Both referendums failed, but the district still has aging facilities and educational and other needs. Give your opinion on what steps the district should take next.
Many District 67 parents and administrators worked for months to craft and promote the two ballot questions put to voters in Tuesday's election.
Voters said no to both, however, leaving the district to make cuts. Before the referendum, it outlined on its website which cuts it would make if one or the other, or both, referendum(s) were to fail.
Earlier: Both District 67 referendums fail
The district is holding a meeting Friday night at 6 p.m. The agenda does not specify whether the board will listen to public comments; Patch will update if this information can be obtained.
In terms of the big picture, what direction do you think the district should move in? Vote in the poll below. The poll is not scientific, but please vote only once.
Christine Aragon
12:45 pm on Friday, March 23, 2012
In my opinion, 9.7M is a huge amount of money to entrust the district with all at one time. They have wasted enormous amounts of money in salaries and $800/day consulting fees over the years and now tax payers whose household incomes are half or even 1/4 of what the teachers and administrators make are supposed to pay for it?
I'd be willing to vote yes if in November they asked for just the money they need for the physical repairs to make sure the children have heat, clean drinking water, and a safe school environment. Once it has been shown that that money has been used responsibly, then I'd be willing to support a referendum for the new gymnasium. Whether or not you agree with me doesn't matter to me. I'm simply letting those in the District who are truly concerned about the children's welfare know how they can earn my vote and support..
Gina
1:10 pm on Friday, March 23, 2012
I will second that!!
grandpa
2:38 pm on Friday, March 23, 2012
80% of the expenses for running the district are for union mandated salaries and benefits/pensions. There is a union contract negotiation coming up in 2013. Workers in other industries have had to give back in order to keep their jobs. This would be a good place for the current administration to start... somewhere in the neighborhood of a 3%-5% pay/benefits cut. This should be done BEFORE going to the taxpayers asking for still more money.
Also, that young Adam fella had some good ideas. The board and administration needs to listen to him and others with suggestions and not just brush their ideas away as an aggravation.
Shawn
3:04 pm on Friday, March 23, 2012
Grandpa, is your problems with unions in general, or did this particular union do something to make you not them?
I'm putting a link below that goes to the Kids67 facebook page; it is an image of one of the pages from the last "The Chalkboard" that came out. Cuts have been made. This page highlights them.
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=309236472445582&set=t.100003368585838&type=3&theater
Gina
3:54 pm on Friday, March 23, 2012
In 2011 Teachers and Admn. received 10% salary increase.
grandpa
5:50 pm on Friday, March 23, 2012
My problem is with folks stuffing their hands into my pocket expecting me to carry their load. The "giveback" was not a cut, (a favorite politicians ploy when the increase is less than they originally asked for). Some of my younger relatives have had actual salary cuts, not lesser increases over the past few years during the current economic problems. So far, teachers and administrators have been immune to the pain the rest of us have felt.
I also find it interesting that the administration either cannot or will not speak for itself and let surrogates in the form of Kids67 do their talking for them.
GOB
5:59 pm on Friday, March 23, 2012
Grandpa, I don't believe it was called a cut. It was called a concession. From what I understand, the teachers agreed to not take the increase that was owed to them through their contract. Let's take it to a smaller scale. If someone owes you $10 and you say "It's ok, I will only take $8", how exactly is that not a concession?
grandpa
6:07 pm on Friday, March 23, 2012
GOB- If I say I am concerned about the fact that your children are starving, I would most likely forgive the entire debt so you can buy food. If the union members were so worried about the loss of jobs by their brother members, should they perhaps not taken ANY negotiated raise?
GOB
6:30 pm on Friday, March 23, 2012
Grandpa-- Emotional pandering about "starving children" aside, do you know what the union was aware of when they voted to give money back to the district? I don't, and unless you were in the room, neither do you. But I notice you dodged the actual question, so I ask again, how is that not a concession?
Matt
4:16 pm on Friday, March 23, 2012
You state 6 pm in story but agenda on golf website says 6:30. Anyone know what the correct time is?
Matt
4:19 pm on Friday, March 23, 2012
Forget it. Was 6:30. Seems to have been updated now to 6:00.
GOB
5:15 pm on Friday, March 23, 2012
I'm sorry Gina, I've seen you post this before, but as far as I can tell, it seems to be completely made up. Can you tell me where you've seen this 10% increase?
Matt
5:33 pm on Friday, March 23, 2012
It's not 10%, It is 5.26%, but remember, this was after major concessions. Average salary increase of 2009 was 8.3%
GOB
6:02 pm on Friday, March 23, 2012
Thanks for the info Matt. I'll look into the 8.3%. My only point was that 5.26% is not 10%, and some people seem to have a penchant for stretching the truth or completely making up facts altogether.
Christine Aragon
6:32 pm on Friday, March 23, 2012
If this was Facebook, I'd be hitting the "Like" button on all of Grandpa's posts.
Gina
8:03 pm on Friday, March 23, 2012
Google district salaries. I found it under taxfamilyfoundation. U can see salaries, by district or by names. I down loaded 2010 and 2011. Some have smaller increases some more.
Mr. B.
1:30 pm on Monday, March 26, 2012
I will will not support any referendum until I see the results of negotiations with the unions. My fear is anything that infuses more cash into the system, be it allocated for capital improvements or not, will embolden the union to ask for more money and benefits, short changing the real needs of the district. Keep in mind, if the state of Illinois has it's way (and it appears they will), the bloated salaries and benefits the board gave away in the past, will soon come back and haunt us in much higher taxes when the pension costs are sent back to the districts. Time to run this district like a private business that benefits the students and not the unions!
Franz
10:51 pm on Wednesday, March 28, 2012
Gina, where did you get your information?
Nikki Crisan
12:14 pm on Monday, April 16, 2012
The fact of the matter is kindergarten cut to 2 1/2 hours a day less then what my daughter goes to preschool now. Cutting math, music etc. Kids drinking brown water and wearing jackets in classroom. If something does not happen property values will go down and neighborhoods will be unsafe that is a fact. Good schools mean good neighborhoods!!
youngfamily
10:42 pm on Tuesday, May 1, 2012
The school board made mistakes in the past, but there is a new school board now and they are trying to correct the mistakes of the past. However, the funds are just not there. We can not operate decent schools on a budget that has stayed the same for 46 years. If you want to make sure they spend the money properly, go the meetings, be part of the board, but don't just say they are stuffing their hands in your pockets, That simply is not true. They cut every thing they could. And they have not asked for money from you in over 46 years!
Public Education means just that. By the people and for the people. The children of Morton Grove deserve a decent education.
Mr. B.
4:07 pm on Tuesday, July 17, 2012
The trouble is the cumulative growth rate of spending by the school districts. It is unsustainable like many things in this state. Look at Niles North SD 219 100% plus spending increase over 10 years. Look at your most recent tax bill! We are being asked to support too many administrators, too many lucrative teacher salaries and benefits that far exceed those of the tax payers within the districts. Now with the pension fiasco about to hit, we will be asked to pay even more. Regarding SD 67 no more money until after the union contracts are negotiated this winter! Long-term wholsale consolidation of districts state-wide is one solution that needs to be investigated.