That was dated December 1st, but just given to county officials on January 28th.

Today, take a look at a February 5th letter from Stern Brothers & Company.

Click to enlarge.

It says the firm will find “sophisticated investors…in tandem with a sophistical investment letter…”

Then, there are two “if’s.”

• The operating LLC raises $8 million in equity, and
• The project is located in a Targeted Employment Area and CFIG (Chicagoland Foreign Investment Group) commits $27 million in long-term take out financing.

Miyun Cho, Managing Director, signs the letter.

Special Education Administrator Perry Yates on the right hand side of the photo and Cheryl Kalfirtz, second from the left, have now left the Huntley School District's buildings. Stacy O'Dea, seen on the left hand side of the picture, and Karen Aylward, between Yates and Kalkirtz, remain. This photo was taken as Kalkirtz was explaining the revisions in how the Federal Stimulus money would be spent.

Yesterday we left the Huntley School District’s Financial Advisory Committee meeting after talking about how stunned those attending were to find out that Special Education Director Cheryl Kalkirtz was no longer with District 158.

Controller Mark Altmayer for some reason didn’t think it proper to share the information, even though the Daily Herald had quoted Superintendent John Burkey on the subject in an internet published article.

In the public comment period, parents spoke about their lack of trust, especially when they see services not being delivered to their children.

They expressed their concerns about a revolving door with Special Ed administrators who seem to disagree with top administrators about what is the right approach.

Huntley School District Contoller Mark Altmayer

Altmayer explained to the committee that parents had a distrust of special services but not the fiscal department (his area).

Parents then emphatically said they didn’t trust fiscal and wanted the committee to provide oversight regarding how the Federal Stimulus (initial time again, IDEA and IDEA ARRA) money is spent. They seemed to want a check and balance on whether it is being spent on where it is intended, that is, special needs.

Altmayer admitted that it wasn’t the district’s finest moments how “it took 4-5 months to get the IDEA ARRA funding correct.”

Strangely, in one breath, Altmayer cheerfully beamed,

“There is not a ton of issues.”

And, in another breath, Altmayer matter-of-factly referred to how administrators came up with how the Federal Stimulus money should be spent:

“It was pretty much a disaster.”

When driving along Rute 47, you may see this in the future.

Here’s the first of a series of article that Pete Gonigam has written for his First Electric Newspaper.

It’s entitled,

FEN Finds Possible Problems for Proposed SportsPlex

You can read about and see the Prairie Grove maraschino cherry processing plant that Lake in the Hills resident and SportsPlex CEO Lou Tenore owns.

The article reports that “at the moment the EB-5 fund owns 65 percent of the company, the Management Group 35 percent. Later on the Management group will end up with a 51 percent interest.”

The intriguing description of tomorrow’s article is

“How Do You Say ‘Sportsplex’ in Farsi?”

The McHenry County Board is poised to vote on whether to allocate $18 million of its $27 million in Federal stimulus money to the Lakewood development.

Previously, administrators incorrectly did the math on a list of items on how to spend about $1.7 million of Federal Stimulus ARRA funds for Special Education.

This week, simple math mistakes appear in the list of how the Federal money will be spent on Special Education.

I was glancing down the revised list and saw this item:

Description      Amount
RtI    25 conference @ $200 each.   $3,000

OK, fifth grade math test time.

What is 200 times 25?

The item is on page 8 of the board packet section which has this link (reproduced above with the questionable item at the bottom of the excerpt).

25 times $200 each is $5,000, by the way, not $3,000.

The math carefulness is repeated on page 12.

RtI Conference/ISHA  12X$350   $7,800.00
5 Laser Printers  (5X$400)    $4,500.00

The laser printer line item is at the bottom of the illustration and the RTI is 13 lines higher.

Anyone can make a math error, but couldn’t memo writers check their work as teachers advise students?

English is better, right?

There was a memo on page 6 of 199 to Supt. John Burkey and the board of education members that was dated January 7, 2009.  It’s for the board meeting on the 7th.  The date I pulled the memo was January 6, and it’s  2010.  The mistake about the year is the kind of mistake we all make at the beginning of a new year. The memo was jointly written by three administrators.

The 2nd paragraph aught my eye.

“Proudly, the Office of Special Services has finalized this list.  Having further worked with District Administration (RtI), the Technology Department, District ARRA Committee, Special Education Parent Advisory Committee and a subcommittee of PAC to establish this final product.”

