Agendas & Meeting Minutes

CARE135

Regular Meeting

Monday, May 21^st, 2012

Orland School District 135

Administration Center, Board Room

15100 South 94^th Ave., Orland Park, IL  60462

MINUTES

The regular meeting of CARE135 was held on Monday, May 21^st, 2012 in the Board Room of the Orland School District 135 Administration Center located at 15100 South 94^th Avenue in Orland Park, IL.

CALL TO ORDER

The meeting was called to order at 9:00am by Nabeha Zegar.  A disclosure of use of a voice recorder was then made.

NOTE: All CARE135 meetings will be recorded to help facilitate accurate record keeping and preparation of minutes.

Roll Call

We want to thank to the parents and residents who attended this month’s meeting.

Introduction of Invited Guests

 

• CARE135 welcomed invited panel guests, Director of Curriculum Dr. Laura Berry and Assistant Director of Curriculum Dr. DJ Skogsberg. 

Nabeha Zegar stated that the way CARE135 works is that we base our meetings on the questions coming in from residents. Today we would like to talk about curriculum because there are a lot of questions regarding the Common Core Standards and some were unable to attend the meeting was held already.

Are the books for the Envision Math Program available at District for parent viewing and is parent input being taken into consideration?

When we started over a year ago looking at the common core referencing what changes would be needed with supplies and curriculum we started looking at materials.    The publishing industry has changed in the last five years.  We wanted good materials with a stable company that could supply us for a number of years.  We also looked to see if they used research in developing their materials and had reference materials for staff.  We found two programs Envision Math and Everyday Math which were brought to the Board for pilot consideration.  We did pilot both of these programs.   The Envision materials were adopted by the Board and the books were available for viewing for 30 days, which is part of the school code.  A public notice is put in the paper and it is in the board minutes.  Approximately seven parents came in to view the books and we had some delightful conversations.

Parents are asked for input.  We surveyed parents whose children were involved in the pilot programs and we fielded phone calls from parents and took into consideration these comments when we made our recommendation to the School Board.  One call that touched me was when I mother called and said she was having difficulty explaining 2^nd grade math to her student.  I understand that because the philosophy of math has really changed with the common core standards.  We looked at the 2 text series; one thing that really stood out with Envision was having support for parents and teachers, since the way of teaching math is changing as well.  Envision will have that available.  There are 2 or 3 minutes clips to help show teachers and parents how the lesson should be taught.  There is a change in the way it is explained and it is researched based on the Math common core standards.  The text books are still upstairs and still available if anyone would like to see them.

Where would parents go to view the videos?

 

The videos are not up yet and we will have to figure out exactly where they will be on the district website.

Will this change do away with self-contained enrichment?

 

No.  This is an academic program and there are many different ways to challenge students.  There is art, music and problem solving.  The previous enrichment program was based solely on IQ scores.  Now we look at other factors like the MAP scores in the 95^th percentile.  I am not aware of any reason to stop the self-contained program other than not having enough students qualify for them.   With the advent of the common core standards we are looking at how the matrix for consideration in this program will be changing.  Now the scores are pulled from Illinois state standards and there may be a slight drop in in RIT scores in the fall.  We are working on forming a committee to review the matrix and make any changes that are necessary.

 

 

You will continue with MAP testing and ISAT testing?

 

Yes, where it is available, so from 3^rd grade and up there will be MAP and ISAT testing.  This testing will be changing to the common core state assessments and we are not sure how that will work.

In two years, 2014, we are hearing is that there will be four assessments per year online that the students will be taking 3 through 8.  Currently there are 2 plus ISATS.

Will there be better communication about what the RIT scores mean in regards to grade level?  Should the history have changed again for the 1^st graders from fall to spring?

 

Norms have changed since more students statewide are taking the tests and the percentiles have changed just in the fall. There should have been no change in the RIT scores or percentiles from fall to spring.   If there was changes please let us know because then there is something that is not right.  The principals and enrichment teachers have taken this into consideration when assessing who will qualify for the enrichment program.

The first grade MAP tests are different in that they are skills assessments and giving students practice in taking the tests.

What about social skills and organization skills for the enrichment students?   What do we do for kids that test well but are not really learning the materials?  Are we helping them we other skills?

These are normal developmental issues no matter what level they are performing at or what program they are in.   Some children get it where others do not.

One parent said she believes that they are meeting those needs.

What about the students in the regular classes?

 

A parent said she spoke to the teacher and they are working to improve the organizational skills.  We got the social worker involved to help and the student improved.

Dr. Berry stated that there are strategies that are taught in the junior high level when the child is more developmentally ready.

How often are reading materials (novels) reviewed at the Jr. High level?

 

We have had an approved list for a number of years, that was reviewed extensively 5 years ago when we changed the language arts program.  Currently there is one new book being reviewed to be added to the list PEAK.   We have streamlined the procedure for a teacher to bring a new book forward for review.  The teacher, parents, and district will read the book.  There was a challenge brought to the district by parents for The Hunger Games.  This was reviewed and reapproved by the Board.  The books need to be able to be used for teaching the common core standards.  Once the books are approved they are not really reviewed per se, but there are new ones added and if they are not being used they stay on the list.  Dr. DJ said we did review list last spring.  Right after the review was done on The Hunger Games.

 

Is there a resource parents can use to find an appropriate book for a child that can read at a higher level but is still age appropriate and not lexile.com?

The lexile level usually goes with grade level.  There is no perfect resource to find appropriate content using the lexile level except for a parent, teacher or a well-informed media specialist.

Lexile levels are based on the length of a sentence number of high vocabulary words and the speed in which the student reads.  However reading is also based on interest.  For example if a student loves dinosaurs they are apt to read more books on them and learn their names and the vocabulary that is used in these books and will probably be able to read a higher level book on this subject.  The lexile level is a good starting point.  Finding a book that works for the child is.  Students at the lower level are taught just right strategies to choose a book to read.

How can I find out what the lexile level is for a book?

 

Many publishers print this number on the book or something similar like the Fontus & Penelli level.   Usually you can also look up this information online for books older than six months.

What is ATOS level?

DR. DJ said he didn’t know but can find out.

Has there been any thought at revising our grading scale?

 

This has been a recurring question.  We changed our grading scale to the higher scale based on what Sandburg was doing and at their suggestion.  After we changed the grading scale they changed back to the easier scale.  A much better way to communicate how you child is doing is to use the Portal and look at the scores for the individual tests.   We would like to use grading based on the common core standard to see when a student has mastered a standard.  For example you will be able to see if a student has mastered a geometric problem and not an algebraic problem, now you currently see one grade for math.  This way you can see what standard the student needs to work on.

Changing the grading scale is very political and would take a lot of work.  Dr. Berry then suggested reading the book Mindset that covers student motivation.

Mr. Soustek stated if this were to be changed it would be a recommendation to the Board by the district.    This change would not only affect the grade scale but the assessments teachers do would have to be changed.  We went back to why the high school changed the scale and why we agreed with them.  It took two years to completely make the change.

Why don’t we use percentages instead letter grades?

Districts will be going to a standard based report card.  This way you will see how a student is mastering a standard.  For example, if a student is understands algebra but not geometry and is currently getting an A, there is no indication on the report card of this.  When we are standard based you will be able to see how the student is doing on each standard.

A parent stated that there is a math teacher who lets students take home tests they did poorly on.  The student is then required to correct the problem showing the work.  The student then returns the test the next day and their grade can be adjusted.  This way the student learns the concept that they originally got wrong.  The parent like this philosophy and would like to see other teachers in the district do this.

Dr. Berry stated that most math teachers do it.

Would the district ever consider having summer classes similar to sports camps?

This is something we have talked about.  But we need to have the interest from the parents because they are self-funded.  We also need to consider scheduled maintenance at the schools and other costs such as air conditioning.

Where do you feel we should be with technology?  From a curriculum perspective is technology important for a child?

 

We need to make sure we are making sound decisions for technology.    Right now we are working on the infrastructure.  We have put in fiber optics but are now trying to increase the bandwidth to support the technology.  We are a fiscally sound district and we are not eligible for any grants in this area.  We want to be careful not to have technology we can’t support.    The buildings are not quite ready for all technology. The district is putting in projectors in most of the classrooms.

Dr. Berry said she would like to see a standardization of ereaders so the students are not carrying all these heavy books.  But as of now not all publishers use all ereaders so you are locked into certain publishers if you buy a certain ereader.

Is this much technology even good for our children?

We need to control what students will see and regard as a truth.  There are three ways to teach with technology:  About technology, from technology or with technology.  The highest level of learning is with technology.    Technology is good when students learn by interacting with the technology.  Information is readily available with technology. Today new information is available every 48 hours today.  We need to teach students how to differentiate data on the internet from what is correct and what is not.  Filtering this information is a skill set we are teaching in schools.

Where should technology go in future in our schools?

 

Moving to common core standards there are ways that technology can be useful.  Showing clips of a film to illustrate a point is an example.  Some lessons also assign video clips for homework for the next lessons because of the different ways children learn.  Common core standards would like to see mastery through application, so seeing a video can supplement lessons. There is also a 4^th assessment for common core standards which will be application based.

Mr. Reiniche says that business and curriculum work hand in hand.  We are trying to get the best prices for infrastructure and bandwidth so we can have more funding for technology in the classroom.

How will technology affect Kindergarten and first grade?  I see students that don’t get to play at this level and build social skills and I’m concerned?  Will the common core change this?

 

School today is much more academically focused at these grade levels now. Teachers are teaching to take tests.  Lives are overscheduled also not just school.  Mr. Soustek says we don’t have a choice. Teachers are evaluated on how well their students perform.  The parent states that there is research that shows we learn from playing.  Mr. Soustek states that this is what is expected by society in general.  Schools are limited in funding so we can’t think about full day kindergarten, which is needed to address these standards.

A parent asks isn’t this is a global issue?  Kids from other countries are more advanced than ours.

Dr. DJ says that other countries decide early on which children will be going to high school and college or to work.  Comparisons on an international level are based on these students where here we give all children have the opportunity to learn and go to high school and college.  So even though these studies state that the US is behind globally we are not comparing apples to apples.

Parents feel bad for other kids that don’t have good family support.  Kids who are born into a good family home will do better, this is not fair but that is the luck of the draw.

 

 

What training are teachers receiving prior to the start of the next school year in order to be prepared for this change in curriculum?

 

There will be a lot of training.  We started training on the past institute day.  Extensive training s scheduled in June and/or August.  Complete transition to common core will take at least 2 years.  There are certain skills that are assumed to be mastered at a greater level before moving on to the new standards.  We will be using assessments to see where students are according to the common core standards to know where to begin the instruction for the next school year.

 

It was mentioned that a math program was going to be piloted for the 6^th -8^th grades next year, can you tell us a little bit more about this?

 

We are working with junior high math teachers and Sandburg to look at some pilot offerings.  Common core first looked at college standards, high school standards all the way down to kindergarten.  The biggest changes were found at the kindergarten to fifth grade math.  Then we looked at the six to eighth grade math to see if students are receiving new skill sets to move ahead as strongly as they can.  We are major feed to Sandburg High School.  There used to be 14 sections of pre-algebra.  Sandburg was expecting a large failure rate in algebra the first year.  It was discovered that students weren’t performing well because they didn’t have a good foundation.  It was discovered that junior highs weren’t teaching some concepts because it was not part of our standards.  However, our students are very strong in mathematics.  We are constantly making sure our standards are correct for high school.  If we find resources that will help them prepare strongly then we will pilot the program if not we will wait another year.  Our students are prepared for algebra one in high school.  Right now our students are ready for algebra freshman year.  We will continue to tweak the curriculum.  As of now it is a possibility but we do not know of a program to pilot.  We also want to know that Sandburg will have the curriculum track for our students that are ready for algebra honors or geometry honors.

