Capitol Fax.com - Your Illinois News Radar

Question of the day

Posted in:

Illinois

* Press release…

State Senator Robert Martwick, State Representative Kam Buckner and Educators for Excellence joined together at a press conference Tuesday to announce a measure that will permit compensation for members of the Chicago Elected School Board.

“Permitting compensation for board members as a way to remove barriers will enable the board to more accurately represent the diverse communities of Chicago,” said Martwick (D-Chicago). “We want the board to truly represent the students and families they serve and to include voices from every community.”

As written, the law that created the Chicago Elected School Board process permits reimbursement to board members for expenses incurred while performing their duties. It currently does not allow compensation for members, which may create barriers for individuals who cannot afford to take the time away from working to serve on the board.

Martwick’s measure does not set a monetary value for compensation, but removes the prohibition of compensation to elected school board members.

“Individuals shouldn’t have to choose between serving on their local school board and providing for their families,” Martwick said. “By allowing for the possibility of compensation, we remove barriers and provide opportunities to future members.”

The bill is here.

* Sun-Times editorial…

Yes, board members are giving up their time to serve. Yes, lower-income and working-class people bear a heavier burden than those who are wealthier when they choose to do so, perhaps having to forgo hourly wages or persuade a stubborn boss to give them time off for board meetings and other activities.

To make up for that, it seems entirely fair to provide a modest stipend for members and/or reimbursement for board-related expenses. If it helps pave the way for more parents and community members to run for board seats, so be it.

But a modest stipend really ought to be the extent of any compensation, and sensible limits should be clearly spelled out in the proposal introduced last week by state Sen. Robert Martwick, D-Chicago, and state Rep. Kam Buckner, D-Chicago, as first reported by Chalkbeat Chicago.

We’re also not swayed by the argument that pay is necessary so teachers can run for board seats. Under the 2021 law, teachers and other Chicago Public Schools employees are rightly prohibited from sitting on the elected board. If they decide to quit their full-time jobs in order to run, taxpayers shouldn’t be expected to foot the bill with anything approaching a full-time salary.

Illinois law currently does not permit school board members to be paid a salary or stipend, though it does allow for reimbursement of expenses.

* The Question: Pay them an adequate salary, give them a “modest stipend” or don’t pay them anything except expense reminbursements? Take the poll and then explain your answer in comments, please.

online polls

posted by Rich Miller
Monday, Oct 30, 23 @ 2:04 pm

Comments

If they are looking for a professional board that is going to have expectations for professional work and deadlines, etc. then it should be adequate salary. These folks should take over for the CEO of education post and make actual policy, right?

Comment by cermak_rd Monday, Oct 30, 23 @ 2:06 pm
This is going to be a fairly sizable board and it’s difficult for me to imagine individual members really taking on responsibilities that would approach 35+ hours a week, thus justifying a full salary.

The median income in Chicago is about $34k, so maybe 80% of that should make it possible for anyone to serve and commit 20 or so hours per week to the role.

Comment by Heart of Chicago Monday, Oct 30, 23 @ 2:20 pm
there are lots of boards and commissions which take a great deal of time and energy if one is serving well. you cannot expect this one to get an “adequate salary” and watch other boards with nothing.

Comment by Amalia Monday, Oct 30, 23 @ 2:25 pm
Modest stipend based on meeting attendance plus reimbursements.

Remove financial barriers to service on board, but don’t make it a blank check. Set basic expectations like board and committee attendance, link stipend to those expectations. Treat reimbursements separately (travel, meeting/convention registrations, related association memberships). I know from having served on and been president of local board that lack of stipends and reimbursements turns people off to public service and/or weakens their commitment to it.

Comment by Flapdoodle Monday, Oct 30, 23 @ 2:25 pm
I think tiering it the way city/county boards do it would make a lot of sense. The chair should probably be accessible day in/ day out, so they should get a decent salary.

For the rest of the members, a salary around 15-20k to pay for their accessibility and additional time commitments seems fair.

The fact that school boards are currently unpaid is ridiculous, and absolutely prohibits people from being financially able to be involved. This should be fixed (and I think this applies for most other involved and unpaid boards).

