Hooray. investigative journalism isn't dead after all! Good work, Brenda Schory and the KCC!

Agreed--just fess up and we can move on!

Perhaps we can't and we shouldn't try to find out who was responsible for the enrollment figures used in referendum literature, but it is important that someone within the school board/school administration assume responsibility for information released to the public. The public should be able to rely on official information distributed by public agencies, which means someone has to take responsibility for verifying that the information is correct. In volunteer efforts like referendum campaigns, it can be difficult to monitor what everyone is doing, but there has to be some oversight. And corrective action should be taken when mistakes are made. Since no one is certain how these particular figures were released or where they came from, one would assume that the numbers would or should have been questioned at the time they appeared in the literature by people who were aware of the Kasarda report figures. Perhaps they were and perhaps people just assumed they were from other research. Regardless, the school board and school district officials need to be more careful about the information they disseminate and that information needs to be sourced and verified.

Terry, at first I thought like you that we needed to implement policy so that at least an accountable person would sign off on referendum figures in the future. I have since learned that the School Board President at the time DID sign off on the inflated figures so policy didn’t prevent the mistake. The school board denies any knowledge of how the numbers got inflated. The administration provided them the numbers and maybe it is protocol to sign off on and trust the administration? However, that negates the checks and balances that we hope is inherent in our system.

Brenda Schory/Chronicle nailed it and did a fantastic job of investigating!
Some things still don’t sync. It bothers me that Dr. Kent Mutchler in his Board Retreat presentation on March 17, 2012 said “we’ve always been following, since I’ve been here, the level B projections…”. Listen to this video clip at http://genevataxfacts.org/School-Board-Meetings/03-17-2012.html (fast forward to 3hrs 11 minutes or use shortcut to 4.3 Kasarda report calculations). Dr. Mutchler was hired in July 2006 and the referendum was held in April 2007? He had sufficient time to look at the projections during that 9 month period yet he and his team didn’t notice the inflation of the Series B projection of 345 additional students to the advertised 1618 increase?? (The consultant did NOT recommend the Series C projections, he recommended Series B which was an increase of only 345 students over the 5 year period.)
Also, if they found the models used to do their own in-house calculations using the “Bell Telephone Method” and the “Cohort Survival Method” etc, how hard was that to trace who did those “regularly calculated” numbers?

Fess up and move on? Not until you pay some of my 11,400 tax bill!!!!

What does Burns have to do with the school board? Please educate me if I am wrong, but I did not think city politics & board of ed had any crossover.
This whole issue is obviously concerning & messy, but name calling is not going to bring us closer to a solution. Ignorance is what got us here.

Outrageous comment. We pay the Superintendent more than $200,000 per year to prepare items for the school board and they trust him, and vote. The Superintendent polices the school board not the mayor. We have a major law suit with Margaret Pennington going on for years due to the Superintendent's hiring practices. Federal ARRA tax dollars were used to avoid a law suit from her, didn't work and now we have these luxurious schools that weren't needed. Google Dr. Kent Mutchler Ankeny Iowa and see what happened to their school district.

I deleted a slanderous, non sequitur comment from James.

I second Maribeth. Information is key

What I learned from Brenda Schory's piece was that Mike Jacoby (an excellent school person at many levels, not to mention singer) still esposes the theory that over building is ok in the long run (a Keynesian corollary to the dictum: "in the long run we are all dead") . I disagreed with him years ago and I still do. The reason is simple. While the aggregate cost of a gradualistic approach to building may be higher, as he says, that is not the point. This is one of the very few situations where "the monthly payment" should drive the decision of what to buy, not the total purchase price. The reason is that the taxes are paid by different cohorts over the years. I'm willing to help buy schools for the kids almost certain to be here in a 3 year period. But I am not willing to help with schools for kids who arrive 10 years from now. The taxpayers with those kids should help me, but if they don't show up at all I'm "sol"! That is where I find myself now.

Hindsight is oh, so easy. Would that our foresight were so accurate.
I saw this same problem evolve in another district, with a family member on the Education Board, I have a guess as to what may have happened.

Population projections are like predicting a horse race. You have all the facts and figures but how it will actually end up is still anybody's guess.

A possible scenario:

Several years ago we were experiencing tremendous growth. There were several large developments being planned for west of Geneva and more open land available for development. The schools are going to need more room, but how much? Everybody has their own idea.