 

What can we do at home, as parents, to help prepare our children for this change in curriculum?

 

The major thing is reading.  Biggest shift in language arts will be to informational text, non-fiction books.  Go to places, if you can’t visit use world book online.  This is available to students.  It will be important to understanding non-fiction vocabulary.  Take students places to have experiences to scaffold the vocabulary is one of the best things you can do.

Dr. DJ says there is not much out there for parents in math. We do have a document that shows what will be taught per grade level with common core standards.  We can make this available to you.   You can also look at the common core standards online.  They provide a nice breakdown of what will be taught. Envision will also have materials online.   There are plenty of apps for math fluency.  McGraw hill is one of the publishers that have apps some on iTunes I believe. Also they do provide some free applications, mostly math but some others too.

Mr. Soustek says he would not like to be a kid today.  He suggests going to the museums, Springfield give them the experiences to apply what they have learned.

 

Transitions of new employees?  Who will be leading us in the next few years?

Dr. Howell will be curriculum director and Ms. Zeder is the assistant director.  Dr. Howell is leaving a year from spring.  We will be looking for his replacement earlier to aid in the transition.  We are transitioning with Ms. Zeder already.  We have left Ms. Zeder reading material along with historical background on thought processes which lead to the decisions.   Mr. Soustek states that curriculum has moved forward with Dr. Berry than previously in the district.

Thank you Dr. Berry and everyone for joining us.  We have learned so much from this meeting.  We had also asked the President of the Board Mr. Carmody to attend.  Thank you to the administration staff as well.

Dr. DJ says he has the answer for the ATOS question:  it is the software that is used to determine the accelerated reader level by AR book finder.  This software corresponds the lexile level into the accelerator reader level.

The comparison from current math program to the common core standards will be emailed to Bia.  Dr. DJ states that whatever is in blue on the sheet is new and what is pink on the sheet is gone.

Who pays the fire department when a kid pulls the fire alarm?

 

At Sandburg High School the fire department is fining each student responsible $1,500 for each false fire alarm.  At Jerling they will not fine students or district at this time.  The students were suspended and will not attend graduation and the police department issued tickets.  A parent asks if there will be an announcement about the penalty for this type of prank.    The junior high principals have been instructed to speak with all the eighth grade students about this.  False fire alarms are very serious.  When the fire department responds it can place a lot of people in danger.

A parent suggests that the whole school along with parents should be informed of the pranks and the consequences that will be handed out.

Why are gym classes up to 45 students per 1 teacher in Jr. High?

 

45 is the maximum number of students in gym, due to staffing.  During class the children are separated into smaller groups.  A parent states that there are long lines into and out of the locker room and some students are marked tardy.  This is a prime opportunity for bullying.  Is anything going to change?

It is the responsibility of the PE teacher to supervise the locker room and hallways. This number is consistent across the junior highs.   An answer would be to look at scheduling and staffing to reduce class size.  In some areas it is difficult to schedule gym.

A parent states that other states only have gym 3 days a week, is this something we are looking at?

Illinois requires gym every day.  In the past there were between 30 – 45 students in gym class.   We offered to bring in another PE teacher at one time but the PE teachers wanted to divide the classes among themselves.  PE classes were always higher than other classes.  Another parent questions if having PE after lunch is that a good idea.  Mr. Soustek says there always was this time slot.  If you have concerns talk to the gym teachers.

Talking to teachers has helped parents solve issues.  Start with teachers, then principals.  If you are concerned that a teacher/principal will take it out on the child that is another issue entirely.  In high school Mr. Soustek suggests that the student talk we the teacher first.  This is an option for the junior high students as well.

Bia thanks everyone again for coming.  Meeting ends about 10:38am.

 

 

—————————————————————————————————————————————————————

CARE135

Regular Meeting

Monday, April 23^rd, 2012

Orland School District 135

Administration Center, Board Room

15100 South 94^th Ave., Orland Park, IL  60462

MINUTES

The regular meeting of CARE135 was held on Monday, April 23rd, 2012 in the Board Room of the Orland School District 135 Administration Center located at 15100 South 94^th Avenue in Orland Park, IL.

CALL TO ORDER

The meeting was called to order at 9:07am by Nabeha Zegar.  A disclosure of use of a voice recorder was then made.

NOTE: All CARE135 meetings will be recorded to help facilitate accurate record keeping and preparation of minutes.

Roll Call

Present were:

Nabeha Zegar

Nooshin Trombetta

Paula Zulewski

Rene Round

Kelly Cantillon

Mark Duffy

Pam Hodgson

Laura Wagner

Katie Curtin

Kathy Radzicki

Kathie Svabek

Abby Azhar

Cyndee Harris

Jennifer Carroll

Heather Conrad

Dan Doogan

John Reiniche

Dennis Soustek

Joseph LaMargo

Note:  Attendees who were present but not listed did not sign in.  If you wish to be included in the minutes at future meetings, please sign in upon arrival.

Introduction of Invited Guests

 

• CARE135 welcomed invited panel guest, Board Member Joseph LaMargo.  He was thanked for his time and commitment to community involvement.

 

• CARE135 invited Board Member Thomas Cunningham to attend as a panel guest.  Mr. Cunningham accepted this invitation however sent word that he would not be in attendance via Mr. Soustek.

Brief introductions of members in attendance were made.

Nabeha Zegar stated that a recurring topic at previous CARE135 meetings was technology in the schools.  Rene Round met with Dan Doogan and John Reiniche on behalf of CARE135 and was asked to present based on her findings.

 

Ms. Round noted that one of the goals of CARE135 is to advance technology in the classrooms.  After meeting with Mr. Doogan and Mr. Reiniche, she posed the following questions and findings:

Why does CARE135 care about technology?

First and foremost it is about our children; we want to make sure they are getting the best education they can.  We are working on launching them into the future that we know is technology driven.  We want to make sure they have the competitive edge in their educational development.  Technology plays an important role in safety these days.  The way that we push out information, especially in emergency situations, demands that we have technology that is prepared to do that sort of thing.

District reputation?

 

We are currently looking for a Superintendent, and we hope that that person will come in with a vision about the use of technology.  Ms. Round stated, “If I were looking for a job here, I would want to know what the commitment to technology is on behalf of the people who already live here. Maybe teachers will want to know the same thing as well, so it affects our reputation as a district.”

Our school districts are some of the crowning glories that we have in our village.  Without the strong school districts or if they have a negative reputation, it is going to have an impact on our property values.  There are many reasons why technology is important within the district.

Being Mindful of Technology Purchases

 

Technology for technology’s sake is a bit of a trap.  We do not necessarily have to have the latest and greatest toys because they can be expensive and may not benefit us.  We have to be mindful as we move forward in any kind of a technology discussion.

It is fair to say that everyone has had an experience with this (technology in the district) and has an opinion.  Some concerns that we have heard are:

• Other districts have more technology than ours does.
• What technology we have is useless.
• Our district is unwilling to invest in technology.

Defining Technology

 

• Telecommunications
• Information technology
• Instructional Technology

Each of these categories comes with a price tag.  Just because we buy some computers, does not mean that we have the understanding of the full scope of the costs of implementing this technology.

There is a requirement that a technology plan is filed with state every three years.  This plan was filed in 2011 and allows for partial reimbursement from the state for technology spending.

Due to our district’s financial health, we are not eligible for as much reimbursement as some other districts that may be struggling financially.  We have good relationships with some of our neighboring districts and we hope to learn from some of their experiences that will help us make proper decisions in the future.

Some of the neighboring communities do not have fiber optic access to all of their buildings, their network closets are not temperature controlled, which means the equipment can get hot and break down.  Even if these districts have ipads or other technology that we do not, we have a wonderful infrastructure in place. All of our buildings are wired for fiber optics and good pathways in and out of our buildings.  We are connected to fire department, police department, the village and the library.

Mr. Reiniche added, “We are not necessarily connected to the village entities you mentioned, but when we did the plan, we made a conservative effort to go by the fire district, the village, the police department and the library so that we could have the opportunity to share that infrastructure.  We also ended up putting extra tubes in the ground at a very small cost should we want to expand or share that infrastructure and we would be able to keep 135 in a  separate tube and if the village wanted to be able to pull through and use it they would have their own tube and protection.  The total cost was about $2.5- $3 million and the extra cost for the tubes was $50 for future investment or to lease the tubes.”

Ms. Round noted that that occurred in 2005 and we had a referendum because our district was not well funded, and we still spent money at a time when we didn’t have as much as we do now, with some forward thinking, so there is some vision which is good.

Our IT is now collaborating with D230 and some savings will be made because of our investment in Microsoft software.

Mr. Reiniche added that there have been comments such as Why are we buying a phone system?, We spend $50-60,000 a year on AT&T on T1 lines to our schools, when we actually have an infrastructure of fiber optics that are already in place.  If we buy hardware up front, at a cost of about $75,000, we will no longer have to pay AT&T the $60,000 to add the T1 lines.  Moving forward, that $50-60,000 we used to spend on T1 lines will be put back into technology.

Ms. Round asked if there was reimbursement on the hardware costs.  Dan Doogan said that we only get reimbursed for internet and phone services, we get a portion reimbursed through e-rate.  Mr. Reiniche added that we do apply for the reimbursements, we do not get as much because it is based on our free and reduced lunch counts, and some districts have a higher free and reduced get a much higher reimbursement that we do.

Ms. Round said that we are in an enviable position in that we have a technology person at each building.  That is not the case at many districts.  If there is an issue in the building, a technology issue, it is able to be immediately addressed.

Outdated Technology?

 

In the past, there have been some missteps on technology purchases.  We purchased laptops without batteries, then purchased batteries that were defective and a hazard.  The district leaned from this experience and is moving forward.

We currently have a “hand-me-down” succession plan in which the junior highs received the newest technology, it is then passed down to the intermediate and then to the primary schools.  This practice is not working well and is being corrected.

Currently, there are monthly conversations with the principals of the buildings in regards to their needs per school.

A hierarchy has been created based on these conversations and is being implemented in this order: Software upgrades, followed by wireless technology and projectors.  There will be many changes over the summer as far as technology is concerned.

Ms. Round stated she thought that technology used to report to curriculum, but was unsure if they still did.

Mr. Soustek added that technology and curriculum are one.  “The philosophy has always been that technology is supporting the instruction in the classroom.”

Ms. Round added that is also infrastructure as well.  Mr. Soustek agreed and added “that’s why when curriculum purchases a new textbook series and other software for that textbook, if we do not have the infrastructure to run that series, we need to go to business services with the recommendation to purchase what is needed.”

Mr. Soustek also noted that prior to 2006, parent organizations were not allowed to purchase anything in the way of technology.  That has changed as principals have requested assistance in purchasing technology.

Mr. Round went over the technology spending.  Last year we spent about $300,000 on technology.  This year we spent at least twice that much.

Mr. Reiniche said that it is actually closer to three times as much.  Mr. Soustek stated that by the end of the summer, our district will have spent close to $1 million on technology.

Ms. Round said it is important to take a look at what we should be spending, what other districts are spending and where we get our vision about technology.  She questioned whether parent organizations’ money would be better spent by sending Dan Doogan to conferences so that he can go out and find out what other districts are doing instead of buying technology.

