Voters have spoken again...
YES 858 37.16%
NO 1451 62.84%
This should be a clear message to the School Board... Its time to go!!!
YES 858 37.16%
NO 1451 62.84%
This should be a clear message to the School Board... Its time to go!!!
posted by Candidate at
10:38 PM
13 Comments:
A victory for the D46 taxpayers!!!
Blogs like these continue to be a valuable tool for letting the community voice their opinions about this deceptive school district. Thank you for the hard work CD.
This D46 school board has gotta go!
By
Anonymous, at 11:14 PM, November 07, 2006
I heard school board elections this spring. Is that true?
By
Anonymous, at 10:18 AM, November 09, 2006
To my understanding, there are three members that are up for re-election in the spring: Laura Domoto (President), Hiedi Jessup and Karin Bowman. These three members consitently vote as a block for referendums and have even personally financed advertising for the referendums.
By
Anonymous, at 10:34 AM, November 09, 2006
This blog seems to be about people just hashing around the same erroneous information. You voted this Board in and they are 7 different people with 7 different backgrounds and strengths. They are not evil people out to spend your money. They are volunteers that depend on other volunteers and professionals. If you think finance is being handled poorly then join the finance commitee and show the Board what you think is best for the school. Regarding the comment about the Board is poor at estimating how many new kids will be admitted.....They don't do those estimates they pay professionals. They don't pave the parking lot they pay professionals. They set policy. If you have personnel issues, let them know. But just remember they have all the same legal restrictions about hiring/firing as any large company.
By
Anonymous, at 3:53 PM, November 09, 2006
I would think that after being soundly defeated twice that the superintendent and school board would sound more willing to work out a compromise. However based on the comments made by both in the Northwest Herald today, it sure sounds like more of the same on the way. http://www.nwherald.com/articles/2006/11/09/news/local/doc45530000a3361813626617.txt
By
Anonymous, at 6:18 PM, November 09, 2006
Judging from the feedback of Northwest Herald readers, a common theme is occuring. This community has lost trust in the D46 school board, and wants its school board members out. There is now enough momentum to get some heads to roll this spring. Compare the voting results from the November referendum with the voting results back in April. CONCLUSION: Mary Fasbender and Laura Domoto are not making any progress with the community. They have become dead weight.
Mary, you pissed off too many people at the Tall Grass zoning meetings last year. I doubt you will fully recover your credibility with the community. Voters have long memories. You have left too many people angry. This election did only one thing for you...it OFFICIALLY proved you to be ineffective when working with the community.
...and Laura, you are a nice sweet lady, but unfortunately everyone can feel your referendum hand creeping into their pockets for money. You are not fooling anyone. Darling, your time is up.
...and Steve Todd? Clearly this community is not interested in your ideas. Make us all proud, and step aside.
By
Anonymous, at 11:39 PM, November 09, 2006
Chris, pull your head out of your butt!!!
What possible motive does the board have other than to provide a quality learning environment for district children??? The board solicited the input of the best people in their fields to help make their decisions. You relied upon second-hand "facts" scrubbed to play into your misguided, emotional hands. You also played upon the anti-tax emotions of the community for your personal gain. You are shameless...
This district lies in the direct path of urban sprawl. Stick your head in the sand, slowing housing starts or not, this community will grow at a steady clip. You've done nothing other than stir a misguided anti-tax sentiment in the community to ultimately hurt the children. The district will now be forced to educate the growing student population in temporary, mobile facilities, and pack more children into already overcrowded common spaces. You must be so proud!!! Obviously, you have nothing to lose in this debate...
Take a minute, step back, look at yourself in the mirror, truthfully ask what is best for the children (not you) of this community, and work to make a workable solution. I know it's hard to grasp, but this work might take a bit more effort than the keystrokes you invest to run this blog.
Your effort has done nothing other than keep more cash in your pocket at the expense of the kids.
Wimps say no, men work to forge a solution to protect our kids.
By
Anonymous, at 11:55 PM, November 13, 2006
To Previous Anonymous: When I read posts such as yours, it is clear why the YES people are in the minority in this community.
You seem to have a blind allegience to the Board. You accept without question whatever they say. The anti-tax emotions and sentiment in the community are the direct result of the Board's decisions. No one else. Pissing off taxpayers is about the worse thing a board can do "for the kids." Do you think telling the taxpayers on thing is 2002 and taking much more is OK? Why don't the YES people stand up to this and insist the board make it right? Then maybe taxpayers would be open to more taxes. And did all the money they took in taxes go to the kids?
