Daily Herald: Board Rejects Earlier Pledge
The Daily Herald has now written a story about the D46 school board reversing course and keeping money they received unethically.
Here are some excerpts with my comments and corrections:
|
Grayslake Elementary District 46 board members are going back on their pledge to refund extra money collected after voters approved a tax increase in 1999. The board voted Jan. 10 to reject the rebate, an about-face from an October vote on the issue. The second vote was needed, officials said, because the board did not follow proper procedure in October. As a result, the district will keep the $6.9 million it collected over the state-imposed debt limit as part of the $23.2 million referendum that funded construction of Prairieview and Frederick schools. |
An abatement or defeasement is not an actual rebate. Each would just lower the tax rate. The district would not be sending taxpayers a check.
The procedure mentioned was really the fact that the abatement had to be in the form of a resolution rather than a motion. As I stated before this is another example of laws put in place to thwart the will of the public by slowing down the process and buying more time for the school bureaucracy to find a way to reverse the decision as happened in this case.
|
A Daily Herald investigation in April 2005 found District 46 was one of 66 suburban school districts to use bond loopholes to collect more money than allowed. |
For those of you who continue to claim the board did everything right, the Daily Herald does not agree with you. They too, understand that district taking more taxpayer money than is allowed.
|
Surroz, who voted in favor of the original rebate in October, opposed it in the second vote. “We could use the interest on the money to restore programs we have lost,” Comments2 Responses to “Daily Herald: Board Rejects Earlier Pledge” |
Lennie’s title says it all. “Board chooses Money over Ethics”. What he is really saying is that the board finally made a decision that represents all of the students that attend D46 schools. Wow, what a concept. An elected board for the district made a decision that is best for the students of the district, not Lennie’s home schooled child. Now that is ethical. I guess Lennie’s title should have read Board chooses “Money over the Ethics that serve Lennie Best”. Don’t worry Lennie, you still are Rohrer and Copeek’s puppet master. Remember Lennie, the nation is founded on the concept of “We the People…”, not “Me the Lennie”.
We the people should mean all the people of the district. Many of those people have emailed and called the board members. That is the reason they voted to abate the bonds last October. The people were tired of the board using legal loopholes to take more money from the taxpayers than was approved.
The majority of these elected members were elected by people not wanting a referendum and saying they had enough money. This board is not listening to the people.
You stated, “An elected board for the district made a decision that is best for the students of the district”. By your logic, then you are claiming the board should use every legal loopholes to tax its residents at whatever level they can no matter what the voters want? That is what is wrong with our government and many individuals today. The ends do not justify unethical means.