Ms. Zegar added that typically, in PFE, what we do is ask the principals of each school what they need, or could use.  Ms. Round stated that asking the principals, we are already in charge of lots of things and on top of that we are asking them to be the visionaries.  She asked Pam Hodgson, Jerling Principal, if she gets any outside looks at what is happening elsewhere.

Ms. Hodgson said that they do meet with area schools, like Tinley Central and have opportunities to go out and view other schools in our area and Ms. Zegar stated, we do ask our teachers what they need to incorporate into the classroom.  We could buy smart boards for all then some end up in a closet.  We have to make sure that is something our staff wants to take on and can use in their classrooms.  She thanked the PFE for their support in providing these things to the classrooms.  “We need to make sure we have updated software first that can support the technology we purchase.”

Ms. Round introduced Mr. LaMargo as a member of our school board and the technology chairperson.

Mr. LaMargo noted that he has a vested interest in technology, with three children in the district, just as everyone else present does.  “When I came on board, I sat down with John (Reiniche) and Dan (Doogan) and one of the things that we have done in the past is pigeon-holed ourselves into some of the technology in the past.  Let’s use ELMO’s as an example, they may be great, but if ELMO’s go out of date, we can’t upgrade them because the foundation was not there before.  Now we are revamping our foundation, as Ms. Round has mentioned.  Training is also vital.  We cannot hand a teacher a smart board and expect them to know how to use it in the classroom.  Curriculum working with technology is very important to assure that not only the technology is good for our students but growing with our students as well so that as technology advances and changes, we will have that support.  On the surface it may seem that we are not doing a lot, but we are.

Mr. LaMargo noted that teachers are being asked how they are going to utilize the technology so that we can be sure the money is going to good use and they know how to use them.

A CARE135 member suggested that we ask the companies that we buy the technology from to offer training with the sale.

Mr. Reiniche said that when smart boards are purchased, professional development comes with the purchase and they do utilize this service.  He added that we have realized that our software is outdated.  We upgraded all operating systems to Windows 7 and suites and we came across an issue where the Jr High printers would not work with windows 7.  We were able to work out an agreement with Microsoft where if we upgraded one time it would cost $350,000- $400,000 to purchase this upgrade.  We are now collaborating with D230 and we have purchased, for $50,000, (an ongoing subscription) to stay current all along.

Streaming media will also be possible now with over 4x the bandwidth we have now upgraded to.

Dan Doogan said that with the fiber optic infrastructure in place so we will have all the bandwidth we need.  Primary schools did not have the high speed switches to connect in the building.  So we have updated all the switches at the four primary buildings this year as well.

Mr. LaMargo added that a misperception out there is that certain schools get favoritism over other schools.  We can guarantee that all schools are equal a far as technology.

Kathie Svabek added that although she agrees with what has been said thus far, she has to say that the only reasons that some smart boards were kept in a closet in the past was due to the fact that they were portable smart boards that were a bad investment due to their lack of ease of use.  They take longer to set up then the time to take to use them.  If you bump them, they may reset.  Also, someone mentioned that there was no interest in ELMO’s.  “I was on the foundation at the time and we gave 12 ELMO’s to the district and more were requested, but we could simply not raise enough money.  There was, and still is an interest for these projectors.

Mr. Reiniche said there is a misperception that we are against smart boards.  That is not the case.  Out teachers thought that the most impact would be made by having projectors put in first.  We will be able to put a projector is every classroom, and that is the first step.  We have a great maintenance staff that put in all the wiring in house.  Our staff put that in while neighboring districts pay to have that done.  We will eventually buy the interactive white boards.

Ms. Zegar asked if we have all of the software that is needed for the current projectors that were installed.  We have heard from some of the schools that they are missing this software that would enable the use of the projectors.

Mr. Doogan said that some of the schools have older computers and we are in the process of upgrading on as needed basis.  As we install the projectors, we will follow with the software as needed.

Ms. Zegar asked “If the PFE or another organization donates of purchases technology, do we get the same professional development that is offered with district purchased technology?

Mr. Reiniche said yes, the funds may come from the other source, but it is all considered a district purchase and has the same benefits.  We have a procedure in place to purchase through the district.

Mr. Soustek as Mr. Reiniche to address the “phase-in”.  Mr. Reiniche said that when they passed the referendum, there was a loophole that allowed us to go back out and get more than what our intention was.  The board rejected this proposal.  A neighboring district took advantage of this and took more money than what they told the voters and were able to use those funds.  We did not take advantage of this.

Ms. Caroll asked if we have a contract with Smart Boards, there are many interactive white board competitors that should be looked at that are comparable or even better.

Mr. Doogan said we do not have a contract with them, but the teachers have been trained on and do feel comfortable with the smart technology and that is why we went in that direction.  We are going by the proposals written up by each school and the requests by the teachers to determine what is purchased.

Mr. LaMargo remarked about his son’s history class where they used the interactive boards to name each country and about the kids’ enthusiasm.

Ms. Svabek added the boards are a great tool to determine which kids are getting the material and which are not.  Mr. Doogan said that is built into the software itself.

Mr. Reiniche said they are working on a grant for the “clickers” to go along with the projectors and you do not need the interactive board.

Ms. Zegar said that at the last C.O.W. meeting, Dr. Berry remarked that although it was not pertinent, this interactive technology would be helpful in teaching this curriculum.  Mr. Doogan said that the projectors will be helpful in this aspect.

Mr. Reiniche said we have added 20,000 feet of wire this summer so that we can use wireless technology in the future.  If we bought ipads now, we would not be able to use them.  We are also using many software upgrades to protect our children from SPAM and outside interferences.  We are determining, with the wireless technology, will we allow the children to use their own devices to access the wireless technology and bombard the servers.  We are looking to see about these things.

Mr. LaMargo added that as far as the superintendent search, they looked at their views of technology as criteria when looking for a new superintendent.

Ms. Round noted that we are moving forward as far as technology, and CARE135 will be following closely the advances we are making.  Parents’ visions matter as well and should be considered.

A CARE135 member asked to Mr. LaMargo, if we had the best technology, would that necessarily translate to the best education?

Mr. LaMargo replied, no.  That is why we need to work with curriculum to make sure the technology is being utilized for the best benefit of the children.  A CARE135 member noted that the human element is sometimes more beneficial to the children.  Mr. LaMargo agreed.  The CARE135 member said more emphasis would be put on the quality of teachers and the principals because a quality teacher would be better than an unqualified teacher with the best technology.  Mr. LaMargo said that we want to provide the current, great teachers we have with the best possible tools to allow them to provide the best education to our children.  We can all say in confidence, that what we are most proud of as a district is our teachers and their outstanding abilities and accomplishments.

Mr. Reiniche excused himself from the meeting to make it to another commitment.

Ms. Zegar then asked Mr. LaMargo:  Because we will be promoting and endorsing candidates when the election comes around next year, we wanted to give every board member the opportunity to tell us their view of the current issues before the school board.  The superintendent search, pension reform, the litigation costs before us, the Melanie Walsh case.   Can we start with why you wanted to become a board member?

Mr. LaMargo replied “One of the reasons I wanted to be a board member is because I have a vested interest in the district, with three children in the district.  I did look at the numbers; I have a BB in Economics and a masters in public policy and organizational leadership.  I saw that we have a 72% fund balance before we collected any new dollars and every year we would increase the level by the maximum amount.  Mr. Reiniche takes unfair punches, and I can say that in confidence.  I have been the budget guy before, and his job is to get as much money as he can and I can understand.  We have to work smarter with our money and put the money into what is needed.  Right now we have a dilemma because the state takes so long to give us our money.  40%, 50%, 80%, how much of a fund balance is needed?  I personally think a 45% fund balance would give about 4.5 months of a cushion to pay our bills would be fine.

Ms. Zegar asked “Do you think this large fund balance is inhibiting us from obtaining grants that we are applying for?  Dr. Howell mentioned that we have applied for grants but we have been turned down.”

Mr. LaMargo asked if we had a grant writer on staff.  Mr. Soustek said that the curriculum dept. takes care of grant writing.  He added that the fund balance does not have anything to do with receiving grants but it has to do with those who qualify for free and reduced lunch.  We do not get grants that other district do because we are a financially healthier district.

M. LaMargo said another reason he ran for school board is because he took a look at his tax bill and saw that 65% of the property tax bill goes to the school districts.  I wanted to make sure it was being well spent and I happened to be at one of the schools and saw this old “CRT” monitor and could not believe that this is what the teachers were using.  Now things are changing for the better and we are moving forward.

Ms. Svabek asked about the double positions and litigation the district faces.

Mr. LaMargo said that the Melanie Walsh litigation could have been completely avoidable.  I see the perception of getting a whole pool of people in to interview for her job, but the way that I understood it was, the current procedures that were in place were followed to a t and those were the procedures that were in place at the time.  At the end of the day, it is costing about $100,000 when you break it down.

Ms. Svabek asked “I am hearing a couple of board members say that this should not have happened, why is it still ongoing?  I don’t understand why this is still ongoing.  There are a small amount of people that want it to keep going and there is a large amount of people that want it to end.”

Mr. LaMargo said the majority of the board chose to demote her.  The union has chosen to litigate this and the school district has to defend itself.  The school board would have to say whether or not they want to settle or end this.

Ms. Zegar asked that if it were to resurface at the board table, would there still be that same 4-3 split?

Mr. LaMargo said he cannot speak for other members, but he will speak for himself.  In his opinion, it was a mistake and should never gotten this far.  It is costing us $100,000.  I would love for it to stop.  Three of us thought that it should not have moved in that direction.

Many CARE135 members expressed their frustration with the situation.

Ms. Zegar said public perception is that there is something personal going on; this is not normal hiring and demoting practices.  They want to know why.  Was she an incapable employee?  What was the reason for this?

Mr. LaMargo answered “I will tell you what I told the papers; I asked these questions at an open meeting, was the application filled out correctly? The answer was yes.  Did it follow all D135 procedures?  The answer was yes.  Did she qualify for the position?  The answer was yes.  Was she doing a good job in the position?  The answer was that she was highly recommended by her peers and her superiors.  Was her relative involved in the final decision of her hiring?  The answer was no.  He said he saw no reason not to keep her in that position.  Other board members had their reasons for voting the way they did, but it is not my place to speak for them.

A CARE135 member stated “The board members responsibility is to protect our tax dollars.  Spending $100,000 for a mistake is irresponsible.  Who made this mistake?  That person should be held responsible.

Mr. LaMargo responded “In my opinion, no one made a mistake.  I cannot speak for other board members, but in my opinion, no one made a mistake.”

Laura Wagner asked “How can we help make sure something like this does not happen again?”

Ms. Zegar asked “Can you tell us how this came to be, so that we can avoid it happening again?”

Mr. Soustek interjected “Now (Ms. Zegar) we have talked about this at your PFE meeting (Jerling PFE meeting) and I already said (at the PFE meeting), the problem that the board had to face here at the first hiring was that what the procession was? We had a person in charge of the department saying to HR, I only wish to interview internally.  The HR department has always, by practice offered every department this hiring option.  The person that was going to be doing the hiring said let’s just do it internally.  There were 8 candidates, one being a relative, but the perception to some of the board was what if this system was played by this person in charge.  Consequently, they wound up talking to the person and asking the person to go back to their previous position as a paraprofessional.

