Challenging the financial justification of D58′s 2007 referendum won Scott O’Connell the admiration of local conservatives and a seat on the school board.
But half-way through his term, O’Connell’s apparently tireless proclivity for questioning the district’s financial practices is alienating parents, board members and even some of his former supporters.
His latest effort to halt the district’s planned sale of $10 million in life-safety bonds was the final straw for many district residents. Nearly 200 of them turned out at Monday’s school board meeting to express frustration at his delaying tactics.
O’Connell has twice held up the bond sale by threatening litigation. He has questioned both the estimated cost of replacing the roofs and the propriety of using life-safety bonds for that purpose, preferring that the district fund the improvements with working cash. This despite the fact that both the State Board of Education and the Regional Office of Education have approved the district’s bond plan.
The threats are the culmination of a long series of attempts by O’Connell to hold the district to a excruciating level of financial accountability. While some of his diligence has paid off — by delving into the district’s insurance records to determine why its premiums were so high he prompted the former administration to seek out a benefits consultant — in other matters his effort has fallen short.
O’Connell’s unbridled penchant for FOIA requests and other maverick tactics ultimately has put him far, far outside the collegial circle of both previous and current school boards.
Within a year of his election, O’Connell’s former colleagues censured him for disrupting district operations, wasting district resources and harassing district administrators. Within eight months of the election of four new board members last spring (a fifth, John Miller, was appointed in October), his new colleagues were charging him with holding the district hostage over the bond sale.
Back in April 2008, I suggested board members might have taken O’Connell seriously if he had been more measured, balanced and thoughtful in his approach. At that time, I called for him to “ratchet down the attack or risk losing not just his credibility, but the ability to do the job he was elected to do.”
Unfortunately, O’Connell has appeared hell-bent to continue his solitary crusade. But to what end?
O’Connell might have prodded the board to think beyond the bland, standard-issue role decreed by the Illinois Association of School Boards. He might have led the way toward a more appropriate level of financial oversight by the board, particularly in the aftermath of the failed 2007 referendum. He might have offered a refreshing counterpoint even while adhering to the majority rule.
Instead, O’Connell’s approach has devolved into a fanatical quest to assert his personal philosophy of school finance. And in doing so, he has created a standard by which aspiring board members who seek to reasonably challenge the status quo will be measured, and almost certainly rejected, for the foreseeable future.
Already in recent elections, we have heard candidates referred to as “another Scott O’Connell,” meaning they have the potential to be disruptive, doctrinaire and unwilling to work together for the greater good.
This is regrettable because now, more than ever, we need school board members who understand that the environment for government of all levels is in a period of wrenching change.
We need elected leaders who can see beyond past practice as they negotiate the upcoming challenges. We need leaders who will think creatively and work hard to bring consensus. We may not need another Scott O’Connell, but perhaps a fresh approach — one that challenges and compromises in equal measure — is what we need.
WOW, Elaine! I feel like you were reading my thoughts as I was reading this. I’ve spent the last couple months trying put these sentiments on paper. Over the last few months, I’ve been very candid about my thoughts on Scott O’Connell. Why I originally voted for him and why I feel he’s failing the cause he supposedly champions.
The man becomes bigger than the message.
Its called ego.
It is good to see the media/EJ as a defender and enabler of the status quo and attack any one that stands against business as usual. You admit that he has done some good things yet berate him for not being collegial, collegial may be a two way street. With the economy only worsening(foreclosures even in DG will be skyrocketing too) keeping DG from signing on to more debt is the only wise policy. If you can’t fund the schools with the already high level of taxing and spending then it is time to cut the bloat, not to burden the people with more gifts of money to the bond boys.
Not sure where you got the impression I’m an enabler of the status quo from this post, Randy, but I won’t try to argue you out of it. I also wouldn’t argue against the school board — or any other governmental unit — attempting to cut the budget wherever possible. The handwriting is on the wall where that is concerned.
Oh — and say hi to Nurse Ratchett for me, ‘kay?
EJ-
Couldn’t have said it better. The most valuable piece of this article is :
“Already in recent elections, we have heard candidates referred to as “another Scott O’Connell,” meaning they have the potential to be disruptive, doctrinaire and unwilling to work together for the greater good.
