Yet another letter from yet another involved Distirct 211 student

A pro-referenda student has written a fairly decent appeal to vote "Yes" on 211.  I thought I'd post the entire letter (with my commentary).

___

Student:

That letter is absurd. I'm a junior in District 211 and SOS has NEVER operated during school hours. It has after school, which is entirely legal.

Bruno comments:

Your letter is much better written than the insulting screed put forth by one of your compatriots.  It shows that you, at least, have gotten a good education.  Unfortunately, you are mistaken about the referendum, and if you are open-minded, you will entertain the possiblity that I am correct.

First let's look at your point about SOS (Orwellian for "Save our Schools?") meetings.

There is a difference between "legal" and "moral."  The fact is that the district is using large amounts of district resources to promote this tax increase.  Though they are watching the borderline between legal & illegal promotion, it is pretty clear that they have gone over that line.

To be fair, each and every anti-tax group should have access to the mailing data that the district has, and every pro-referendum meeting needs to have "equal time."

After all, it is their tax dollars being spent.

Student:

There is an advisor who sits there to monitor what goes on so we don't plan anything illegal -- he does not get paid for it nor has he said anything during the meetings. It does nothing with school funds except perhaps use paper every once in awhile, but is that honestly a crime?

Bruno comments:

This is a thin argument.  Every event on public property should allow equal & opposite viewpoints.  Furthermore, you know as well as I do that students who argue against the tax increase will be forced to suffer socially and perhaps academically.  That is a travesty.

Student:

The only thing at my school that has been done with SOS is a group of about 10 people and the Hoffman choir going to the Schaumburg public library to sing/pass out flyers which was allowed by the library. I'm doing it to keep my school paper alive. I'm doing it so I can keep six classes instead of having to drop AP Spanish or AP European History.

Bruno comments:

Spare me the histrionics of all the things that will be cut.  The cuts at the expense of the students should be blamed on the District Management and Teacher's Unions and NO ONE else.  Below is a perfect example of where to cut to get your programs.

5 Asst. Dist. Supers @ $952,933

20 Assistant Principals @ over $2,000,000 +

2 Coordinators @ $266,000 +

14 Directors @ $1,711,000 +

43!  FORTY THREE!!! Guidance Counselors @ $3,881,165

You need to wake up young man / lady, and GO AFTER YOUR TRUE OPPRESSORS!!  Your Education System is reaming your district taxpayers blind raw, and sending you kids out to whine about "funding".

All your courses and activities can be saved by simply sending a good bit of the feather bedding home.  They deserve it.

Student:

I'm doing it to show people that it's not merely about the teachers. I'm doing it so people can know that students do care. I'm doing it so freshman have something to do while in high school. I'm doing it so that when I graduate I have a Variety Show or a musical to come back to and enjoy.

Bruno comments:

I've already demonstrated where the money should come from.  The taxpayers are burdened enough, and your benefits are being squeezed by a greedy system.

Take some of your zeal and investigate what is REALLY going on.  Then use your righteous indignation to go after the real culprits.

Student:

I'm doing it for the first year teachers who might lose their job even though they're only being paid $40,000. I'm doing it so that taxpayers realize that the district's area is an edge city and not a farmland anymore. It's time for a change, and it's time for taxpayers to look at it from the student's point of view.

Bruno comments:

This is pretty rich, young grasshopper.  YOU PAY A MORTGAGE & TAXBILL before you moralize and preach to the taxpayers. THEY WENT TO SCHOOL!!!  Based up data, THEY got a better education for less money. THEY HAD BAND, PLAYS, AP CLASSES, but with out the 47 "Directors", 87 Assistant Buttmunchers, 43 Guidance Dweebs, and the like!!!

FIRST, YOU raise a family and pay the bills!!! THEN you can talk about the "student's" point of view.

Student:

Voting no IS voting against education. There is no option A, B, or C. There's yes or no, and we already know the consequences of voting no.

Bruno comments:

If you aren't a teacher pretending to be a student, you should be congratulated on your drive to "improve" schools.  Let me asure you that your energies are being misspent.

Before your teachers get another dime, they should let go the useless class of assistant principals, Staff Supervisors & the like.  It is an over staffed bureaucracy.  Voting against this tax increase is voting FOR regaining control of a corrupt and bloated system.