She went back to that position.  The problem that the board had is that the union came back and said you cannot demote her.  We went through arbitration and that result will not be available until June 1^st.  In the meantime, the union filed an unfair labor practice lawsuit against the district and now we have to defend ourselves against that as well.

Ms. Zegar responded that she apologizes for the redundancy; however we are trying to give Mr. LaMargo the same courtesy, as we have with our board member guests in the past, and I think the gap that I was referring to was at which point did someone come back and say, we need to look at this?  If that practice was regularly followed, then what brought it back to the table?  Is there a policy or procedure in place for this type of situation?

Mr. LaMargo said that the way it was brought to his attention was that someone had been brought “through the back door” and we didn’t follow procedures.  That is how it was presented to me.  And, so after discussing things and doing my research and finding that everything was done according to procedure. We are in the process of fixing that.

Mr. Soustek said that the procedure has now been changed and we no longer just advertise internally.  All positions are internally and externally advertised.  A nepotism policy will be put in place in May as well.  You cannot work for anybody where a relative is in charge of that position.  That is going to clarify things.  Under these circumstances, this would never have happened with these safeguards in place.  We are waiting to hear the results of the arbitration hearing to see what was determined.  Our attorneys were very confident that the board did follow it correctly when they sent her back into her paraprofessional position.  The unfair labor practice lawsuit will be heard about for years to come because the labor board is not going to listen to it right away.  This will continue on for 3-4 years, if in fact it goes that far, just to let you know.

Nooshin Trombetta asked, “It seems to me that one part of it is yes, the procedures are now in place as of May will keep this from happening in the future.  Now, we are in a mess and how can this board move on?  How can we fix this?

Mr. LaMargo responded, “We are moving on, we have changed the procedures.  The only way for everything to stop would be to give her job back.

Ms. Wagner added that she was more concerned about a policy that not all board members agreed on this, can there be a policy that maybe stops destructive behavior like this?

Mr. LaMargo answered “That is how it works, a majority vote of the board.”

Ms. Round redirected and asked Mr. LaMargo to discuss pension reform.

Mr. LaMargo said that, first of all, shifting the pensions from the state to the local school districts is not pension reform.  It is a shell game.  Do I think things need to change? Yes, absolutely.  What the state has done, in my opinion, is saw these school districts with these healthy fund balances, and the state said, we have these school districts with all of this money, let’s give it to them.  That’s not right.  Is it right that Orland Park has been fiscally responsible for years and we should be penalized because we are watching our dollars?  I do not think that is right.  I think Tom Cunningham said it best when he said it is not a matter of if it is going to happen but when it is going to happen.  I think it is going to happen after the general election during the lame duck session.  I think it is wrong and strongly encourage everyone to call their state legislators and tell them not to shift this burden, because the only ones that are going to suffer are the taxpayers and the kids.  Let’s think about the seniors and people on fixed incomes.

Ms. Zegar asked “if we are going to responsible to pay teacher pensions, who will manage the funds?”

Mr. Soustek said the first thing we realized about the governor’s proposal for pension reform, nothing was there about sending this back to the districts.  His proposal takes away o the benefits, we knew this was coming.  You are going to see a big increase in the pension reform system. The individual teachers will pay an additional 3% on top of the already 10% they already pay towards the pension system.  I heard on the news that they have this “golden insurance program” that upset me because it is not a golden program; it costs approximately 12-14,000 a year for the health insurance.  That is going on right now.  It most likely going to come back to the districts, maybe not as a lump sum, but possibly as a phase in.  What this is going to do is take education dollars away from the kids if the district is bound to pay more money into the system.  I have talked to Rene Kosel and she has said that she will vote against it, but we need to continue to call our representatives and express our concern.  This is the legislature’s problem; they spent this money instead of putting it into the pension system.  They spent this money to get their votes for the politics for the whole piece and they never funded it to where they were supposed to fund it and now their answer is….it is like you going out and buying a car, and cannot make payments, then you say, don’t come after me, I got it from Ford, go to Ford and get the money.  You can’t do this, this is their obligation and they didn’t do it and now they want to pass the buck.  I don’t object to paying property taxes as much as I object to paying income taxes and I’ll tell you why.  The property taxes I pay stays here, it is for my schools, my library, my fire department, my police department, my park district and programs and those kinds of things.  What I worry about is the money that is going to be taken away from the education of kids.

A CARE135 member said we should now start preparing the community for this tax increase.  This is a fact of life.

Mr. LaMargo said he disagrees; you cannot keep putting it on the backs of the taxpayers.  You have to make cuts.  Until the people start sending the message down to Springfield, get out and vote, that will change things.  As a taxpayer, resident and parent I think we should continue to have superior services, but not on the backs of the taxpayers.  There are seven of us on the board; we will determine what we are going to do.  My opinion is that I am going to vote against anything that is going to take another penny from the taxpayers.

I was down in Springfield and Al Riley, who is a state rep out east, covers some of Tinley and Orland, said he is against this.  I was told that he was called into Mike Madigan’s office and reamed out for making that statement.  I want to know what happened to my income tax increase that supposed to go towards education.  I want to know what happened to the lottery dollars that are supposed to go towards education.

Ms. Svabek asked, are the board members writing, calling and making their views known?

Mr. LaMargo said they did pass a resolution collectively but he does not know what each individual board member is doing on their own.

Mr. LaMargo had to excuse himself at this time.  He said that his contact information is available on the district site and he will be happy to speak to anyone.

Ms. Zegar asked Mr. Soustek about an email she sent to Mr. Soustek in regards to the junior high schools.  One of his responses was that that “Jerling has building problem” and asked him to elaborate.

Mr. Soustek replied “What I meant was that from the discussions with parents, there appears to be a problem.  Pam and I have been talking about this and there seems to be a problem.  This is not what the schools should be taking about.  I did come, with Pam’s permission, and address the staff of Jerling.  When we talk to our staff, it should be about where we are moving forward in the building, what we are doing for our kids, not who is in favor of the principal and administration and who is opposed to the principal and administration.  I spoke with the staff and I expressed my concerns.  The focus needs to be on education.  Just like with the board of education, the board seems to be a little disconnected right now, as far as people would say.  My whole hope as I came in as the interim was to try to help them focus and find a new superintendent and working on one goal and unanimously move forward.  All of the discussions that take place, there has to be some sort of focus.  We have a healthy fund balance, and I am for a minimum fund balance.  The high schools have a minimum fund balance, the village has a minimum fund balance, why not district 135 have a minimum balance that it cannot drop below a certain amount and instead a cap of what it cannot go over?  If that is the way that the board decides and that is the way the community wants it, then that’s fine.  We have to rely on state taxes; we do not have sales taxes like the village does.  The fortunate thing is that your district is solid with a solid fund balance.  When the county is late on its taxes, we don’t have to borrow money to pay salaries and pay interest on it.

We have issues coming up, you are fortunate that you have a great village; you have a great police and fire department.  I have worked in 6 different villages and what you have right here is the premiere.  It is unbelievable, I can have a bus clip a mailbox and I have paramedics on the scene, police on the scene and they are making sure everyone is ok and everything is done right.  That bus driver then goes over to the police department and is drug tested and questioned.  You have got a system here that is phenomenal.  Our police department has VIPER, it is a computerized system in every police car that when anything happens in school, a police office can go right into that system and see the whole layout of the school, where all of the entrances are, where the electrical shut offs are and everything.  It is really amazing to be in Orland Park.

Yes there is stress, yes I feel bad for the homeowners and yes, I feel bad for the kids when money is taken away from their education.  The idea is that we have to keep doing what we can to continue to support our kids and their education.  We have the bang for the dollar, but we also have kids in the technology age.  Our scores can be matched against any districts that have smart boards in every class.  The core education your kids are getting is phenomenal.

Ms. Svabek thanked Mr. Soustek for stepping up and taking the job when we really needed him.  She said she knew what it was like to be with a contentious board and have dysfunction because of the board.  She said that he came in this time and it was a lot on his shoulders.

Mr. Soustek thanked Ms. Svabek for her kind words.  He said the board came together last time he thinks the expectation is that I was going to come in and perform a miracle.

Tim Foley asked Mr. Soustek to share his thoughts on the superintendent search and the candidates that were presented.  Is it even realistic that they will all agree unanimously on one candidate?

Mr. Soustek responded that it happens sometimes when boards hire candidate with a 7-0 vote.  With this particular board, what they wanted to do is come away and agree on one candidate.  We did have a closed session and Dawn from IASB.  What was interesting was a board member’s comment after that meeting who said “This was fun!  I know we don’t always agree but we all really came together in this and it was great.”  Mr. Soustek was glad to hear that.  He was hopeful that discussion would continue.  He said that although there was a candidate that they all kind of liked, they said the comparison of the candidates was weak.  So, how do you compare someone you kind of like to a weak comparison.  I was hoping they would come back and say they like a few that they need to decide between.  In the end, they could not, in confidence, agree on one candidate.  Now I have to come up with a plan to move forward.  It will be a board decision as to whether or not they want to use a service again.  There are three choices the board has, first, they can use IASB again since we have already paid them and do not have to pay again.  The second choice would be to go with a different firm, or another company, which I would not agree with because they would have to pay again.  The third choice is to do the search themselves to avoid additional costs.

The board was concerned that they did not get to see as many of the candidates that were out there.  There were 41 candidates that submitted applications, but they only got the resumes of 5.  The IASB said that is how it is done.  Mr. Soustek said he talked to people who submitted an application and did not get an interview.  They did not interview everyone who applied.  I wonder why they did not interview these candidates.  I also heard that the some of the same candidates were interviewing at Lemont SD and we interviewed some of the candidates after they rejected them.  He also noted that superintendents and teachers are bailing all over the state with the governor’s proposal about the pension benefits changing.  They are getting out now before this change takes place.  You are going to see an exodus now.

My advice to the board will be to go out August 1^st and advertise to go out early.

Mr. Foley said that he was less concerned about the rejection than this board’s ability to be unanimous.

Mr. Soustek said the board felt the candidates the IASB sent over were no one that they could get excited about.

Ms. Wagner asked, “How it is in our children’s’ best interest to have people on the board that do not even value our district enough to send their children there?”

Ms. Trombetta added that she has been to the board meetings and she can see the body language and the bickering is not positive.

Mr. Soustek answered that people send their kids to parochial schools for religious education and he can appreciate that.  The proof of what you hear from people when they are speaking.  I don’t hear from the board members their concern for the kids.  That is my problem.  I want them to talk about how the pension reform is going to impact the kids, but all I am hearing is 7 angry taxpayers.  What we need from a new superintendent is to move this district forward.  I cannot bring a new plan or vision and then leave, they have to have a vested interest and be part of this.  This is why I am pushing for the earlier search for superintendent.

Ms. Svabek noted that it would be better to first agree on what they all agree they want in a candidate instead of trying to take all of their ideas of what they want and make one person fit into that expectation when they vary as they may.

Mr. Soustek said community input was taken into consideration and the school board saw from the community response that they are “unliked”.  Mr. Soustek said that this happened at a time when they were coming off of teacher negotiations, the Melanie Walsh case and it left a bad taste.  The perception was that someone was directing this along without letting people know.

Ms. Svabek noted that all school board members were not present when the vote to hire Ms. Walsh occurred.  That is their responsibility to be there.

Ms. Wagner asked, can they do that for anything?  Say I was not there and go back and change the vote?

Mr. Soustek said I would never say that is ok to go back and change that hiring.  The recommendation for the hiring is mine.  I have had this conversation with the board.  We have a lot of interviewing going on right now, and I said to them, this is my recommendation, not someone else’s.  My job is personnel, their job is not.  If you have an issue with it, it’s mine.