This is regrettable because now, more than ever, we need school board members who understand that the environment for government of all levels is in a period of wrenching change.”
These two paragraphs above are why ALL should be for the removal of O’Connell.
EJ,
Let’s go through your post to see if you are manning the barricades against one man at least trying to do something, do you think Mr. O’Connell and his family like being the object of organized ire?
You accuse him of a tireless proclivity for questioning the district, alienating parents, board members etc., his latest efforts to “halt”, the final straw,his delaying tactics, he has twice held up, he is threatening litigation, my he is a one man army. You have a quote from Jefferson posted above, I think Mr. O’Connell is true to a Jeffersonian tradition in America of guarding the liberty of the people like a crown jewel Jefferson also mentioned that by debt we would be enslaved.
You continue by quoting other government agencies as holy writ by saying that they approve of the bonds/more debt, what is wrong with O’Connell, can’t he see that top experts(who are never wrong) say go ahead. He holds the board not just accountable but excruciatingly so(if only the aldermen would do the same to Daley) if such excruciating honesty was standard operating procedure our country might not be in the straits we find ourselves, now you admit that his diligence paid off in savings in the area of insurance but his efforts have fallen short in other areas, might that be due to obstructionism from the other board members? Then Mr. O’Connell is unbridled with a penchant for information, should a bridle be inserted so that collegiality is maintained? He was censured for wasting resources yet when he is allowed to continue he actually uncovers a waste of resources. Then he is charged with taking the whole board hostage, I guess after he released the hostages he was then hell-bent on his solitary crusade, we might need to quickly bind him before he strikes again! We all know that the crowd is always right and the solitary crusader is always wrong.
You say he could have done much if he would have gone along to get along, but instead he became a fanatic and scared off others who wanted reform but are now cowering in fear of what Mr. O’Connell has wrought in his fanatical, unbridled, tireless, hostage taking, hell-bent, solitary crusade.
But then he goes further by pursuing a “quest” to assert his personal philosophy(how dare he) versus the detached, public interest is my only interest for the children only viewpoint of the other board members, teachers, administrators, insurance agents, roofers, bond underwriters, lawyers, parents and local bloggers. How dare he have his own selfish opinion, medicate him immediately.
The fact that he is disruptive(bad board member, go to the corner) doctrinaire and won’t work for the common good, maybe tarring and feathering Mr. O’Connell should knock a bit of respect into him. Then there is the last two paragraphs where it seems you acknowledge that business as usual doesn’t work, but Mr. O’Connells way isn’t the way good people do things. I put it to you that DG 58 is very representative of how all levels of government and big business have been operating for a long time and now that we are collectively deep in the hole, Mr. O’Connell is just the first of many reactions to this he didn’t cause these troubles and in his imperfect manner is trying to help fix it, when this economic crisis bottoms out, new roofs for schools may be the last thing on our minds. If you want to say hi to Nurse Ratchett you don’t have to look far, she is everywhere.
Thanks, Randy, for your thoughtful response. You make many good points — heck, you raise issues I’ve been writing about for years, the need to depart from “business as usual” among them.
I’ve had a good half-dozen conversations with O’Connell since he was elected and I very much respect his willingness to ask hard questions and to depart from the very choreographed role of a school board member as prescribed by the IASB.
However, what good is any of that if you don’t combine it with the ability to effect positive change? By assuming the role of financial nit-picker, O’Connell has marginalized himself where he might have led, big-time. By digging in his heels over these bonds — and, BTW, I believe he was right to raise the questions and concerns he did — he is attempting to circumvent the fundamental of majority rule. I don’t see that as effective leadership, but that’s just my opinion.
If he believes filing suit against the sale is the right thing to do, let him do it and not just threaten to do it. If he can sway public opinion on the matter, more power to him. He’s certainly free to come on this blog and explain his position.
As for the ultimate impact of the financial crisis, I heartily agree that it will impact more than roofs. School boards have rarely had to wrestle with the hard choices the village, for example, has just made. However, that time may soon be coming and we will need board members who not only are willing to ask hard questions, but also to lead.
Wait, nurse Ratchett is everywhere?!? Does that mean life is just one big therapy session?? Whoa..
The IASB is a load of …………(enter explicative here)
There is a big difference between a reformer and a gadfly. Most can complain, few can offer solutions, even fewer can lead the change they purport to advocate.
