Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: Misinformation, misreading and misdirection
Next Post: Vaccinate these kids
Posted in:
* Thankfully, the Senate will try to work something out with the incoming mayor instead of just blindly zooming a bill through the chamber like the House did yesterday…
The Illinois House of Representatives voted overwhelmingly on Thursday to make Chicago’s school board elected rather than appointed by the mayor, approving a bill that Chicago Mayor-elect Lori Lightfoot told WBEZ would be a “recipe for disaster and chaos.” […]
The vote comes just two days after Lightfoot won the election to be Chicago’s new mayor. Lightfoot campaigned in support of moving to an elected school board, but told WBEZ last week that the bill, which calls for 20 board members plus a board president, would create a school board that’s far too big.
“Having a school board of 21 people is completely unwieldy,” Lightfoot said in an interview. “That will be a recipe for disaster and chaos. It’s way too large.”
* The Tribune pressed her a bit on the topic during an in-depth interview…
Q: A bill allowing a Chicago elected school board passed the House today (Thursday). Under that version, I think there’s 20 members and the legislature gets to draw the districts. Do you have thoughts on who should draw the boundaries, how many members there should be?
A: Well, I think there are some fundamentals that still haven’t been addressed, and I’m not fond of the bill in its current iteration at all. I don’t think you can have a number of people on a board that’s completely unwieldy and are not going to be able to do their business. We haven’t answered the questions of, “OK, if we have an elected school board, what’s the selection process?” And it can’t just be this is like aldermanic races. That’s not going to work.
I want actual parents to be able to sit on that board, and if we treat it like another political body, that’s not going to happen and that to me is absolutely untenable and a nonstarter. What the level of experience is that people have to bring, and the kinds of experiences also make a difference to me. I favor a situation where we have people who have come through the (Local School Council) process, because they have skin in the game. That means they’re probably a parent. They’ve been able to make and meet budgets. They have some expertise in doing hiring. I think all those things are very valuable skills that will help inform a school board. So obviously, Mr. (state Rep. Robert) Martwick did not confer with me about the content of his legislation. That to me is a nonstarter.
Q: So, maybe you’ve had to serve for a certain number of years on a Local School Council before you can run for school board?
A: Yeah. I want to spend a little more time with it, but that makes more sense to me than just throwing it open, because then it just becomes another political monster. We’re going to replace one broken system with another broken system, and that’s not going to build confidence in anyone. I don’t favor this bill at all. I don’t favor it.
Lots of interesting stuff in that interview, by the way. Click here to read the whole thing.
posted by Rich Miller
Friday, Apr 5, 19 @ 12:28 pm
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: Misinformation, misreading and misdirection
Next Post: Vaccinate these kids
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
The obvious solution: appoint a board to supervise the board. It’s boards all the way up. /s
Comment by Ed Higher Friday, Apr 5, 19 @ 12:35 pm
She wants insiders to run the game still. She does a good job of prettying the comments up, but she wants to circumvent her constituents, the board’s constituents, by controlling who they are allowed to vote for.
If you want to have more say on how many districts there are, or take away the map from the GA and give it to the City Council, those both make sense to me, but being an elitist and saying “Only special people should be allowed to run” is not a step in the right direction.
Comment by Perrid Friday, Apr 5, 19 @ 12:38 pm
Susan Garrett always wanted members of the transportation boards to have experience in transportation. That was alawys amazing to me, because if someone had experience in transportation they probably would have a conflict of interest.
Same applies to other governing boards. If you’re going to have an elected school board it needs to be open to all candidates. Otherwise you need to have an appointed school board and the Mayor can appoint people who have served on local school councils.
Comment by Just Me 2 Friday, Apr 5, 19 @ 12:42 pm
I agree with her on a 21 person Board. That is far too many even for a district the size of CPS. Just too many.
=I want actual parents to be able to sit on that board, and if we treat it like another political body, that’s not going to happen and that to me is absolutely untenable and a nonstarter. =
She wants to eat her cake and have it. Tough luck my friend, this whole qualifications stuff is malarkey. Whom ever gets elected is who runs the district. EVERYONE else deals with that. It will be out of your hands.
Comment by JS Mill Friday, Apr 5, 19 @ 12:43 pm
Mayor-elect Lightfoot’s points make sense. Politically, she is probably vulnerable to an attack from the left if she puts a lot of conditions on the elected part of the school board.