To find 7 people, what their reasons are for being on the board, why they really came on the board that is why actions are so important.

Ms. Wagner said this is one of the reasons she is a part of CARE135, she wants to go back and inform others about our board, prior to this, I just went along with whatever happened.

Mr. Soustek said without the Melanie Walsh issue, without the negotiations, this wouldn’t have been an issue.

Ms. Wagner said it should be our concern.  We are moving to make it more positive.

Ms. Zegar said that, in her opinion, she is not being represented on the board; they are making decisions that seem unfair and calculated at times.

Mr. Soustek said that maybe they are representing others, with different views than hers.  It is possible that her views differ from others.

Ms. Zegar agreed but noted that in regards to the Walsh case, she has not met one person who agreed with the decision that was made.  Regardless of age, income level or other, not one person who thinks this was a good decision.  How is that good representation?

Ms. Wagner said she didn’t know the board had that much power, when they overturned that vote and went thought the entire interview again and then she (Ms. Walsh) was still a top candidate and not hired.(Ms. Zegar noted that she was recommended by the hiring committee for the job and still did not receive the job.)

Mr. Soustek said that he is putting influence to make sure a nepotism policy is being included in the new applications and he is following this policy even before it is adopted to make sure we avoid any issues for the time being.

Ms. Wagner said she does not see how that sort of change could be made. (To change a hiring decision)

Mr. Soustek said a decision can be made for a board to change a vote.

Ms. Zegar asked is there an imbalance of power?  Why does this board, whose job is to hire and fire a superintendent and set policy, why do they have so much influence on administrative staff?

Mr. Soustek said that is a good question, and the answer is that they probably shouldn’t but board members take on different roles and if I am a superintendent who is worried about my job…the problem is when you start listening to this board member who wants something different, and this board member who wants something different, and so on, you end up coordinating seven superintendents in the school system.  The idea is that you would have to go back to the board and say that is not your job.

Ms. Zegar asked who would do that.  The superintendent?

Mr. Soustek answered that the superintendent would say that is not your job. “When the board comes to me and says we want you to do this, or we want to do this, I say that is not your job that is my job.”  I do not think the board wants to micromanage but got used to doing that.  Some board members have a better feel than others what their role is as a board member and they are coming to grips with that.  It is because boards get into situations of circumstances and they feel that is what they want to do.  If 4 people tell you that this is what we want to do or you’re out and the superintendent would probably go along with it.

Ms. Wagner said that is what I want to know.  I want to know that is being said.  We have a right to know these things.

Mr. Soustek said that boards can direct superintendents to do things, they can fire the superintendent for insubordination but they would have to pay out the contract and have an issue with the attorneys.  I can go back to the superintendent before Pete Yuskas, he was having an issue with the board and he was asked to leave and they had to pay out his contract.

Ms. Zegar asked “If the board were to direct a superintendent to make a decision based on a hiring, could the board fire him if he refused?

Mr. Soustek said they could but would have to pay out his contract.  You have to have a relationship with the board.  We have a certain respect for what they are saying and try to convince them, from an educational point of view, where I am coming from.  The state of Illinois demands that the superintendent have an educational certificate, not a business person.  That is why you want educated people and people that are pro-education on your board.  Their first line of defense is the education of the children.

Ms. Zegar asked “Do you feel that we have that with our current board?”

Mr. Soustek said he does not know that they all have that understanding.  Just listen at the board meetings, it sounds like seven taxpayers.  I am not saying they are wrong about the pension system, or they shouldn’t say anything about the pension system, but what they need to say is how it relates to the education of the children.  They have to come and start to talk about how it relates to the kids.  No one has ever said that.  I have talked to them about this.  They are the ones that hire, they are the ones that suspend, I cannot suspend past 10 days, it takes board action to suspend.  Any person that I want to hire, I cannot hire without board action.  It is a very important position, the board.

Ms. Round noted that it was encouraging to that the board seemed to agree at least on the superintendent search.  Mr. Soustek said it was very encouraging because they went out on their own and googled the candidates, looked for who knew these people and even found more information than the IASB gave them about them.  In one instance, it was found that a candidate had resigned from his job in January, yet the IASB still had him listed as currently employed at that district.  Now that’s a big deal.  That should be updated.

Ms. Wagner asked if the IASB has been talked to about this.  Mr. Soustek said they have.

Ms. Zegar called for the adjournment of the meeting.

Next meeting will be held Monday, May 21^st at 9am.

——————————————————————————————————————————-

CARE135

Regular Meeting

Monday, March 19^th, 2012

Orland School District 135

Administration Center, Board Room

15100 South 94^th Ave., Orland Park, IL  60462

MINUTES

The regular meeting of CARE135 was held on Monday, March 19th, 2012 in the Board Room of the Orland School District 135 Administration Center located at 15100 South 94^th Avenue in Orland Park, IL.

CALL TO ORDER

The meeting was called to order at 9:05am by Rene Round.  A disclosure of use of a voice recorder was then made.

NOTE: All CARE135 meetings will be recorded to help facilitate accurate record keeping and preparation of minutes.

 

ROLL CALL

Present were the following CARE135 members:

Nabeha Zegar

Abby Azhar

Rene Round

Paula Zulewski

Laura Wagner

Tiffany Kazlauskas

Julie Sullivan

Stacey Linnert

Pat Gira

Jenny Sheehan

Lisa Brown

Fern Vaughn

Also present were the following:

Deneen Pajeau, Illinois Federation of Teachers

Dennis Soustek, Interim Superintendent of District 135 Schools

Lynne Donegan, Board of Education Member and District 135 parent

John Reiniche, District 135 Assistant Superintendent for Business Services

Julie Oberwise, District 135 Director of Human Resources

Bridget McGuiggan, District 135 Community Relations Coordinator

Heather Conrad, Assistant Principal at Meadow Ridge

Pamela Hodgson, Jerling Jr. High Principal

Cheryl Foertsch, High Point School Principal

Dave Snyder, Liberty School Principal

Ellen Belotti, Director of Special Education

Ben Feldheim, Orland Park Patch

Felicitas Cortez, Orland Park Prairie

Brief introductions were then made to familiarize those present with the identity of those in attendance.

PANEL QUESTIONS

Ms. Zegar proceeded to ask a series of questions of panel guests that had been collected from interested members of CARE135.

Q:  Julie Oberweis was asked to give an update on a member’s request to look into adding a section on the registration program to include allowing use of information for school directories. 

Ms. Oberweis replied that it is up to individual teachers to obtain information from parents and then the room moms create the directories.  According to Mrs. Oberweis, this is something that needs to be handled on an individual school basis and not at district level.

Ms. Zegar suggested the use of online forms for directory registration to avoid the commonly heard complaint of non-inclusion from parents who never received a form.

Q: Lynne Donegan was asked about her inspiration to run for school board.

Ms. Donegan stated that after much involvement with being a room mom, band mom and being involved with the PFE since her kids were in kindergarten, she wanted to run to highlight the positive things that are within the district.  She thinks that taxpayers should know about all of the positive aspects of what is being done at their schools.

Q: CARE came to be after the teacher contract delay.  In your opinion (although we know you did not sit on the panel) what was the reason for delay?

Ms. Donegan explained that she, herself, was kept in the dark throughout most of the negotiation.  In August, she was told that the contract would be resolved within a couple of weeks.  Ms. Donegan tried to reach out and get answers, but was without response to her inquiries for months.  After meeting with the attorney, she learned of the sticking points and did not see any reason those could not be easily worked out.  She was still unclear as to what took so long to settle the negotiations; she said she was not privy to that information.

Dennis Soustek made note that five years ago, at the last negotiation, the board held several closed session meetings to relay information about the ongoing negotiations.  He claims that then, the board members were always updated.

Ms. Donegan stated that this was not the case this time around, as she was not updated. John Reiniche insisted there were updates available and maybe Donegan missed those update meetings.  Donegan said this was not the case; no updates were made available to her.

Q: Rumors are currently being misconstrued as fact lately.  Can you clarify by telling us what exactly happened in the case of Melanie Walsh.  Why was she hired, then demoted if she was qualified in the first place and why are we now fighting a lawsuit because of it?

Ms. Donegan replied that she is only representing her opinions and views and opinions and not necessarily those of her fellow board members.  According to Donegan, she felt that what happened should not have happened.  It should have all been avoided if things were done differently from inception.  Donegan claimed that certain board members, certain administrators and superintendent, an unsigned contract mixed with a little politics created a “perfect storm”.  Donegan said that she could not go into specifics in regards to why Walsh was hired then demoted but did say that she did not agree with the decisions made on many levels.  She added that it did not matter because at the end of the day, no matter how she voted, it was overruled by a majority vote in the other direction.

Q. When you say that you did not agree with the decision that was made, do you mean the decision to hire Ms. Walsh or to demote her back to her old position?

Ms. Donegan stated that normally, board members are not involved in the day-to-day activities of the district office and it is not a board member’s decision to decide who is hired and fired.   Ms. Donegan stated that she was not involved in the decision making process.

Q: Is the current attempt to get a nepotism policy in place based on this issue?

Ms. Donegan stated that it may very well be and the entire situation has shined a light on some very negative attributes and magnified them.  Donegan suggested that it is imperative, prior to the hiring of a new superintendent, to have a nepotism policy in place so that we can move forward.

Q: At the last board meeting, a representative was present who was discussing bonds.  The information was difficult to follow for some present and parents have asked about the use of a PowerPoint presentation in situations such as these to help those present understand the issues as they are being presented.  It was noted that PowerPoint presentations are used for other reasons that are brought before the board.

Ms. Donegan replied that there should have been one to make the information more easily understood.

Dennis Soustek requested that any parents or community members that have questions contact John Reiniche directly with their concerns.  Mr. Soustek went on to say that what most community members do not understand is that a board meeting is NOT a public meeting, it is a meeting of the board and public and there is a difference.  He went on to say that they would be happy to answer any questions.

Q: Can you give us an update as to where we are in regards to the superintendent search with the IASB?

 

Ms. Donegan replied that two meetings are coming up in April.  Soustek said that the meetings will be held on April 12^th (closed session meeting with Dawn Miller of the IASB who will bring the final candidate recommendations) and then again on April 16^th (for actual interviews of the candidates).

Q: How has property control changed over the last two years?  How have the costs changed as a result of the district maintaining said properties instead of the village?

 

Ms. Donegan asked for clarification in regards to what property we were speaking of.

Ms. Zegar stated that the park property and ball fields that were previously maintained by the village and are now maintained by the district were the areas of concern.

Ms. Donegan said that she knew of a section of Cachey park that is district owned but she thought that the district has always maintained it.

Mr. Soustek added that there was an intergovernmental agreement that was put in place many years ago that district owned property, such as baseball fields, was maintained by the village because the district did not have the equipment to maintain them.  He stated that over time the district has grown so much in the way of maintenance that we are now able to maintain the property, which is district owned, on our own.  This includes the scheduling of the ballfields.  The difference for what we spend as far as maintenance and what we receive as far as fees paid by baseball oganizations is about $3-4000.

Mr. Reieniche added that they (the district) were able to incorporate the duties into the current positions’ responsibilities which is more cost effective when compared to the village maintaining the fields.  He cited, as an example, times when he had noticed 4-5 village employees maintaining Center school’s baseball field when we were able to incorporate the duties into the current district employees’ responsibilities.