Voting "Yes" is rewarding their misuse of students, dollars, decades of ill-deserved good-will.

Comments

[Joe]

From the student's point of view he is correct. He is fighting to keep his services (AP European History, AP Spanish, Variety Shows, etc) because the administration is threatening to cut them due to lack of money. And the only place to get that money is from the property tax base.

Bruno comments:

Sa you post below, the only "correct" part of the student's post is that s/he wants a "good education." We all agree that this benefits society.

The "lack of money" argument the student makes is false for the following reason(s).

1. You can get AP level content AND other aspects of a "good education without the tax increase if;

a) the district lives with in it's means and,
b) properly decides which payroll to cut (ERO payments, over staffing) and which to keep (AP teachers, the extra period, etc.)

Joe again:

You can't fault him. No one wants services cuts, especially when someone else is paying for them. The student is just that - a student. He has no experience with finance, and being a 21st century student in an affluent suburb probably has not been taught, and certainly has not seen firsthand, the evils of socialism or communism. You can't fault him for his position. It will only be when he exists outside the dependency of the services of this instituion, or when he goes to live somewhere that isn't nearly affluent, that does not have a motivated tax base of producers, will he realize what is going on here.

Bruno writes:

Joe, I can fault anyone I want, and then bear the burden of making my case. In this instance, you are correct that the student is a product of his/her over funded/under powered school system. That is no excuse for promoting bad policy like this referendum.

S/he posted here, and I can reply. Your post is also part of the conversation. The fact that "some don't better" is no excuse to refrain from informing them.

Joe again:

The premise that the only place to get the money for these services is from the property tax base is the premise that needs to be pounded. Turn the student against the teacher - 'Your future is being compromised by inflation of teachers salaries....this inflation is eliminating the programs'. Perhaps ingenuity and motivation on the part of the students to raise money for activities (bake sales, car washes, etc) are a better source of funding than raising property taxes on a 65 year old man who is seeing his income drained due to pension cuts or inflation. If you can raise your own funds, you are not a slave to the tax base. You can do whatever you want, the sky is the limit.

Bruno writes:

All good strategy points. I've done all of the above on this blog.

Joe again:

Telling these people they are wrong would be like going to Moscow in the 1950s to preach that communism is wrong. You are not going to convince anyone who is benefitting from the system that the system is inefficient. No matter how evil the system may or may not be.

Bruno writes:

You may notice that in this specific post, I ran out of time, and haven't yet finished the reply. Certainly there is little value in simply telling a person they are wrong.

If you don't have the time, however, it simply must be stated to get that point of view into evidence. Facts will come later.

Joe again:

The only way to solve this problem is to get the people that are enslaved to the services to believe they can do better on their own, instead of being a tax addict. You might be able to do that with the students, as they are young, have energy, and may be able to think creatively. But the example must be set, and you are not going to get that from the addict teachers. Addict teachers will spawn addict students.

Bruno Comments:

Joe, you are making many of the same arguments I make, and a few other good ones as well. One area where I believe people like you and I stumble is in the need to convince "every one" that we are correct.

In fact, the job is easier. We need only to convince 51% of the people that we are 51% correct on any specific election day. The defeat of the 211 referendum disempowers the corrupt bureaucracy and empowers taxpayers.

The real trick is how to use political power & marshall greater success from a win. The lay-offs in 15 are good place to start. We need to remain engaged in the debate as these item hit the news to contimuously point out the nature of the system and the political mendacity behind the "cuts."

[The Involved Student]

Thank you for taking the time to respond. I reassure you I am not a teacher, but a 17-year-old junior at one of the schools who wishes she was 18 so she could vote yes.

First of all, when I said that SOS is legal I was referring only to the student effort. I see nothing that is immoral about students banding together to support their district. I know that I am doing the right thing by supporting my view on this issue. I am being active. Of course as you made clear, what does a KID know about anything tax related? But there you are wrong. I do NOT need to pay taxes to know what I am saying. Because I, unlike you, see what goes on with tax money. I use it every single day. You say that students would be hounded for being against the referendum -- and you are very wrong. There are plenty of students against the referendum -- and you know why? "Our teachers are the highest paid in the state!" If ONLY that were true. It is NOT true. Many districts are K-12 and the K-6 average salaries bring down the 9-12 teachers' salaries. If D211 teachers averaged their salaries with D54 and D15 the average would go SIGNIFICANTLY lower. Numbers are one sided and do not mean anything unless you break them down. As for those students against the referendum... we are not allowed to discuss the issue in class. Teachers do NOT go around asking if you are for or against it. I'm a writer on the newspaper and someone attempted to write an anti-referendum opinions article. They were going to publish it -- the advisors encouraged the student to serve a purpose with his article -- to change minds if he must. He did not make any valid points in the article and therefore it was not published because he refused to revise it.