Maybe Huntley’s English teachers can use this with their students to show how the second “sentence” is a phrase and not a sentence. Maybe it will be in sophomore year of high school. I remember my Middletown, New York, English teacher in 1957. She had as her goal teaching us how to write a sentence.

You hear people complain about how students graduate from high school without learning to do math or write complete sentences. When I worked as a cashier at Crystal Lake’s McDonald’s (one with arches and a sign saying 300,000 sold) in the summer of 1960, I added what was bought in my head. Now employees punch pictures.

I wonder why.

And, just in case you are interested in the Read 180 and System 44 expenditures planned, I’ve captured that page above.

Approved unanimously by the McHenry County Finance and Audit Committee this morning, the proposed $40 million McHenry County Sportsplex comes with $5 million worth of strings to Lakewood taxpayers, including $1 million to buy the land on Route 47 and 176.

A May 13th letter from newly-elected Village President Erin Smith to McHenry County Sportsplex entrepreneur Lou Tenore of Lake in the Hills promises a “cash transfer of $1,000,000.00 from the Village to MCS to the extent permitted by law or acquisition by the Village of up to $1,000,000.00 in land for the project.”

This is part of a $5 million assistance package “to support this project in a manner consistent with Illinois law.”

Outlined in the letter are other financial incentives:

“Waiver of Lakewood municipal annexation, platting, permitting, and associated hearing fees as well as reimbursement of Village professional costs up to a total value of $1,000,000.00.“An additional $3,000,000.00 (or greater to the extent that the amount provided if fee waivers [above] totals less than $1,000,000.00) provided through a combination of other sources included, but not limited to:

1. Revenue-sharing agreements or tax rebate agreements
2. Assistance from the Village securing a grant from the Upper Illinois River Development AuthorityOther technical assistance from the Village whether provided directly to the Developer or to the Village
3. Introductions and support by the Village to funders for other grants whether such grants are made directly to the Developer or to the Village
4. Any grants or financial assistance provided to MCS from McHenry County at the request of the Village
5. Property tax abatements, if any, for the parcel
6. USDA technical assistance whether provided directly to the Developer or to the Village
7. Tourism attraction or TAP grants whether provided directly to the Developer or to the Village.

So what, according to the letter, does Lakewood get in return?

To recover the $1 million “advance”

• The village may retain, for its own purposes, its share of the first $1 million in sales tax revenue or amusement tax revenue generated by the project.
• It can also “be satisfied by other cash payments from the Developer.” Listed are a “10% additional charge on all regular admission fees and a 20%s charge on all tournaments fees along with a $1 per vehicle parking fee.” This would be pledged for a ten-year period.
• If the village supplies land, rather than case, the land will be deeded to the developer when the village has recovered the purchase price through sales tax, amusement tax and other fees.

For the $15 million loan he sought authorized by the same Federal Stimulus source, Woodstock minor league baseball promoter Pete Heitman told the New York times that he expected to save $5 million over twenty years.

The letter from Village President Smith says the $5 million in assistance needs to be provided “within 18 months.”

= = = = =

The photo to the right is of Lakewood Village President Erin Smith at a fall “Meet with the Village President” gathering.

The proposed McHenry County Sportsplex will be mainly on the west side of Route 47 where it joins with Route 176. That area is within the planning jurisdiction of the Village of Lakewood. Background on the project can be found here.

While discussions have been going on for a considerable length of time, the application says that the Village of Lakewood will not act on annexation and approval of the project until next March.

Issuance of the $18 million in bonds, if approved by the county board, is scheduled for April 15^th. Construction would begin January 1, 2010, with completion six months later.

If approved, unless more Federal stimulus money is found, the current $27.5 million allocation of Federal Stimulus Bonds would not seem to have enough remaining to also provide the $15 million in financing that the Woodstock minor league baseball stadium promoters are seeking.

Concept Plan for the McHenry County Sportplex on Routes 47 and 176.

SportsThe time table listed seems a bit optimistic, given the stated March approval by the Lakewood Village Board.

The name of the limited liability corporation which will own 30% of the project is MCSMG LLC. It was formed on May 12, 2009.

The Illinois Secretary of State’s Office lists it as “McHenry County Sportsplex, LLC.”

McHenry Sportsplex E-5 Fund LLC, established August 21^st of this year and located at 111 E. Wacker Drive in Chicago, will own the other 70%. According to the Illinois Secretary of State’s Office, it is related to McHenry Real Estate and Property Investments, LLC. The fund proposes to invest $27 million in the project.

