I hope I fully expressed how grateful I am to have your support during this campaign. At times, things were really clicking, and it was a great campaign. At times, the challenges and obstacles appeared as if they might get the best of us.

Regardless, as a team, we fought hard until the last vote was cast. For that, I am eternally grateful. Every person I met along this campaign had a positive impact on me, and ultimately, that’s what we should take from both our successful endeavors and those that do not end as positively as we wish.

Thank you, again.

As well, it should be said that Anne Miller, Dave Alessio, and Karen Roeckner all deserve the community’s support as the elected board members. They’re entrusted with the authority and responsibility to make the decisions for District 300. For that, they should be congratulated and recognized.

Oh, and this weekend alone, our teams visited over 2,000 houses…

…with two more days, we’ll easily get over 5,000 individual houses visited. Wow!

Case in point – the recent purchase of smart boards for classrooms and schools. On the February 9 agenda, the item came up as new business. In the board packet, one dollar figure was provided for the board to consider when making their purchase, $749,006.61. Additionally, pages of an implementation and distribution schedule was provided to show that all schools would be receiving the technology. Good information, but simply not enough.

Immediately, the first question that popped into my mind was “how much are maintenance costs,” and “who is to be trained on this?” Additionally, I asked myself how much this would cost the district in the future. The same question was asked to the individual making the presentation to the board, Eric Willard.

Two weeks later, at the February 23 meeting (where boards were purchased by a 7-0 vote), the information was provided in a detailed multi-page presentation. Having said that, I am glad the information eventually was giving to the public and the board. However, I’m still disappointed that it took the board requesting this information instead of it automatically being considered part of the initial proposal under new business. Here’s another important part to keep in mind…

…the cost request when up another $21,504 for “professional development.” Wasn’t in the first proposal to the board, when the public would have two weeks (at least) to provide some feedback on this. Instead, it went before the board right before they approved it.

I don’t like that. I’m not in favor of that. That practice has to change. My opponents say that we already have processes that involve consultants providing us budget projections. Well, outside of the fact I don’t believe we should be paying outside consultants exorbitant fees to do our financial planning (I try to pick and choose my battles), I’d again like to describe exactly what my opponents are talking about.

First, they are referencing Board Policy 4:20 “Administrative Procedure – Fund Balance”, which reads, in part:

On an annual basis during the budget formulation period, the administration will develop the budget as well as projections for the next three (3) years. If the projection for any year shows a decline in fund balance to less than (3) months’ reserve, the administration will alert the Board so that an action plan can be developed to prevent such a decline from occurring.

Here’s the important distinction. This requires the OVERALL $200 million plus budget be projected out three years, but not anything else, and for the purposes of identifying if a budget shortfall will impact fund balance reserves. Not a bad policy, but simply not enough.

Think, in all the discussion about financial planning, who has offered you that explanation? I have. Please reference my answer at the 24:30 mark in the LWV forum video for my answer there, which explains the difference between budget finance planning and program finance planning. The two are unique, and that is something that my opponents have failed to grasp. Frankly, if we used the method I propose with FISs, we would have seen that document and analysis on the first reading of the SMART board purchase on February 9.

We did not.

I’ve said throughout this campaign that rhetoric is no substitute for ideas. I am the only candidate in this election with a plan. Call that an agenda if you want, call it a roadmap for all I care. However, I will not be told that ideas do not have a place on the school board.

I simply refuse to believe that having goals for action and doing it for the kids are mutually exclusive from one another.

Jacobs High Schools
2601 Bunker Hill Drive
Algonquin, IL 60102

Hope to see you there!

District 300 is diverse and large. We’re not always gonna see eye to eye on everything, but hey…ain’t no big thang. Keeping the eye on the prize – providing a high quality public education to students in District 300 – is what’s important.

We just gotta dance! (Disclaimer: The music is kinda cheesy, but it’s still a cool video).

Win or lose, nobody can ever take that experience away from you.

You think there’s be a bit more public comment on some issues?

Here’s the information:

Saturday, March 14
10:00 am – 4:00 pm

Sunday, March 15
11:00 am – 3:00 pm

1600 Big Timber Road
Hampshire, IL 60140

It says nothing about what improvements will be made to avoid such drastic measures in the future. I don’t think we should simply rely on staff cuts in all instances. Again, I would have supported it last night – but we need to better plan our spending and hiring so that no decisions like this have to be made. The problem with the budget is not merely cyclical (due to the economy), but partially structural (due to District spending).

For example, just last year the District filled eleven and one half full time positions that were not needed! At the candidates’ forum on Saturday, I estimated a conservative approach of $30k / position (so as not to overly embarass the District) per position, totaling about $350k. Even Dave Alessio said that the estimate was too conservative, meaning the cost was close to $500k!

Now, what I don’t understand is how we overhire last year and cut the next. That’s ridiculous, and it has to change. This is an opportunity for District 300 to reasonably evaluate its process to help avoid these sort of problems. We cannot accept them as the “cost of educating.” We have to be more prudent.

Just another example how I’ve met my obligation to give voters plans on what I’d do as a board member. No other board candidate to this point has offered specifics – I have. We’re obligated to, otherwise the community is likely to elect individuals who will contribute to yet another ridiculous cut that impacts student.

Remember, the road to Hades is often paved with the best of intentions. Intentions won’t avoid situations in any better fashion than what took place last night. Plans, ideas, and teamwork will lay the foundation for a strong road to progress.