McHenry County Blog

You might have had a teacher or two who told you to check your work before turning it in.

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.

You need a quorum for a board meeting.

Right now the Huntley school board has only one board member as a carryover for its Finance Committee.

That would be Kevin Gentry.

Hard to have a quorum with one committee member.

Finance Committee members Tony Quagliano and Larry Snow are no longer on the board.

Replacement members to the Finance Committee have not yet been appointed and approved by the Board. Board approval is required by the board’s policy. Such a vote of approval can only occur at a scheduled board meeting and that hasn’t happened yet.

Will the new board members pretend it doesn’t matter if the new board follows board policy or the Open Meetings Act?

Board member Aileen Seedorf alerted the board to a similar situation at the last Committee of the Whole meeting.

She pointed out the Legislative Committee could not convene because Snow, the chairman, and Quagliano were no longer on that committee. The board agreed to not officially have the Legislative Committee that evening.

For those at home hoping to follow your school district’s finances, well, you can’t. At least not for now. Neither the Building nor Finance Committee board packets are posted online.

Shawn Green was elected Board President again, but he missed his first Committee of the Whole meeting.

Last night a contract negotiation meeting was held between Huntley’s teachers union and the negotiating committee for the Board. Absent was the administration. Apparently the Superintendent, Controller and Human Resources Director all had other more important things to do.

Board President Shawn Green was very vocal that the union should discuss their proposals in public.

Good for him!

Illinois should follow Florida’s example and conduct all union negotiations in public.

Apparently the union wants to bring its proposal for early retirement benefits to the board in secret session.

If the teachers union’s proposal has merit, then why wouldn’t the teachers want to present it in public?

Is the answer a bit obvious?

The agreement between the Board and union says that on consensus the proposal will be brought to the board.

Has there been a consensus?

The agreement also calls for consideration of an alternate salary schedule plan. (For information about past salary hikes, go here.)

With what they won after their strike, why would the Huntley Education Association want to change anything in the salary schedule?

The teachers obviously want their retirement benefits sweetened, but they don’t seem to want to talk about the current really sweet deal they have on automatic salary increases.

The union is refusing to talk about changing salary schedule.

The current longevity step increase is 3 1/2%–quite high when compared to other schools. That means starting salaries for teachers might have to be lower than surrounding districts to compensate for the later huge automatic step increases.

Of course, starting salaries are easier for reporters to understand than step increases.

And how much sense does it make to pay extra money for double masters’ degrees?

That’s in the salary schedule.

Unless increased performance can be linked to a second master’s degree, does it make sense to pay extra for it?

Just asking.

= = = = =
The photo of the teachers in HEA shirts was taken the night they confronted the board.

The Huntley School District 158 has a new controller and he is a CPA.

That’s short for Certified Public Accountant.

His name is Mark Altmayer.

It probably didn’t hurt that two members of the current board— Tony Quagliano and Kevin Gentry—are also CPA’s.

It’s my experience that people doing the hiring feel most comfortable with employees with similar educations or job experience.

But, having prepared budgets for the United States Bureau of the Budget under the Lyndon Johnson administration, and served on the Legislative Audit Commission and Illinois House Appropriations Committees, I’ve a little experience in that field myself.

I know padding when I see and it surely looks like Larry Snow has found some that is hard to explain.

In last year’s budget there was $30,000 for consulting services for the Fiscal Office. Last year District 158 seemed to have revolving chief fiscal officers. Money was needed to pay these folks.

It isn’t needed now that Altmayer is on the payroll.

But, it’s still there and Larry Snow, not taking a defeated candidates typical “slacking off while on the way out of office” attitude, found the blatant padding of Altmayer’s budget.

Superintendent John Burkey, who is ultimately responsible for the budget presented, didn’t catch it either.

So, not only was the second version of the budget fatally incomplete because it had no ending balance or deficit, as the case might be, it was padded in places that Snow found.

Burkey characterized the budget as “tight.”

Anyone could have predicted such tightness after the huge salary increases (over 18% over three years) granted teachers. Huge in comparison to the one-tenth of one percent increase in the Cost of Living this past year.

So, with a “tight” budget, wouldn’t you think the budget guy and those reviewing his work would put those green eyes hades and search for unneeded expenditures?

Snow pointed out some interesting discrepancies that needed correcting.