SOS does not use school time or funds to do anything. My peers have only passed out flyers at the Schaumburg Public Library. One of the schools hosted a dance that was $5 a ticket and paid for itself. The school that sells wristbands? Again, pays for itself. I would like to know how you are so positive that it is district money going to referendum campaigning. I do remember a few months ago getting extra help from a teacher during my lunch period and his department chair asking if there was anyone who would like to "donate to the referendum." Honestly, I haven't given that a second thought until now. And, come to think of it, the referendum dance a few weeks ago was advertised as providing money for the "referendum fund." And the bracelets, too, I think, go to this "referendum fund." The bracelets and the dance were completely student supported... and I'm guessing all the subject departments collected donations. I'm not stating all of this as fact -- it is mere observation, but it certainly seems logical. There's NO evidence that the Union is tapping into the tax money in order to campaign for the passing of the referendum.

You say that anti-referendum groups should have the data my school has in order to efficiently carry out their campaign. Here's one: their own two feet -- perhaps a car. My teachers and peer's parents volunteer their weekends to go door-to-door. Is that something an anti-referendum campaign cannot do? The only meetings the school board has given on the property are strictly informational meetings where opponents can come to and speak out against the passage if they so wish to. I believe there is a meeting this week, if you'd like to check out the district's website and go to it... after all, it's only right that the opposition gets "equal time" IF and only if the opposition is willing to put forth that time.

"FOURTY THREE" guidance counselors -- as if that's plenty?! You do realize those 43 guidance counselors meet with 12,000+ students. So each counselor ONLY has to meet with approximately 279 students? So.... even though it takes me a month to meet with my counselor... the district should get rid of some and each counselor should take on MORE students? Perhaps you do not realize what these counselors do. They are not only there for school support -- they serve as many people's emotional counselors too. But of course, they're only helping 279 students.... OF COURSE they can have more. That'd be fun to make the appointment list even longer. Many times I've had to catch mine before he goes to his car in order to talk to him for five minutes. Maybe I'll ask him what would change if the number of students he has to meet with doubles... when I talk to him at our 15-minute appointment in early May.

"This is pretty rich, young grasshopper. YOU PAY A MORTGAGE & TAXBILL before you moralize and preach to the taxpayers. THEY WENT TO SCHOOL!!! Based up data, THEY got a better education for less money. THEY HAD BAND, PLAYS, AP CLASSES, but with out the 47 "Directors", 87 Assistant Buttmunchers, 43 Guidance Dweebs, and the like!!!"

So, you're saying that I can only realize anything when I own a home? THAT is pretty rich, old grasshopper. It's not a hard concept to grasp. My parents not only will have to deal with a possible tax increase, they also will be sending me to an Ivy League school on little scholarship money. I do not come from a rich family. Now, realize this. When the last referendum passed forty years ago, how many students attended the District? You seem to be so efficient at looking up numbers. Look that up. Look to see how many clubs and sports were in existent. Then, please try again at an educated assumption.

"FIRST, YOU raise a family and pay the bills!!! THEN you can talk about the "student's" point of view."
A shot at my age is low. Students are not blinded by numbers. That's a defect in the taxpayers. They are BLINDED by the numbers. It does not matter how efficient the teachers may be nor how the students use the money -- all they are to taxpayers is a salary. A dent in their pockets.