The comment made above that, “in his imperfect manner [he] is trying to help fix it,” rings hollow, as there have been no notable initiatives or accomplishments. The only thing that this board member seems to be able to lead is the front page news.
EJ,
Why does it always enrage the totalitarians of this world when one person says no? He will still lose the vote but the fact that one person says no will encourage others to say no, that is what enrages the Ratchetts of the world because once people see through the pompous asses bs whether it is global warming, the foreign boogeymen, money for the children, the roof is falling, the health care crisis etc, change might happen. Maybe the other members of the board are the self righteous arrogant type(I don’t know them, but it is possible, many do gooders are that way) so maybe they just don’t like somebody that disagrees with them, maybe if they listened, the DG schools could be a leader in innovation and frugality, didn’t Jefferson say, “that a wise and FRUGAL government” should be the goal, not a high tax, spend and incur debt type government. What should he have done once they started to deny all his requests? Just quit and go home, should the colonists have quit when it got tough? As the layoffs start to hit DG these debts will become ever more onerous, maybe these 200 people should lead by example and each plunk down 5-10K and get the roofs fixed without sending interest payments to Wall Street, kind of like the ending of “It’s a Wonderful Life”, if the definition of loving the children is to encumber every piece of real estate in ever escalating debt that I think is what Mr. Potter had in mind, not George Bailey. Lead by example protestors, because as this economy worsens it would be better not to do things like this because you don’t want S. O’C saying I told you so.
Fair enough, McMurphy. You’ve given all of us something to think about.
Sitting down Chad? I think IASB has some very worthwhile initiatives.
If the Working Cash fund (08/09 EOY balance $9,689,042) is used to bridge teacher salaries, what about also tapping the Education fund (08/09 EOY balance $12,011,099) for that purpose? Does that have different specific uses?
In 08/09 58 had about a $26.7 million cash reserve in various EOY fund balances for various categories. They want to amp that up to about a $33.5 million total COH for this next budget by adding in $6,970,000 to Capital Projects. Am I reading that right? That’s where the $10 million goes? If so, where does the other $3 million go? If that’s already spent, and the balances are that healthy, count me in the 80%.
MT,
I have already covered this. There should be no bridge to nowhere needed for the teachers. This is the problem. The government is the problem. The teachers salaries should be in the budget. Just tell us what we need to pay these people. The government holds the district hostage with its non payment. So we need to keep more money in the reserve than maybe would should. I am going to agree to disagree with you on this one. I would rather just pay the teachers out of our property taxes. Period.
If you want a real program for educating out children check out this website link.
http://www.adamforillinois.com/Education/
Mark, perhaps some readers aren’t aware that the 6/30 (district fiscal year end) fund balances include the receipt in June of the first of two payments of property taxes to be received during each calendar year. The balances at the end of the fiscal year should be high, since all of this money will be needed to cover expenses for the next twelve months. The year-end balances, when combined with the second round of property tax receipts in the fall, represent virtually all of the unrestricted receipts of the district. (Only about $1.3-1.5 million of state funds are unrestricted, with another $2.3 million of restricted state funds designated for Special Education) The district policy is to have maintain funds representing approximately 8-12% of the budget as a prudent cushion, in excess of the budgeted operating expenses. Eight percent of the normal operating budget of approximately $56 million (not including anticipated construction spending) is approximately $4.5 million. As of the April ’09 budget workshop, $4.5 million was the forecasted 6/30/10 cushion. By 6/30/10, the anticipated amount to be spent on roofs will be approximately $3.9 million, so, yes, the $3 million you refer to will have already been spent.
Thanks Craig.
I voted for Scott O’Connell with the idea that he would move the School Board toward wiser spending of the taxpayers’ money.
What has disappointed me is Mr. O’Connell’s attitude. He has questioned expenditures as if he is the U.S. Attorney looking for corruption in Cook County. He is brusque, and that’s being kind.
One thing I learned years ago that diplimacy and tact will help sway people, if they not inclined to agree with you. It appears that Mr. O’Connell has never tried diplomacy and tact even once with fellow board members, staff, and parents.
ckfred,
I agree with your last statement. I should use your advice on diplomacy and tact from time to time!
