McHenry County Blog

With both House Speaker Mike Madigan and House Minority Leader Tom Cross supporting Cross’ pension reform bill, the Illinois Education is contacting members urging them to contact their state legislators.

No mention is made by the IEA of how their lobbyists convinced legislators in decades past to move money allocated for pension payments to State Aid to Education. (See Teacher Pension Mess Brought About by Teacher Union Requests for Current Salaries Out of Money Earmarked by Pensions.)

Here’s the IEA web site today:

The IEA pitch to contact legislators follows:

Here’s the memo about what the pension reform bill will do to teachers’ pensions:

 

We are in this mess because over the years Governors have proposed X amount of dollars for education.

 

Usually a couple of hundred million dollars.

When the discussions of how to cut up that amount took place, current salaries won over future pensions.

That’s what the Illinois Education Association lobbyists said they wanted.

If it made that powerful group with its big Political Action Committee happy, legislators were happy.

This was a win-win for the teachers’ unions.

They knew the state constitution would require the General Assembly to come up with the pension money.

And, with the larger share going to State Aid to Education that originally planned, not only would their members salaries be higher, but their pensions would increase.

I became interested in a series of emails from and to incumbent candidates running for re-election on the Grayslake Unit School District 46 Board.

They are of interest, first, because they were sent on two school district email accounts and, secondly, they give a pretty good indication of what happened when during a teacher union-backed election campaign.

I have noted previously that in low turnout elections, relatively small, but well-organized groups like teachers unions can have disproportionate influence on outcomes. In McHenry County, it would surprise me if any school district’s board did not have a majority whose members were not supported (officially or unofficially) by its local teachers’ union.

Yesterday, we looked at emails for the first week of March, a month before the April 5th election. (Part 3–the end of the campaign–can be found here.)

This week there was an action-packed meeting that you can read about here and here.

But let’s look at some more emails. As usual, you can enlarge any image by clicking on it.

First, let me post one from March 3rd that should have been in the first article.

More tomorrow.

Chris Williams of  Grafton-Algonquin-Nunda-Dorr Community Advocates shares a request that Crystal Lake High School District 155 make public details of the most expensive part of the school budget–teacher salaries.

It comes on the rejection of the following Freedom of Information Request:

Here is District 155′s reply to Williams’ request:

April 27, 2011

Mr. Chris Williams
GAND Community Advocates
3951 Willow View Dr.
Lake in the Hills, IL 60156
crswms@comcast.net
VIA ELECTRONIC MAIL

Re: Response to FOIA Request – Community High School District 155

Dear Mr. Williams:

This letter is in response to your Freedom of Information Act (“FOIA”) request
dated April 19, 2011 and received on April 20, 2011 by Community High
School District 155 (“District”). You requested “a copy of the Board’s and IEA’s
offer correspondences related to the teacher ’s contract under negotiation.”
Your request is respectfully denied as records relating to collective negotiating
matters between public bodies and their employees or representatives
are exempt from FOIA (5 ILCS 140/7(p)).

Please be aware that our response to your request is pursuant to our understanding of your FOIA request. If we have misunderstood your request, please let us know as soon as possible so we may provide the correct information.

You have a right to have the denial of your request reviewed by the Public Access Counselor (PAC) at the Office of the Illinois Attorney General. 5 ILCS 140/9.5(a). You can file your Request for Review with the PAC by writing to: Public Access Counselor, Office of the Attorney General, 500 South Second St., Springfield, IL 62706.

You also have the right to seek judicial review of your denial by filing a lawsuit
in the McHenry County circuit court (5 ILCS 140/11).

If you choose to file a Request for Review with the PAC, you must do so within
60 calendar days of the date of this denial letter. 5 ILCS 140/9.5(a). Please
note that you must include a copy of your original FOIA request and this denial
letter when filing a Request for Review with the PAC.

Sincerely,

Jeffrey Puma
Freedom of Information Officer

The follow-up from Williams is below:

Subject: District 155 Teachers Contract Negotiations

Hello,

Thank you for giving our organization a voice in January 2011. GANDCA remains engaged in the D155 budget and taxpayer impact. We believe that our involvement has influenced the board to abate $2.5 million for FY12 in February 2011 from the tax levy, which they unanimously passed on December 14, 2010. It is also worth noting that D155 did not take the legally available 1.6% budget increase for the 2011/2012 school year as many other districts have; saving D155 property taxpayers ~1.2M. To date GANDCA believes that it has influenced a total D155 property taxpayer savings of ~$3.7M.

We have remained abreast of the teachers’ contract negotiations to the best of our ability.