Among the most “flagrant foul” (to borrow a basketball term) items was budgeting (page 21) for $30,000 for consulting services for the Fiscal Office.

Snow had questioned this item among others by email prior to last Thursday’s meeting. Neither Burkey nor Altmayer responded to Snow’s question on this one, so he asked about it at the public meeting.

Snow’s instincts were right.

This was money budgeted in the prior fiscal year to pay for an Interim Chief Financial Officer and the new controller carried it over. Maybe he was trying to pad his own budget. He surely should have known that his payroll check took the place of that.

Burkey admitted at the meeting that’s what the money was for and shouldn’t be in next year’s budget. It will be interesting to see if it is taken out or left in.

This discovery also should lead an oversight group like the school board to look for other padding in the administrative budget.

But, considering their disdain of Snow, I somehow doubt it will.

While he probably should have been campaigning, Snow questioned other items.

Both ahead of time and at the meeting he couldn’t get answers.

Administrators budgeted less money for reading specialists at two schools, but couldn’t tell Snow what their personnel plans were that reflected the reductions.

Snow asked for clarification to an emailed reply he said he didn’t understand. Burkey said he didn’t understand the answer either.

No one had an answer.

Which leads to an obvious question:

Who is inserting the numbers into Huntley’s line item budget?

Snow pointed out how District telephone expense is once again being over-budgeted.

Padding the budget in this account is apparently an annual event for district administrators.

Snow got “carefully review” into board policy concerning the documents submitted to the board. That change was stimulated when former finance guy Stan Hall submitted budgets whose numbers went up and down like a yo-yo.

And, guess what else is missing from the budget.

Salary hikes for administrators.

Maybe that was why the budget padding Snow discovered – and maybe other unnecessary planned expenditures – were included in the budget.

If you manage a part of a business or help run a business then you know what a budget is.

Most adults have a concept of a household or personal spending budget.

So imagine being able to budget only those parts of a budget that are positive and not showing the parts that result in large deficit spending or the “bad” part.

If you were newly-sworn-in Governor Pat Quinn, you could ignore the two-year deficit that has increased $1 billion a year for every year the Democrats controlled the Governor’s Mansion.

That’s exactly the type of incomplete budget that was given to the Finance Committee and Huntley Board of Education at Thursday night’s public meeting.

What was missing?

The deficit producing part.

You see Huntley District 158 school administrators are running a large deficit this year.

Even though the board said in May the district would not:

“The Board reiterated to the HEA that the Board is committed to an agreement that does not require deficit spending.”

Even though the teachers said there wouldn’t be one. Here’s what the Huntley Teachers Association said about their July 14th proposal:

“(It) will not result in deficit spending. It will not require a tax increase or budget cuts. Budget surpluses will continue.”

What Superintendent John Burkey and his fiscal office didn’t tell the entire board negotiating committee was how the district didn’t have the money to pay for the bond and interest payments this year.

Deficit spending was required in January to prevent the district from defaulting. $1.5 million had to be transferred from the Working Cash Fund to the Education Fund to make the payments.

Any similarly planned transfer is not shown for next year’s budget either.

Just pretend the bond and interest fund doesn’t exist.

That’s like pretending the billions being borrowed by the Federal government don’t have to be paid off.

But at least the Federal government, for whose budget office I used to work, puts that element in its budget.

Not so District 158. At least not yet.

Remember that the school board has two C.P.A.’s .

When outgoing board member Larry Snow pointed out the proposed budget was incomplete, Certified Public Accountant board members Kevin Gentry and Tony Quagliano offered no comment.

The week before the election Snow had asked that

“Administration’s projected deficit/surplus for this fiscal year”

be placed on the Finance Committee agenda as a separate item.

It wasn’t.

So, at the Thursday meeting, Snow asked the new Controller, Mark Altmayer, for his deficit (or surplus) projection for this year, which ends in less than three months on June 30th.

Altmayer replied he wasn’t able to come up with a projection.

He’s been on the job three months as the top financial guy.

How many C.E.O.’s of a $70 million private business would be happy learning their top financial guy—in the 10th month of a fiscal year–has no idea how large the deficit will be?

Really, strange, but Larry Snow won’t be there to point out the obvious when the end of year balance is revealed.

And, by then School Superintendent John Burkey will probably have received a healthy raise that he didn’t want considered in October.

I wrote about how a measure of inflation, a cost of living index in the form of the Consumer Price Index, has been only 1.1% for the last 12 months.

