Well you have to admit that none of the fraud would have come to light without a watchdog i e Tom Hayden If the Board and the Administration follow a more honest and truthful path it’s because of one man. Thanks Tom. But it’s a little scary that that’s what is holding them accountable
Well you have to admit that none of the fraud would have come to light without a watchdog i e Tom Hayden If the Board and the Administration follow a more honest and truthful path it’s because of one man. Thanks Tom. But it’s a little scary that that’s what is holding them accountable
Agree with this sentiment! Thank you, Tom, for doing the digging. I think it was Mya who, in the meeting, expressed surprise that some of these measures weren't already being taken previously. But at the same time, the way it's framed was still more along the lines of (how did the admin not put this in place), not "oh wow, as a board, we should have been tighter on a lot of this stuff."
While it's refreshing to have Dr. Turner and Ms. Mitchell being proactively transparent and laying out systems of accountability, it's frustrating for the board to hear how these kinds of things weren't in place during their oversight and essentially say" Welp!"
One thing I think about - imagine you get appointed to the Board to a public company, a company with $150 million in annual revenue and about 1000 employees. This would be a medium sized company. You appoint a CEO with two bankruptcies and you don't tell any of the shareholders the process you used to hire that CEO. The CEO lies to your face in order to get capital from the bond markets to do a big building investment but also doesn't build the building. He uses your COVID relief money to give contracts to his friends. He also moonlights with a recruiting firm (with Board OK) and hires away your top employees to a third company. The CEO then bounces to a bigger company, while using the company card to relocate. He then owes you fines related to breaking his contract and uses a subordinate to proxy the (late) payments for him.
And the whole time, you're like "he's our guy!"
Then all of a sudden, when the shit hits the fan, you're like "Oh wow, we didn't have any financial controls? I had no idea!" - the shareholders would sue this board into orbit and YOU, the Board Member could actually go to jail. You'd at least be tied up in litigation for years and it would be misery.
I also think it's worth reminding people that the board members responsible for appointing said CEO brought him in with high pressure/expectations to get said "big building investment" done, to the point where other potential warning signs were overlooked and dismissed. Including the estimated annual savings on bussing magically amounting to exactly the annual repayment of the loan .
It is so frustrating that these systems weren't put into place after the first deficit surprise last year. Where was the board and admin then? Also, it doesn't seem like everything is on the table for cost cutting measures--- like the new school.
I just don't know how they can not do the new school at this point. Not because of political reasons (those would be bad) but because of the contractual terms they accepted in the lease certificate. Unless some random citizen sues, they're pretty much obligated to move forward. The 2022 Board signed a really really bad certificate that doesn't even line up with their own resolution - I'm not sure anyone even read it before they signed.
- They can't use the money for anything else
- They can't pay anything back for 10 years (the resolution says redemption can happen immediately). So there are at least 10 years of $3.25m payments.
- The tax implications if they don't build are bad and ????
- They have no more bond room to take out general bond obligations to pay it off, even if they could (Skokie did this for instance)
I'm open to creative ideas, though. I've heard folks suggest that re-tendering is an option but I'm not sure how that would work and whether these could even be re-tendered.
The whole concept is just so insane - the Administration seemingly made up numbers on the bus savings in order to take out a really horrible mortgage. Imagine like falsifying your income on a mortgage application in order to take out a mortgage that's not even enough for the property you want to buy. It's so laughably absurd.
I think there's a certain amount of audacity for the admin, board, and Dr. Grossi to have all this talk about cost-cutting measures, deficit, etc. without ANY mention (unless I've missed it) of "nothing is off the table. we even looked into our options with respect to the Foster School project and found that, even aside from the fact that we would be extremely hesitant to take that away from that community based on our equity goals, the remaining net cost would be ___, and thus the savings would be ____. Given that, just purely from a financial standpoint, it's not really an option."
You can't defer that conversation to December when Dr. Turner, Dr. Grossi, and Ms. Mitchell will be presenting their recommendations, because such an inquiry -- if done seriously -- would need to happen now/yesterday.
Speaking of made up numbers...page 18 of that doc has the enrollment figures from back then with projections: 21/22 actual - 6,497; 22/23 projected - 7,158
Compare that to the enrollment data shared last night. Ohhh but the birth rates!
Also, none of the enrollment totals in the "Enrollment Trends and Grade Distribution" chart match with the actual enrollment numbers available in the Enrollment Projections reports available online. Wonder where they found their numbers?
This is where we ask if there are any willing law professionals that could at least start the process of legal action against the board/district. The board’s negligence has caused harm to taxpayers and to students. How is there NOT a route to legally address this situation?
I personally blame the state legislature for passing the garbage Local Government Debt Reform Act in 1995, which chips away at the democratic powers of citizens to dictate funding through referendums. Classic Illinois shit to basically pass a loophole
Well you have to admit that none of the fraud would have come to light without a watchdog i e Tom Hayden If the Board and the Administration follow a more honest and truthful path it’s because of one man. Thanks Tom. But it’s a little scary that that’s what is holding them accountable
Tom needs to be paid for his time and energy. A lot.
