#1 -- Point and Counter-point?
Not exactly.
For our faithful PRU readers interested in the budget issues facing District 207, we strongly encourage you to read this (.pdf) -- it is titled 'Cost Reduction Recommendation Jan. 11, 2010' and is a report to the District 207 Board on the financial review undertaken by the district's administration.
To those espousing the opinion the District 207 Board should draw down the current fund balance, instead of making cuts, we will be more than pleased to provide a link or publish an equally analytical and considered report -- because this isn't cutting it.
And to those educators encouraging the participation of students in the public discourse on this topic, and we know you are -- while individual efforts vary, so far we would give your charges a collective grade of "C." Somewhat disorganized marching, chanting, sign-carrying and petitioning may garner media attention and be exciting to view on the local news, but those efforts do little to add any measure of real excellence and substance to the debate. Such activities, while intrinsically of value in the process of exercising rights in a democracy, are really pretty run-of-the-mill efforts.
We don't have any excellent ideas for you as to what your "A" game may look like in the debate, but then again, the Crew isn't being paid while attempting to provide information and education -- we use the term loosely -- to anyone in our community. And we guaranty everyone, there is no guaranteed pension plan for curmudgeonly bloggers, much to the Crews' disappointment.
#2 -- Preliminary Points to Ponder!
For those of you interested in the flooding issue, you may want to attend the 6:30 p.m. joint City Council Workshop/Flood Control Task Force meeting this evening at City Hall. And if you're truly an ambitious citizen, you can prepare for the meeting by reading the Flood Control Task Force Memo & Summary (.pdf) in advance! The Council will be dedicating a whole half hour to this workshop!
#3 -- Putting Their Pointy Heads Together!
Also scheduled for this evening, a whole half hour after the joint workshop, is another exciting COW meeting with emphasis on Finance & Budget and Procedures & Regulations. The agenda (.pdf) may appear to be light, but some of the subject matter is fairly weighty, given the City's current financial condition.
#4 -- Point of No Return?
Forwarded from a PRU reader --
"From Crain's:
Foreclosure suit hits Park Ridge building
Chicago-based New Century Bank has filed a foreclosure suit seeking to recover $1.57 million on a 63,000-square-foot office building at 444 N. Northwest Parkway in northwest suburban Park Ridge. The property, known as Colonial Plaza Office Center, is owned by a venture controlled by John M. Heinz, whose real estate firm Heinz Group Inc. is located in the building. The Heinz venture defaulted on the loan in December 2008 when it failed to make a payment, according to the complaint filed Dec. 2 in Cook County Circuit Court. Mr. Heinz did not return a call. The three-story building is fully leased, and the largest tenant is Rainbow Hospice, according to data provider CoStar Group Inc. The court-appointed receiver, Daniel J. Hyman of Millennium Properties R/E Inc., declines to comment. The bank’s lawyer in the case, Thomas J. Dillon of law firm McFadden & Dillon, also declines to comment."
Ouch!
January 25, 2010
A Pot Luck Of Pursuits!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
11 comments:
Can someone help me understand how District 207 came up with the list of teachers and aides whose jobs would be cut? I have heard that they are mostly non-tenured teachers. What would the union's position be on who to cut (if we assume for a minute that they would agree that some could be cut). Does the contract specify a procedure for who goes first?
This link to the
2007-2012 MTA - BOE Agreement
could have the information you asked for.
ARTICLE XVI : TEACHER REDUCTION IN FORCE begins on page 28.
PRU-
I actually had looked at that section of the Agreement, but it only applies to tenured teachers, as far as I can tell. And I understand that those cut are mostly non-tenured.
Anon@10:23 --
Thank you for submitting the below article for the attention of PRU readers.
However, the accompanying editorial comment is not acceptable material -- no liable, no bullshit, and private family matters are always off limits.
Below is the acceptable portion of your comment
Anonymous 10:23 AM (22 minutes ago)
Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "A Pot Luck Of Pursuits!":
You have to read the story below.
Ex-Dist. 207 superintendent Morris: I didn't mismanage
I revised by statement.
You have to read the story below.
http://www.dailyherald.com/story/?id=352979
Joel Morris was our superintendent for three years. Within 6 months of taking the job he was noticed that he was going home for lunch and not returning, he was seen constantly texting in school board meetings and in teacher union contract negotiations. He was so preoccupied that he did not mind his job which included keeping an eye on the finances and the Business Manager who he hand picked to handle the finances of the district.
During his second year, he was confronted by the President of the school board and the attorney representing the district that he was not doing his job. He promised to shape up and for a short period of time he was doing his job and then lapsed back into not doing his job. Joel Morris was then told that the school board would be excepting his and his business managers resignation at the end of the year.
And he has enough nerve to whine in the papers that it is not his fault!
The District 207 Bargaining Agreement contains the answers to why the budget in 2007 is such a mess....just as does the Dist 64 agreement.
The Dist 207 salary schedule shows that the average teacher salary increase over the 5 years of the contract is slightly over 7% per year based on the schedule for a BA/BS degree teacher. The last time I looked at Dist 64 it was 6.7%.
The tax cap says that revenues collected cannot exceed the smallest of 5% or the cost of living which has been very low for several years and negative in 2009.
Salaries account for 75% of the schools expenses. You can't raise costs 7% with revenues flat and not end up where both districts did.
This is just awful management!!
It leads to the cycle of costs out of control leading to layoffs leading to parents go crazy leading to a referendum for higher taxes which passed in 64 last time. The system works great for the staff but not for the students or the tax payers.
By the way, at 7% per year things double in 10 years. That leads to the following wage schedule for a new teacher based on the present contract increase as below
Year 1 $43,000
Year 10 86,000
Year 20 172,000
year 30 344,000
Year 40 688,000
Pension at 75% $516000 plus cost of living
Don't kid yourself this won't happen and meanwhile most of our sons and daughters won't have a pension
I am a Park Ridge resident who does not have children. In Spring 2007, I remember people going door-to-door working for a referendum to increase funding to the schools, using the argument that our great school system is one of the primary reasons why our property values are so high.
Well, our property values have tanked.
What will their reason be this time?
I can't wait to hear it.
C:
Have I missed something?? There does not appear to be a single party involved in this thing who wants, or has suggested a referendum to increase funding for the district. What exactly is the "this time" you are refering to?
By the way, the quality of schools is one of the factors that does affect real estate value. The conclusion you reach in light of all that has gone on in the last few years (in and out of PR) leads me to conclude that you live in a bubble.
Here's your "A" on District 207
PLEASE SPREAD THE WORD & LET YOUR VOICE BE HEARD!
www.northshorevoice.org/publishdistrict207.htm
MGV --
We don't mind allowing you to promote your web site here on our blog -- but we think you're deluding yourself if you really believe a web page with little more than a list of links merits an "A" by any measure.
Post a Comment