In that article Friday, I suggested tax district officials would be saying,

So would have Huntley School District 158 teachers had not three school board members more friendly to the teachers than the taxpayers made a last minute change in the salary offer.

When District 158 made its “Last, Best and Final” Offer to the Huntley’s teachers union, the salary offer was for indexing the 2nd and 3rd year using the Consumer Price Index.

Specifically the increase would be the CPI, plus 0.65%.

Chief Negotiator Larry Snow had full support of the Board for this.

The Board negotiating committee was six members–

Snow, Aileen Seedorf, Board President Shawn Green, plus the two C.P.A.’s, Tony Quagliano and Kevin Gentry, and Kim Skaja, who had voted for huge increases for the teachers in past contracts.

It should come as no surprise to anyone that Snow and Seedorf were the backbone of the “financially responsible” part of this Board.

Normally it would take a 4-2 vote to reverse a six board member decision.

I said, “normally.”

Because Board President Sean Green showed up for only five hours or so during the last 150 hours of contract negotiations, Green was “Absent” literally and for all practical purposes.

This made it possible for a 3-2 vote to get the CPI index removed from the Board’s final negotiating position.

It was a given that Kim Skaja would go along with most anything that favored the teachers’ union.

So when Quagliano insisted on removing the CPI and going to fixed percentages for years two and three, and sidekick Gentry agreed, the die was cast.

When the two Certified Public Accountant’s caved, Skaja’s quickly agreed and the concession was made.

Caving in will turn out to be financially costly.

How bad?

The fixed percent raises were 5.25% for most teachers.

If you are optimistic about December’s CPI number then the total for the year may be 1.1%.

That would have meant the Board’s formula would have generated 1.75% raises. But there was a floor of 2% in the language.

So, there’s basically a difference of 3 and a quarter percentage points.

Under what the “Last, Best and Final” offer, next year’s raise would have turned out to be 2%. More than what it appears the cost of living will increase, but not the 5.25% Quagliano, Gentry and Skaja inserted at the last moment.

This translates into about $1 million a year in extra concessions than what was in the “Last, Best and Final” offer.

Ouch.

In simple terms, to balance the budget next year this means a million dollars of other spending (for additional class room teachers, for example) can’t happen.

Not just for one twelve month period, but again and again as the extra million dollars becomes a baseline for extra teacher salary expense year after year.

Word is that Huntley District 158 wants to hire a Certified Public Accountant for its next a chief financial officer.

Protecting the interests of taxpayers is not automatic just because one has passed that exam. Think Arthur Anderson and Enron for an extreme example of that.

The auditor who got the District 158’s audit numbers wrong in 2007 was a C.P.A..

The previous auditor was a C.P.A. and he got the numbers wrong in previous years as well.

Quagliano’s, Gentry’s and Skaja’s cave in, in this instance, will cause an automatic financial cave in for next year’s budget and the one after that.

Making this concession didn’t even prevent a strike.

The CPI is not in formula and wasn’t in the last weekend’s proposals to the HEA and they called the strike anyway.

That tells you how little good the C.P.A.s’ concession actually did at the time.

It wasn’t used to “make a deal;” it was a giveaway.

Both Snow and Seedorf were outvoted in caucus.

The “Last Best and Final” offer made sense as a financial structure.

Maybe if Green had bothered to show up he could have made it a 3-3 vote and the original proposal would be in the contract.

= = = = =
Huntley School District 158 Board members Larry Snow and Aileen Seedorf are seen top right. To the left and slightly below is School Board President Shawn Green. Below right is Kim Skaja. Below left are Kevin Gentry and Tony Quagliano. The picketers were found outside the western entrance to the Red Barn Road campus on the first day of the Huntley Education Association’s strike.

I wrote about how a measure of inflation, a cost of living index in the form of the Consumer Price Index, has been only 1.1% for the last 12 months.

In that article Friday, I suggested tax district officials would be saying,

So would have Huntley School District 158 teachers had not three school board members more friendly to the teachers than the taxpayers made a last minute change in the salary offer.

When District 158 made its “Last, Best and Final” Offer to the Huntley’s teachers union, the salary offer was for indexing the 2nd and 3rd year using the Consumer Price Index.

Specifically the increase would be the CPI, plus 0.65%.

Chief Negotiator Larry Snow had full support of the Board for this.