We have to build but if we make a mistake and don't build enough we will be short on classroom space and either have to build again or go to portable classrooms; neither a good solution.

History shows that all these suburban towns eventually "build out" to their limits. So, let's do it right the first time; build as much as we can possibly use because we will use it eventually. The best "population growth" projections try to see up to 5 years into the future. It takes more time than that to plan, finance, and build a new school. We need to think 20 years out.

So the Board chose that option. They, like almost everyone else in the world, failed to predict the world economic collapse. So now it is easy, in hindsight, to make it look like they did something wrong.

Their only mistake was the same one everyone else made.

That "fess up and move on" comment I posted meant that someone needs to take responsibility. Unfortunately it seems like everyone involved in positions of responsibility on the School Board and in administration is doing the Sgt. Schultz "I know nothing" thing. Of course that is totally I acceptable. Obviously the superintendent is the person in charge and the one paid the big bucks to make the decisions. Dr. Mutchler--it's your turn to be a leader. The Board president at the time also needs to step forward and assume responsibility. Whoever was in charge of the citizen's advocacy group pushing the referendum needs to step forward too. And then what? The board needs to change in the next election. We need to cut expenses and be serious about dealing with the DEBT we're facing. That's moving on, and no Dana--I can't pay your tax bill--mine is high enough!

I meant to say totally UNACCEPTABLE....

My comment is a response to Colin Campbell’s explanation. Colin, your thoughts are logical and kind but the consultant, Dr. Kasarda considered all of this. I would post his logic and methodology for recommending a much more conservative approach, but the file is a pdf file on the district website.
I urge everyone to review this to clear the air about no one having a crystal ball. The document is at https://www.geneva304.org/district_information/documents/Kasarda_CUSD_304_2006.pdf and if you start on page 16 and read down to page 20, you will see the consultant considered all of the development being predicted at the time. He warned against planning so far out and said that “experience shows that, in addition to shifting macroeconomic conditions, problems with water and sewers, road access, terrain, and even local resident resistance or glitches in financing can delay, limit, or stop proposed developments. For this reason, in Series B, I modestly deflated the forecasted new housing numbers for the next six years and spread them out in later years, some of which could be beyond 2016.
We paid this gentleman for his advice in 2005, 2006 and 2011. Dr. Mutchler is quoted as saying he was always following Series B. So, it wasn’t just a typo or a little mistake. If we had followed the consultant’s advice, we wouldn’t be where we are now. We did have a crystal ball, but maybe as Rodney Nelson suggested, someone thought they had a better ball.

A couple of things to keep in mind
1. The Settlement of LaFox was not included in this referendum, a elementary school was planned for that subdivision and was to be part of the phase II building plan in 2009. Kasarda INCLUDED Settlement of LaFox in his projections.
2. In late 2006, Kasarda updated the 2005 report and Series C enrollments actually decreased. Kasarda's Series C numbers included projections provided by local developers based on their plan plus a 20% override.
3. No one builds for 20 years into the future. As Mr. Nelson stated, you build so that the new residents share in the building costs. Today's portable classrooms are very nice for a short period.
4. Board meeting minutes do not mention any "model" that the district has used successfully for many years. Where is the information inputted and the outputted from the model? Dr. Kasarda's report is over 40 pages. Where is the district's? They claim they ran their model first and then hired Kasarda to verify their results.
5. Someone had to provide someone else with the numbers that the school used. There are at least two people who know what happened. This issue isn't so much about who provided the numbers and said Dr. Kasarda verified them. It's now about the fact that no one knows anything and a 79 million dollar referendum was passed.
Yes, no one could predict the seriousness of the market drop but someone did decide that an expert's projections were completely wrong by as much as 50%.

Rod,
This is a little aside to the issue of our school board and the enrollmemt figures, but why are you willing to help buy schools for kids who will need them in 3 years but not in 10? If you had said you don't want to buy schools that are not needed, I would get it, but that isn't what you said. Actually come to think of it, what I think your tax dollars are paying for is bonds issued to build schools that somebody else decided we would need 10 years ago.

