolfmeyer requesting the minutes and the audio recording of the event. On March 12, 2010, School District attorney David Walvoord responded to our further inquiry letter and supplied us with an audio copy of the meeting and a written explanation regarding the event.
In its written response to our letter, Mr. Walvoord confirmed that four members of the District’s seven-member board, including the President and Vice President, were present at the event. Clearly, therefore, more than a majority of a quorum of the Board was present and gathered at that time.
One requester was told by District Spokesperson Stacey Shangraw that the event was open only to “members of the professional press.”
This Office has reviewed the audio CD supplied to us by the District. The event’s timeline follows:
2:54- Primary speaker invites questions from the media “for us.”
4:07- In response to a question regarding whether deficits came up in the selection process, the primary speaker states, “I don’t think we got into those kinds of specifics,” and goes on to recount that Lathan shared “with us” an anecdote about a deficit she dealt with in her job with the San Diego school system.
6:00- In response to a question whether Lathan has unanimous support of the board, the primary speaker states “she has the full support of the board.”
13:00- At this point, multiple board members amplify previous answers. At least 3 board members appear to speak interactively at this point.
21:00- The primary speaker notes that “we” are paying for her expenses while she’s here.
23:00- A Board member other than primary speaker makes concluding remarks.
In his letter, Mr. Walvoord explains that the press conference did not violate OMA because the only comments made by Board members were in response to press questions and that there was no discussion or dialogue among the Board members present.
For purposes of OMA, a “meeting” is defined as a gathering of at least a majority of a quorum of the members of the public body held for the purpose of discussing public business. 5 ILCS 120/1.02. The phrase “discussing public business” refers to an exchange of views and ideas among public body members on a matter or matters germane to the affairs of their public body. It is not directed at casual remarks, but, in effectuation of section 1 of the Act (5 ILCS 120/1), at discussions that are deliberative in nature. A deliberation in this context is a discussion aimed primarily at reaching a decision on a matter of concern to the public body, regardless of whether the discussion will result in the taking of an action, will set policy or is preliminary to either. See, Guide to the Open Meetings Act, at 20 (Rev. 2004).
In this instance, we conclude that although a majority of a quorum of the Board was present at the February 16, 2010 event, the Board members did not engage in a deliberative discussion of public business, and thus, did not violate the Act. Based on our analysis of the audio recording, the comments made by the individual members in response to questions posed by the members of the media did not constitute a deliberative process aimed at setting policy or that could lead to a final decision by the Board. Accordingly, the gathering was not a “meeting,” for purposes of OMA.
Therefore, we find that further action is not warranted.
We would strongly suggest, however, that gatherings of this nature should be discouraged. Clearly, in these circumstances, the gathering of four members of the Board in a venue closed to the public caused serious questions to be raised as to the propriety of the event. Further, although a gathering may not be planned with the intention of discussing public business at its outset, the gathering is subject to conversion to a statutory “meeting” at any point. Thus, a gathering will becomes [sic] a “meeting,” for purposes of the Act, if the attention of the requisite number of public body members present turns to a deliberative discussion of public business, whether or not there was any intent to conduct a “meeting.” Had this occurred in these circumstances, a violation of the OMA would inevitably have happened.
Should you have any questions or would like to discuss this matter, please feel free to contact me at (312) 814-5383. This letter shall sever to close this file.
Sincerely,
Cara Smith
Public Access Counselor
By:
Matthew Rogina
Assistant Public Access Counselor
The School Board on Monday voiced a consensus seeking what amounts to about $69 million in local property taxes next year, an increase of about 1 percent, but far less than the 6.5 percent increase requested last year…. The proposed levy would add about $18 [to a $100,000 home]…. Prompting that increase is District 150 has 15 schools in need of a mandated 10-year safety survey yet this year and another 11 schools next year.
[Interim Comptroller/Treasurer Dave] Kinney says the levy would allow for about $700,000 more to be collected toward the life safety inspections – which are required by law – but it’s just a start. “With the first eight schools on the list it’s looking like about a $6-million price tag over a five year period,” says Kinney. “It’s not anything we have to address immediately but going forward we know we’re going to have to address it at some point.” …Kinney says the levy alone does not completely solve the district’s budget deficit. “There are going to have to be other decisions made to help not only balance the budget this year but next year, too, “says Kinney.
