Thursday, March 24, 2016

Cook County Precinct Results Now Available for the March 15, 2016 HMS Referendum

Cook County has now released, by Precinct, the results of the HMS Referendum.

For those readers interested in analyzing where the Yes and No votes were cast, we have provided the results below.  DuPage County has not yet issued the results, but when they do, we will publish them.


For those of our readers interested in seeing exactly where the boundary lines are for the 4 Cook County Precincts, we have copied a map below:


Anonymous said...

I've been looking at the district website as well as BoardDocs. A few things I wanted to bring up:

On BoardDocs, for the Learning Committee, under the minutes from the last meeting ($file/BOE_Learning%20Com.%20Mtg.%20Min._3_2_16.pdf), it said that the learning committee discussed the belief statements for the Digital Learning Initiative. Um, why does it need belief statements? In my opinion, that's just fluff. We need them to look at more substantial things, like, oh, I don't know. Maybe the CURRICULUM?!? I don't really care what shiny, new toys the kids and teachers use as long as my kids a great education. If the administration really deserved their exorbitant salaries, we wouldn't need a digital learning initiative. We've got an assistant superintendent of Curriculum & Instruction, a Director of Curriculum & Instruction, an interim Technology Coordinator and an interim Educational Technology Coordinator. That's probably $400,000 in salaries right there, and closer to $500,000 once you figure in the other goodies like insurance and pensions. Why can't they figure out what technology is needed to teach our kids and how to use it?

Speaking of the Director of Curriculum and Instruction, looks like the district is anticipating a new opening:

Am I correct that this is Dawn Benaitis' position? Is she leaving? Or is Dr. White reorganizing the administration again and creating an additional position? I hope it's the former. Good riddance. She hasn't been very good since she's been in the district. Plus, we don't need yet another $100,000+ administrator.

Anonymous said...

11:27: You have highlighted some interesting points. I want to address your comment about the new job posting. I opened the link you gave in your comment and it looks like the job was posted yesterday to begin in July. Either you are right that the current Director of Curriculum is leaving, or Dr. White is adding yet another position. It makes no sense. The district just hired two new Assistant Superintendents of Curriculum and PPS to start on July 1. Why do they need yet another Director to start at the same time? Maybe you are right that the current Director will be leaving -- although I checked Board Docs for the last few months and nothing has been approved on the Personnel Consent Agendas -- and there has been no discussion during open session about adding a position or needing to fill an upcoming vacancy. But if the current director is leaving, I think the position should not be filled until after the new Assistant Superintendent of Curriculum comes on board and decides if one is even needed. It seems from what has been posted about the new Assistant Sup. of Curriculum that she is highly qualified and will know how to run the district's curriculum programs. The district administration should let her decide what she needs and wait until she arrives to participate in the hiring process of any director she might (or might not) think needs to be hired. Why would the current administration hire any lower level administrative employees who will report to the new Assistant Sup. of Curriculum? Maybe there is some political maneuvering going on in the administration? Perhaps Dr. White has a specific employee in mind that he wants to hire from his old district or perhaps an internal promotion of one of his supporters? Either way, posting a position that will be filled before the new Assistant Sup starts on July 1, assesses her department and decides what direction to take it and who she needs working under her smacks of some back door planning that hasn't been discussed in open session and certainly hasn't been discussed by the 7 board members in public who are supposed to be making fiscally responsible decisions.

Anonymous said...

11:27and 2:18, you are right that no new hires should be approved by the BOE until well after the new Assistant Superintendents of Curriculum and PPS arrive and have gotten their bearings. To add new lower level administrators will only create confusion for the new assistant superintendents. If an internal person is promoted to the director position, it doesn't sound like that would be a good message to send to the new assistant superintendents because they should get to choose their lower level administrative help and not be forced to accept anyone that White or the current administration chooses without their input and insight that can only happen after they are working at D181. I don't even think a director is really needed. One was added in the past because of poor performance or lack of skills of the assistant superintendents who should never have been hired to positions they were not qualified for. But that doesn't seem to be the case with regard to the 2 incoming hires. They appear on paper to be qualified in their respective areas -- curriculum and PPS -- and should be the ones to make hiring recommendations to the BOE. They may well decided they don't need a whole tier of directors under them, which would be great news financially for the district, since we all know how overpaid all the lower level adminsitrators have been for the last few years. It is time for D181 to tighten its belt, not keep loosening it. I hope the majority of the BOE puts a stop to this latest posting.

Anonymous said...

If we can get the right people, I could see having one Assistant Super for the DOL, and then have 2 directors: C&I, and PPS/SpED. Probably could use a person to handle Assessments/number crunching, but not necessarily a director position. The Asst. Sup. could do the big picture for learning, while the directors can be the more detailed, specialized areas of curriculum. Not to downplay the importance of SpEd, but do we really need a $120,000 asst. sup for SpEd? Could we save several grand and do it with a director level person? I don't have kids who need SpEd services so I wouldn't know.

Anonymous said...

I just checked board docs. The math trajectory is being discussed at the learning committee tonight.