1). Many people in the community would like to become more involved with the School Board and the Schools in D46. Listed as one of the goals of the BOE, is reaching out more to the community. While presenting their SIP Reports, Administrators expressed a need for more parental involvement. Are the Board Members and Administrative staff aware that their demeanor, expressions, and tone, yield feelings of being “unwelcome” and “condescended to”? Would at least 1 Administrator and 1 BOE Member address this and help the Parents at the Forum understand how we can be more involved in discussions with the BOE along with the Administrators at their respective schools?

2). Would it be possible to review the policies currently in place for student conduct (and consequences) in the classroom, school-grounds, and buses? Would the Policy Committee consider meeting with members of the community and note their suggestions on policy modification?

3). There are reports that the Education Fund has a “surplus”, a “rainy day fund” if you will, of somewhere in the neighborhood of $10 million dollars. What is the dollar amount in this fund? You have stated that some programs and personnel were eliminated due to low enrollment; what was the reason for not obtaining the balance of programs and personnel by utilizing a small portion of what is in the Education Fund?

4). With the State of Illinois in financial straits and D46 having $2.7 million dollars pending payment from the State, what provisions are being made should the monies not be provided as expected?

5). We submitted the idea of moving toward more paperless options from the schools. The response we received is that paperless options are being looked at.
Please expand on that: Is the technology in place? Has a cost analysis been done to see how much it would cost to put a system in place? How much money will the district save? Have you considered using 1 school or a small group of parents to test a system on? How can the community help this become a reality?

6). Have Band/Chorus fees been discussed further or decided on? If the BOE decides that fees for programs will be implemented, will it be in the ‘09/’10 year?

5). With 7 schools in our district, has any research been done on the impact of adding on to some current buildings and selling off other buildings to consolidate fees for property, building, teachers, staff, technology, etc.?

6). Are the Park Campus Buildings being used to capacity? If not, how much is not being used? Can you provide the approx. cost for maintaining the un-used portions? What are the plans for filling the buildings to capacity?

7). Will you please provide an explanation for purchasing 258 Laptop computers? Could the purchase have been made utilizing less sophisticated laptops, in an effort to reduce cost?
a). We were advised that the BOE Members, Administration, and Tech Dept. have agreed that Tech Hardware Expenses will be way down in the next years to come in order to keep the Ed Fund money to pay for teachers salaries. Are the new Board Members aware of this and can we rely on you to follow through on this “promise”?

8). Will you please explain why the district opted to obtain 38 SMART Boards (when many districts have 1 or none)?
a). Currently, only 5 District Personnel have been formally trained on the SMART Board; What are the Districts plans for further training of those who have not been formally trained?
b). Cost of this training?
c). What is the lifespan of a SMART Board?

9). Have the Administrative Salary increases been determined?
a). If yes: By what % per individual?
b). If no: When does the BOE foresee this decision being made?
c). Has the BOE considered tying salary increases to CPI with a cap?
d). What about Salary Freezes or Decreases?

10). Is the BOE aware at this time of any upcoming cuts that to be made? (Can the BOE give us any idea on items or areas that will be looked at in the event that more cuts need to be made from us getting less revenues than we have expenses?

11). Why were we caught so completely off guard with the CPI? The economy has been in a recession since late 2007; did the PMA projections in 2007 & 2008 show this?
a). What provisions are being made to make sure we are covered when our housing assessments start to decrease and revenue declines as a result?

12). Is the Staff Development Budget being reduced for ‘09/10?
a). What % of the projected budget is for travel?
b). Have reductions been made in this area for everyone from administrators, teachers, to non-certified staff? If not, will reductions be made in this area?
c). How much of the Staff Development budget is allocated for Blue Ribbon of Excellence, Inc.? How much of the Superintendent’s Professional Development Account is allocated for Blue Ribbon of Excellence, Inc.?
d). Will any administrator, teacher, or staff member (certified or not) be attending the National Conference in Dec. 2009 @ Disney’s Contemporary Resort in Orlando Florida?