Comment by Three Dimensional Checkers Friday, Apr 5, 19 @ 12:50 pm
It appears my vote for Lightfoot was good. She clearly is a smart woman. 21 members is absolutely ridiculous.
Comment by Anonymous Friday, Apr 5, 19 @ 12:57 pm
21 members does look like it would be unwieldy. From what I’ve seen more than 7 to 10 gets to be unwieldy.
It would also make some sense to have things tied to the wards to a degree, like 5 members elected from districts consisting of sets of 10 wards. Maybe add a couple/few more (elected at large, or appointed in some fashion) to round it out to 7 or 9 (9 should be a max number).
Comment by titan Friday, Apr 5, 19 @ 1:02 pm
The number of members is a sideshow. If a CPS Board was forced to stay within a certain budget set by the city, fine - the sure-to-be CTU-controlled board would likely show its true colors, but then the board would have some accountability. Without that restraint, the Board would buy itself some time by selling off CPS assets (which is not a bad thing per-se) and then would go on a spending spree, telling the city to just make “rich people” pay for it.
Comment by lake county democrat Friday, Apr 5, 19 @ 1:08 pm
===I don’t favor this bill at all. I don’t favor it.===
Martwick is hilariously, and presumably unintentionally, making Lightfoot look better and better. He’s the perfect foil for her.
Comment by 47th Ward Friday, Apr 5, 19 @ 1:09 pm
LAUSD has a larger enrollment and 7 districts.
==Can’t wait for the teachers union to control the school board.==
Might be good for them to see the other side of the ledger and live within the confines of a budget. But like every other school board, they’ll blame the state.
Comment by City Zen Friday, Apr 5, 19 @ 1:26 pm
Even if the elected board is limited to parent, teacher or principal candidates with LSC experience, the CTU can still select and fund candidates who are sympathetic to the CTU’s concerns. I don’t see how you legislate an elected board that has to think a certain way.
The CTU wants more than just wages, pensions and work rules-they want more input on how the schools are run. After all, unlike appointed board members, the teachers are in the classrooms every day.
The CTU’s preferred candidates will still have to win elections. And I expect there will be
candidates who will oppose the CTU’s preferences, and that PACs will form to fund those candidates. There will probably be a lot of money going into these elections.
Comment by James Friday, Apr 5, 19 @ 1:35 pm
Many districts operate at a surplus. Sorry if that messes up your narrative of “every”.
Comment by JS Mill Friday, Apr 5, 19 @ 1:49 pm
If there’s an elected School board doesn’t that take all the headaches of managing the CPS off the mayor’s plate? Wouldn’t that all fall to the elected board like every other district. Whomever was elected board president could have a thought job than the mayor.
Comment by LTSW Friday, Apr 5, 19 @ 1:50 pm
Tougher not thought, sorry
Comment by LTSW Friday, Apr 5, 19 @ 1:51 pm
She’s not suggesting “special people” serve on the board, she’s suggesting candidates for any elected school board should be members of their Local School Council in order to be eligible to run. LSC members are not elites…they’re elected by fellow parents and voters who live in the surrounding neighborhood. It’s a decidedly unglamorous job (believe me, I served on one.)
Comment by BC Friday, Apr 5, 19 @ 2:00 pm
Get elected to get elected? Not sure how legal that might be….
Basically she wants to square the circle. If you have an elected board, you have politics.
Other districts max their tax take during assessments. Why would CPS be any different?
Comment by Fav Human Friday, Apr 5, 19 @ 2:28 pm
If 21 is unwieldy for CPS, what does that make the Chicago City Council, which serves the exact same borders?
How many flip flops is this for Lori so far?
Comment by Precinct Captain Friday, Apr 5, 19 @ 3:07 pm
===How many flip flops is this for Lori so far?===
Zero?
Comment by 47th Ward Friday, Apr 5, 19 @ 3:12 pm
21 members is out of control. Kudos to Lori for saying it out loud.
I’m guessing Martwick is regretting that presser crash in February right about now.
Comment by Shytown Friday, Apr 5, 19 @ 3:28 pm
21….nope…she’s right. too many people. circus.
Comment by Amalia Friday, Apr 5, 19 @ 3:44 pm
21 people representing a most diverse population would have difficulty coming to consensus on any school or budgetary issue. It would be “ Everyman for himself and nothing for the schools”
Comment by Flyer Friday, Apr 5, 19 @ 3:56 pm