If that is really Dawn Desart, then it sounds like she is ready to be another Illinois Democrat. Autocratic and ready to pounce on other people.

Madigan needs her to double income taxes on Naperville residents and we will get back 5%. She is part of a movement to put down hard working Illinois citizens.

To Dawn D, if that is really you. I thought you were already running for another office, trying to get in position to reap pension plan benefits of your own. Funny how your board seat was not even warn yet, and you were already preparing for the next office. To me, it sounds like you do not even read your email, because in your mind, that is already your old job right? WHy not just resign and let someone who really does care about the district serve it loyally?

To "Fed-Up With District 204,"
You wrote, "Look at (the) "agendas" of the Board members, one i.e. the member who kept pushing for the vote has a middle school child & one in late elementary. Hmmmmm"
You're absolutely correct! As a Board member, I DO have an "agenda" as related to my Board duties: To make this School District the very best it can be, so that each of our students can thrive and succeed within their capabilities and beyond.
I would NEVER foster a "personal agenda," and as the Board member who "pushed" the vote, I resent the implication.
I'm wondering if you are "Fed-Up With District 204" because you can't get your facts straight. I have a first grader and a freshman. By the way, neither are in band or orchestra. I listened to my community; read literally hundreds of emails; and voted the way I did based on feedback; interviews with the professionals; and research. That's how I roll. Any other implication is false and misleading, and I'll thank you to get your facts straight before you besmirch someone else.

"D204 SHOWS COMPROMISE VALUABLE IN THESE TOUGH TIMES" - Now really Sun Newspapers? Talk about drinking the Kool Aid! Are you fearful of retribution if you did not reprint the article verbatum? Now I am going to assume you were not just reprinting, and these were your own words, so I will give you full credit - meaning you either don't know your math, or worse.

The new contract is the same old same old as follows:

1) take a lessor raise in year one; get it back and even more in following years (One would think there's a union playbook - that says during recession = zero next year, small increase year 2, and year 3 is huge number that no one will discuss). In a non-recession, just add 3-5% to all years.

2) no sharing of the medical premium shares to be paid (by teachers, by administrators, by support staff?) I suspect the details are so minimal, D204 is shy to share the numbers and who gets what. Please note that Fortune 500 company employees pay about $5000-7000 per year for medical. Since D204 pays their more experienced teachers and staff more than their Fortune 500 counterparts, perhaps they should pay more as well.

3) not a single change on the pension plan that is making Illinois the laughing stock of the country - laughing because even New Jersey is addressing it - the former most corrupt, overtaxing state in the union. Guess who is going after the number one spot as the most corrupt overtaxing state?

Seriously, folks, not addressing the Achilles' heel of our state RIGHT NOW, will continue to take away education and educational services from our very own children. Our government leaders are essentially greedy cowards - and I am almost ready to call them traitors to our country. Throw the bums out in the next election if you care about our state - and I mean the longest "serving" pols - as they are the problem.

And the $108 fee paid by only music students does not amount to a hill of beans. So we hire back half the teachers we fired from these savings? Do you think we are stupid or something? Do you think we would re-elect board members and their hand picked pals? Do you think we would approve a third high school based on fraudulent population figures? Do you think we will approve another tax increase - or even recognize we had one slipped in on us? ...never mind, I need a high ball.

By Experienced,

"Second, those who are willing to not call the state to task for not supporting school districts have to remember that by the state constitution and laws the state is required to support education."

They do support it. The Constitution fails to say by how much they need to support it. The same Constitution says that this education must be free. So, why have we had all the fees since the dawn of time to have a student in D204 even before the state stopped 'paying up' ? Districts who live in glass houses. . .

Thom Higgins can tell you the $96 million in overtaxation and the money keeps on coming. They don't even have to borrow $36 million for construction.

What are they going to do with the $10 million windfall this year from Cantera?

The "quote" over taxing did not result in near enough to balance a budget - and the fact they are under ruuning their capital project referendum when 204 over spent theirs by $20M is THE difference. Also 203 will NOT be paying for their powerplants 16-20 years from now as 204 residents will due to the creative financing to build the new high school.
No one said either district is perfect- but trust me 203 residents have the much better end of the stick.

And YES, the state owes the districts $, no one is arguing that- but sorry I don't buy the 204 smoke screen on the state issues as if it was the onbly cause - even if the state had paid on time, the deficitis for 204 were already documented to be large and growing every year after 2009 in their own financial documents as was highlighted by a few of the SB candidates last election. That is because of wreckless spending on capital projects that were not needed - including lawsuits and condemnation financial hits based around their movement of the school to a new site.