@ randall mcmurphy
When one person thwarts a course of action supported by six people (plus the D58 admin and the so-called rubber stamping regional boards) it is that one person who seeks to be totalitarian, not everyone else.
Scott O’Connell absolutely deserves to have his message listened to, with patience and respect. But then the vote is taken and the majority decides.
That is America, baby.
Craig, thank you for such a thorough explanation. That is what the public needs to hear.
Randall, I have to disagree with you. We are not enraged that Scott O’Connell stood up and voted no. Not at all. That is what he was elected to do. We are enraged because the board as a WHOLE voted yes, and O’Connell as a board member cannot accept that he was in the minority on this vote. The board voted for the bonds. O’Connell had his opportunity to vote, and he did. Now he needs to step back and let the district issue the bonds as decided upon by the board as a whole. He is one member of a voting board; he doesn’t get to decide the fate of the district by himself. That’s what we’re fired up about, not “enraged” because O’Connell is asserting a different opinion.
Francis & Julie the Devine,
If there was a referendum and the bond issue was passed by the voters of course it would proceed. But in 2007 it was voted down. But the board is doing an end run to issue bonds on a “emergency safety” basis and he is daring them to do so as it may not be as legal as is proclaimed. If he is right he is saving them from future legal and financial troubles, if he is wrong the bonds will be issued in due time and no one is the worse. Go get upset at the pension time bomb, or when Mayor Daley(he is your Mayor don’t you know) sells the water system to private interests and at least triples your water rates, stopping government(the board) from spending is a noble tradition in America and if he is doing anything illegal or dishonest let us know. The people that want to spend money are the ones to watch out for, not the savers. What happens when gas prices skyrocket again and more layoffs hit the local area and tax revenues continue to decline, the economy is so fragile right now that you should be saving every nickel anywhere you can. A Chinese Politburo member was recently quoting Ben Franklin concerning US DEBT, “when you go borrowing, you go sorrowing.” What a sad state when Chinese Communist leaders quote one of our Founders concerning governmental frugality. BTW Miss Devine are you enraged or fired up? You state that you are both.
Randall,
I actually agree with conservative spending. My husband and I are about as fiscally conservative as a family can be, and believe our government should be as well. However, I see no other options with these bonds. If we use the reserve fund, payroll can’t be met.
I do believe the money you invest in the schools and community is reaped in our property values. Having a daughter in a school with water leaking out of light fixtures, I do not have the same “in due time and no one is worse for the wear” belief you do. There is a safety risk in these roofs not being replaced in a timely manner. I do not believe either of us will convince the other to come around to our way of thinking. I will just respectfully disagree with you and leave it at that.
Mr. mcmurphy,
Please show Julie Devine some respect here. She had the guts to get involved and then felt compelled to post here. Lets stick to topic and keep the discussion moving. Although it is kind of a cute nick name. I wonder if it will stick! LOL
McMurphy-Love the Irish name. Anyway, I agree with Julie. In no way am I “enraged” that someone rolls up their sleeves and tries to use my tax dollars in the most prudent way possible. I thank my elected leaders for that! But, as mentioned before, LEADERS know how to get people on their side. They appeal to our sense of “oneness” with our fellow men and women, and give them an honest listen. I am a strong, opinionated person, but I am ALWAYS open to hearing the other side and even having it sway me. I don’t have a grandiose idea of myself so much so that I can’t possibly take someone else’s framework or ideas and adopt them as my own. This is what O’Connell can’t seem to do. He lost the respect of his board members and some of us folk out here, the very day he wouldn’t take his entire oath. That was our first red flag. Why didn’t he approach his fellow members by saying, “Hey guys, hear me out on this one…….” Nope. Instead, it’s IT’S HIS WAY OR THE HIGHWAY! Stubborn, brash, and unapproachable are his technique which has, in turn, alienated himself from the rest of the board. Consequently, ruined ALL of our chances of having a board member win over their fellow members on their taxpayer-focused proposal. So, in his pursuit of being the maverick that saves us all our tax dollars, he in turn, produces no results at all on this particular issue of the roofs. What a shame. He’s hurt all of us. The ones who voted for him and believed in his message and the ones who were skeptical but had high hopes. We’ve ALL been let down. So, let’s not divide ourselves, or shoot our neighbor in the foot when we all want the same thing–fiscally-minded, responsible, elected-leaders that are accountable to themselves, their actions, and the people they represent. We need to go to the BOE meeting on the 11th of January–you too, McMurph, and tell him you believe in him, but to get it done in a amiable way instead of his alienating way. We don’t not like his ideas, we don’t like his approach that results in, well…….no results at all.
