It seems that my interpretation of the Illinois statute governing school consolidation is correct, at least according to Don White, District 108 superintendent. White offered his clarification as a letter to the editor in the Times today.
White attributes the following quote to 108 board attorney Mike Tibbs:
A petition to create an optional elementary unit district can be initiated by only two methods. The first method requires a petition containing the signatures of the requisite number of legal resident voters from each affected district.
Such a petition does not exist. Continuing …
The second method requires the approval and submission of a petition by the boards of education of each of the affected districts. If the board of education of even one of the feeder districts fails to approve a board level petition, then the petition fails to meet the statutory requirements, does not qualify for submission to the regional superintendent, and cannot result in the placement of a referendum on the ballot.
The school boards of the other districts have shown ZERO interest in this issue, so this requirement is not met either.
Money Quote from Don White:
[...] the board decided that they would not spend taxpayer’s money on something that has no promise of improving the education of our children and is not permissible by the current law.
Huh. This whole proposition for consolidation is not even possible without the consent of the other feeder districts, which the Citizens for Pekin School Consolidation have FAILED to obtain. In other words, Jim Mangan is WASTING EVERYONE’S TIME.
Isn’t that “special”?
Finally, speaking of “special,” here’s a question for the Times. Why do those opposing consolidation get their opinions placed as just another letter to the editor, but those in favor of consolidation get a “special”???
5 responses so far ↓
1
rick
// Jan 11, 2007 at 2:34 am
For anyone who has been following the Times for any length of time, it should be obvious why some letters are just that and others are “special to the times.” Our letters policy states that letters are to be no longer than 350 words. Longer letters are published as “special to the times.” They are more in the vein of guest commentaries. The fact of the matter is, a close observer would recall that Fred Altman, not a supporter of consolidation, wrote a special to the times. It’s a way we can allow those with more to say to do so. It is our answer to those who slam us for being biased; we print what people say. As a matter of fact, in the next day or two, expect a “special to the times” from the 108 board president. What is interesting, is that in spite of the fact you disagree with Mr. Mangan so vehemently, he signs his letter, he takes responsibility for his words, unlike cowardly bloggers such as yourself.
2
Ms. Teacher
// Jan 11, 2007 at 2:36 am
I’m so glad he wrote that.
…and yet…
I know that the people who are so EXTREME in their belief that the consolidation is the saving grace of our school system will see that as nothing but “defensive” and another example of Dr. White “not listening to the people of Pekin”.
I’ll have my fingers crossed that people will see the article for what it is: A man who has done his research stating the facts AS THEY ARE without twisting anything around to make himself look good.
3
knightindragonland
// Jan 11, 2007 at 5:02 am
Who put vinegar in your Wheaties this morning, Mr. Wade?
A simple clarification of your letters policy would have sufficed. The charge of cowardice is petty, spiteful and unnecessary. Take a lesson from your fellow editor Michelle and defend your paper without trying to start a pissing match. A close observer would also notice that I’ve commended your paper as often as I’ve criticized it.
As I’ve stated before and as your comment proves … my blog is open and available to accept criticism. I’m not “hiding” anywhere.
4
knightindragonland
// Jan 11, 2007 at 5:34 am
Ms Teacher,
I’m sure we’ll see a response from Mr. Mangan in the near future.
5
Lyle Meece
// May 26, 2007 at 9:50 pm
I heard a quote once, it was something to the effect of “never fear, if you can’t defeat a man in a fair argument, you can always call him names.” I think the purpose of any writer is to make the reader think. I really don’t like Pam Adams in the Journal Star, but I always read her articles. And that is her job, to get people to read her. Not to get people to agree with her. And Knight if you piss people off, Kudos.
Leave a Comment