I hear that 204 gets a bigger percentage of their budget from the state than 203. Don't know why. People may think that 203 over taxes because they don't get as much state money. At least they have a balanced budget and they aren't laying off teachers and cutting programs. We should be so lucky.

Over-taxing it's residents??? Please explain.

If I'm being overtaxed, I wan't to know how and why.

By Experienced on May 24, 2010 7:08 PM
Those who are proclaiming the wisdom of NCUSD 203 over IPSD 204 have to remember that the difference in the financial of the former over the latter is that the former is over-taxing its residents at this time. Without the excess tax revenue, they would be in the same condition as all other school districts.

Those who are proclaiming the wisdom of NCUSD 203 over IPSD 204 have to remember that the difference in the financial of the former over the latter is that the former is over-taxing its residents at this time. Without the excess tax revenue, they would be in the same condition as all other school districts.

Second, those who are willing to not call the state to task for not supporting school districts have to remember that by the state constitution and laws the state is required to support education. The state is spending the funds elsewhere, however.

I applaud the board for finally recognizing the fact that wages and benefits must be controlled. Assuming the teachers ratify the contract, I applaud them, as well. The administration should have realized that health care costs also need to be controlled. As I understand the concession from the union this year, it is that employees whose spouses have alternate coverage available, but choose to avail themselves of the district's coverage, must pay $1,800 per year. It's a start, but no one can possibly believe that amount begins to cover the costs of the benefit. Once again, in the private sector employees are typically paying 25% - 35% of the total cost of coverage. How much are our employees paying?

Next, collecting a music fee of $108 from 3,500 students will raise a total of $378,000 a year. We are led to believe that will cover the costs of retaining 10 teachers. That's a little under $38,000/teacher including benefits. That is far, far less than the average teacher salary in this district. Perhaps the music faculty is paid far less than average -- or, it's more chicanery. No matter how you fell about the importance of the music program, our administration must be realistic.

Someone mentioned the $5 million for the Brach Brody partial land purchase. Proponents will argue that we'll sell it and recover our costs. We may, but in the interim, we've lost the investment income for that money for over 4 years already -- it's already a big loss and growing every day. But at the time, our board assured me this couldn't happen. Same board that predicted 10,800 students in high school right now. My point is that they were not willing to consider the possibility of being wrong and that is a dangerous (and expensive) lack of judgment. I see no indication they have learned from the past.

The deadbeat amendment is preposterous. We remit less than $6 million per year to the state. Maybe the state will let us keep the $6 million and the state can keep the $20 odd million they used to send us. The state will be $14 million per year ahead and we'll be the loser -- but we'll have made a point. The deadbeat amendment is shortsighted and it's diversionary. Focus on the problem which is, in my opinion, simply learning to live within our means. It's may not be what we're used to doing, but it should be obvious that the public sector cannot continue to live in a fantasy world where tax revenues are limitless and voters don't care.

The over riding question on these developments is this: if they had not overspent the referendum by $17M+ ( for an unneeded HS on top of it ) - would any of these actions listed here even be necessary ? The answer is no.

Fed-up with District 204:

I definitely understand your frustration with this, and you are definitely not alone. But my HS freshman told me the other day that a student in her orchestra class was quitting music after this year. Not because of fees. Because her family was relocating out of state and her new high school DID NOT offer a music program for orchestra. Only band. So keep in mind it could be a lot worse. 204 still has an excellent and multi-faceted music program, which is a lot more than other school districts have.

My youngest took technique classes throughout her 3 years of middle school and insisted they were instrumental (pun acknowledged) in learning viola. Technique is like a private lesson in a small group setting, so it was essential for kids who were not taking private lessons outside of school (my daughter did both). Parents can make up for the loss of in-school technique by putting their kids in private lessons. Or they can pay a yearly fee to keep technique available. A yearly school fee, while annoying, is a much better value.

I wasn't thrilled with students being pulled from core classes for technique initially, but this didn't seem to hurt my student at all. And there's no way technique can be offered during lunch. Given the size of the student body at my daughter's middle school, there are already multiple, shortened lunch sessions. My daughter barely has time to finish a sandwich now. Scheduling technique at lunch times would eliminate eating entirely for these kids on technique days.