The Board negotiating committee was six members–

Snow, Aileen Seedorf, Board President Shawn Green, plus the two C.P.A.’s, Tony Quagliano and Kevin Gentry, and Kim Skaja, who had voted for huge increases for the teachers in past contracts.

It should come as no surprise to anyone that Snow and Seedorf were the backbone of the “financially responsible” part of this Board.

Normally it would take a 4-2 vote to reverse a six board member decision.

I said, “normally.”

Because Board President Sean Green showed up for only five hours or so during the last 150 hours of contract negotiations, Green was “Absent” literally and for all practical purposes.

This made it possible for a 3-2 vote to get the CPI index removed from the Board’s final negotiating position.

It was a given that Kim Skaja would go along with most anything that favored the teachers’ union.

So when Quagliano insisted on removing the CPI and going to fixed percentages for years two and three, and sidekick Gentry agreed, the die was cast.

When the two Certified Public Accountant’s caved, Skaja’s quickly agreed and the concession was made.

Caving in will turn out to be financially costly.

How bad?

The fixed percent raises were 5.25% for most teachers.

If you are optimistic about December’s CPI number then the total for the year may be 1.1%.

That would have meant the Board’s formula would have generated 1.75% raises. But there was a floor of 2% in the language.

So, there’s basically a difference of 3 and a quarter percentage points.

Under what the “Last, Best and Final” offer, next year’s raise would have turned out to be 2%. More than what it appears the cost of living will increase, but not the 5.25% Quagliano, Gentry and Skaja inserted at the last moment.

This translates into about $1 million a year in extra concessions than what was in the “Last, Best and Final” offer.

Ouch.

In simple terms, to balance the budget next year this means a million dollars of other spending (for additional class room teachers, for example) can’t happen.

Not just for one twelve month period, but again and again as the extra million dollars becomes a baseline for extra teacher salary expense year after year.

Word is that Huntley District 158 wants to hire a Certified Public Accountant for its next a chief financial officer.

Protecting the interests of taxpayers is not automatic just because one has passed that exam. Think Arthur Anderson and Enron for an extreme example of that.

The auditor who got the District 158’s audit numbers wrong in 2007 was a C.P.A..

The previous auditor was a C.P.A. and he got the numbers wrong in previous years as well.

Quagliano’s, Gentry’s and Skaja’s cave in, in this instance, will cause an automatic financial cave in for next year’s budget and the one after that.

Making this concession didn’t even prevent a strike.

The CPI is not in formula and wasn’t in the last weekend’s proposals to the HEA and they called the strike anyway.

That tells you how little good the C.P.A.s’ concession actually did at the time.

It wasn’t used to “make a deal;” it was a giveaway.

Both Snow and Seedorf were outvoted in caucus.

The “Last Best and Final” offer made sense as a financial structure.

Maybe if Green had bothered to show up he could have made it a 3-3 vote and the original proposal would be in the contract.

= = = = =
Huntley School District 158 Board members Larry Snow and Aileen Seedorf are seen top right. To the left and slightly below is School Board President Shawn Green. Below right is Kim Skaja. Below left are Kevin Gentry and Tony Quagliano. The picketers were found outside the western entrance to the Red Barn Road campus on the first day of the Huntley Education Association’s strike.

The Daily Herald ran a little story November 15th about the Huntley school district.

In it, Superintendent John Burkey was quoted:

“I’m concerned by the few number of selective colleges we see on this list. I just want to make sure that a student that is qualified for a university of that caliber knows what he has to do.”

This shouldn’t come as any surprise to residents. School Board member Kim Skaja and former board member Rosemary Herringer, a retired teacher, have consistently described as elitist efforts to have any district goals for what percentage of students should be going on to a four-year college.

Not 10%.

Not 20%.

No goal of any kind whatsoever.

The Board majority elected Shawn Green as board president. He has been vocal at public meetings that he feels no students should go directly on to a four year college.

Interesting how Green forgot to mention that part of his educational philosophy when he ran for school board.

Even board member C.P.A. Tony Quagliano opposed having any goals–even 10% or 20%–set for the district for the percentage of students going on to a four-year college.

Less than half of Huntley’s students have plans for a four-year college. And this is from a student survey, which probably includes a lot of optimism of getting into one.

How can you tell there’s optimism in the survey?