On April 17, 2011, we shared with Jill Hawk our desire to inquire with the board at the forthcoming board meeting on the teachers’ contract negotiations to learn of the progress, any impact that the local and national teacher layoffs has had, as well as, the Wisconsin Governor, Scott Walker’s actions on the negotiations. It would be insightful to learn the mood and atmosphere. Jill Hawk has not replied to date.

We submitted the attached FOIAR and received the attached response, which we are inquiring with Lisa Madigan’s office to learn if D155 correctly interpreted the law.

We urge D155 to make the teachers’ contract negotiation dialog/offer public just as D158 did the last time around.

The public deserves to know how our school board proposes to spend out tax dollars, especially since District 155 teachers are already the highest paid in McHenry County.

The current economic and political environment is conducive to negotiate anything but the status quo contracts of the past.

The record property tax appeals are proof that the property taxes that support D155 are at the tipping point; D155 employees are included in those that appealed.

We are in the process of identifying all D155 employees that have filed for a 2010 property tax appeal with McHenry.

Please share if you are interested in meeting.

Chris Williams, President
GAND Community Advocates
3951 Willow View Drive
Lake In The Hills, IL 60156
847.340.8531

While I was doing the story on how the Rockford Register-Star is trying to hold onto circulation, I found a story on the Rockford school district that had an interesting paragraph.

Here it is:

Union contract talks

In March, the School Board approved a one-year contract extension with the Rockford Education Association. Pay and benefits were frozen for the year and carried over from the previous year. Employee step and lane increases, however, were still in place, so many union members are still earning more money this school year, despite the freeze.

I would hope that any reporter covering teacher salary negotiations would figure out and report this essential aspect of the story.

The National Education Association is a pillar of the Democratic Party.

But, most people don’t know what’s in the semi-public statement by former General Counsel Bob Chanin above.

It’s now being aired on Wisconsin television stations by The Economic Freedom Alliance.

The Illinois Education Association is this state’s affiliate.

Last week McHenry County Blog pointed out where $3.2 million of the dues come from.

Thanks to Illinois Review for running the ad first.

McHenry County Blog has surveyed school districts with major presences in McHenry County and discovered that union employees paid $3.8 million in dues during calendar year 2010.

The total amount was $3,825,572.

Contracts are typically for more than one year and most expenses would in contract negotiation year.

Most are from dues paid by teachers, but there are also office worker and school bus drivers.

Most go to the Illinois Education Association-National Education Association.

Part of the collective bargaining proposal made by Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker is to end mandatory union membership.

Illinois, of course, has laws that force all employees of a bargaining unit to pay dues.

The legislation would require that teacher union officials collect their own dues, rather than having as a payroll deduction, as is the case in all of the districts below.

To no one’s surprise, employees of the largest district examined, Carpentersville Unit District 300, paid the most dues.  The total was over $1.1 million.

• Barrington Unit District 220 – $554,555
• Alden-Hebron Unit District 19 – $22,427
• Cary Grade School District 26 – $52,254
• Crystal Lake Grade School District 47 – 315,342
• Crystal Lake High School District 155 – $287,202
• Carpentersville Unit District 300 – $1,122,392
• Fox River Grove Grade School District 3 – $23,599
• Harvard Unit School District 50 – $96,745
• Huntley Unit School District 158 – $356,047
• Johnsburg Unit District 12 – $106,055
• Marengo-Union Grade School District 165 – $48,778
• Marengo High School District 154 – $30,005
• McHenry Grade School District 15 – $207,111
• McHenry High School District 156 – $109,331
• Prairie Grove Grade School District 46 – $10,863
• Richmond-Burton (Nippersink) Grade School District 2 – $59,429
• Richmond-Burton High School District 157 – $37,592
• Riley Grade School District 18 – $9,161
• Wonder Lake (Harrison) School District 36 – $13,249
• Woodstock Unit School District 200 – $372,595

There was a cartoon in the Chicago Tribune in which a man wearing a red “Wisconsin Teachers Union” tee shirt says, “Must be some Nazi!”

He’s referring to Democratic Party President Franklin Roosevelt’s 1937 comment,

“The process of collective bargaining, as usually understood, cannot be transplanted to the public service.”

Indeed most Federal employees are not in unions.  Those in the Post Office are and we know the problems that declining institution has.

In Crystal Lake, perhaps elsewhere, the clock in the service area disappeared a couple of years ago.  I note that if one came to the Post Office near closing time, one could tell if the doors were locked early with a clock on the wall.  Not so easy now that it is gone.

Is it postal union(s) inflexibility that leading to the decline of the Postal Service?  I’m not close enough to the situation to know.

There are two aspects of public employee unions that aren’t discussed much.

Let’s categorize them as

• Two bites at the apple and
• Sitting on both sides of the bargaining table

State employee unions negotiate with those representing the Governor.

What happens when they don’t get what they want?

They can make another pitch to the legislative branch.