In other words, once again we’re going to be paying more for less. It will be interesting to see how current school board member Jim Stowell votes on this tax increase, and how that decision affects his run for Peoria City Council.
After I posted the press release from Rev. Raymond E. Watson, Jr., I was received some e-mail messages disputing the accusations made. So I made some inquiries. School Board member Laura Petelle stated, “Contrary to what this press release claims, I have not been contacted by this group or any individual claiming to be connected to it, though I realized people sometimes misspell my last name when attempting to e-mail me. However, I attempted to contact them after receiving this press release and they have not returned my attempts at contact.”
In addition, I requested an official response from District 150 through Stacey Shangraw, who referred me to the new FOIA officer. My e-mail to the new FOIA officer wasn’t acknowledged, but Petelle forwarded me this e-mail from Superintendent Lathan (with Lathan’s permission). She also forwarded the e-mail to Billy Dennis (Peoria Pundit) and Emerge Peoria.
Board Members,
In response to Reverend Watson’s “press release” here are the actual facts about PHS. To my knowledge, only one blogger has inquired about the press release.
1) All principals and Central Office administrators in the District, who were not already on multi-year contracts, have been offered one-year contracts. There were no exceptions. Any ongoing multi-year contracts prior to my arrival must be honored. New principals were offered multi-year contracts.
2) Textbooks are an ongoing issue throughout our District. Several years ago, we evaluated our textbook process as a Six-Sigma project. We improved the process, but our high student mobility rate is an issue. To correct his letter, the first Peoria High textbook request sent to the warehouse was dated August 19, not August 1. The warehouse has filled all of the received textbook requisitions that are able to be filled.
3) There are only two plumbing work orders outstanding for PHS. A Sept. 30 work order for a leaking drinking fountain and an Oct. 5 work order for two toilets – one fills slowly and the other has a broken flush handle. A nearby plumbing service would need to be contacted.
4) I am developing a schedule to meet with all parent groups to introduce myself and allow time for Q&A.
5) We have been working collaboratively with the City to address the after school safety issues :
a) The posting of new signs on North Street indicating “No Stopping or Standing” and indicating no left turn onto North Street between the hours of 2:00 & 4:00 PM Monday through Friday.
b) Requesting support from the Parking Enforcement Division to assist in the enforcement of parking violations.
c) The installation of gates that will prevent vehicles from exiting designated entrance / exits.
d) The moving of the public bus stop form Richmond/North to Nebraska/North
e) The purchase of video cameras to tape student dismissal and after school activities.
f) Conduct school assemblies at all high schools regarding sidewalk safety.
Grenita F. Lathan, Ph.D.
Superintendent
Peoria Public Schools
3202 N. Wisconsin Avenue
Peoria, IL 61603
I received an e-mail yesterday that said: “The attached is a press release from concerned parents of PHS students. This is a response to negative and comments that have been publicly made. We send this in hopes that it will posted on your information websites.” It was signed by “Concerned Parents of PHS Students,” but only one member of that group was named — Rev. Raymond E. Watson, Jr., who is listed as the “contact person.” Here’s the letter:
Once again the parents of Peoria High School students feel the need to stand up and speak out against false accusations by the District 150 Administration, School Board and certain individuals/groups in the public that have made it their personal agenda to attack Peoria High School and thus, our children.
We have repeatedly asked for Board Members to come meet with us to discuss our issues and no response. We have contacted Dr. Lathan as far back as May, and had no response. If The Chamber of Commerce or any other organization deemed important by the B.O.E. or Superintendent requested their presence, they would attend. We, as parents, are tired of groups/members of the public that have no children at PHS spreading false rumors and accusations against our children and school staff. We felt the closure of a high school was a mistake but we have to make the best out of the situation. Those in the public that are spreading rumors, we ask you to stop because it does nothing but harm all the students of PHS. There is much truth to the adage if you can’t say something positive, say nothing at all. You are there to represent all the students of District #150 and set an example. How do you think our students feel after hearing these unwarranted accusations? Remember, the Board voted to close Woodruff and now it is a Peoria High problem? It might behoove you in the future to have solutions before decisions are made.