To be fair, there was no District 58 bond issue that was “voted down” in 2007. Instead, it was a referendum for a 31-cent tax rate increase that failed to pass. It is because of that failed referendum that the current bond issuance was made necessary. As such, there is hardly any “end run” going on here under the guise of “emergency safety.” Revisiting the editorial that the DG Reporter ran in February 2007 on this topic may be enlightening to the earlier commentator: http://www.community58.org/pdf/reporter.pdf
Mr. McMurphy, can you (or anyone else) explain to me what the legal risk is of issuing a life-safety bond? And doesn’t the board have legal counsel? What exactly is Mr. O’Connell protecting us from?
Yes, I’m answering part of my own question…
A DuPage County judge ruled 10/6/09 on Mr. O’Connell’s first complaint, saying D58 had done everything legally required in regards to the bond sale.
So I ask again: what is Mr. O’Connell protecting us from?
Sparta,
Maybe the Spartans shouldn’t have battled the Persians just let them through in an amiable manner since they were outnumbered, why stand up? BTW Christ said not to take oaths, just to make your yes, yes and your no, no. You can look that up.
Miss Knudsen,
Go bury yourself in debt if you like, but to keep piling it on everybody through the government, that is what is wrong in the good ol USA. I think he is protecting you from you.
Punta,
Why even have referendums, just issue these bonds whenever you “need” money, if this ain’t an end run what is?
They have the 6-1 majority and the resources to ram this through no matter what O’Connell does ultimately so instead of personalizing this let that process work. Roofs have been patched before. Since Washington can’t cut spending and the national deficit and debt have been exploding, what happens when the Feds either dramatically raise taxes or let inflation work its magic by eliminating our wealth by stealth Or Springfield for that matter, you all know they want to raise the state taxes substantially. Let alone the odds of more war in the Middle East, plus when Cap and Trade is encacted fuel costs will double or more, it is best to cut costs now and economize so we can get through this perfect storm of debt, decreasing revenues and increasing costs. We don’t live in a vacuum and we better be aware of the external forces buffeting us about. Off to coffee, enjoyed the debate remember that as G. Washington said, “government is force not eloquence.” Mr. Jefferson added, “the power to tax is the power to confiscate”, and cautioned that we don’t become like the English, “laboring 15 hours of every 16, our main source of sustenance riveting the shackles on our fellow man.”
Good Day all!
Randy – get a real name and then maybe (but I doubt it) I will listen to you (Elaine isn’t he off topic?)
The Spartans would not have been able to battle the Persians if they refused to invest in their collective community and have the ability to be smart enough to guild bronze and apply strategy. It’s a good question about fix vs replace. I’ll submit this for your consideration. The FAC and the board vetted alternatives. This was not done quickly or hastilty. O’Connell objected by saying the bids were too high without offering anything in return. What’s important here is that O’Connell did not object to replacing the roofs and did not say we should fix them instead. So, at least tacitly, O’Connell agrees the roofs need to be replaced based upon the information he has seen. Throw on reviews by outside entities that were summoned by O’Connell that found the decision making process to be sound and we have a pretty extensive process that was used to make a decision. Many good and talented people spent their time and energy to look at this. Do people honestly think they are trying to rip you off? Although I’m not an advocate of present day French culture I’ll leave you with this French proverb (they did help Washington defeat the British): Be careful not to be penny wise and pound foolish. Me thinks this may have lead to the current state of affairs…….
Wow. The blind ideologs have invaded, pull up the ramparts and heat the oil.
This thread began with a leaky roof, concerned parents and one man’s crusade against a bond. Since then I’ve read about George Washington, the Middle East, shakles, Chinese Communist leaders, Mayor Daley and nurse Ratchett.
…and the roof is still leaking.
Meat, you forgot Ben Franklin and Thermopylae. It’s an education all in itself…
Will someone please mention Hitler? Then I can close down comments and we can call it a day.
thank you Mark, it is an education at little or no cost, with spirited debate, no need for buildings or roofs, unionized teachers, highly paid administrators, ballooning pensions or debt bomb overhangs. Just us citizens chatting.