This aura of hatred around educators today is disgusting. Why must taxpayers be so persistent in trying to bring them down? District 211 does not consist of five one-room little schoolhouses. It is a district that brings people into the area. Without the district, there would be less demand for the housing in the area, thus housing prices fall. Perhaps not significantly, but why would people want to go to a district that has one level of sports? There are a few teachers who make a large amount of money, yes. For example, I know of one teacher who is making around $150,000. However, he was subject to early retirement. From what I understand, he received a significant raise for THIS school year, his last year, so they don't have to pay him $100,000 for this year and the next. So, in essence, they're saving $50,000, as his retirement pension is NOT from the Education Fund. And by hiring someone to replace him at $40,000 -- they are not mismanaging; THIS IS MANAGEMENT!!!! However, as far as I understand, this early retirement type-of-plan has recently been outlawed for upcoming years meaning you won't see many teachers’ salaries that inflated with or without the passing of the referendum.

You say: "Before your teachers get another dime, they should let go the useless class of assistant principals, Staff Supervisors & the like. It is an over staffed bureaucracy.”
Staff supervisors? As in anyone who is not with an administration or teaching position? I'll go through those who aren't and assume I'm covering who you mean.
College Consultant: One person. Needed.
Counselors: Discussed.
School Nurse: Uh.
Secretaries: .....
Librarians: The poor library already has experienced a significant cut. They need to leave the library alone.
In-school substitutes: Already have been cut
Paraprofessionals aka Hall monitors: We want to keep the students in the classrooms.

I do not pretend to be an expert or more knowledgeable than the next person on this subject. I've looked at the facts from numerous sources. I've looked at anti-referendum websites. I've read what the Superintendent has to say. I've talked to other students (both ignorant and brilliant), to teachers in different schools and districts, to school-active parents for and against its passage. I've formed my own opinion. I don't expect my opinion to matter much, of course, because with awful teachers and a corrupt Board of Education... what would their student know about anything?

--------------------------
And now in response to the comment.

"Perhaps ingenuity and motivation on the part of the students to raise money for activities (bake sales, car washes, etc) are a better source of funding"

I'm going to get eighteen million dollars from a bake sale? I do understand the point, however, and even if I wanted this to save my clubs and classes, it's not possible. Pay-to-play has been turned down by the Superintendent. It's not an option. I suggested advertisers and such -- there's a technical, just reason as to why we can't that has slipped my mind. I do know that it is not an option.

[Joe]

Student -

Good posting. I can only encourage you to keep an open mind about the events that are unfolding before you. Challenge both sides as to their core beliefs.

You state "Pay-to-play has been turned down by the Superintendent" Why, in your opinion, would the superintendent do that? Why is advertising not an option? I would challenge the system to explain why it will not let you compete in a free market.

Remember - the administration's best (and easiest) route to money is raising taxes. We live in the northwest suburbs...there is so much non-tax money here to reward hard work and creativity. Why doesn't the administration embrace this and encourage students to compete? They encourage you to compete on the football field...in sports in general....in academia. Why don't they encourage you to compete economically? That is the foundation of our society, and is the KEY to advancing your quality of life. Yet why are you not encouraged to engage market forces to better your school, clubs, classes, etc?

Answer that question and your eyes will be opened. Please do not take this post as talking down to you. Just consider what I am saying. The example they are setting by running to raise taxes when they want something, and encouraging you to do the same is harming your economic education. You won't realize this until you are NOT in a position to raise taxes (i.e. working in the private sector) to get more revenue.

And I will also suggest since the administration themselves cannot compete on an economic level, they cannot set the example for you. What does this mean for your future?

Please consider this.

[Michelle]

Bruno,
I think it is great that these students are getting involved. It shows that they actually care about the school they attend as well as the programs that may have to be cut(I will spare you the details since you seem to know about this). I am extremely impressed with your list of salaries for the district. My husband is a teacher in D211 and we can't afford to live in the district! I think you need to take that into account when you talk about the teachers salaries.....and then we can discuss what is "fair".

Bruno writes:

Is your being "impressed" an oblique way of disagreeing with the figures. My research tells me that they are an accurate representation of the compensation of teachers.

Does the fact that you "can't afford to live in the district" mean something significant? If so, what.

Education in America is over funded. The entire education superstructure is overfunded. It is an utter myth that we need 3-4 Assistant principals, numerous "staff supervisors" and the like, combined with Union labor for every item on any education agenda, combined with the useless mandates that do more to create bureaucracy than to "educate" a student.

Sooner or later, people will figure out that people can be well educated for about $3,500-5000/yr. Public Education is built upon lies, and only the threats and misinformation, combined with the awful tactic of using students as hostages (instead of taking less retirement bonuses & perks) keeps you in the game.