We have asked for a reason behind the PHS staff being the only high school that has its administration on a year-to-year contract. There have been numerous administrators that have received multi-year contracts before they proved themselves capable. Some have not even lived in the District and yet they are given multi-year contracts. This is a double standard and we feel there are ulterior motives behind the lack of continuity from the Board and Administration on Wisconsin Ave. We have been told that the Superintendent wanted to evaluate things before making a decision. So, what is the reason for individual administrators unfamiliar with our District and yet having been relocated to District #150; how do they justify receiving contracts without proven results?
If you want results, here are some results.
The facts are as follows:
PHS ACHIEVED SAFE HARBOR
AVERAGE DAILY ATTENDANCE IS 93%
ACT SCORES ARE UP AND NOT JUST FOR ONE YEAR
2008
2009
2010
Average
16.28
17.08
17.7
The fact that discipline in school is being handled by our undermanned staff (add 500 students and only 2 additional campus police officers for a total of four) is a testament to the PHS Administrators who have made the best out of a difficult situation thrust upon them by a School Board and community leadership that failed to plan. Where are all the civic leaders that endorsed closing a school? Where are the business leaders that profess wanting the best for all the children of District 150? Talk is cheap!!!
The students are in a safe environment and learning in spite of the district’s failure to provide children with schoolbooks. It was not until e-mails were sent out that books were finally delivered 2 weeks into the school year and PHS staff requested the books August 1st.
Another issue is the transportation system that is the fault of District Administrators who were unprepared due to a failure to plan. This is unacceptable and continues as buses fail to show for extra-curricular activities, or do not have heat or are mechanically unsound putting our children in danger.
In addition, why has it taken 5 months to get work orders regarding plumbing issues addressed? Why is it that basic maintenance issues that should have been addressed years prior as part of routine upkeep of the building were presented to the public as ‘major updates’?
It is not the responsibility of school staff to follow students home. The responsibility to ensure your child gets to school and home safely is the responsibility of the parent, student, District #150 Board and District #150Administrators. It is unrealistic to think that school staff can follow every child home. There are numerous after-school activities and teachers are available for students that need extra help with their studies. The responsibility lies mostly with the District #150 Board and Administrators, not PHS staff. We realize that buses are provided for students who live a certain distance from their respective school and for students who have to cross hazard-deemed streets. However, again, this all comes back to a failure to plan, to obtain correct information; and it certainly points to the fact that the knowledge was not present when the Board or District Administration decided to close a high school. The due diligence was not done to plan for such possible events since the District has encountered similar issues with the other high schools. The onus is on the Board and Administration who failed to work cooperatively with the proper entities with whom they should have a good-working relationship to see how potential issues could or would be addressed. It is always best to plan for unforeseen happenings
We also are offended by the fact that nothing was done by the Administrative staff to prevent these stories from exacerbating on Channel 25 and in the Peoria Journal Star. Stories like this could likely be ran about every school in America, but the Board and Administration reacted to the stories by recommending staggering dismissal times, etc., in essence, blaming PHS. Again, more assumptions about our Peoria High students. We understand that there will happenings, but it is not exclusive to Peoria High. These incidents occur across every school, across every city, across the nation.
In summary, we feel we are receiving disparate treatment as issues are ongoing at the other schools, yet they do not receive the unwarranted attention that has been thrust upon the Peoria High School community. The Board of Education and the Superintendent have failed to address and plan regarding the issues mentioned above. We do not appreciate the inaccurate perception that is being portrayed to the general public about our school and we are extremely disappointed and frustrated with the lack of information and support that we have received. Randy Simmons and his staff are the best of the best and we expect to be treated as such, which provides for a domino effect to the education and fulfillment for the PHS students. Our children deserve no less.
We have asked for School Board involvement and been ignored. We have asked for District150 Administration involvement and been ignored. We will no longer be silent about the injustice being perpetrated against PHS and our children. Let all who read this know if you want your child to be taught by the best and cared for by the best then PHS is the right place for your child!
About a week after a District 150 bus driver [Gary H. Stewart, 46] was arrested for allegedly driving while under the influence when he crashed into two parked cars and sent more than a dozen children to two Peoria hospitals, the School Board fired him. Driving while under the influence in Syracuse is a serious offense. It can lead to you losing your driving privileges, possibly getting jail time, and it may even trickle down to other aspects of your life, such as your chances of employment.