Time to hit the gym which the free market provides me a virtual palace with incredible amenities for a very little cost with a leak free roof to boot.
With all the sass, I didn’t get a real answer to my question. I’m seriously asking, not being snarky. Mr. O’Connell is threatening litigation, and I want to understand if the bond sale is soundly legal, or if there is a legal issue at hand.
No need to reply, Mr. McMurphy. I will continue to ask until someone can give me an answer. Thanks.
Did anyone stop and think O’Connell may be bluffing? Call him on it. What can it cost us? We are already into this deal. Lets get er done!
Except I don’t want to blindly call his bluff and roll the dice… I want to be assured it’s completely legit, and I want to be told by someone who is right.
If that’s the case, yes, why not confidently move forward?
What I’d *really* like to see is Mr. O’Connell work with his fellow board members, and if there’s a legal problem, to find a solution. If it’s illegal, we should go back to the drawing board right now.
p.s. Mr. Walz, please stop hatin’ on Whittier. One of the things we love about Whittier is we work as a community to help provide our children with the best possible education. We want to extend that community to the rest of the district, no matter what size house we live in.
“Will someone please mention Hitler?”
How about Schickelgruber? Just askin’.
Andrea: I may have notes somewhere that might address your question — on Monday. Trying to catch up with the holiday preps for now.
EJ – After reading all the comments, I think Randall missed your point.
Randall – I don’t think you realize, that a majority of people in this community would probably support O’Connell’s efforts if he did in a way that didn’t alienate them. I voted for Scott because he told us that he’d be the champion of fiscal responsibility and government accountability. He should be building bridges between the sides of “anything for education” and “the fiscally conservative” Instead of building bridges he’s driving wedges.
Chad – I agree it’s time to move on and call his bluff. If he would vote against an additional $250/yr in taxes with a nickel levy, he’s definitely not going to be willing to pay $250/hr for a lawyer.
This HAS been very educational. The way district 58 pays for things seems very complicated. Thank you to erveryone that has said their two cents.
58 has a lump sum summer vacation pay option, right? Is that a component of the current contract and if so can that be removed from the next contract? Why not either pay them in 12 equal payments or in 10 equal payments.
Andrea,
I am no Whittier hater, far from it. One of my most favorite people in Downers Grove lives with in your boundary! Hint: He is a new member of the village council.
I just thought a candle light demonstration was silly. Having said that…You made your point and brought some very needed attention to a very important topic. For that you all should be commended! Remember, I am a Kingsley parent. My school needs a new roof just as bad as the next.
I think people sometimes get me wrong because on many issues I want to know why we are spending tax dollars and if we can be more efficient with the us of them. I like to play devils advocate and that doesn’t always sit well with people. If anyone wants to talk on a personal level with me about issues my door is always open. EJ has my email anyone can ask her for it she knows I love to talk! LOL The end game in all of this is to get the best information possible so we can make sure our government entities are making the best decisions possible for our community.
Have a Merry Christmas and Happy news years to everyone!
I enjoy reading the comments about Mr. OConnell’s exploits, and I’m happy he is in his current position to challenge spending of the taxpayer’s HARD EARNED cash.
There are so many people lined up against him he must be doing something right. While he may increase his effectiveness if he were more collaborative, a relationship takes two willing partners, and the other board members never wanted to be his dance partner. They are angry that someone actually has the ability to challenge their decisions, which they want rubber stamped. So he makes their lives miserable and gums up the works. If that keeps the government cash register from ringing, so be it.
Now we have the safety issue, and I share everyone’s concerns about the potential danger to the students and faculty – but the sad fact is that this could have been averted if the roof issue had been properly prioritized. Who is challenging the school board about past decisions made where less important capital projects were funded? Deal with safety first! Perhaps one of the informed participants can provide the capital expenditures for the last five years that were funded? People should be angry that this important safety issue was not addressed first.
I hope Mr. O’Connell continues to challenge every single dollar spent. This country was built on the backs of the hard working American citizen, but those backs are aching. Every single government entity wants to stick their hand deeper into the pocket of the taxpayer, and if Mr. O’Connell can help to ensure that only the most needed projects receive funding, I say more power to him.