Comment by That Guy Monday, Oct 30, 23 @ 2:28 pm
My hot take is to let CTU pay them. Especially since CTU will be running their campaigns and giving them marching orders.

Comment by 47th Ward Monday, Oct 30, 23 @ 2:34 pm
No pay

Firstly, why are the Chicago School board members so special that they and only they need compensation? Secondly, this is ripe for abuse, a few years ago IMRF had to really crack down on elected municipal trustees who simply assumed they were entitled to a pension without certifying they actually worked the 600 or 1000 hours annually. Now most municipalities have removed compensation for trustees.

Comment by Donnie Elgin Monday, Oct 30, 23 @ 2:35 pm
Modest stipend. Adding: this should apply to all school boards, not just Chicago.

As someone who served on a school board for 16 years, 12 as president, this is a good idea. Good board members put in a lot of time, and the work can be stressful. Tough decisions often make it to the board and consume a significant amount of time. While volunteering time is a good thing, some level of compensation is appropriate.

Comment by Pot calling kettle Monday, Oct 30, 23 @ 2:37 pm
No pay - this is not supposed to be a full time job. I actually oppose the entire concept of an elected school board so now just adding more costs associated with the salaries and benefits of these board members.

Also re: marginalized communities. My take is this. These Board positions will effectively be making decisions regarding how the school system is run. I understand the need for diversity, but if you have to choose between working your full-time job or being on the school board — it is likely not the best situation for you to be on the school board.

Comment by Hannibal Lecter Monday, Oct 30, 23 @ 2:51 pm
Small fixed amount,not hourly, for every meeting attended. Big enough to encourage attendence but small enough they will want to get the meetings over in a timely manner.

Reimburse reasonable / actual out of pocket expenses, but not for travel to and from any meeting. There is already a Federal tax deduction for officer and board member expenses for charity work, which this basically is.

Comment by RNUG Monday, Oct 30, 23 @ 3:12 pm
I served on a suburban board for 12 years without pay. You do it because you want to see change and be involved. No way should we pay the elected Chicago Board and not the suburban. This is ripe for a political battle between Chicago legislators and rest of state.

Comment by Dupage Dem Monday, Oct 30, 23 @ 3:23 pm
My head is spinning, and checking temperatures today maybe hades has frozen over? I agree with Donnie Elgin. The idea that a CPS board member should be paid when no other boards get paid is offensive. Poverty exists everywhere. Enough with the special CPS rules and money.

The idea is plain absurd.

Comment by JS Mill Monday, Oct 30, 23 @ 3:32 pm
I am not sure what should make this school board different than other school boards.

Out of curiosity, is there any prohibition from people who have been elected to other offices being a Chicago school board member?

Comment by OneMan Monday, Oct 30, 23 @ 3:35 pm
Bad idea- Now it’s become choosing between the school board or taking care of your family. Come on man. How much is the expectation of salary going to be? How often is the school board meeting?

If you have to add funding, I don’t think you need to, set the rate in statute, and you cannot get a pension.

Why does Chicago need to do this? They haven’t even had an election. This will be for a board that’s still half-appointed. Poor districts are able to get good school board members all throughout Illinois without a paycheck. See what you have once you have a full elected board then decide if you need this.

Comment by Frida's boss Monday, Oct 30, 23 @ 3:40 pm
First will be modest salary and reimbursement, then will be health insurance then paid leave then pension and probably a union
And great idea to advance the idea when property assessments coming out

Comment by DuPage Saint Monday, Oct 30, 23 @ 3:48 pm
I do not think that is a best practice to provide salaries to one school district while other districts are not salaried.

Comment by Gravitas Monday, Oct 30, 23 @ 3:54 pm
With half the city budget going to the schools and now an new elected School Board, perhaps it is time to reduce the City Council from 50 to 25 alders.

Comment by More on That Later Monday, Oct 30, 23 @ 3:55 pm
This is an all around bad idea. Don’t they also get additional staff as part of the legislation? Besides the board helps set the policies and the CPS admin implements. The existing CPS board staff and admin team also does the bulk of work requested by board members. With this multi hundred million dollar deficit, this couldn’t be worse timing. And when the deficit gets even bigger because of this, where do we all think they will go for more funding (hello state legislature)? In all seriousness, I still think the mayor should have control of the board and if they screw it up, voters can hold them accountable.

