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.
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 boardтАЩs 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
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 boardтАЩs 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