Ms. Zegar inquired whether the district was paying overtime to employees that were now required to work evenings and weekends in order to maintain the fields.

Mr. Reiniche stated that they are, in fact, paid overtime.

Ms. Zegar then asked if this is still considered cost effective.

Mr. Reiniche assured those present that it is still cost effective.

Q:  One issue that has arisen due to the district fields being controlled fully by the district is the division of the rain lines that notify parents of cancellations.  Is there any way to consolidate cancellation info to include all fields so that there is less confusion when inclement weather is an issue.

 

Mr. Reiniche said that OYA is responsible for notifying families of cancellations.

Ms. Zulewski stated that there are two phone lines, one for village owned fields and one for district owned fields and often the notification comes after the fact of a field being unavailable for use.

Mr. Reiniche added that he gets a phone call when his own child’s game is cancelled.

Ms. Zegar stated that some families have more than one child playing OYA, making the field cancelations confusing if the fields are divided between the village and district fields.  She referred back to her original question of streamline cancellations into one rain line.

Mr. Reiniche replied that the district works very closely with the village and he does not think that there has ever been an instance in which use of village fields were cancelled and district were not.

Several attendees disagreed and stated that this was not the case.  There were many instances last season when the village cancelled and the district did not and vice versa.

Mr. Reiniche agreed to talk to the village about this problem.

Q. to Deenen Pajeau:  From your point of view, what were the sticking points of the teachers’ contract this time around?

 

There were a lot of language items that were on the table and the board had brought forth a change in how the salaries were to be configured and that took a lot of time to work through.

Q. Ms. Zegar addressed the apparent protest of teachers by collectively sitting in their cars and not entering the building in the mornings while the negotiations were ongoing and asked for an explanation by Ms. Pajeau.  Is this something the union requested the teachers do and what was the purpose of this action?

 

Ms. Pajeau responded that the teachers had started the school year without a collective bargaining agreement, which hadn’t happened in over 30 years.  We had felt that negotiations could have been moving quicker and felt that at that point what we wanted the teachers to do was to work to the rule of the contract, which was what the teachers were doing, working to the rule of their contract and not doing additionally the volunteer things that they would normally be doing.  While that may have looked poor to parents, they were actually entering the building when they were to do so rightfully by their contractual agreement.  Teachers are typically in the buildings much earlier and stay much later and that goes unnoticed, outside of the negotiation period.  It was done to make the point to the administration and to the school board the amount of professionalism that teachers are putting forth.

Ms. Zegar praised the teachers, saying we have some of the best teachers around and we do know of and appreciate all of the extra time they put in to their jobs.  She noted that the parents stood by the teachers during negotiations and this was detrimental only to the parents who were, basically, the only witnesses to the protests, of sorts, in the school parking lots.

Ms. Pajeau added that the teachers were working to be consistent with their actions to work to get an agreement to avoid working towards a strike.

Q. To Ms. Pajeau:  Moving forward, how can we avoid the situation (delayed contract settlement) in the future?

Ms Pajeau stated that contract negotiation teams vary, terms vary and they are different every time.  The community chooses who will represent them on the school board.  It is also a matter of communication and the items that are on the table.

Q.  In regards to the Melanie Walsh situation, what can you tell us about the union’s view of the situation?

Ms. Pajeau:  We believe that Melanie first was brought in to face a decision of either termination or a demotion.  Throughout the process, she was, by board action, demoted on Oct. 17^th so the union filed grievances based on her demotion and the suspension. An unfair labor practice charge was also filed through the Illinois Education Labor Relations Board. Those are pending and an arbitrator heard our grievances recently and those are pending a decision, hopefully, by June 1^st.  The unfair labor practice charges are still pending with the labor board, we have not gone to hearing yet on those.

Q. Do you feel the process, in this situation, was handled differently in this case?  Was the process different from regular hiring practices?

Mrs. Pajeau: Yes.  The hiring practices are different.

Q. To Mr. Reiniche:  At our last CARE135 meeting, we asked for a rundown of costs that the district has spent on litigation during the last three years.  Do you have those figures?

Mr. Soustek answered:  We budget $100,000 a year towards legal fees and when we are in negotiations we may exceed that figure and other years it can be less.  We can get you a three year average.  (Mr. Soustek has since provided these figures and they can be viewed on the care135.org website or on the CARE135 facebook page.)

Q,  What are the projected costs for litigation of the Melanie Walsh case?  How much has already been spent?

 

Mr. Soustek replied that he does not think the district has been billed as of yet.  For him to estimate, he would be guessing.  It also has to do not only with the arbitration that Mrs. Pajeau spoke to but the unfair labor charges as well.

Ms. Zegar commented that many parents are concerned that this cost the taxpayers could have been avoided by simply taking another direction and allowing Ms. Walsh to keep her job instead.

Q. Submitted question:  Why would a school district willing to pay overlapping salaries for top-tier jobs?  This practice is never done in the private sector, for a week or two at most, even in high paying administrative positions overseeing hundreds of people and millions of dollars.  People are expected to be qualified and astute enough so as to be able to perform at full speed quickly.  This practice is especially wasteful in the context of very tight budgets.

Mr. Soustek inquired if the question was referring to the superintendents salaries.

Ms. Zegar noted that there are a few overlapping salaries, including but not limited to, the superintendent position.

Mr. Soustek deferred to Lynne Donegan since the decisions were made prior to his involvement.

Ms. Donegan answered that although she is not justifying the amount, she thinks that it is important to have a superintendent that provided stability.  She described the district as “a ship sinking fast” at the time these decisions were made.  The board was unable to get simple answers to simple questions and have basic communication district-wide.  The board needed to bring someone in that knew the district, how things should be done and that is why Mr. Soustek was brought in.  At the time, things were not getting done.  In her opinion, bringing in Mr. Soustek was the right decision.

Q. Ms. Zegar asked why is Colleen Shultz, who is also in a dual position at this time, at Prairie School and not at the Administration building?

Ms. Donegan replied that she has her theories, but at this point, after everything that has been said and done, she does not feel it would be in her best interest to bring her back into the building, even though she thinks she should have never been asked to leave the building.  In Ms. Donegan’s opinion, she thinks she was being punished, it should have never happened and it all could have been avoided from the very beginning.

Mr. Soustek noted that Ms. Shultz is retiring in June and the reason we do not see her there often is because she is using up her vacation time.

Ms. Donegan asked if Ms. Shultz was still being used as a resource for special education in the district.

Mr. Soustek replied that the location has not diminished her responsibility with special ed..

Q. Is it common practice for strong school districts to depend on parent fundraising to buy classroom technology?  Other strong districts are well equipped in the classroom starting at low grades.  Is this disparity from fundraising or prioritization of school funds?

Mr Reiniche answered that it is common practice and he referenced an article he read recently about a Lincolnway parent organization and how they raised funds for school technology.  The district 135 principals were asked to list their priorities for technology for their schools.  First on the list was updated software.  We are entering into a new licensing agreement with Microsoft to allow us to upgrade. Second on their list was wireless technology to bring technology into the classroom.  Third were the projectors.  The district is working to accommodate these requests based on principal recommendations.  He directed any future questions about use of smart boards based on integration with curriculum to Laura Berry.  He said they worry that smart technology costs far exceed the rate of changing technology and we should wait until the costs come down if we do purchase them.  He also noted that it would be a change from current technology to smart technology.  Teachers are very happy and have called district office to thank them for the projectors. $350,000 was budgeted for technology this year and we are going to double that.

(*PFE has supplied many projectors district-wide as well)

Q. Are long term plans in place as far as technology upgrades?

Mr. Reiniche: Yes, the board has asked for a long term plan.  We are upgrading internet access to bring video streaming to the classrooms as well.

Q.  Teachers at Jerling have asked the PFE for Smart boards, is this something we should avoid purchasing?

Mr. Reiniche: I would never say that you shouldn’t buy them.  I just think that it would not be cost effective for the district to go out and buy a bunch of Smart boards.  It is nice that the PFE can do that, to be able to give the teachers a reward whether it is carpeting for a Kindergarten class or a Smart board…

Ms. Zegar stated that she did not think of it as a reward for the teachers but something that they have requested to enable them to better teach the curriculum.   Mr. Reiniche agreed.

Ms. Zegar questioned the concern for cost effectiveness when taking note of frivolous lawsuits that could have been avoided that we are spending untold amounts of money on.  She questioned the spending on these types of needless expenditures and the unwillingness to spend on needed expenditures such as technology. She expressed frustration with fundraising to buy technology when we would take the estimated $100,000 we are spending on the Melanie Walsh litigation and outfitted schools with better technological resources.  She noted the double salaries as wasteful as well.

Q. Rene Round noted that communication is key.  She asked about the response to the community survey about the new superintendent that was made available on the district website.

Mr. Soustek said that we received 357 responses.  Mr. Soustek said the number is pretty consistent with previous surveys.  He did not think the number of responses was the important factor but the quality of the responses which were extremely beneficial.

Q. Ms. Round asked: Are you getting community feedback, do we have the right conduits, if a citizen comes to a meeting, that person asks a question and they alone get an answer in writing, but only that person, do I have that correct?

 

Mr. Soustek replied that is the current process.  Usually an administrator will answer the question.  He said that he believes CARE135 can act as that conduit for communication.

He added that he would not call the lawsuits “frivolous” but noted that the district is constantly defending themselves against many different suits.  Ms. Zegar agreed that “avoidable” may have been a better word to describe the said suit. Ms. Soustek said that he will gladly answer any concerns from any citizen directly who contacts him.

Q.  Ms. Round asked, how do you get your community perspective?

 

Ms. Donegan replied that she gets hers from parents, neighbors, teachers, people who call her to express their concerns.  She tries her best to address them, along with the superintendent, and work them out to the best of her ability.  She stated that she expects people to contact her and her contact information is listed on the district website.  She wants people to contact her if they have any concerns.

Mr. Soustek said that he used to hold an “In the Round” that was a beneficial means of communication.  He also addresses phone calls regularly from parents.  He also stated that he hears from many citizens that are not parents who express concerns and he addresses their questions as well.

Ms. Donegan suggested use of social media to connect with parents who cannot attend due to being at work or not being able to attend during the day.

Ms. Zegar noted that CARE135 now has a website www.care135.org where citizens can view information, send questions and/or concerns, view minutes and more.  She agreed that the first stop for citizens should be the district website, and CARE135 can act as a conduit for those who cannot directly attend these events/meetings.  She suggested that all parent/community organizations have a means of communication to address concerns, whether it be a page on the site or a state of the school board style monthly communication letter for all.

Q.  How much influence do teacher complaints have on job security.  For example, if a teacher or parent complains about a principal of a school, how much influence does that have?

 

Mr. Soustek said that every complaint is addressed, investigated and looked in to.  They look to solve the issues.  There is a new administrative evaluation plan that is based on student performance, community perceptions and responsiveness; those things are all part of the evaluation that is going to start the next school year.  He thinks that what they are looking for is do we have the leadership, are we looking forward, are the goals being met, what is the morale of the school and these are the things we will look at.  As far as the rumors about next year that is not true.

Mr. Reiniche added that they meet with the OCE once a month or when teachers or support staff have concerns, we bring those up at our monthly meetings and we have good communications.  They recently had an issue in regards to timesheets and another time it was the lighting at Park school.

Mr. Soustek added that any rumors about animosity between the OCE and the school board should be put to rest because the relationship is based on mutual respect.