As for the second-hand facts you refer to...remember the "donated land" claim back in March? It was a lie. And how about the claim we will be getting a refund of the overtaxing? How much? They can't say. When? They can't say.
When a board lies to a community, don't use the welfare of the kids to excuse it. As for solutions, there are other options to deal with the growth. Expansion options were presented by the board back in February at the infomation sessions. They seem a reasonable first-step to dealing with the growth. But those options have now been twisted in terms of costs and dismissed by the board--I guess building a glittering new school is the only way.
Some NO people worked hard on the task force but walked away in disgust. The whole process was so rigged. Was that to "protect our kids"? Until the school is sincere about finding a good option with the community (instead of shoving the new school idea at us over and over again), it is the school that is playing with the welfare of the kids, not the people want other options. (And not this $13 million expansion crap! That is an example of people not being sincere but rather trying to frame other options in a absurd way. The option shown in February was $3-4 million.)
A lot of NO people are convinced voting NO is for the kids because it keeps the school out of financial trouble. Take a look at overcrowding and cuts in programs at nearby schools in financial trouble. The kids lose! We need to pick options we can afford. That is truly in the best interest of the kids.
By
Anonymous, at 10:57 AM, November 14, 2006
To the Anonymous personal attacker.. Once again, you are missing the FACTS. The school board is not listening to the community. The board and its supporters want to build a building at all costs. They have maintained a consistent disregard for the truth and have wasted a lot of people’s time and money in the process. I witnessed the process first hand and I’m relieved that I was able to communicate the facts via this blog. I’m also very proud of the community’s for taking the time to learn the facts and vote down this referendum.
Had the board passed the March referendum, we would have accepted Premium bonds at significantly higher interest rates, began construction on a school several years before any new students arrived from the various developments and we would have not been able to meet our obligations on the bonds. The November referendum for $25MM was another attempted by the board to overextend the community with even more obligations and still without the justification of real developments underway. In fact, had either of these referendums passed, they would have burdened our district to the point of financial ruin and for what? A school board that is hell bent on leaving a legacy. That’s not in the interest of the kids and or anyone else. We need to send a clear message to the Board that its time for them to resign.
I will continue to use this blog to communicate the facts. This forum has allowed both sides to voice their opinions. Whether you like it or not, people make up their own minds. This blog is not going to deter anyone from voting their conscience.
Unlike the School Board, my agenda is to help the community understand the facts so that they can make sound decisions about our future.
By
Candidate, at 11:19 AM, November 14, 2006
My wife and I have grown tired of the D46 "It's For The Kids" argument. There is a double digit percentage of taxpayers in D46 that have no kids in the school district. The D46 board assumes we all have kids in their school. They are wrong. They completely ignored this group in both referendums. That's why my wife and I voted NO (not because of a blog). In the meantime, along the way, D46 leadership has lost my repect and trust....and yes, I understand a good school district can improve our property value, but so can remodeling. Individually, we can control remodeling costs, but not D46 costs.
I agree with the previous anonymous poster, it's time for new D46 leadership.
By
Anonymous, at 1:57 PM, November 14, 2006
I cannot believe the poster who claims people who voted NO did so to "keep cash in your pocket." The taxes I pay that go directly to district 46 increased 68% since 2002. With inflation at less than 3% per year and enrollment flat, district 46 has received generous community support. Seems like YES people feel people should give and then give more for their kids. When will the YES people stand up for what is right and question if the money is being spent wisely? When will the YES people demand the board act ethically and tax people only what was promoted in 2002? Enough already!
By
Anonymous, at 7:38 AM, November 15, 2006
What a joke. It looks like Mary Fastspender is at it again with her partner in crime Laura "Tax 'em" Domoto. They want to get another tax raise on the ballot for April 2007. What has changed since November? Clearly, these women are out of ideas, as they keep trying the same strategy and same message with no success. What can we do to get some leadership that is in touch with the D-46 community?
Here is the NW Herald article in regards to the potential April 2007 issue.
http://www.nwherald.com/articles/2007/01/15/news/local/doc45ab09d761e13493240293.txt
===========
PRAIRIE GROVE – When District 46 voters head to the ballot box April 17, they might be asked for the third time in 13 months whether the school district should issue bonds to build more classrooms.