13). What can the community do to help the Members of the Board? Superintendent? Administrative Staff? Schools?

First there is Winthrop Harbor District 1. There fee structure is as follows:
* $0.35 for first 10 pages
* $0.25 for pages 11-25
* $0.10 for pages beyond 25

There is no reason for a different cost since the only things that can be charged are the actual costs of reproduction. Manpower of any kind cannot be charged. Needless to say, the State Attorney General agreed with me and sent this letter to the Winthrop Harbor School District.

Second, I questioned the cost in Grayslake District 46. When I started FOIAing documents 2 years ago, they charged 10 cents per copy. They have since raised their costs to 20 cents. When I questioned why they had raised the fee, I was ignored by being told, this is what we always have charged and no further research was going to be done. You can imagine my reaction. I immediately FOIAed the actual cost of copiers, paper and ink toners. I have received those and was also told there that there was manpower cost to find documents and to consult with attorneys on whether the documents were FOIAable.

I scanned in the copier cost and paper cost receipts. The toner costs is included with the copier. As you can see from these receipts the costs for reprooduction is as follows:

Again, the State’s Attorney General agreed with me that the district is overcharging for the copy of a FOIA request. Follow this link to the letter sent to the district. I have also emailed the new board asking them to correct this situation.

Other taxing bodies that I believe appear to overcharge for a FOIA:

• The district did not a FOIA policy as required until after I made a second request.
• They refused to release the same information about a referendum supporter as they released about me
• They denied requests and fulfilled it upon appeal
• They made statements about several request but did not provide the supporting documentation so the numbers could be verified
• Their fee structure appears to be excessive
• They only allow inspection of some documents even though other districts provide copies of these same documents

This will also give you an idea of what documents you can FOIA from your own school district.

May 17th – First email document request
May 18th – Dr. Tenbusch’s Response and attached documents

• 2005 AFR
• 2005 Audit
• Fiscal Year 2006 Budget
• January 06 Financial Report
• Outstanding Debt

May 18th – Reply to documents
May 19th – Second email document request
May 22nd – Email asking for a time frame
May 22nd – First Official FOIA request – Notice this was sent before the District adopted a formal FOIA procedure
May 22nd – Dr. Tenbusch’s time frame response
May 25th – Dr. Tenbusch’s Formal Response to my FOIA
May 25th – Request for further research
May 25th – Dr. Tenbusch’s Denial – and reiterated claim my email was not forwarded. Decide for yourself is his statement is accurate:

• Email Compare 1
• Email Compare 2

May 25th – Request for public records
May 30th – FOIA request and appeal – Replies dated 06/07

• Reply Letter – Under #3, it states there was no formal FOIA process, which they should have had already, and that the formal procedure was adopted due to my mulitple requests for documents. As you can see from the time line here, I had made only 2 email requests of several documents each at the time of this new policy. How interesting it is to change a policy for only 2 requests.
• Email Denial
• Prior Teacher Contract Denial (Later provided with a new FOIA request)
• Check Register Denial – Notice here I can only inspect these in the office even though other districts provide copies. Also, in Dr. Tenbusch’s email dated 04/22/2006 he states, “The documents you have requested in your last two emails are not available electronically; however, with the possible exclusion of the check registers for the last three years“
• Current Teacher/Administrator Contract Approval
  • Brooks Contract
  • Hodge Contract
  • Whitford Contract
  • Tenbusch Contract – You’ll notice that Dr. Tenbusch’s contract was to end June 30, 2006 but was extended by the board through June 30, 2007. There is also and automatic renewal clause that guarantess another year if notice is not given before the end of March that the contract will not be renewed. (page 9)
  • 2005-06 Teachers Contract

June 2nd – Response to letter from Dr. Tenbusch

• Letter from Dr. Tenbusch – Dated May 30th/Mailed June 1st/Received June 2nd
• FOIA Procedures
• FOIA Documents Available
• FOIA Request Form
• Board FOIA Policies – adopted May 22nd after my second email request
• Citizen Advocacy Center (FOIA process explained with samples and how to appeal)