I hear the frequent claims that this issue will only cost us a few dollars per household, but this is only one of the many issues being teed up. We need to look at the tax burden in total.
Well said Mr. Franklin, doesn’t it seem that many people are very naive when it comes to government and the power to tax, bond and spend? And that they will organize against a man who loses every vote 6-1, who hasn’t the power to direct no-bid contracts, who has no friends in the bonding, legal, pension or insurance business and no connections with teachers unions. Those are the people who need to be scrutinized not the guy who wants to shine a very bright light upon them. The schools of this country are run just like GM and Chrysler, with high costs and relatively low quality, however government schools unlike private business can just keep raising the price(taxes) as they have little or no competition and anyone that gets in the way might get a candlelight vigil directed against them. Once the locals go bankrupt(self-inflicted) maybe the Federal Government will bail out the local governments and schools and we will have Federal Czars(or a Daley or Stroger family member) run our affairs for us whether we like it or not. I certainly look forward to parking meters and red light cameras everywhere in our fair town as long as the proceeds go to the children(with a small “cut” going to the insiders). The money is drying up and 2010 is going to be a lot tougher economically as layoffs, foreclosures, bank and business failures will be increasing. The time was years ago to rein in local government spending(which is all we have any bit of control over) but even at this late date we have to do more with Less, starting with this bond issue. Spending money nobody has will just make our future financial problems worse.
Off to brunch, Cheers!
Again, Franklin and McMurph. We agree with you. We WANT someone such as O’Connell to watch out for our tax dollars, what we DON’T like, is the way in which he is conducting himself and trying to get his point across. He has screwed all of us by getting so many people turned off by his antics, that NOTHING is getting done. Again, people, we all want the same things here, but human decency needs to be a factor in trying to get things done on a school board as well.
I agree Sparta.
{ Sparta – I don’t think they get it. }
Downers Grove as a community is fiscally conservative. The challenge I would place on any who supports SOC behavior:
1) If you have a job, start acting like Scott at the office and see how long before your fired. Good luck finding a new job, your reputation will follow you forever.
2) If own your own business start treating your staff this way, you’ll find that all your best employees go somewhere else where they are treated with respect. Good luck finding new talent to fill their shoes, your reputation will follow you forever and you’ll be left with applicants that no one else will hire.
I think you would find the community, as a whole would support someone who championed fiscal transparency and worked to find solutions that met both needs of the district and respected the pocketbooks of the taxpayers. That’s why SOC was elected but once again this is not how SOC acts. Just within the comments of this post there are at least five people who I believe would be better attune to this than SOC.
Well said Sparta, Chad and Todd.
If you know of somebody fellas who has the incredible character to say no and the incredible charm to sway his opponents let’s run him for Governor or President not just the DG 58 board.
Todd,
Every Republican since I have been old enough to vote(1980) has said that they will reduce the size of government, and look where we are because they are always trying to be gracious to the other side, at somepoint there has to be a confrontation and it won’t be pleasant. When school boards through emergency bonding bypass the voters is that not a form of tyranny yet many criticize the one person standing up to this committee for not being civil, I truly think that it is appropriate that a new version of “Alice in Wonderland” is out soon, as words mean what we want them to mean. Put the issue back in front of the voters, if SO’C is so wrong it should pass nearly unanimously.
Sparta,
How have you been screwed by gridlock? Since governments power is mostly negative if they have been tied in knots they haven’t been able to impose further burdens upon you, we should only be so lucky at the national level.
I would love the federal government to be gridlocked right now! LOL
I pose the question..(I think Ryan evaded it).
How is it that one person can bring this whole thing to a screeching halt? Why would Chapman and Cutler not issue councel because of one man’s threat of litigation? Surely they think he’s “bluffing”.
I wouldn’t consider it “standing up to a committee”. If O’Connell was “standing up” he would have facts and we would support him. However, he has no facts even though he was part of the process. In fact he witheld facts when they were not in his favor (rejection of State Superitendant appeal). The decision making process was defined, up front and sound. O’Connell is actually costing us more since we need to pay lawyers for work that adds no value and buildings suffer more damage as water makes it’s way into them. O’Connell has saved the district money on other issues. However, you need to move forward when you’re wrong. His issue was about the cost of the work (again no facts and it is covered on other parts of this blog), not putting it out for a vote. Wonder how much more it will cost the tax payers when someone gets hurt and sues…..