Q.  The basis for my previous question was an anonymous letter about a Jr. High principal that has been circulating that may or may not be linked back to a teacher who was previously employed under that Principal.  We have heard that this “movement” against this principal is gaining momentum and may affect this principal’s job in the near future.  What avenue can parents take to support this member of administration?

 

Mr. Soustek said the ABCDE award system is a great way to show support and added that just because some parents or staff may be upset with someone does not necessarily mean that that person is on the skids or up for remediation.  When we look at building principals or any administrator, we look for somebody that is able to move the district, and the building, forward.  We look for someone who is able to take that controversy and grow from it as an administrator and I think that is what we look for and what we have in many of our administrators.

Lynn Donegan added that we have to take into consideration the information you hear and the credibility of the anonymous letters being passed around.  She added that she knows that there are a lot of parents that think their kids are perfect and you have to take into consideration the nature of person you are dealing with, it all has to do with credibility.

Mr. Soustek asked that parents and staff members receive anonymous letter that they share them with him so that he can address the situation.  He said that a couple of years ago he received an anonymous letter about a residency issue.  He investigated the situation and found out the grandparents of said child were the guardians of a child and the student was legitimately attending the district schools.  He was unable to respond to the complaint because it was anonymous.  He continued to receive letters asking when he was going to do something about the situation and he had no way of going back to the parent and explaining the situation.

At this point, Ms. Zegar opened up the floor to anyone present that had questions for the panel prior to adjournment.

Q.  Lisa Brown asked:  What if we have issues with teachers that are bullying children or a teacher who says negative comments to a group of children in the classroom, how do we handle that type of situation?

 

Mr. Soustek advised that the parent should go directly to the principal of the school and convey their concerns.

Ms. Brown said that was done and it was brought to the teacher’s attention and it has not made a difference.  She understands that with tenured teachers, there is not much you can do there.

Ms. Pajeau said that that was a misnomer.

Mr. Soustek said that was not the case anymore.  Ms. Pajeau said that has never been the truth.  Mr. Soustek agreed.  In the past we have had remediation processes.  The perception may have been, in the situation you reference, that it was ignored, but it most definitely was addressed.

Ms. Donegan expressed her concern about children being called out in class.  She said that if it is not resolved within the school, parents should go to the superintendent because they can direct some kind of positive change with the least impact to the child.

Ms. Brown asked if there is a situation where you are told that if the situation persists, the teacher will have to be notified as to who is complaining, how is that going to impact the child in the classroom at a later date?

Mr. Soustek replied that it makes it difficult for him to see if the situation is happening is by observing.  He needs to know where and who is having a problem in order for him to better address the issue in a timelier manner.

Laura Wagner added that she recommends going straight to the teacher if you have a problem.  You have to bring it to the teacher’s attention, she said.

Stacey Linnert added that if a child has an issue with a teacher, some parents may not feel comfortable going to the teacher.  How can we protect the kids?

Ms. Wagner suggested bringing another parent as support.

Ms. Linnert suggested a system similar to the bulling system we have in place for the children, but to report bullying by teachers.

Mr. Soustek replied that he would like to think adults can handle situations a little bit different than the kids.  Speaking from experience, why his child has a problem with a teacher, he went to the school and talked to the teacher.  If the situation did not change, he would have gone to the principal, then the superintendent if necessary.  You confront the person and tell them your perspective of the situation, gain their perspective and go from there.  He added, as parents we need to help our kids solve the problems, not that we solve it for them, but that we listen to what the situation is and we help them come up with strategies and keep that communication open.  He thinks that would help a lot of the situations with parents and the schools with bullying if they become more involved with their kids and helped them with their problem solving.  Our job as parents is to help our kids understand what the options are and help them problem solve.  They just do not learn that on their own and very often they learn that from watching you and how you act when you have a problem.  They watch your relationships at home, in public and they get their cues.  If we show proper problem solving, they learn from that.  If your child is having a problem in Jr. High and having a problem and you help them problem solve, they will learn to handle those situations in the future on their own as they get older.

Ms. Round thanked the panel and adjourned the Q & A portion of the meeting at 10:32am.

CARE135 members stayed for the administrative portion of the meeting.

The next meeting will be held Monday, April 23^rd @ 9am at the Admin Center. (15100 94^th Avenue)

MISSION, VISION AND GOALS- (reviewed and approved as of 3/19/12)

Mission — Care135 is an organization whose aim is to forge and maintain a working relationship between the community, School District 135, and the Board of Education.

Vision — Care135 will liaise between the community at large, the Board of Education, and School District 135 to encourage the effective and efficient use of the district’s financial, human and technological resources.

Goals – Represent the opinions of the community.  Increase transparency between all parties.  Promote horizontal decision-making.  Advance technology in the classroom.  Promote and endorse candidates for the Board of Education.

—————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————–

CARE135

Regular Meeting

Monday, February 27, 2012

Orland School District 135

Administration Center, Board Room

15100 South 94^th Ave., Orland Park, IL  60462

MINUTES

The regular meeting of CARE135 was held on Monday, February 27, 2012 in the Board Room of the Orland School District 135 Administration Center located at 15100 South 94^th Avenue in Orland Park, IL.

CALL TO ORDER

The meeting was called to order at 9:07am by Nabeha Zegar.

 

ROLL CALL

Present were the following CARE135 members:

Nabeha Zegar

Abby Azhar

Nooshin Trombetta

Rene Round

Paula Zelewski

Laura Wagner

Tiffany Kazlauskas

Cindy Miller

Jenny Sheehan

Cyndee Harris

Kelly Cantillon

Kathy Shaheen

Diane Leib

Marcy Paddock

Fern Vaughn

Also present were the following:

Dennis Soustek, Interim Superintendent of District 135 Schools

Ann Gentile, Board of Education Member and District 135 parent

John Reiniche, District 135 Assistant Superintendent for Business Services

Dan Doogan, District 135 Technology Coordinator and Supervisor

Julie Oberwise, District 135 Director of Human Resources

Bridget McGuiggan, District 135 Community Relations Coordinator

Heather Conrad, Assistant Principal at Meadow Ridge

Pamela Hodgson, Jerling Jr. High Principal

Dave Snyder, Liberty School Principal

Ellen Belotti, Director of Special Education

MISSION

 

Unapproved mission was read by Rene Round to the group, as follows:

Mission — Care135 is an organization whose aim is to forge and maintain a working relationship between the community, School District 135, and the Board of Education.

Vision — Care135 will liaise between the community at large, the Board of Education, and School District 135 to encourage the effective and efficient use of the district’s financial, human and technological resources.

Goals – Represent the opinions of the community.  Increase transparency between all parties.  Promote horizontal decision-making.  Advance technology in the classroom.  Promote and endorse candidates for the Board of Education.

If anyone would like to add to it, we’re open for suggestions.

PANEL QUESTIONS

Ms. Zegar then began to ask a series of questions of Mr. Soustek, Ms. Gentile, Mr. Reiniche and Mr. Doogan that had been collected by interested members of CARE135.

To Mr. Soustek:

Q. Our goal is the represent the community.  What are the things the district and board could benefit from learning from us?  How can we be useful to the district?

Reply:  Currently communication seems to flow well between the district office, down through the schools and to PFE and the reverse works well, too.  When I receive e-mails from community members, that information is also passed along to the Board of Education.

If your organization is looking for increased communication, you may want to consider having somebody from CARE135 attend the board meetings and be the spokesperson for your group.  This would give you the opportunity to address the board.

Note:  when someone makes a statement or asks a question, no immediate response is given so that a debate does not ensue.   Board members will address the comment or question as a group and then will communicate their thoughts or an answer at the next meeting.

The community may also be looking for an avenue of communication for those who do not have children in the district, as 80% of taxpayers do not.  For example, during teacher negotiations we heard a lot of opinions from individuals who did not have children in the district and they may wish to have a voice as well.

Finally, he reminded us of what communication are currently available, including the new Open Book section of the District website.

Ms. Zegar noted that questions posed at board meetings receive a written response to the person who posed it; however, others present who may also wish to know the answer and have no way to getting it.  Mr. Soustek added that that could be a place where CARE135 could be helpful.

To Mr. Soustek and Ms. McGuiggan

Regarding the school directory handled by the PFE, because student/parent information has already been collected at registration, is there a way for the parent to give permission for its use at that time (check a box, for example) so that it could be passed directly to the school’s administration or PFE contact?  Is there a privacy issue that prevents us from doing that?

 

Reply by Ms. McGuiggan:  Julie Oberwise is our Student Services Director and should answer this.  Ms. Oberwise said she would check with the administrator of our Power School platform to see if that is possible and would relay the answer to Ms. Zegar.  Regarding receiving answers to this and other questions, Ms. Round noted that CARE135 now does have a facebook page and that interested individuals may wish the “like” the page to receive updates.  She added that a web site is forthcoming.

 

 

To Mr. Soustek

Q.  Regarding the current grade scale system, how was it determined that we would use that system and why is it one of the hardest ones in the area?  Will it change when we go to the common core standards and when?

Reply:  The current system was established around 1999 when we moved from the typical 60-70-80-90 system to what the high school was then adopting as our current system to raise our expectations of students.  Now that the high school has returned to the old system we are considering it, too.  Another piece of this is the assessment process used by teachers to determine grades.  The goal is not to lower standards, which is why the assessment process must be considered as well.

Comments from CARE135 members followed including the suggestion that percentages be included on report cards.  It was noted that on tests with fewer questions, one incorrect answer may be a “B” or “C” and this can be quite upsetting to younger students who don’t yet understand percentages.

To Ms. Gentile

1.  What was your inspiration to run for school board?

Reply:  I purchased my first home at 131^st near Sandburg in unincorporated Orland Park and wasn’t considering school districts at the time.  When we made the decision to consider moving into the village, I began to attend school board meetings.  After six months I was sure that I wanted to be in this district and even after we moved into it I would still attend occasionally.  Through my four children we have had many different experiences with our educational system, including honors and enrichment, special education and regular education and I had also gained experience through volunteerism and PFE participation.  I came to realize that I wanted to share that and become more involved so the board felt like a place where I could make a difference.  My plans were delayed when we were in a car accident where a drunk driver hit us, causing my husband to require extensive recovery time.  However, after a year and a half when he was finally able to return to normal activities — like golfing – I was able to run for the school board.  I still volunteer at the schools of my four children and I enjoy being busy and involved.

To Ms. Gentile

Q.  With regard to the teacher contract and the length of time that it took to get settled (which is not uncommon, but had been for our district), what do you think was the main problem that kept it from being resolved?

Reply from Mr. Soustek:  I think John Reiniche should address this.  Ms. Gentile:  I would like to say, first, that I would like to extract the word “problem,” as I don’t think there was one.  Ms. Zegar:  What was the delay?  Ms. Gentile:  I think John should address this, as I was not on the committee, but as a board member I do have questions for my colleagues.

Question from CARE135 member:  So the entire board was not involved in the negotiations?    Ms. Gentile:  No, there was a committee composed of (Board Member) Mary Bragg, (Board Member) Tom Cunningham, (Director of Human Resources) Julie Oberwise, (Assistant Superintendent for Business Services) John Reiniche and our attorney.

