The school board recognizes the community would like to see the strike issue resolved for both the staff and the students.
The school board would like to continue to give annual raises at least 2% above Consumer Price Index as they have every year in the last decade. The financial reality does not allow us to do so.
The State of Illinois, under it’s own financial pressures, underpaid the district by $1.5 million dollars last year. Furthermore our financial projections show a $2.2 million dollar deficit next year, even if we do not give raises to the staff.
The Board is trying to avoid deficit spending.
What does that mean for D46 students and community?
- The district may need to eliminate 37 positions for school year 2013-2014.
- The district has already begun discussions of the possible need to close a school.
- Staff raises at this time will add to the deficit and could lead to further teacher eliminations, increased class size enrollments and possible program elimination.
- There is a very real possibility that the State of Illinois will shift some of the pension burden to the school districts.
For the teachers and their many community supporters it must seem that the Board of Education is unwilling to give the staff adequate raises.
As with everyone, we hope that an economic turnaround will start to improve revenues to the district.
Until that time, the board is committed to the long term financial health of the district. This offer gives some compensation increase to our outstanding teachers, while maintaining their excellent benefits and attempting to lessen the negative impact to our students.
POLL: D46 Board and Union to Negotiate Again Sunday. What will be the Outcome?
Gallery: From the District 46 Picket Lines
District 46 Residents Turn Out for Citizens' Strike Forum
UPDATED: No Agreement Reached in D46 to Avoid Strike
Kristin H.
12:14 pm on Friday, January 18, 2013
If the BOE had been a respectful group of people who were not out to get the teachers to begin with maybe you would be believed. Most of the above statements are just conjecture. Luckily for Grayslake the majority of you will not be involved in those future decisions. Vote for what the mediator came up with and if there are issues with teacher lay offs or schools closing (most likely because of attrition) then so be it. I am willing to accept that is a possibility. It will be for a whole other board with broader ideas and more community support to decide. Your childish antics have lost my confidence in anything you say. Vote and move on.
Brad Faxton
12:26 pm on Friday, January 18, 2013
Current climate does not predict the future. The board is a lame duck - sign something now, get out and let the new board whittle their pencils.
catalina10
12:55 pm on Friday, January 18, 2013
There are many members of the community who understand and support you! Stand strong, We get it!! For those who do not agree with this, that is your choice. I choose to be realistic.
Kristin H.
12:54 pm on Friday, January 18, 2013
The BOE twiddled their thumbs and screamed at each other for two years rather than working to come up with a viable solution to this. It isn't a surprise that the contract expired and we are in this predicament. This BOE has failed Grayslake and cannot be trusted to tell the truth or make the right decisions. The levy issue and admin raises prove that they do not care one iota about the teachers or the students.
Black Betty
6:43 pm on Friday, January 18, 2013
Rumor has it the Board is going to cancel on Sunday night. The BOE is supposed to meet with the Fed Mediator an hour early at 5pm and the negotiations would start at 6pm with the Union.
Whatever side you are on, make sure BOE doesn't care more about their 3-day weekend plans and shows up to settle this.
If the BOE doesn't show up, this strike is going another week. With 2 weeks of striking, the BOE will have made enough money up to pay the teachers but the lost school days won't be made up.
Wouldn't it be sad if this whole strike was the BOE's attempt to put money aside at the sake of our children's education? How sad would that be. I wouldn't be surprised if that was their intention the whole time.
I would expect a refund for the days of education your children don't receive.
Make sure the Board of Ed shows up on Sunday for the meeting.
BB
Brad Faxton
12:27 pm on Saturday, January 19, 2013
Refund on the days of education your child won't get? No, that isn't true - the days are tacked onto the end of the year. They are going to get the same days of education.
Black Betty
7:39 pm on Sunday, January 20, 2013
Brad,
Same team. It was sarcasm.
Toti
2:41 pm on Saturday, January 19, 2013
The Official School Calendar is the single document around which a school district functions. The School Code mandates a minimum of 185 days in the proposed school calendar to insure 176 days of pupil attendance. The School Code also defines the “types” of days which may be included in the calendar, i.e., Teacher Institutes, Parent/Teacher Conferences, etc.
Toti
2:50 pm on Saturday, January 19, 2013
The BOE has clearly proven that they are not interested in our children's education why would they threat parents with school closures and teacher layoffs why aren't they getting rid of all of these administrators that are making 85,000-120,000!! Look up all the administrators in the district office are they really necessary if we are in such financial strain!!!! Do they need 2 special Ed directors and a curriculum director!!!
Brad Faxton
2:56 pm on Saturday, January 19, 2013
Exactly - there are other areas which can be pruned back or optimized. non-teacher administrative expense is a huge burden.
Terri
4:42 pm on Saturday, January 19, 2013
If enrollment continues to decrease, a school closure is prudent. The savings would be dramatic
Lennie Jarratt
8:51 pm on Saturday, January 19, 2013
The presentation from today's townhall meeting is now available at http://ForOurChildrensFuture.com. Feel free to contact me with any questions.
Terri
9:49 am on Sunday, January 20, 2013
So, let me get this strait. I should:
"ask questions to make sure you (I) have the correct information instead of spinning and insinuating false information."
But you post information where you "believe there is an error. Not sure if was a district error or an ISBE error at this point." and the only way to know that is to come to your meeting?