Furthermore… out in the real world, I can’t imagine a corporate board that would accept this type of action from a board member after a final vote was taken. That’s not how boards function. In fact, they *wouldn’t* function.
If we remove personal politics from this issue, crusades by the minority *after* a final vote looks just as dysfunctional as the government entities we rally against. I know it’s “broke,” but this certainly doesn’t “fix” it.
And, thanks, EJ. Look forward to that info!
One comment about the State Superintendent. Why do we even have this worthless, unneeded and I imagine highly compensated position in the first place? State pay role‘s are bloated as it is.
Second, of course the state board of Ed is going to support spending money on schools. This state is wasteful and corrupt. An appeal rejection for any state board of Ed employee is not going to sway my support.
The roofs need to be done that is a given. Lets just call O’Connell’s bluff and pay the lawyers if need be. I think it’s a stall tactic, otherwise the district would have litigation on their desks already. We are already this far in to it. Just don’t elect him next time. We are going to put way too much time and money into trying to get this guy off the board. 2011 will be here very soon.
Chad – AGREED!!!
Randall -I’m sure you’ve heard the quote “Keep your friends close and your enemies closer” SOC does nothing but build barriers between his enemies and his potential allies. That is point that everyone here is try to drive and your missing that point. He doesn’t need to to be suave or charismatic, he just needs to be respectful. I voted for Scott because he told us he would bring change. Instead. the only change he’s really made is building larger barriers further preventing the change he supposedly championed. If you think SOC is doing such a great job, I’d encourage you to run for the BoE and campaign yourself as another Scott O’Connell and see how much community support you have. As far as standing up to the committees. Why not make a bomb threat or take people hostage to get his point across. Would you applaud him then? He’d be standing up for what he believes in.
We need people in government that promote fiscal change in a civil manner. We don’t need complainers. The biggest problem with SOC is he’s a complainer not a solution finder. Eliminating the working cash fund or using those funds to fix the roofs is not a solution. Since this would cause additional problems. Go look at schools that do not have WCF and you will be major financial issues in those districts. Craig does an excellent job explaining this above but once again I’ve afraid it fall on the deaf ears of zealous individuals who believe there is only one means to solve a problem.
ok ok….since I am the one trying to “cause trouble” I will do what others have asked…
Craig, you sound like HITLER…There, now we can suspend this thread..Buh Bye.
Well, he did grow up in Germany…
Todd,
threatening litigation over this issue is not the same as taking hostages or a bomb threat, those are felonies. Would you advocate SOC being taken hostage or being the victim of a threat, that might put a stop to his delaying tactics? But it sounds like some of the candlelight vigil types would like to do that to Mr. O’Connell. As you know if you don’t pay the property tax they will forcibly take your home, that is the power of the taxers, how you impute violent felonious actions to those opposed to this bond issue is an interesting leap of logic. Maybe SOC should be put in front of a Peoples Court charged with being an enemy of the People with Mr. Vishinsky as prosecutor. There was a guy who protested the money changers, that didn’t work out so well for him, we celebrate his birthday this week. 2011 isn’t far away and if he is that unpopular he won’t be re-elected, or better yet let’s send him to Washington where he hopefully can really save us some dough, kick him upstairs and everyone benefits!
In answer to the question of legality, using the Life/Safety code to issue bonds is a way to avoid taking the bond issue to the voters via a referendum. The roof issue stirs emotions so that is the justification by the board, even though the statute does not have replacing roofs in its provisions. As someone else posted, these roof replacements have been budgeted since 2001. Using the life/safety excuse is common among school boards, but that doesn’t make it right or legal. In my humble opinion, it should be considered fraud and I believe that is what O’Connell thinks and he does not want to be a party to it.
I believe that they are not issuing the bonds with a threat of litigation because it effects the marketablility of the bonds. Whether O’Connell files a suit or threatens to, it taints the bond issue. The investors won’t buy them if there is a perceived issue.
As far as his methods, I do agree that you catch more flies with honey. However, when he joined the board, he was already disliked and was facing the “good ole boy” network.