Comments on: Grayslake D127 Approves Levy http://educationmatters.us/2006/12/26/grayslake-d127-approves-levy/ Reform Education because Education Matters. Mon, 29 Mar 2010 00:37:28 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1 hourly 1 By: site admin http://educationmatters.us/2006/12/26/grayslake-d127-approves-levy/comment-page-1/#comment-25553 site admin Sun, 31 Dec 2006 14:20:46 +0000 http://educationmatters.us/?p=695#comment-25553 Joe said, "trying to point out another possible interpretation of the comments based on my knowledge of the kinds of numbers involved in the situation". Again, you are trying to spin this to make it sound better. I was there. I heard how and why it was said. It was an arrogant display of the school district attitude of entitlement. Joe said, “trying to point out another possible interpretation of the comments based on my knowledge of the kinds of numbers involved in the situation”.

Again, you are trying to spin this to make it sound better. I was there. I heard how and why it was said. It was an arrogant display of the school district attitude of entitlement.

]]> By: Lisa http://educationmatters.us/2006/12/26/grayslake-d127-approves-levy/comment-page-1/#comment-25489 Lisa Sun, 31 Dec 2006 08:52:50 +0000 http://educationmatters.us/?p=695#comment-25489 "So your understanding of it is certainly biased by your husband’s account." Of course it is biased!!! I know my husband to tell the truth! I only know you from what I have seen you do a number of times on here. You make a snide comment about what he writes and then turn around and act like you are so offended at his answer. Case in point... above! Debate... yes, but what you are doing is trying to smear him. Truth be told, I just got tired of it. We even get email about why we even allow some of the comments that we receive. So with that being said, may I remind you, Joe, that your comments as well as everyone else’s is screened/filtered and allowed to be posted here. This is not a message board. Although we have let some through, if you have something personal to say, please click on the link that says "email me" at the top of this blog. Or you can choose to do as some would do and write it on a message board that doesn't have decorum. “So your understanding of it is certainly biased by your husband’s account.”

Of course it is biased!!! I know my husband to tell the truth! I only know you from what I have seen you do a number of times on here. You make a snide comment about what he writes and then turn around and act like you are so offended at his answer. Case in point… above! Debate… yes, but what you are doing is trying to smear him. Truth be told, I just got tired of it. We even get email about why we even allow some of the comments that we receive.

So with that being said, may I remind you, Joe, that your comments as well as everyone else’s is screened/filtered and allowed to be posted here. This is not a message board. Although we have let some through, if you have something personal to say, please click on the link that says “email me” at the top of this blog. Or you can choose to do as some would do and write it on a message board that doesn’t have decorum.

]]> By: Joe http://educationmatters.us/2006/12/26/grayslake-d127-approves-levy/comment-page-1/#comment-25439 Joe Sun, 31 Dec 2006 03:41:44 +0000 http://educationmatters.us/?p=695#comment-25439 Doesn't sound to me like you were there either, Lisa. So your understanding of it is certainly biased by your husband's account. Your opinion is just that. I wasn't discrediting the messenger, rather trying to point out another possible interpretation of the comments based on my knowledge of the kinds of numbers involved in the situation. It is unfortunate that you are so quick to criticize my view from another perspective. Isn't open and honest discussion about topics where there are differing opinions heathly? Or is it only healthy when seen through your filter? Doesn’t sound to me like you were there either, Lisa. So your understanding of it is certainly biased by your husband’s account.

Your opinion is just that. I wasn’t discrediting the messenger, rather trying to point out another possible interpretation of the comments based on my knowledge of the kinds of numbers involved in the situation.

It is unfortunate that you are so quick to criticize my view from another perspective. Isn’t open and honest discussion about topics where there are differing opinions heathly? Or is it only healthy when seen through your filter?

]]> By: Lisa http://educationmatters.us/2006/12/26/grayslake-d127-approves-levy/comment-page-1/#comment-24947 Lisa Thu, 28 Dec 2006 14:30:15 +0000 http://educationmatters.us/?p=695#comment-24947 Joe, I don't know how you can debate the understanding of what the business manager said since you were not there and Lennie was. I think he was clear on what was said and the content with which it was said. My opinion... I think you questioning it was meant only to discredit the messenger. Joe, I don’t know how you can debate the understanding of what the business manager said since you were not there and Lennie was. I think he was clear on what was said and the content with which it was said. My opinion… I think you questioning it was meant only to discredit the messenger.

]]> By: Joe http://educationmatters.us/2006/12/26/grayslake-d127-approves-levy/comment-page-1/#comment-24746 Joe Thu, 28 Dec 2006 05:22:30 +0000 http://educationmatters.us/?p=695#comment-24746 I'm not debating the levy dollar amounts, just your understanding of the explanation of them. Sorry you see that as 'spin'. I’m not debating the levy dollar amounts, just your understanding of the explanation of them. Sorry you see that as ’spin’.

]]> By: site admin http://educationmatters.us/2006/12/26/grayslake-d127-approves-levy/comment-page-1/#comment-24734 site admin Thu, 28 Dec 2006 03:12:51 +0000 http://educationmatters.us/?p=695#comment-24734 Joe, You can spin it all you like. It is still large amounts of money. The 2005 levies for just the Education and Operation & Maintenance were $21.5 million and 2.5 million respectively. The request for these funds in 2006 are $27.5 million and $3.5 million. Everyone can see that this is $1 million dollars in the O & M fund and $6 million in the ed fund. This is not pennies to the taxpayers. <a href="http://www.d127news.com/2006/Tax_Year_2006_Proposed_Levy.jpg" rel="nofollow">2006 Levies</a> <a href="http://www.d127news.com/2006/Tax_Year_2005_Actual_Levy.jpg" rel="nofollow">2005 Levies</a> Joe,

You can spin it all you like. It is still large amounts of money. The 2005 levies for just the Education and Operation & Maintenance were $21.5 million and 2.5 million respectively. The request for these funds in 2006 are $27.5 million and $3.5 million. Everyone can see that this is $1 million dollars in the O & M fund and $6 million in the ed fund. This is not pennies to the taxpayers.

2006 Levies
2005 Levies

]]> By: Joe http://educationmatters.us/2006/12/26/grayslake-d127-approves-levy/comment-page-1/#comment-24671 Joe Wed, 27 Dec 2006 19:59:56 +0000 http://educationmatters.us/?p=695#comment-24671 "This ballooning allowed the district “flexibility to move pennies”. This statement was astounding, but not a surprise. The audacity to call moving hundreds of thousands of thousands of dollars or even millions of dollars as moving pennies is offensive to me and should be to all taxpayers." That statement seemed to strike a nerve with you. Did you ask him for clarification to be sure that you didn't misunderstand what he meant? Is it possible that the "pennies" he referred to were not 'hundreds of thousands of dollars' and maybe they were a reference to the levy multiplier for each fund used in the 'per $100 of EAV' calculation instead? When slicing up where the money goes, it is often literally in pennies in the calculation. “This ballooning allowed the district “flexibility to move pennies”. This statement was astounding, but not a surprise. The audacity to call moving hundreds of thousands of thousands of dollars or even millions of dollars as moving pennies is offensive to me and should be to all taxpayers.”

That statement seemed to strike a nerve with you. Did you ask him for clarification to be sure that you didn’t misunderstand what he meant? Is it possible that the “pennies” he referred to were not ‘hundreds of thousands of dollars’ and maybe they were a reference to the levy multiplier for each fund used in the ‘per $100 of EAV’ calculation instead? When slicing up where the money goes, it is often literally in pennies in the calculation.

]]>