So I understand why technique was the first to go when state funding was reduced. Technique classes are a great perk, but not a necessity as kids can always get this training outside of school. So it makes sense to me for those students who want this training to continue to pay for it through increased fees. A $100 or so fee a school year is a bargain compared to the cost of weekly private lessons. Given the circumstances, I don't mind paying extra for it.

really MMH ? Please give us a few examples of issues they've worked thru - I'll give you some also
- and how much they used 'community' input - not just that of a few hand picked PTSA presidents...
> they'worked thru' the 3rd high school situation by selling and building on false attendance figures they knew were off by 1500- 1800 BEFORE they started construction ( on tape at SB meeting)
> they 'worked' thru the extra money needed for the aforementioned 3rd HS debacle by spending $20M more than they were given - using funds that could have been earmarked for anything to do so
> they 'worked thru' the deadline on the school by spending millions of dollars expediting
> they 'worked thru' the no A/C issue by shelving it for all that 'needed' space up north
> they 'worked thru' more funding issues for the 3rd HS by re fnancing ALL of our district debt out another 10-14 years.
> they ' worked thru' the boundary issues by sending 2 schools 7-9 miles away to a high school nowhere near their areas - totally isolating communities
> they 'worked thru' opposition by portraying some areas as ' entitled and even rascist' to isolate them from others

You may call it working thru- I call it Chicago politics in 204...you may want them to handle your check book, many of us who actually look at the facts do not. Of course if one is part of the

I think the board is doing a good job working through the issues and taking the community's input on recommendations.

You have to love a SB who has the stones to call out the state as a 'deadbeat ' state over their financial practices when they have yet to explain to the voters how much money they REALLY spent on the white elephant 3rd high school. Look at the web site and the last update. The school has been open for an entire school year- time now to explain that $150M was the price tag - not $124M they keep repeating from the referendum.
--Ask them to explain the additonal $17M in bond financing for the school- that for the record is perfectly legal, but has remained undercovers to the general populace. Ask for an accounting of how many millions were spent to expedite the opening. Have someon explain the $5M for land to be sold counted as an asset against the school bill. ( which is no longer worth anywhere near $5M and no one is going to buy. Ask about how many millions are still owed BB trust over renegging on that deal.
---when it comes to financial practices there should be no fingerpointing from this gang. If we hadn't spent all the extra money on a school we didn't need- we wouldn't be looking to cut anything- like our neighbors to the east aren't.
As for not being able to do anything about the 3rd high schoolnow- it's true , it's why they rammed it thru without land appraisals so that they could get their northern Neuqua. Well now we have it, and for the next 20 years will pay a steep steep price, including the other monies we extended financing out for to accomodate) - maybe we should withhold those funds for poor mismanagement of monies - like the deadbeat amendment is wanting to do ?

The "deadbeat" amendment is a red herring meant to distract the public from the fact that D204 has over-relied on state money compared to D203 and wasted money on a 3rd high school we didn't need - how much over budget was MVHS?

The music technique issue is a debacle - again instituted by an incompetent board.

1. Kids don't go to school to get an education in music. But you would think that living here. Why must we preserve this part of the program (technique) while allowing academic classes to balloon in size?
The district needs to get its priorities straight.

2. If parents want their kids pulled out of classes for private instruction - then let them pay for it.

3. The district needs to quit kowtowing to the loudest and best organized group. Their charge is to educate the kids. Not respond to the best PR campaign. This is how they run everything. See who makes a fuss and then act accordingly.

4. At the high school level, private (out of school) lessons are required to be competitive. The people who run the NVHS band program are some of the most arrogant people I have encountered. There is no room for kids who are average or who want to participate in multiple activities. Parents of younger students in music might want to consider this before they get up in arms about middle school technique.

The fundamental question regarding the 204 music program is being overlooked: the Board has voted to institute a FEE from taxpayers to pay teacher's salaries so students can continue academic courses. This is patently wrong. There are several very disturbing questions/issues with this:

1. Why is a person who is not & never has been a 204 taxpayer or 204 parent, allowed to start an online petition drive & present to our Board? The website is www.Petitiontosavethemusicprogram@IPSD.com

One answer is that this person has a daughter whose job is on the line: an elementary school music teacher at the end of her last year prior to tenure. Day one of next year, she would have tenure. Her's (and the others rehired) accumulated salary, benefits & pension will not nearly be covered by any collective $108 fee for next year. Can this "ultimate Naperville 203 Parent" really force our 204 Board's hand in instituting this fee?!

2. Why is this fee only to be foisted upon instrumental students 6-12? This is to retain some elementary teachers, 5th grade band & middle school technique classes? Why not across the board to everybody who participates in music? Why not only those who are benefiting (5-8th grades)? Why high school when they already have higher fees for everything?

3. Look at "agendas" of the Board members, one i.e. the member who kept pushing for the vote has a middle school child & one in late elementary. Hmmmmm.