June 12th – Previous Teacher Contract FOIA
June 12th – Printed Check Register and Payments to Retiring Teachers Appeal
Responses to June 12th requests

• Retirement Payouts – I cannot verify this without pay details since no supporting documentation was provided.
• Previous Teacher Contract Approved
• Final Email Header Denial – I have exhausted all avenues with the District to obtain this information. My question is who are they trying to protect? Why are their different rules for referendum supporters and referendum opponents? My only recourse, at this point is to file with the curcuit courts. At this time I do not intend to do so since it would cost the District money, but I am leaving the option open if I need to at a later date.
• Printed Copy Check Register Denial – I could not inspect these records until after 7/17. I will be scheduling this for sometime in August. This is still not acceptable since other school districts provide printed copies and it can most likely be printed from their accounting software.

June 15th – Clarification request
June 20th – Email conversation
June 27th – Email requesting date to inspect – No response to date

2003 Audit
2004 Audit
Salary Schedules from Teacher’s 2000-2005 Contract – I can scan the rest of the contract later if it is desired.

I will update this with the actual audits and contracts as I get them scanned in. You can tell by what is here already how difficult the district has been in giving me the documentation I have requested. There are also several cases where there is no supporting documentation for what they did provide, so I cannot verify its accuracy. With the lack of openness and trust issues, it makes one wonder what is being hidden?

After the March defeat, Tenbusch stated he would do everything he could to keep the district under local control.

Now today it is:

That does not appear to be trying to keep local control. From the quotes that follow, it appears he is heading down the road of manipulation and threats again. Here are a few more quotes from the Chicago Tribune.

Sounds to me like another referendum is coming in November with more threats and information about the State takeover. I can hear it now, “Really, this is your final chance. The state really is going to take over this time. We’re not kidding.”

This is exactly why there is an effort to change the language in the law. It is very deceptive and allow the districts to say one thing while legally do another. Here’s a link to the latest information on Glen Ellyn District 41. Here is an article I wrote about How Districts Overtax Their Residents. Of course, all of this information is exactly what districts define as false claims when clearly the ballot question is a problem not those opposing a tax increase.

The ISBE numbers are off as well. It appears they averaged 2% growth in revenue each year. The historical average in Lake County since 1991 has been 2.6%. They also do not take into account any appreciation in home values that would accompany each succesive year nor an increase in State or Federal funding. I believe ImATaxpayer on GoFlo.com has pointed out a 6% increase in home values in Winthrop Harbor. With conservative corrections of 5% appreciation, keeping the historical 2.6% CPI, not including any state or federal increases, it would appear the district balance sheet should appear more accurately as follows:

You can see I started with the current balances of the 2006 fiscal year. I am giving WHD1 the benefit of the doubt that these numbers are correct despite past mistakes. Some of the accountants out there can check my calculations for accuracy. As you can see, using the ISBE figures for expenses, the district returns to a surplus in 2008 instead of blowing up as projected. This again is without the referendum passing and the District not going on a spending spree which they appear to have done in 2003.

I did a second analysis on 2.5% CPI and 2.5% property appreciation. A surplus results in 2009 instaed of 2008. Both scenarios do not require a referendum passage or an increase in State or Federal funding. It only requires fiscal restraint to stick to the expenses estimated by the ISBE.

I did a quick look at the WHD1 claim of the 65% solution. I immediately saw a problem. According to a candidates for office forum I attended librarians do not count along with several other of the district inclusions. I really have to question whether TAWs count. Sorry, the District does not meet the 65% standard.

And finally the Spring Bluff analysis; nowhere that I saw does it include selling the property. If the school is closed, sell it and use that money to do the addition to North Prairie or lease temp space. Then the money from the reduced staff is surplus and this becomes a cost effective solution.