Seriously Chris? The ONLY mandate of the board is to hire/fire the Superintendent and approve the budget. It’s not to reform a system, bring equitable change or any of the moronic and socialist things the board talks about, almost none of which discuss bringing better educational outcomes to the so called marginalized they claim to care …
Seriously Chris? The ONLY mandate of the board is to hire/fire the Superintendent and approve the budget. It’s not to reform a system, bring equitable change or any of the moronic and socialist things the board talks about, almost none of which discuss bringing better educational outcomes to the so called marginalized they claim to care so much about. So when anyone says they have any empathy for a board member that was part of Horton’s hiring and then continued to let that guy do his thing without question which resulted in spending millions of dollars on pet projects, hiring of shady friends, a botched Covid plan that kept kids out of classrooms far too long and over $500m spent on his own personal security I WANT TO PUKE. The board is accountable for Horton from start to finish. Don’t ever think otherwise.
I remember Sergio making statements during the last election that they needed to take on affordable housing! Maybe a little guilt for the gentrification that will accompany the new school, but so far out of the board’s purview that it’s ridiculous.
Most of the board is so far outside their mandate it's hard to even fathom. If you listen to a school board meeting, it is abundantly clear. They also think that because they were voted in (mind you less than 20% of all Evanston voters voted in the last election), they have been given the golden ticket to pursue their initiatives. Let's be honest....you shouldn't have initiatives as a school board member. The charge is fairly simple and they are failing miserably at their core duties.
I don’t think there’s anything socialist about an arrangement that extracts millions of dollars of public funds and deposits it into whatever private firm owns those lease certificates. Redistributing wealth up and and out of a community seems tragically, familiarly capitalist to me.
The socialism is avoiding the referendum which I would argue they legally need to build a new school bc the board believes a new school "must" be built to bring equity to ward that lost a school 60 years ago when the demographics were different. The ISBE statute allowing lease certs was likely meant for small school additions (think the multi-purpose room addition at Willard about 15 years ago). Yes, paying bankers taxpayer money to broker a questionable deal feels yuck, but having a board in charge of a $160 million budget with their mindset is a far bigger problem. Also, to clarify, lease certificate owners don't hold deposits. They get paid interest and principal. That's their return.
I should do an update on lease certificate stuff - the way that D65 used this is not what the Municipal Reform Act intended it to be used for. My understanding is that the main intent of this funding is to give public bodies the ability to fund things quickly without a referendum in the case of (1) building danger/hazards or (2) statutory changes (such as requiring full day preschool). It wasn't meant to be an all-in funding mechanism and not even Skokie, who used one to build Lincoln Middle School, funded the entire thing this way.
I emailed the board a few weeks ago to suggest that they sue Raymond James for misleading them with respect to the lease certificates. I did get a nice reply from one board member (Ms. Su) thanking me.
I think we are in strong agreement about the board going way outside the bounds of their job description and acting like they’re the great champions of the oppressed while making the city and schools more inhospitable to the populations they claim to be helping. Once we have a board that can stay in their lane and take responsibility for their own actions I’d be happy to grab a coffee and debate ideologies. Until then, I’m happy to focus on electing a board that won’t hemorrhage money, students, and faculty.
I am going to make a post on this soon - by far - the biggest challenge I've encountered in local politics is this question: in a highly technocratic liberal society - what is the right level of interaction between elected officials and technocratic staffers? What comprises a "lane" for someone who is elected and can't be fired? What types of problems are acceptable for them to deviate from the lane? What if staffers they appoint suck? I think this is a much harder question than people appreciate and it is rampant across all levels of evanston government.
I think if they had the same goals, ideals and ‘dreams’ but were actually good at their jobs I wouldn’t care. The role of a school board is probably pretty vague and leaves a lot of freedom for varied agendas but again, you have to actually be good at your job.
Seriously Chris? The ONLY mandate of the board is to hire/fire the Superintendent and approve the budget. It’s not to reform a system, bring equitable change or any of the moronic and socialist things the board talks about, almost none of which discuss bringing better educational outcomes to the so called marginalized they claim to care so much about. So when anyone says they have any empathy for a board member that was part of Horton’s hiring and then continued to let that guy do his thing without question which resulted in spending millions of dollars on pet projects, hiring of shady friends, a botched Covid plan that kept kids out of classrooms far too long and over $500m spent on his own personal security I WANT TO PUKE. The board is accountable for Horton from start to finish. Don’t ever think otherwise.
I remember Sergio making statements during the last election that they needed to take on affordable housing! Maybe a little guilt for the gentrification that will accompany the new school, but so far out of the board’s purview that it’s ridiculous.
Most of the board is so far outside their mandate it's hard to even fathom. If you listen to a school board meeting, it is abundantly clear. They also think that because they were voted in (mind you less than 20% of all Evanston voters voted in the last election), they have been given the golden ticket to pursue their initiatives. Let's be honest....you shouldn't have initiatives as a school board member. The charge is fairly simple and they are failing miserably at their core duties.
I don’t think there’s anything socialist about an arrangement that extracts millions of dollars of public funds and deposits it into whatever private firm owns those lease certificates. Redistributing wealth up and and out of a community seems tragically, familiarly capitalist to me.
The best of both worlds - money out of our pockets to Wall Street AND a messy public works project! Public-private partnership at its best.
The socialism is avoiding the referendum which I would argue they legally need to build a new school bc the board believes a new school "must" be built to bring equity to ward that lost a school 60 years ago when the demographics were different. The ISBE statute allowing lease certs was likely meant for small school additions (think the multi-purpose room addition at Willard about 15 years ago). Yes, paying bankers taxpayer money to broker a questionable deal feels yuck, but having a board in charge of a $160 million budget with their mindset is a far bigger problem. Also, to clarify, lease certificate owners don't hold deposits. They get paid interest and principal. That's their return.
I should do an update on lease certificate stuff - the way that D65 used this is not what the Municipal Reform Act intended it to be used for. My understanding is that the main intent of this funding is to give public bodies the ability to fund things quickly without a referendum in the case of (1) building danger/hazards or (2) statutory changes (such as requiring full day preschool). It wasn't meant to be an all-in funding mechanism and not even Skokie, who used one to build Lincoln Middle School, funded the entire thing this way.
I emailed the board a few weeks ago to suggest that they sue Raymond James for misleading them with respect to the lease certificates. I did get a nice reply from one board member (Ms. Su) thanking me.
That would be very helpful!
I think we are in strong agreement about the board going way outside the bounds of their job description and acting like they’re the great champions of the oppressed while making the city and schools more inhospitable to the populations they claim to be helping. Once we have a board that can stay in their lane and take responsibility for their own actions I’d be happy to grab a coffee and debate ideologies. Until then, I’m happy to focus on electing a board that won’t hemorrhage money, students, and faculty.
I am going to make a post on this soon - by far - the biggest challenge I've encountered in local politics is this question: in a highly technocratic liberal society - what is the right level of interaction between elected officials and technocratic staffers? What comprises a "lane" for someone who is elected and can't be fired? What types of problems are acceptable for them to deviate from the lane? What if staffers they appoint suck? I think this is a much harder question than people appreciate and it is rampant across all levels of evanston government.
I think if they had the same goals, ideals and ‘dreams’ but were actually good at their jobs I wouldn’t care. The role of a school board is probably pretty vague and leaves a lot of freedom for varied agendas but again, you have to actually be good at your job.