School board members are expected to discuss at their regular meeting Tuesday night whether they should put a referendum question on the April 17 ballot. Board President Laura Domoto said there had not been any decision as to how much that bond issue could be or what it would cost the taxpayers.
“It’s still completely up in the air right now, but the decision will have to be made in the next ... weeks for sure,” Domoto said. “The planning for the district has been going on for years. We know that eventually the land will be filled up with houses.”
Domoto said the board was looking at several options to handle projected growth, including building an addition to the existing schools and building a new school from scratch.
Twice last year voters batted down by nearly 2-to-1 margins bond sale proposals that district officials said would accommodate expected growth.
In November, 63 percent of voters opposed to the district’s proposal to take a $25 million loan.
A month later, School Board members heard an $18 million proposal to build an addition to the Prairie Grove Junior High building.
“We did ... have our architect give us a proposal for an addition to the building, which would have made the building have seven classes at every grade,” Domoto said. “We’re obviously looking at lots of different options.”
Superintendent Mary Fasbender estimated that, based on village building projections, as many as 400 new students could enroll in the 1,055-student district within the next decade. The district draws students from Prairie Grove and parts of Crystal Lake, McHenry, Oakwood Hills and rural McHenry County.
“There is going to be a presentation on another set of options in terms of facilities, and the board would need to decide,” Fasbender said.
The school board has until Feb. 13 to adopt a resolution to place a referendum question on the April ballot.
If District 46 does not have a question on the April ballot, the next chance for a referendum would be in 2008. There is no November election in odd years, and McHenry County Clerk Katherine Schultz said that could mean a busy ballot across the county.
“My guess is there will be quite a few questions,” Schultz said. “April will be the only ballot that school boards have to ask a question unless they want to wait until April ‘08.”
By
Anonymous, at 12:30 PM, January 15, 2007
Well it looks like Charlotte Kremer is listening.
==============
This was is the NW Herald on 1-17-2007
PRAIRIE GROVE – Voters might have to wait a year before they will see another District 46 building referendum.
District 46 board members voted 6-0 Tuesday night to delay a vote until a special meeting on Feb. 12 to, as several of them said, “see if something changes” between now and then.
That something could include a change in public support of a referendum or a sudden burst in stalled development within the district, board President Laura Domoto said.
“There’s all kinds of things that generate change ... I think we’re kind of locked into a point-of view right now,” board member Karen Bowman said.
She said that a referendum in April would be a difficult sell to the taxpayers.
The special meeting on Feb. 12 still would allow time to approve a ballot question for this year before the county’s Feb. 13 deadline.
At the same meeting, the board did take a step forward in the plans for expanding.
Two options for expansion were considered by the board for a referendum.
One option would cost about $18.5 million and would be an add-on to the current building. The second would call for the building of free-standing building on the school site at a cost of $21.8 million.
However, district 46 Superintendent Mary Fasbender said the board seemed unlikely to select either option or go to an April referendum question.
In a 5-1 vote, the board authorized the district to purchase about 30 acres of property adjacent to the Route 176 campus.
The $3.5 million purchase, which will be paid with impact fees from recent developments, will put the district in a position to either expand current facilities or build another building.
Domoto said the purchase will help to secure land for buildings to house the estimated 2,300 students the district will have, once Prairie Grove is fully built out.
“We have dreamed to own that property ever since I have been on this board,” Bowman said, who has served on District 46’s governing body for 12 years.
The land-grab measures lone detractor, Charlotte Kremer, said she thought move went against what taxpayers have voted down in the past.
“The voters told us not to build, not to buy land,” she said.
Two previous referendum last year were defeated by almost 2-to-1 margins.
Board members also directed staff to obtain a mobile classroom from District 200.
Fasbender said the purchase would cost the district nothing to buy the mobile, and could require as much as $15,000 to transport and install.
This purchase could be used to help house students if the referendum is put on hold, she said.
The mobile would, at first, be used for storage and would eliminate a $6,000-a-year bill the district is currently paying for off-site housing of material, Fasbender said. It and possibly two other future mobile purchases could be used in the future as classrooms.
By
Anonymous, at 8:32 AM, January 17, 2007
Post a Comment
<< Home