The application says that $13 million in equity will be put up by the investors.

This is how the document says the $40 million will be spent:

• $6 million – land acquisition
• $6 million – site development
• $24,100,000 – new construction
• $500,000 – furniture and fixtures
• $2.9 million – professional fees

Getting the project off the ground will produce 524 temporary jobs, the application says. 420 permanent jobs will be created. Annual payroll after the first year is estimated to be $14.1 million or almost $36,000 per person per year.

The investment banking firm is identified as Stern Brothers. The bonds will be privately placed.

Kitak, Rock, LLC, will be the bond counsel.

Legal counsel is Mike Moody of O’Rouke and Moody at 55 W. Wacker Drive, Chicago.

The application is dated December 16^th.

An attachment showing local labor, supplies and materials to be used is not posted on the county’s web site. Another attachment explaining the project is also not attached.

There are probably a few teachers in Huntley School District 158 who are either recoiling in dismay or laughing at how former teachers, now administrators in their district, have a different standard for themselves when they become administrators.

In this case, several parents, including Mrs. Sara DiFucci, seem far better at reading comprehension and mathematics than administrators who prepare and (are supposed to) read the documents given to the board and public.

In Thursday night’s board meeting, DiFucci pointed out a large error in special education material Supt. John Burkey submitted to the school board. It was in a document in which administrators added up their spending list for the Federal Stimulus ARRA IDEA funds.

There was a $295,576 addition error.

You can see the error on page 464 of 507 of the November board meeting packet.

If you scan and do a quick addition of the numbers on the first page of the report, say the first ten line items, you can see how they add up to much more than $800,000 (click to enlarge page 464).

Quick rounding is a way professionals and educators—even 5th graders in my son’s homework last year—look at numbers to see if there are any obvious errors.

Burkey’s board packet presented a spending total of $801,660.81 for 89 items in the initial request for Special Ed money from the Federal Stimulus Package.

The problem is that the first ten items on the two page list total more than $840,000.

A casual look of ten items lets you see there is an error.

Of course, Burkey probably doesn’t look at documents like this closely before they go to the board. That’s what staff are for.

Other administrators apparently didn’t bother either.

Later on in the meeting, board member Aileen Seedorf asked Controller Mark Altmayer if he knew of the large error.

Altmayer’s reply was interesting.

Without saying who was responsible, the Controller emphatically said it wasn’t his document, emphasizing he didn’t know about the error.

Sources within Huntley 158 have let it be known that multiple administrators knew of the error before Thursday night.

Is it possible, as top financial guy, Altmayer was left out of the loop and this wasn’t discussed at Burkey’s weekly cabinet meetings of which he’s part?

One might think that an expenditure as contentious as this would make that agenda.

To be fair to the new Special Ed (Special Services) Director Cheryl Kalkirtz, I have it on reasonably good authority the error was not of her making.

Interesting is no administrator was willing to raise his or her hand and say it was not Burkey’s mistake.

Burkey in the past has seemed proud of how he has a C.P.A. as Controller.

No comments about the C.P.A. test Altmayer passed Thursday night.

A fair question to ask is “What’s the point of having a C.P.A. as Controller if the district’s isn’t taking care that public documents with financial numbers in them are carefully reviewed?”

In any event, someone dropped the ball. In fact, the total for the proposed Special Education expenditures from the Federal Stimulus Package aren’t even in the ballpark.

In years past, Huntley’s board had Larry Snow and Tony Quagliano on it.

Both loved to review financial documents.

Snow, of course, lost to Mike Skala and Quagliano decided to retire.

There’s still a CPA on the board, Keven Gentry, but he apparently didn’t catch this mistake while reading the board packet. There are also a couple of M.B.A.’s on the board now. But, considering the District 158 administration dumped 507 pages into the board packet, there’s no reason they should have discovered the mistake.

The only board member who gave an indication of caring about the large error was Aileen Seedorf, who has been the one bird dogging on Special Education matters.

The six-member board majority expressed no concern at the mistake.

I will note, however, when state officials wanted a legislator not to find something, they smothered them in so much paper the odds of finding something that might be amiss were minuscule.

Burying people in paper is a tried and proven way to keep people from finding something.

Supt. Burkey didn’t so much as offer a superficial apology for the mistake. He didn’t say a word.