4. Other districts accomplish technique through lunch hours, etc. without pulling middle school students from core courses.

5. Overall class size issues should be addressed before music dept. if any further state money comes through--this benefits everyone.

This additional fee may well be the straw that break's the camel's back in this household, after years of band involvement. We have spent untold amounts of dollars on private lessons, instruments, music patron donations, etc. I will not pay for my child to take an academic class when I am already and have been for many years paying property taxes to support salaries in this district.

Shame on the Board for cow-towing to this small group of Naperville parents!! (with the exception of Ms. Tyle & Ms. Piehl).

Anonymous on May 22, 2010 7:51 PM

I'm against any "deadbeat" amendment because it is written as a special interest piece of legislation and we already have way too much special interest. If we are going to allow a school district to withhold taxes then in all fairness we also have to allow businesses in the private sector to withhold taxes when they have a beef when something they don't like is going on.
----------------------------------

I understand your point, but this is our money. If the state doesn't pay, we have to make up the shortfall. Look at how long the Hinkley schools had to wait to get the $2 million they were promised for construction. That money had to come from other tax payer funds until the state finally paid 2 years later.

Someone above posted words to the effect: I too am against the third high school but theres not much we can do about it now. Its there. Well, there is something you can do. Sit down stap it on for you are going to be paying more in taxes for a long time to come to fund it. That is something you can do.

I'm against any "deadbeat" amendment because it is written as a special interest piece of legislation and we already have way too much special interest. If we are going to allow a school district to withhold taxes then in all fairness we also have to allow businesses in the private sector to withhold taxes when they have a beef when something they don't like is going on. The result would be close to anarchy so don't expect either to be voted into legislation any time soon.

The "deadbeat" amendment is simply a bad idea and more a knee-jerk attempt at revenge than it is a real solution. A better solution is to hit the house and senate where it hurts them personally. It would be far better to enact legislation that cuts off all salaries and benefits to the house and senate and all of their staff and departmental budgets whenever the they are unable to work together to find a solution. A companion part of the piece of legislation should force the house and senate to stay in session continuously until a solution is reached. For all of these clowns to go off on summer vacation with full pay and benefits and their staff getting full pay and benefits while tens of thousands of local units of government are in disarray, thousands of public workers livelihood and careers on the edge of being eliminated, etc., etc., etc, is a shame and disgrace to this state and the arrogance by which none of those in the house and senate seem to really care about anyone but their own selfish agendas speaks volumes about why we need to throw them all out and elect a whole fresh new set of representatives in the house and senate. The absolute worst offenders is the existing leadership in both the house and senate and we simply have got to focus every ounce of effort on getting this corrupt group tossed out of office first.

The teachers are not getting raised next year (2010-2011) - they are freezing their pay. They will also be paying more for health benefits, and will not be moving on the "steps" on the contract (another freeze). So their paychecks will most likely be smaller for the next school year than they are this year. The following year (2011-2012) they will get raises.

Knowing many teachers, they are grateful to have jobs. Especially those that received their certification in the last 5 years.
Many of the teachers are being rehired to maintain more acceptable class sizes. Some are also music teachers who are a direct result of the fees being instituted in music. Having a son considering getting teaching certification, I am actually discouraging it. It is just not the time to be graduating with a degree in education.

I too am no fan of the 3rd high school, but there's not much we can do about it now. It's there. But there is no way the rehires are a way to justify the third high school. In the future, we all need to be vigilant and think more than twice about who we are electing onto the school board.

Why are the 70 school teachers being rehired ??? Is it a way to justify the third high school we didn't need. Why are the school teachers getting any raises at all next year, seeing as many people have lost their jobs or could possibly loose their jobs.

Teachers should, as well as anybody else, should be glad if they still have a job.

And, I think the Deadbeat Amendment is a good idea, However, I also think, that Taxes should be reduced for senior citizens, and that someone should not loose their home if they don't pay their taxes and that you should not have to pay taxes for more than 12 years seeing as this is generally the amount of time your child spends in school. And please don't tell me about social responsibility when 204 has a high school that was never needed, the five million dollar loss on the Brock property, and the Golden Parachute plans for the Adminstrators, and the list goes on !!

The "deadbeat amendment" is nothing more than the recognition that the Law of Setoff applies to tax collection. The first setoff law was enacted in 1728. The only reason that such an "amendment" is necessary for tax collection is because of the draconian tax enforcement laws that allow government to collect contested taxes by levy or lien directly from corporate officers prior to adjudication.