Huntley has about 10% who don’t graduate from high school with their class, yet 93% have plans to go to a technical school, junior college or four year college.

Could it be that high school administrators and teachers suggested that if they could ever possibly go to a technical school or junior college they should check the box?

In spite of having well-paid guidance counselors, Huntley doesn’t really keep track of which students are accepted to a four year college. There is no verification process of “Please show us your letter of acceptance.”

Instead a survey is filled out by students who can write they are going to Northwestern when, of course, they might just graduate from high school. In other words, teachers and administrators with master’s degrees who have studied student measurement and assessment opt for a “let’s use a technique that will make the results look good.”

It’s a bit ironic that Superintendent Burkey is publicly surprised few students are aspiring to attend an elite university when Burkey vehemently opposed setting even a goal of 20% for the percentage of students who go on to a four-year college.

I doubt all Illinois school districts eschew an actual management goal for any, even 20% of the students, to go on to a four-year college.

But that’s the case in Huntley School District 158.

When it comes to setting high standards by the board majority in Huntley, the board majority is willing to settle for no standard.

The Daily Herald ran a little story November 15th about the Huntley school district.

In it, Superintendent John Burkey was quoted:

“I’m concerned by the few number of selective colleges we see on this list. I just want to make sure that a student that is qualified for a university of that caliber knows what he has to do.”

This shouldn’t come as any surprise to residents. School Board member Kim Skaja and former board member Rosemary Herringer, a retired teacher, have consistently described as elitist efforts to have any district goals for what percentage of students should be going on to a four-year college.

Not 10%.

Not 20%.

No goal of any kind whatsoever.

The Board majority elected Shawn Green as board president. He has been vocal at public meetings that he feels no students should go directly on to a four year college.

Interesting how Green forgot to mention that part of his educational philosophy when he ran for school board.

Even board member C.P.A. Tony Quagliano opposed having any goals–even 10% or 20%–set for the district for the percentage of students going on to a four-year college.

Less than half of Huntley’s students have plans for a four-year college. And this is from a student survey, which probably includes a lot of optimism of getting into one.

How can you tell there’s optimism in the survey?

Huntley has about 10% who don’t graduate from high school with their class, yet 93% have plans to go to a technical school, junior college or four year college.

Could it be that high school administrators and teachers suggested that if they could ever possibly go to a technical school or junior college they should check the box?

In spite of having well-paid guidance counselors, Huntley doesn’t really keep track of which students are accepted to a four year college. There is no verification process of “Please show us your letter of acceptance.”

Instead a survey is filled out by students who can write they are going to Northwestern when, of course, they might just graduate from high school. In other words, teachers and administrators with master’s degrees who have studied student measurement and assessment opt for a “let’s use a technique that will make the results look good.”

It’s a bit ironic that Superintendent Burkey is publicly surprised few students are aspiring to attend an elite university when Burkey vehemently opposed setting even a goal of 20% for the percentage of students who go on to a four-year college.

I doubt all Illinois school districts eschew an actual management goal for any, even 20% of the students, to go on to a four-year college.

But that’s the case in Huntley School District 158.

When it comes to setting high standards by the board majority in Huntley, the board majority is willing to settle for no standard.

Just before tonight’s Huntley School District 158 Board meeting, Huntley Education Association Co-President Julie Hunter handed a sheet of paper across to the board and superintendent.

On HEA letterhead, it said,

“This letter is to formally notify the Board of Education that without a tentative agreement, the Huntley Education Association will be going on strike, Monday, September 15th, 2008. We hope to reach a tentative agreement with the Board by Sunday, September 14th, 2008.”

Teachers’ union officials have repeatedly said they won’t go on strike while they are still negotiating.

Teachers marched from a remote parking
lot to District 158’s administration building.

En mass they entered the Administration Building.

They filled the room to overfilling.

One teacher even raised the Venetian blinds and opened the windows
so teachers standing outside could see and hear what was going on.

Only one teacher, 29-year veteran Jean Ziller, spoke to the board. A Learning Disabilities teacher with a master’s degree at Conley Elementary School, Ziller said she earned $80,869 last year, would get $81,466 this year, but after retirement, medical and another expense I didn’t catch, she would be getting $800 less than this year. $44 less each pay check.

“I don’t know about you, but I don’t think this is acceptable,” Ziller said.

CPA Board member Tony Quagliano did something board members usually don’t do.

He answered Ziller.