A $295,576 error would seem to me to be worth a mention.

Teachers help our children learn how errors should be admitted to when made.

It’s not as if anyone was expecting a Tiger Woods-like “I regret those transgressions with all of my heart” type of apology or offer of repentance.

An insincere “We regret the inconvenience this error may have caused anyone” that you might associate with a utility, bank or cable provider would have been in the something – anything category.

The example to teachers in the audience was when you make a large error admit to nothing and don’t say a word.

Special Ed director Kalkirtz apparently reports to Associate Supt. Terry Awrey.

Awrey, like all other administrators, sat silent, not volunteering a word lest it be thought he was at fault.

Showing teachers that neither he nor any of his top administrators are willing to admit to an error can hardly be considered leading by example.

It certainly won’t win a “We Set Good Examples” shiny apple award.

My guess is that all sorts of people set better examples of accountability than those unwilling to admit or apologize for this $300,000 mistake in public.

Say,

• kindergarten teachers
• first grade teachers
• second grade teachers
• third grade teachers
• fourth grade teachers
• fifth grade teachers
• sixth grade teachers
• any special ed teachers
• any certified special ed support people

or, well, you get the idea.

Some administrator(s) apparently has (have) not learned to check work before turning it in. Or to take responsibility for mistakes.

Or proof read the reading assignment given to the board and public.

Educators (and President Barack Obama) talk of teachable moments.

The Special Education revelation could have been one of those.

Burkey could have apologized for his staff’s mistake.

He didn’t.

He could have asked his staff in public to be more careful in the future, to double check their work before turning it in.

It gives me something other administrators can use as “how-not-to” example.

Perhaps the school board and the public will allow the “whatever” approach to an almost $300,000 error.

Even my son has learned there are consequences to that approach.

My guess is that teachers have set higher standards for students in Huntley’s classrooms.

Board member Aileen Seedorf questioned a disbursement to Scholastic Inc. for over fifty thousand dollars in the financial records. Scholastic provides Read 180.

Controller Mark Altmayer didn’t give it up and said he didn’t know.

With some persistence, other administrators fessed up and the cat was out of the bag.

Finally, Supt. Burkey confessed, saying 60 licenses had been purchased.

Curriculum director Mary Olsen said all of these licenses were to be used only for regular education students.

Tough to figure out how no licenses had been purchased a week earlier but we’ll wait for the response to the Freedom of Information request. And, if it’s unsatisfactory, I’ll file it again after January 1st when there will be actual penalties for those responding falsely.

One could still wonder why the Read 180 purchases were in a special ed classroom unpacked by a special ed student and given to a special ed student to take home to his parents.

Apparently at least one special ed student had been using the Read 180 program when none had been purchased for their use.

What the special ed parents asked for at the board meeting was

• Being able to make a presentation to the board on caseload staffing
• Parent participation on the committee coming up with revised ARRA funds spending recommendations

Seedorf tried to get the board and Burkey to agree to schedule a presentation by the parents at the next committee of the whole meeting.

Burkey and the board majority turned cold shoulders to both suggestions.

How unreasonable are such requests, considering how the Special Ed Moms have been treated this fall?

They are very reasonable.

In order to get the superintendent and 158 administrators to listen one apparently has to go door-to-door passing out flyers.

The Daily Herald pointed out how Burkey had “stone ears” in its article and how the parents distributed flyers door-to-door in order to stop this vote and get a revised spending list.

The Northwest Herald observed of the newest revision of how District 158 intends to spend the $1.6 million (which happened after the flyers hit door knobs):

“And the initiative for additional staff development –such as the opportunity to be trained in disability awareness –increased to $450,000 total.”

Parents told the board there had been other items purchased besides Read 180 and there was an internal memo indicating such.

As you might expect, administrators asked for a copy of their own memo, rather than offer to provide the memo to the board with an explanation.

Perhaps the memo has to surface publicly before its existence is confirmed by the administration.

Sort of like how the Read 180 licenses and materials weren’t purchased this year until a special ed parent brought the materials to a board meeting for show and tell.

District 158 is among the model local governments in revealing what will be discussed at their meetings. (In comparison, Crystal Lake reveals nothing more than its agenda and, then, not on a convenient basis.)

But with how it obtained the Read 180 licenses, which it apparently wants to finance with Federal stimulus money and which educational value is clearly experimental for special ed kids, “transparency” apparently means,

“Show us evidence of what you suspect and we’ll admit that’s what it is.”