If the bill passes, then they have their collective bargaining accomplishments, plus the additional benefits conferred by a new state law.

Let’s move down to the school board level.

The teacher unions do their best to make sure that local school boards are controlled by those favoring raising teachers’ salaries and benefits.

Consider the Grayslake Elementary School District 46 School Board.

Mary Garcia is its President.

Mary Garcia is also President of the Northbrook/Glenview Elementary District 30 teachers union.

No conflict of interest, of course.

Perhaps a convergence of interest, but you can comment on that below.

She complained to the Daily Herald after three Tea Party opponents had their web site links sent out via Twitter that, according to the reporter,

“she follows the Illinois Education Association union philosophy of doing what’s best for students in a financially responsible way. Garcia said she isn’t political in her union role and remains nonpartisan on the District 46 board.”

From this example, you can see how the Grayslake IEA local union has a rather powerful ally on the other side of the collective bargaining table.

Don’t think similar teacher union allies don’t serve on local school boards.

The goal of the Illinois Education Association is to control both sides of the bargaining table.

And when reading some union contracts, one might guess a couple of them.

Rest assured there are others.

Since McHenry High School District 156 has the hottest school board race in the county, I thought readers might like to know how much its employees spend in union dues.

And the envelope, please…

$109,331.

There are 158 teachers.

Operating expenses are reported as $12,330 per student by the 2009-10 School Report Card.

So, who’s going to be the three victors out of the thirteen candidates for the McHenry High School District 156 board contest?

Tell me which of the thirteen are endorsed by the teachers union and I’ll tell on whom I would place my money.

The reason is that teachers, other school district employees and their families have the most at stake. They may not be numerous enough to pass a tax hike or bond referendum, but, in most years, they are a big enough voting bloc to elect any school board member they support.

Because they have the advantage of being organized with Political Action Committee money available from the Illinois Education Association, the statewide union, their endorsed candidates will have professional campaigns. Then, there is the local teachers union money.

The other twelve candidates will fight among themselves for, let’s guess, seventy percent of the vote.

Let’s say there are 2,000 people voting. Each person gets three votes, so there is possibility of 6,000 votes.

If the vote were split evenly, each candidate would get 461 votes.

But, with the teachers and their allies focusing their votes on three candidates, each would get 600 votes as a base (again assuming the teachers control 30% of the vote).

That would leave 4,200 votes for the nine other candidates.

467 votes apiece, if they were evenly divided.

The teachers’ candidates would get not only the bloc of votes from people who have a financial interest in higher taxes, but would also garner some votes from friends who do not know their higher teacher salary agenda.

So, in reality, the independent candidates would not be able to split 4,200 votes, but, probably, less than 4,000.

Of course, the votes of the independent candidates will not be split evenly. One of more of the non-teacher-endorsed candidates may well be able to break away from the crowd and get within striking distance of the teachers’ candidates.

If there were three teacher versus three taxpayer candidates, the taxpayer candidates would probably win, based on the recent referendum margin.

But, who could speak to six of the supposedly taxpayer-friendly candidates convincingly enough to get them to withdraw so the teachers’ candidates could be beaten.

There is no taxpayer organization in McHenry. I know of no “taxpayer party” leader in McHenry who could be persuasive. I don’t even know anyone who could call a meeting of the non-teacher-endorsed candidates to make such a proposal.

The additional problem is that most people outside of the high school teacher leadership clique probably don’t even know who the favored three candidates are.

If they came to a “let’s narrow the field” meeting, one or more of the teachers’ favorites might even be among those selected to challenge the so-far-unknown teacher candidates.

It’s not as if the teachers’ union will make it widely public whom it is supporting. To do that would identify three people that most people in McHenry probably don’t want to vote for.

The teachers’ union strategy is a stealth one.

Its success is dependent on the names of their endorsed candidates remaining secret until the last minute when it is too late to spread the word to the community at large.

Don’t expect the newspapers to tell their readers who the teachers union endorses. They never have before and there is no reason to believe they will this time around.

The papers don’t even identify which candidates have spouses who are teachers.

Even if they teach in the school district where the spouse is running for the board.

Around here they don’t try to be that helpful to taxpayers.

Put your observations on that or other information you know about any of the candidates in the comment section.

People should check out who’s spouse is a teacher. This is usually a dead give-away.

So which of these thirteen McHenry High School Board candidates are most likely to do the teachers’ bidding? Put your observations on that or other information you know about any of the candidates listed below in the comment section.

• Stephen White
• Ali Coy
• Marybeth Varvil
• Donald Cichoski
• Paul A. Stevens
• Tracy Simon
• Darnell H. Qualls
• Mellody Ahrens
• Joseph Meyer
• Beth Taylor
• Steve Bellmore
• Timothy Byers
• Daniel Koruna