Stewart, hired by the school district last year, had been arrested numerous times on various charges ranging from armed robbery to attempted murder, as well as a drug conviction, according to Peoria County circuit clerk records.
But sources at District 150 say they knew only of a misdemeanor conviction for criminal damage to property and a felony conviction for retail theft – which both date back to the 1980s – and did not know of the 1993 drug conviction, nor other arrests. They said it was not on the criminal history check conducted by the Illinois State Police.
Transcripts from the Illinois State Police Criminal History Record Check Information database include records of arrests, state’s attorney filing decisions, court dispositions, sentence information and custodial data, but law permits only conviction information to be disseminated to the public.
Officials with the Illinois Secretary of State’s Office also said they did not know about the drug conviction, which under law would have prevented Stewart from receiving a bus driving permit.
Tammi Kestel, assistant bureau chief of the Illinois State Police’s Bureau of Identification based in Joliet, said some arrests and conviction information may fall through the cracks because they are not reported to them.
Some arrests and conviction information may fall through the cracks? That’s comforting. I mean, it’s just our children’s lives that are at stake. Let’s not get too concerned about it, right? Hey, convictions sometimes just don’t get reported, so convicts may be driving your kids’ school bus. And your children might be in danger. But, not to worry. We’ve determined that the following agencies are not to blame: District 150, Illinois Secretary of State, Illinois State Police Bureau of Identification. Don’t you feel better now?
A new bench has been installed outside Charles Lindbergh Middle School:
The plaque on the bench says “Simply the Best” and “Ms. Davis.” Former Lindbergh principal Mary Davis was charged in April of this year with 16 felony counts of official misconduct and theft. She has since been terminated by the District. Some are questioning why a bench is being installed on District 150 grounds to honor this former District 150 employee. I wonder if they will leave the plaque there if Davis is convicted?
There’s only one mainstream news source I could find that covered this, and it was WCBU News:
District 150’s Director of Human Resources resigned earlier this week. District spokeswoman Stacey Shangraw says Deb Dimke resigned for personal reasons.
Dimke started with the district in July 2009, replacing Thomas Broderick who had resigned. WCBU reports that her last day will be October 8.
I’ve been looking at the Interactive Illinois Report Card for District 150. Here are the total expenditures of District 150 for a period of eleven years, 1997-2008; in the last column, I converted all the amounts into constant 2008 dollars to make it easier to compare apples to apples:
Fiscal Year
Actual $
2008 $
1997-1998
$107,936,064.00
$141,958,238.53
1998-1999
$115,530,704.00
$147,952,054.74
1999-2000
$126,520,944.00
$156,698,726.18
2000-2001
$133,724,155.00
$163,011,857.72
2001-2002
$141,804,220.00
$168,810,141.23
2002-2003
$144,820,439.00
$169,186,245.74
2003-2004
$150,635,231.00
$170,357,567.44
2004-2005
$156,088,426.00
$170,720,248.71
2005-2006
$171,085,329.00
$182,558,995.50
2006-2007
$161,209,034.00
$167,334,977.29
2007-2008
$166,503,198.00
$166,503,198.00
Looking at the inflation-adjusted dollars, and acknowledging that it does appear to have started a downward trend, you’ll nevertheless notice that from 1997 to 2008, operational expense per student has increased over 17%. However, if you look at enrollment over roughly the same period (1998-2009), the trend is different:
Fiscal Year
Enrollment
1998-1999
15,258
1999-2000
15,134
2000-2001
14,910
2001-2002
14,910
2002-2003
14,889
2003-2004
15,001
2004-2005
14,701
2005-2006
14,469
2006-2007
13,961
2007-2008
13,642
2008-2009
13,825
I wanted to include the 2008-2009 data so you could see that enrollment did go up slightly that year. Nevertheless, enrollment from 1998 through 2009 fell by 9.4%. As a result, operating expense per student has increased over 24% — from $9,184 in 1997 (in inflation-adjusted dollars) to $11,398 in 2008.
Questions: Why have operational expenses continued to climb while enrollment has been decreasing? Why are expenses $25.4 million more in 2008 than in 1997 (in inflation-adjusted dollars) when enrollment fell by over 1,400 students? Where is the money going?