Thank goodness for observant parents.

And others.

The only two empty seats were that of Board President Shawn Green and board member Kim Skaja. Skaja showed up after missing the academic spotlight and almost all of the parents’ public comments.  Green was absent, having told me that he would participate by phone if the special education agenda item were to be considered.

The parents’ advisory committee meeting on special ed had started at 6. It received record attendance. (Seen above are some of those who attended the July 14th meeting of the same committee.)

Many special ed teachers were in attendance.

At issue were staffing recommendations that has caseloads close to the legal maximum limit, for example, for speech pathologists in five schools.

The plan proposed by the administration for formal adoption has the burden being placed on individual teachers to prove they have too large of a caseload before adequate staffing is considered to meet the needs of the children.

“Prove it! with you doing all of the work” is apparently Human Resources Chief Lauren Smith’s new idea of working together and “collaborating” with the teachers.

The first item discussed by Special Ed Director Cheryl Kalkirtz was her suggestion to not have a December 10th parents advisory committee meeting.

She asked for a show of hands of those favoring not having the meeting.

The only hands raised were the administrators’.

When then asked how many wanted to have the meeting, a roomful of hands went up.

The attempt to gain approval to cancel the meeting at which the Federal stimulus ARRA IDEA spending would be discussed with parents failed. Apparently, their kids education was considered more important than Christmas parties.

One parent in 158, who is a special ed teacher in another district, made this point about the reading programs proposed to be financed with Federal funds:

“What are we doing to make sure it’s being implemented properly?”

When Kalkirtz seemed to try to brush off the point, wanting to move onto a different topic, a Special Ed Mom from the back of the room spoke up:

“I don’t think you heard what she was saying!”

It was fairly obvious from comments made by some of the teachers that this may have been the only time all of these teachers were in a room and asked or allowed to voice their opinions and ask questions about how the $1.6 million dollars should be spent.

It certainly did not appear that administrators had asked the teachers for their input on the revised list of expenditures.

Strange that teachers may have to attend public meetings if they want to “collaborate” with administrators on a group basis. Wouldn’t you think that would be included in the union contract?

Parents learned that, contrary to what Supt. John Burkey said at the previous board meeting, 60 Read 180 licenses had already been purchased for Heineman school. (When Burkey challenged a Special Ed Mom to file a Freedom of Information request on the topic the Thursday before last, I did. I’ll let you know when I get the response.)

The Moms knew this because, apparently as part of class time, a special ed student was assigned to unpack the boxes which were stacked up in a special ed room.

In addition, a special ed student received the Read 180 materials to take home so the parents could see what was going to be used for that student.

More tomorrow.

Today we continue the comments made by Special Ed Moms.

The plan would “continue to keep the district out of compliance,” Sara Deifucci charged.

“The district is so sensitive when it comes to regular students. It seems insensitive to special (needs) students.”

There was also this intriguing question:

“Has the district already purchased anything that parents aren’t aware of? Have you already purchased Read 180 licenses?”

“No,”

Superintendent John Burkey replied.

“If I FOI it, (will I find something)?”

“Do your FOIA (short for Freedom of Information request),” he said.

Past shyness was shed as one after another they worked up courage to speak in public about what they saw as poor judgment concerning where the money was to be spent.

Those with probing questions trained their sights on a computer assisted reading program called Read 180.

It is a program that is aimed at junior high kids. Late in the discussion it was reported that pilot program for sixty students had been conducted, but none of the students were special ed children. They were low level readers and, from the recommendation to roll out the program more widely, it must have been successful.

“It’s failed iin other districts,” another Mom said. She said her son, who has an Individual Education Plan (IEP) had told her he was going to start Read 180.

“Keep my son out of those things until it’s in his IEP,” she said firmly.

This mother even seems to have made the jump into political arena.

“We made choices by putting you in this spot. I wish I had gotten involved earlier.”

= = = = =
Read the whole series:

Huntley School District 158 Special Ed Moms Draw Blood, Board Divided – Part 1

Huntley School District 158 Special Ed Moms Draw Blood, Board Divided – Part 2

Huntley School District 158 Special Ed Moms Draw Blood, Board Divided – Part 3

Huntley School District 158 Special Ed Moms Draw Blood, Board Divided – Part 4

Huntley School District 158 Special Ed Moms Draw Blood, Board Divided – Part 5