Comment by Shytown Monday, Oct 30, 23 @ 3:57 pm
**My hot take is to let CTU pay them. Especially since CTU will be running their campaigns and giving them marching orders.**

You don’t think that the Big Charter will be running any campaigns and win any races

Comment by JoeMaddon Monday, Oct 30, 23 @ 4:03 pm
**First will be modest salary and reimbursement, then will be health insurance then paid leave then pension and probably a union**

Yea… all those elected officials that have unions, like … oh wait. There aren’t any.

Comment by JoeMaddon Monday, Oct 30, 23 @ 4:04 pm
===You don’t think that the Big Charter will be running any campaigns and win any races===

Run? Yes. Win? Jury is out.

Half the battle will be finding candidates that can win, as a charter backer.

Voted “stipend”, very modest.

Why? The size, nationally, of CPS, this ain’t Oswego 308.

$250 a week.

Comment by Oswego Willy Monday, Oct 30, 23 @ 4:14 pm
===Jury is out.===

I wouldn’t bet too much on that. They’re pretty effective in legislative contests. They’re also cut-throats.

Comment by Rich Miller Monday, Oct 30, 23 @ 4:23 pm
The gig is likely to be time consuming so we would give them a salary. Might help them think objectively too.

Comment by Annonin' Monday, Oct 30, 23 @ 4:23 pm
===I wouldn’t bet too much on that. They’re pretty effective in legislative contests. They’re also cut-throats.===

Too true.

I will enjoy watching these races, the candidates the Charter folks put up, who are the money folks, and truly how vicious it’s gonna get.

Frankly, if Invest in Kids finally tanks, these school board seats are gonna be even huger chips in the game going forward.

Comment by Oswego Willy Monday, Oct 30, 23 @ 4:27 pm
Chicago Police District Council members receive a stipend of $500/mo. Something similar to that would be more than adequate.

Comment by City Zen Monday, Oct 30, 23 @ 4:42 pm
Modest stipend only. If not it will turn in to salary, benefits, staff/office stipend etc…

Comment by CoachK Monday, Oct 30, 23 @ 4:49 pm
Aa many who run and get on school boards, a local school issue is often the impetus. It was in my case back in the ’80’s. Served one term, things were much better so didn’t run again as it took a lot of time from the young family.
Our only compensation was a free dinner ( spouse and alcohol on you ) once a year during the annual School Board state convention held in Chicago each November. As then, it should remain, no pay.

Comment by Product of the '60's Monday, Oct 30, 23 @ 4:57 pm
The new MWRD- full-time staff, full-time salary, full health benefits, pension-it is coming.

Comment by Frida's boss Monday, Oct 30, 23 @ 5:27 pm
===The new MWRD- full-time staff, full-time salary, full health benefits, pension-it is coming.===

Didn’t we go over this last time?

Slow down, Speed Racer. It’s not even a thing, you worry, which is pointed out last time… is just that.

Comment by Oswego Willy Monday, Oct 30, 23 @ 5:36 pm
This is a local control issue. The state shouldn’t tell the city they can’t pay their board, just likely they should tell any other district they can’t pay their boards. Budget should come from Chicago and the amount should be determined by Chicago.

The real debate should be on size. 21 is crazy town. No other district in the state has anything like that! Oh and campaign contributions which should be very small.

Comment by IL Eyes Monday, Oct 30, 23 @ 6:37 pm
===The state shouldn’t tell the city they can’t pay their board, just likely they should tell any other district they can’t pay their boards. Budget should come from Chicago and the amount should be determined by Chicago.===

But…

===Illinois law currently does not permit school board members to be paid a salary or stipend, though it does allow for reimbursement of expenses.===

Likely a safety valve for these boards and cronyism? Maybe, yes, I dunno, but this I do know

State > City

Get the GA to agree. There’s always the “home rule greater that 500,000” gambit.

Comment by Oswego Willy Monday, Oct 30, 23 @ 8:24 pm
I voted for modest stipend. Making the assumption these are part-time positions.

Comment by Levois Monday, Oct 30, 23 @ 9:25 pm