I do this for fun!!
Agreed! And his time and energy needs to be protected too. Ashe, Ashe, Ashe.
Agree with this sentiment! Thank you, Tom, for doing the digging. I think it was Mya who, in the meeting, expressed surprise that some of these measures weren't already being taken previously. But at the same time, the way it's framed was still more along the lines of (how did the admin not put this in place), not "oh wow, as a board, we should have been tighter on a lot of this stuff."
While it's refreshing to have Dr. Turner and Ms. Mitchell being proactively transparent and laying out systems of accountability, it's frustrating for the board to hear how these kinds of things weren't in place during their oversight and essentially say" Welp!"
One thing I think about - imagine you get appointed to the Board to a public company, a company with $150 million in annual revenue and about 1000 employees. This would be a medium sized company. You appoint a CEO with two bankruptcies and you don't tell any of the shareholders the process you used to hire that CEO. The CEO lies to your face in order to get capital from the bond markets to do a big building investment but also doesn't build the building. He uses your COVID relief money to give contracts to his friends. He also moonlights with a recruiting firm (with Board OK) and hires away your top employees to a third company. The CEO then bounces to a bigger company, while using the company card to relocate. He then owes you fines related to breaking his contract and uses a subordinate to proxy the (late) payments for him.
And the whole time, you're like "he's our guy!"
Then all of a sudden, when the shit hits the fan, you're like "Oh wow, we didn't have any financial controls? I had no idea!" - the shareholders would sue this board into orbit and YOU, the Board Member could actually go to jail. You'd at least be tied up in litigation for years and it would be misery.
That's all wild when you put it like that.
I also think it's worth reminding people that the board members responsible for appointing said CEO brought him in with high pressure/expectations to get said "big building investment" done, to the point where other potential warning signs were overlooked and dismissed. Including the estimated annual savings on bussing magically amounting to exactly the annual repayment of the loan .
I think that's absolutely true - I think certain board members were like "by any means necessary" and he was OK SURE
One thing to add: imagine that much of this was known by the public more or less contemporaneously because it was documented in the press.
Agreed. We can't thank you enough, Tom.
It is so frustrating that these systems weren't put into place after the first deficit surprise last year. Where was the board and admin then? Also, it doesn't seem like everything is on the table for cost cutting measures--- like the new school.
I just don't know how they can not do the new school at this point. Not because of political reasons (those would be bad) but because of the contractual terms they accepted in the lease certificate. Unless some random citizen sues, they're pretty much obligated to move forward. The 2022 Board signed a really really bad certificate that doesn't even line up with their own resolution - I'm not sure anyone even read it before they signed.
- They can't use the money for anything else
- They can't pay anything back for 10 years (the resolution says redemption can happen immediately). So there are at least 10 years of $3.25m payments.
- The tax implications if they don't build are bad and ????
- They have no more bond room to take out general bond obligations to pay it off, even if they could (Skokie did this for instance)
I'm open to creative ideas, though. I've heard folks suggest that re-tendering is an option but I'm not sure how that would work and whether these could even be re-tendered.
Here's the cert:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1WHBtiTTahh60FrgAvc3jEeCNrpVYoImw/view?usp=drive_link
The whole concept is just so insane - the Administration seemingly made up numbers on the bus savings in order to take out a really horrible mortgage. Imagine like falsifying your income on a mortgage application in order to take out a mortgage that's not even enough for the property you want to buy. It's so laughably absurd.
I think there's a certain amount of audacity for the admin, board, and Dr. Grossi to have all this talk about cost-cutting measures, deficit, etc. without ANY mention (unless I've missed it) of "nothing is off the table. we even looked into our options with respect to the Foster School project and found that, even aside from the fact that we would be extremely hesitant to take that away from that community based on our equity goals, the remaining net cost would be ___, and thus the savings would be ____. Given that, just purely from a financial standpoint, it's not really an option."
You can't defer that conversation to December when Dr. Turner, Dr. Grossi, and Ms. Mitchell will be presenting their recommendations, because such an inquiry -- if done seriously -- would need to happen now/yesterday.
Speaking of made up numbers...page 18 of that doc has the enrollment figures from back then with projections: 21/22 actual - 6,497; 22/23 projected - 7,158
Compare that to the enrollment data shared last night. Ohhh but the birth rates!
Also, none of the enrollment totals in the "Enrollment Trends and Grade Distribution" chart match with the actual enrollment numbers available in the Enrollment Projections reports available online. Wonder where they found their numbers?
This is where we ask if there are any willing law professionals that could at least start the process of legal action against the board/district. The board’s negligence has caused harm to taxpayers and to students. How is there NOT a route to legally address this situation?
I personally blame the state legislature for passing the garbage Local Government Debt Reform Act in 1995, which chips away at the democratic powers of citizens to dictate funding through referendums. Classic Illinois shit to basically pass a loophole