Reply from Mr. Reiniche:  Major legislation passed down from Springfield called Senate Bill Seven has changed the whole dynamic about how seniority plays a role, how assignments happen and how teachers are evaluated.  For example, we no longer use seniority, we use performance.   Legislatively, there was a lot of language that had to be reviewed.  Financially, most revenues have been capped, so if salaries are going up by 5-6 percent, as our last contract was, and our revenues are only increasing as they are now at 1.5 percent then we would eventually run into a deficit and would be asking tax payers for more money.  So, we were looking to develop a system that would be fair to teachers – because the board did want to give raises – but also that was structured in such a way that would give us long-term sustainability.  So, we came up with a formula and were able to work through that.  I can tell you that at the table there were no problems, just a lot of things that had to be addressed.  This is my third or fourth contract that I’ve negotiated here and I would rather have taken a bit longer to make sure that we got a good contract because we have to live with it for four years.  We wanted a win/win situation that was good for taxpayers and fair for teachers.

There was a lot of language that needed to be gone through, which took time, but there was never animosity at the table.  We got to one point where we felt needed a mediator, so the administration and the board requested one to try to move things along.  We sat at the table for 26 hours and got it done.

Ms. Zegar addressed the concern of parents that came up as the possible strike approached and some teachers began to stay in their cars in school parking lots even while children were entering the buildings.

Mr. Reiniche responded that that was disappointing to see and had to do with a desire by the district to extend the teachers’ work days to include students’ arrival times.

Ms. Zegar then said that although it was requested in this situation by the negotiating committee and the union, it is not a state law that contract negotiations be kept confidential.  Would it be possible to have them open in the future?  Mr. Reiniche replied that this could open the district up for unfair labor practice issues.  Mr. Soustek added that during that time, union members were only allowed to get information from union leaders and administration and board members could only get information from the negotiating team.  Either party using the press or community to spread information would be in violation of labor laws.

A CARE135 member stated that a parent’s line of communication is with teachers and principals, not administration, so seeing upset teachers is distressing.  Mr. Soustek pointed out that some of this pressure also came from other teachers, as not all were waiting in their cars.  When asked if some support could have come from administration to alleviate this stress, Mr. Reiniche replied that while they had wanted to do that, they could not because it might have been seen as an unfair labor practice.  In fact, he was caught off guard at the November school board meeting held at Center School when 400 people showed up.  Ms. Oberwise concurred.

Several CARE135 members then began to relay their experiences of learning about a possible teacher strike and how they felt unclear about what to do, as they had no information.  In fact, outside of those who attend PFE meetings, parents were not even aware that contract negotiations were underway.  Ms. Gentile added that her first inkling that negotiations were taking a possible negative turn happened while picking up her son from Jerling Jr. High where she saw signs in teachers’ car windows.  She added that she did not receive one call from a teacher.  Finally, Mr. Soustek suggested that we may want to ask similar questions of the union, as they are the other half of the negotiation.

The discussion then segued into one of our district’s reputation and how recent issues such as a potential teachers’ strike and personnel issues and changes could affect it, especially as we conduct a superintendent search.  Mr. Soustek then gave the following updates regarding personnel:

–  Director of Curriculum is leaving.

–  Assistant Director of Curriculum is leaving.

–  Dr. Howell asked to go back into curriculum until he leaves in about a year.

–  We’re hiring;

• § Assistant Director of Curriculum
• § Assistant Director of Special Education
• § Principal – Prairie School
• § Assistant Principal – Liberty School
• § Administrative Assistant positions may also be opening at some schools as admin personnel make moves in the future (mentioned later in meeting)

To the Panel

 

Q.  Why is Colleen Schultz at Prairie School sharing an office with Ms. Murphy and not at the Administration Building?  Is it a matter of office space or is there some animosity?

Reply by Mr. Soustek:  Coleen’s role is a consultant to the director of special education.  Ellen Belotti is the Director of Special Education hired by the district, and I communicate through her.  Colleen will be retiring soon and is using up some of her vacation at this time.  She and Ellen are working together to meet the needs of students.  Ms. Gentile added that the individual needs of each special needs child varies dramatically and that failure to provide services as dictated by law could put the district at risk of a lawsuit.  The current structure allows for continuity and other important responsibilities, such as grant writing.

To the Panel

 

Q.  Who does the district’s grant writing?

 

Reply by Mr. Reiniche:  Generally, grant writing is handled by the Curriculum (Laura Berry) and Student Services (Ellen Belotti) departments.  Other departments may also do so, such as the $5 million grant recently pursued by the Business Services Department for capital expenditures.

To the Panel

 

Q.  Liberty recently had a theft of their special needs playground equipment.  Is that being replaced?  Why do we not have cameras?

 

Reply by Mr. Reiniche:  We have looked at that.   With any kind of technology we have to consider sustainability, because after the initial investment there are costs to maintain it.  With the new grant, I would like to include cameras.  The money was earmarked for capital projects but ultimately it’s up to the board.  It would be my recommendation to invest the money back into capital improvements.  We’ll be having a discussion about it at our March 12^th board meeting.

To the Panel

 

Q.  On the issue of transportation, we have learned that in order for our district to be reimbursed for transportation, we had to open our buses up to non-public schools.  Is that correct?

 

Reply by Mr. Soustek:  Partially, yes.

Q.  If we lose our reimbursement, could we cut that service and save $500,000?

 

Reply by Mr. Reiniche:  The law states that we don’t have to create separate routes.  If the bus is driving by and the child is standing there, (s)he can get on the bus and be taken to his/her closest point.  Currently we do run separate routes for St. Michael’s in Orland Park and Cardinal Joseph Bernadine (CJB) in Orland Hills.

Q.  Are there other schools that we don’t service?

 

Reply by Mr. Rieniche:  I’m not sure.

Q.  How do we decide who gets it?

 

Reply by Mr. Reiniche:  It was a practice in place before I arrived.  At one point when we tried to eliminate a remote route our meeting room overflowed and the Arch Bishop attended.  The argument is that they are taxpayers, too.  We do have to do it for reimbursement, but not the extent that we do it now.  Regarding students who live within a mile and a half who don’t receive busing, they are not claimable under the state reimbursement plan because it is not considered hazardous for them to get to school, but the St. Michael’s and CJB students are claimable.  At one time, reimbursement was 98% but that has changed now to 60%.  Don’t think that we’re not looking at that.

Q.  We have heard that St. Michael’s and CJB families pay a small fee for transportation, but our district actually covers the cost.  Is that correct?

Reply by Mr. Reiniche:  CJB does reimburse us for the 1-1/2 mile portion outside of our district for which the state won’t reimburse us.

To Mr. Reiniche

 

Q.  What are our monthly expenditures?

 

Response by Mr. Reiniche:  5 to 6 million dollars.

To Mr. Reiniche

 

Q.  We have heard that we have a large fund balance – in the neighborhood of $50 million.  Why do we have so much?  Could you explain to us how that works?

Response by Mr. Reiniche:  Sure.  Back in 1995, the board asked for a referendum because we had a $4 million deficit.  We had been borrowing for ten years.  We realized that in order to ask for this referendum, we needed to make it last for at least eight years, and in 2012 we will have reached that goal.  Nearly 70% of our school districts are running at deficit spending.  We are very frugal here and because of that we are now being questioned for stockpiling.  We have a fund balance to spending ratio of 55%; the village is at 80%.  District 230 is at about 45%.  The county is behind in what it owes us, which is not the case in DuPage, for example.  Also, the state owes us $13 million.

To Mr. Reiniche

 

Q.  Speaking of fiscal responsibility, we are aware that our district has been involved in some lawsuits.  How much has the district spent during the last three years on lawsuits?

Response by Mr. Reiniche:  I don’t know.  I’m sure we could get that.

To Mr. Reiniche

 

Q.  Specifically, the Melanie Walsh case does not seem like a fiscally sound decision.  It’s been said at a Committee of the Whole meeting that it could cost up to $100,000 — $25,000 for a new position, $30,000 in benefits and $50,000 for litigation.

Response by Mr. Soustek:  Regarding the new position, that para-professional position was needed, so the district would have been hiring for it anyway.  The potential litigation is still with a hearing office so we don’t know how far it’ll go at this point.

To Mr. Soustek

 

Q.  Did this issue really need to go this far?  Could it have been avoided?

Response by Mr. Soustek:  That was not my decision.

Q.  Whose decision was it?

Response by Mr. Soustek:  The board’s.  Comment by Ms. Gentile:  when comments are made at the end of meetings by individual board members, please don’t take them as those of the entire board.

Ms. Zegar commented: The numbers quoted were noted from a formal discussion between board members during a Committee of the Whole meeting, not hearsay or comments made at the end of a meeting.

A general discussion then followed about the value of facts versus the divisive nature of rumors.  Other district boards have a public liaison.  Perhaps someone on the board would consider that role.  CARE135 accepts that role of passing along the information to interested community members.

To Mr. Doongan

 

                     Q. Why are we, as a district, so behind the neighboring districts with regards to technology?  We are financially more stable yet our children are taking turns to use a computer, which may already be outdated.

Response by Mr. Reiniche:  One of our biggest concerns is sustainability.  The board has been asking for that, and when Mr. Doogan came on board six months ago we began working on a plan.  Because of that, we have doubled our commitment to technology.  We’re putting that in place now.

Q. Where are we now on the plan?

Response by Mr. Doogan:  At the start of the next school year we’ll have 235 new desktop computers in place primarily in Kindergarten and first grade, because their computers haven’t been updated in a while.  The rest will be in office areas such as with secretaries and principals.  We also have 135 laptops going out throughout the district at the primary and intermediate levels.  In the past we’ve focused mostly at the junior high levels.  An important focus for us next year will be on software.  We’ve never had a plan for that before.

Additional comments by Mr. Reiniche:  We’re now putting wireless into the primary buildings, based on the recommendations of principals, who had not previously been asked what they needed in the classroom.  We’re looking at many options, and we’re also looking at the mistakes made by other districts so we don’t repeat them.

Q.  What are we looking at in terms of our own intranet, software and licenses for resources such encyclopedias?

Response by Mr. Doogan:  Each resource center has access to encyclopedias online; however, they are not assessable for students from their homes.  We do have a sizeable server system that is secure and must remain so regardless of whether we access via wired lines or wirelessly.

Response by Mr. Reiniche:  Regarding software, our office and operating systems have not held up well.  Mr. Doogan and I have been looking at ways to get them updated in a cost-effective way.  We have just begun to work with District 230 not only on sharing ideas but in pooling our resources for better purchasing power.  As a result we now have a new agreement for office and operating system updates that is based on number of employees versus licenses.  That means we can put the software on as many devices as we need and update regularly with no additional costs.  Finally, when the village was rewired for fiber optics 7-8 years ago, the district spent an extra $50,000 to have a second tube run alongside.  We may now use that to pull through wires as necessary, such as for phones, as ours are quite dated.  We could have a unified message system to push out information and to support a voice mail system for teachers.

Q.  What do you suggest that PFE organizations do when requests for technology are made?

Response by Mr. Doogan:  If an individual school has certain requests, unless they are really not a fit, I would suggest you consider their request as they know their buildings best.

Q.  What about Smart Boards at Jerling?

Response by Mr. Doogan:  The junior highs all pretty much have them and the technology is much improved now that changes are software-driven.

NEXT STEPS

 

Ms. Gentile will mention at the next District 135 board meeting that she attended our CARE135 meeting.  She will let board members know that we discussed:

–          Communications and its importance.

–          CARE135 communications available through facebook and (soon) a web site.

–          Technology and cameras are very important to us.

–          Bussing was discussed at length.

–          Request for legal bill totals for the last three years was made.

Finally, Mr. Soustek extended an invitation to attend upcoming meetings for CARE135 and PFE.

ADJOURNMENT