“If you are off schedule (which I took to mean at the top of the schedule), you would be getting a 2% increase,” Quagliano said. He calculated that to be an increase of $1,638.

“So, with all due respect, I don’t agree with your math.”

The board’s Financial Advisory Committee Chairman Eric Zornow reported that “the biggest thing we noticed in the budget is there is no contingency and things always come up.

“With regard to the contract,” he continued, “as you negotiate with the teachers until both sides can agree on the bucket of money…it’s really hard to start giving on certain items. There isn’t a magical way to increase the dollars.”

“The board would agree with that,” Quagliano said. “We’re not clear there’s a clear understanding among the teachers between deficit spending and a fund balance.”

“(We’re) getting half of our money in June (from property taxes), so the end of June balance is like looking at your checking account the week after pay day,” Zornow observed.

“There’s a true lack of understanding,” Quagliano continued. “I was handed something today that is complete misinformation. People are showing figures that are not true, making statements that are not factual.”

After the teachers walked out of the room, one woman returned and gave Quagliano a button saying, “RESPECT” on top of “Huntley Education Association” and “hea.” He let me have it for my button collection.

Comments made during and after Thursday night’s meeting led me to the conclusion that parents in Huntley Schools should be looking for people to take care of their kids Monday.

= = = = =
The head shots are of board member Tony Quagliano (on the right) and Financial Advisory Committee Chairman Eric Zornow on the left.

I arrived early to the board meeting and board member Kevin Gentry told me the Homecoming Parade was being held Thursday night. Sometime this weekend, I’ll get up the pictures I took.

Just before tonight’s Huntley School District 158 Board meeting, Huntley Education Association Co-President Julie Hunter handed a sheet of paper across to the board and superintendent.

On HEA letterhead, it said,

“This letter is to formally notify the Board of Education that without a tentative agreement, the Huntley Education Association will be going on strike, Monday, September 15th, 2008. We hope to reach a tentative agreement with the Board by Sunday, September 14th, 2008.”

Teachers’ union officials have repeatedly said they won’t go on strike while they are still negotiating.

Teachers marched from a remote parking
lot to District 158’s administration building.

En mass they entered the Administration Building.

They filled the room to overfilling.

One teacher even raised the Venetian blinds and opened the windows
so teachers standing outside could see and hear what was going on.

Only one teacher, 29-year veteran Jean Ziller, spoke to the board. A Learning Disabilities teacher with a master’s degree at Conley Elementary School, Ziller said she earned $80,869 last year, would get $81,466 this year, but after retirement, medical and another expense I didn’t catch, she would be getting $800 less than this year. $44 less each pay check.

“I don’t know about you, but I don’t think this is acceptable,” Ziller said.

CPA Board member Tony Quagliano did something board members usually don’t do.

He answered Ziller.

“If you are off schedule (which I took to mean at the top of the schedule), you would be getting a 2% increase,” Quagliano said. He calculated that to be an increase of $1,638.

“So, with all due respect, I don’t agree with your math.”

The board’s Financial Advisory Committee Chairman Eric Zornow reported that “the biggest thing we noticed in the budget is there is no contingency and things always come up.

“With regard to the contract,” he continued, “as you negotiate with the teachers until both sides can agree on the bucket of money…it’s really hard to start giving on certain items. There isn’t a magical way to increase the dollars.”

“The board would agree with that,” Quagliano said. “We’re not clear there’s a clear understanding among the teachers between deficit spending and a fund balance.”

“(We’re) getting half of our money in June (from property taxes), so the end of June balance is like looking at your checking account the week after pay day,” Zornow observed.

“There’s a true lack of understanding,” Quagliano continued. “I was handed something today that is complete misinformation. People are showing figures that are not true, making statements that are not factual.”

After the teachers walked out of the room, one woman returned and gave Quagliano a button saying, “RESPECT” on top of “Huntley Education Association” and “hea.” He let me have it for my button collection.

Comments made during and after Thursday night’s meeting led me to the conclusion that parents in Huntley Schools should be looking for people to take care of their kids Monday.

= = = = =
The head shots are of board member Tony Quagliano (on the right) and Financial Advisory Committee Chairman Eric Zornow on the left.

I arrived early to the board meeting and board member Kevin Gentry told me the Homecoming Parade was being held Thursday night. Sometime this weekend, I’ll get up the pictures I took.