You should be ashamed of posting data, with names, that you admittedly believe is erroneous...and the only disclaimer is a link that doesn't work that comes after you're called out? Some of the teachers in your slide don't even work in the district anymore. Why would the teachers want a link to misleading information on their Facebook page?
Lennie Jarratt
9:59 am on Sunday, January 20, 2013
The data is from the ISBE as stated. The names DID work in the district in 2012 as shown by the data unless you are claiming the district and ISBE are now using false data on their websites.
The salaries presented are correct, the year is what is in question for 2011. Again, unless you believe the district or the ISBE is reporting false data.
I also pointed out other false data coming from both the district and union. Why don't they want the people to know the truth?
Why is the union, knowing there will be RIFs, negotiating for higher classes (40 -50) is projected with their offer?
Terri
10:12 am on Sunday, January 20, 2013
Using the link on your website to the ISBE database, the teacher on the last line went from $91 in '09/'10 to $95 in '11/'12...3 years...and no longer works in the district.
Where do you get the 40/50 class size data?
It would be appropriate to answer the following directly, IMHO:
So, let me get this strait. I should:
"ask questions to make sure you (I) have the correct information instead of spinning and insinuating false information."
But you post information where you "believe there is an error. Not sure if was a district error or an ISBE error at this point." and the only way to know that is to come to your meeting?
You should be ashamed of posting data, with names, that you admittedly believe is erroneous...and the only disclaimer is a link that doesn't work that comes after you're called out? Some of the teachers in your slide don't even work in the district anymore. Why would the teachers want a link to misleading information on their Facebook page?
Lennie Jarratt
12:51 pm on Sunday, January 20, 2013
Using the link from ISBE that I provided still does not give you the 2010 data. Grayslake D46 is not available in the dropdown. The data posted is from 2011 and 2012. Again, still not 2013 like you keep falsely insinuating. Please provide the source link for the data you used since it is different than the data I have found from ISBE.
Second you show year 10 - 12, that is still only 2 yrs of raises, not 3.
The 40-50 number comes from the district being forced to RIF 37 teachers displacing 740- 962 children (based on current classroom size) and pushing them into other classes. The union's current offer adds up to another 12 teachers to that or 240 - 312 children displaced. That is a total of 980 - 1274 children. Dispersement of those into other classrooms will put you into the 40 - 50 range per class.
If you are anyone else would like to setup a group meeting to go over my presentations, I will be happy to come speak with them. That way we can go into more detail.
Openness, honesty and a dialogue is what is need to solve this issue not your continued distortions and insinuations.
Terri
1:05 pm on Sunday, January 20, 2013
Mr Jarratt
You are the only one distorting by posting info to admittedly believe to be erroneous.
Where, in this comment or thread, did I refer to FY13?
Disagreed...I used the link on your website for ISBE and found that the teacher on the last slide went from $91 in '09/'10 to $95 in '11/'12. Neither match your slide. And it represents 3 years...9/10, 10/11 & 11/12.
I have not insinuated or distorted. You HAVE by your own admission.
Terri
1:12 pm on Sunday, January 20, 2013
If 40 teachers had 23 kids per class, and were not offset by attrition of highly paid teachers and decreased enrollment, there might be some convoluted math that would increase class size. You know the math is not that simple. Otherwise, the current 330 teachers & 4,000 students would create an average class size of 12.
Lennie Jarratt
1:17 pm on Sunday, January 20, 2013
Terri also commented on D46 Teachers Picket Before Weekend Negotiations.
"Several of the teachers you used in your "highest paid" slide projecting increased salary don't even work in the district anymore (2012/2013)."
In addition "and no longer works in the district." where again you are talking about 2013.
Terri
1:25 pm on Sunday, January 20, 2013
The teachers I am referring to are not working in the district for 2012/2013. I thought that was clear, but evidently not. Are you disputing that fact?
GuitarMan
11:23 am on Sunday, January 20, 2013
Want to start finding money to pay teachers, get rid of the highly paid superintedent and administrative staff. That's what is happening on the private side. As all three of my kids went through the GL system I was shocked to meet an assistant principle, paid around 90K per year, who admitted spending much of his time monitoring the dress code of students. Lets get real, teachers don't need baby sitting to teach, and kids will be kids. Quit bashing teachers and let them do their job, just like all of do without others looking over their shoulders.
Forethe Community
12:55 pm on Wednesday, January 23, 2013
350 people showed up Sunday in the freezing cold to support the teachers of their district. That’s:
• 10 times the number that showed up for either of the For Our Children’s Future town halls.
• 10 times the number, on average, that shows up to BOE meetings.
• 5 times the number that have ever shown up for a BOE meeting (in recent history).
30 local business showed their support for the teachers by supplying food, providing parking, providing warming shelters, allowing access to their bathrooms, and donating cash to help teachers that might need it in a prolonged strike. Residual benefits went to local food banks through excess donations. That’s:
• 10 times the number of local business’s that spoke at any levy hearing.
• Equal to the number of attendants at any For Our Children’s Future town Hall.
• Equal to or greater than the average attendance at a BOE meeting.
Actions speak louder than words. I applaud the board for listening to the public. I only wish the silent majority had been more vocal at the levy hearings. It’s too late to do what the public really wanted.