In a letter to parents, Evanston/Skokie District 65 Superintendent Hardy Murphy says growing enrollment drove the school board’s decision this week to ask voters to approve $48.2 million in bonds for a new school and other construction projects.
And Murphy says the alternative would be increasing class sizes and other steps that “are not in keeping with our core values.”
Here’s the text of what he had to say about the referendum:
On Monday evening the Board of Education voted to place a referendum question on the March 20, 2012 ballot.
The question will ask our voters whether the board “shall build and equip a school building, build and equip additions to existing school buildings, and improve the sites of and alter, repair and equip existing school buildings and issue bonds of said School District to the amount of $48,200,000 for the purpose of paying the costs thereof.”
This is an important decision for our community, and I think it is important to share background information with you about the process that led to the board’s action this week.
Rising Enrollments/Space needs/Facilities improvements
District 65 has seen a rise in student enrollment over the past several years. And, student enrollment is projected to continue growing for the immediate future. The Board validated these projections through an internationally known consultant, Dr. John Kasarda, and with a real estate market analysis done by a local real estate consultant, Dr. Valerie Kretchmer.
Also, an architectural analysis looked at classroom capacity. Over the past several years, substantial improvements and investments were made across the district to address ongoing maintenance and space needs created by the rising enrollments. Renovations and additions have been completed at several schools.
These improvements are in keeping with best practices for maintaining and updating aging buildings. They also are in keeping with the District’s strategic plan goals and our capital improvement plan to address building improvements.
Since the adoption of the District 65 strategic plan in 2009, efforts have been underway to address a myriad of goals, strategies, and core values identified through a year-long planning process.
The core value of neighborhood schools that support families and community led to the board’s formation of a new school committee to study the feasibility for building a new school. That new school committee’s almost year-long process resulted in their recommendation to build a new school.
Board Due Diligence
After the board reviewed the report and recommendations from the new school committee, it began its own due diligence to study and review additional data to help in its decision-making about how to proceed.
The board looked at scenarios and financial models. And, as the discussion moved to looking at a possible referendum, the board also looked at how to best address the expected growth in middle school population.
A capital and operating referendum were considered as well as the estimated impact upon annual taxes of local homeowners. The board’s decision to proceed with placing a referendum question on the ballot has been thoughtful and considerate of the needs of our students and our community.
In the end, the board voted to place the $48.2 million bond sale question on the March 20, 2012 ballot to address several major capital projects.
These projects include construction of a new, state-of-the-art K-5 school in the Central Core community of Evanston; classroom additions at Haven and Nichols Middle Schools (both constructed in the 1920’s); upgraded science labs to support STEM initiatives at Chute, Haven and Nichols Middle Schools and King Lab Magnet School; boys’ and girls’ locker rooms at Bessie Rhodes Magnet School, and a number of life safety-identified and infrastructure projects at these schools including new safe entries with welcome centers to improve our schools.
Additionally, addressing these space and capital improvements with referendum funds better enables the district to take care of other capital improvements in schools across the district including roof repair and replacement and the repair of masonry in a timely manner using current resources.
What Else Can Be Done
We realize that there are other ways to address projected increased enrollments. Class sizes can be increased, specialized programs or services can be moved from one building to another to make room where needed.
Classrooms used for art instruction can be repurposed to accommodate instructional space as needed. And, it is possible to cap enrollment at some schools and transfer students where there is room. But, these management strategies are not in keeping with many of our core values, nor are they consistent with our strategic plan and Board goals.
I know that the length of this letter is daunting. But, I felt that it was important to share background information to enable an understanding of the board decision.
As the referendum campaign gets underway, there will be additional information posted on the district’s website at www.district65.net/referendum. The page will be active before the winter break begins.
"and it is possible to cap enrollment at some schools and transfer students where there is more room."
Translated means- Kids at the overcrowded schools can be moved… but we don't want to deal with the parents upset that their property values are tied to WIllard, Haven, LIncolnwood, Orrington, and Kingsley schools… . So, we'll build a new school to pacify those whose kids will now be segregated again, and slide in mention of a few upgrades to some other south schools and hope that this referendum passes.
Nothing like a bunch of rich folks upset about their property values.
NO to separate but equal
You've hit the nail on the head.
Re-districting is the practically and financially responsible thing to do. While we're at it, let's de-magnetize Rhodes and Lab. (Or do we not want to upset those parents either?)
Vote NO to separate but equal.
“upset rich folks”?
I am not rich but I do live in an attendance area of one of the schools you list. I will vote no because this district has a history of underserving some schools or groups of kids to favor others. I watched my kids' school get a TWI program that it did not have space for, which has made it much worse off than it was a few years ago. When the decision was being made at the board, Hardy Murphy said that larger class sizes did not hurt educational quality. Julie Chernoff, the board member swing voter, agreed and we now we have a very crowded building with large class sizes. A year or two later, Washington got to have an early grade class with 6 students.
Well, if large class sizes were a solution for one school, then that can be the solution for all of the schools in the district. I do not trust the district will use the money if the referendum passes in a way that benefits my school at all. I would not mind helping my fellow Evanstonians if the district had not given my school the shaft in the past.
Save 60 million
Murphy finally said something smart when he wrote "What Else Can Be Done". Save 60 million by voting NO.
Video Gaming Act
When communities and districts across Illinois face daunting capital project schedules that require significant funding, the Illinois capital plan’s Video Gaming Act (VGA) should be considered. This already-enacted portion of the state’s $31 billion capital plan provides municipalities with a significant revenue generating option that makes a local impact. The state collects a 30% tax of the net income generated by individual video gaming terminals. The state then redistributes one sixth of this percentage to the municipality. This amount, which is entirely unrestricted in its use, is placed under local control and can be put toward projects deemed priorities by the municipality. Evanston, for example, can create more than $866,000 annually through the VGA. For more information on the VGA and the Illinois capital plan, please visit http://www.backtoworkillinois.com.
Just think of how many poor people can be sucked into another way to spend their money and probably welfare payments [money is fungible] and thus increase the cost of welfare to taxpayer—with no improvement of services—and add more poor people to the welfare roles.
I guess the Lotto was not enough—i.e. increasing ways to get the poor to gamble away their money.
Seriously, get a GIS program
With a simple GIS mapping program the district could create boundaries around each school which would create equitable enrollment patterns. You simply take the number of pupils, divide that by the number of schools while weighting for the different size of each school. This creates a "student-shed" for each school. Since the district knows where the students live, so you simply create a formula in your GIS program that computes the closest students to each student-shed. This way you get rid of the busing problem and everything is done equitably.
We cannot afford this
We cannot afford this expenditure. We have enough classroom space already if District 65 will cooperate with District 202. We are spending too much on salary and benefits for non-teaching administrators in both districts. We must face fiscal realities of the times.
Leave a comment