I don't really know why people are so surprised that the school district inflated the numbers for the referendum. They've been manipulating numbers to serve their own purposes for years. And they weren't just doing in with projected growth out west. I can remember a PTO meeting many years ago were projected enrollment numbers for Harrison Street school were presented and they were laughable they were so inflated. Also, look at the way the capacities for each school has changed over the years. It's amazing how a building can stay the same size but the capacity can go up or down to suit the districts purposes. Anybody who has been paying attention to school district politics for any period of time and has any amount of critical thinking skills should not be surprised that the district manipulates numbers. At least now we've got some people actually speaking up.

It's apparent this witch hunt has nothing to do with any search for truth and justice but, instead, a disguised effort to take over the school board so the angry taxfax folks can slash and burn our award- winning, internationally- recognized school system in order to satisfy their ideological fanaticism.

Based on comments made at school board meetings, at their little church hall forum, and on these pages, this group wants faculty, administrative, and support staff slashed. They want to eliminate all courses not considered core or the 3 Rs. They want to jack up the participation and lab fees for students and student/ athletes which would force kids from lower- income families to sit out. They want cheap, inexperience, and even unqualified and volunteer labor for all school-related positions.

In other words, they want poor-to-mediocre schools because they don't want to have to pay taxes for an above-average educational system. It's true that money alone doesn't guarantee good schools, however Geneva public schools have a long reputation of being a good value to residents and homeowners whether or not they have children.

The future of our schools should be guided by elected representatives, not bullies with microphones.

I second Kate's powerful speech. The more I read on Patch, the more many, not all, but many, of the TaxFACTS group sounds like bullies.

Perhaps next time the Geneva school board, library or any other taxing body asks for a tax increase this will force them to be up front and honest about why they need the increase.

I think we're at the point where we are not going to find out how the numbers were inflated nor will we find out the person or persons responsible. Our time may be better spent finding and supporting the people we feel have the tax payers interest at heart, by reducing spending and taking on the Teachers Union and School Administration. We need a new perspective on the board, and a different approach to the money problem.The earlier we start looking to replace the four upcoming open board positions the better chance we have of turning this tax nightmare around.

Add to the above list of actions some are proposing to the Geneva Public School District the closing of schools. In his letter in today's Republican, Robert Hohmann suggests redeploying the best teachers "to other schools that absorbed the students from the closed facilities". I am sure all of these ideas will be in full public view come election time.for all parents and residents to see and judge.

Settle down Peter.Please Reread my statement . When I referred to the union and administration I referred to the new Board in the fall.I also stated we are wasting time trying to place blame for the inflated numbers.

That was an honest question, actually. Thank you for your reply. So, I'm confused by something you're saying though. Aren't the union and the school board different groups? I guess I don't understand why you paired them together.

"geneva girl", I have a policy not to engage with morons who make false allegations or personal attacks while wearing a mask of anonymity. I stand by my statement. Watch the tape.

Lance, I have examples of my own that paint a different picture. The schools and teachers are by no means perfect. But the beauty of this district that sets it apart from most is the partnership between the schools, the parents, and the community. Parents or guardians should always be a child's primary teacher and fiercest advocate. I encourage people to get a close look at our schools today before they throw stones. What I was doing in the church hallway during the forum was inviting Bruno The Outsider to actually visit the schools and administrators he is attacking from afar.

As far as people with fixed incomes, believe me, I sympathize. First of all, their property is holding its value better than in most areas and better than if we take a wrecking ball to our school system out of anger and fear. Secondly, the state is not paying its bills and transferring that burden to local entities. Illinois needs reforms like Wisconsin's which eased financial burdens on school districts. I a conservative Republican. I believe in low taxes but I dont believe in bullying, witch hunts, and misplaced blame.

There is no evidence the board lied to get its way. Even if a culprit was found, what then? A hanging in the public square? This is all poison and Geneva deserves better.

I’m sorry to hear all the disagreements; I think Geneva is just looking for clarity. If this helps, I stumbled across some old Daily Herald articles that may provide clarity. There are quite a few of them out there regarding the referendum, and enrollment figures/targets. It seems like Rebecca Allard was heavily involved in projections. My guess is the administration needs to sign off on stuff like that. Just search by Geneva referendum or enrollment. Happy reading!

http://www.redorbit.com/news/education/1094304/geneva_school_enrollment_right_on_target/
http://www.redorbit.com/news/education/235110/geneva_schools_grow_by_103/
http://www.redorbit.com/news/education/640852/geneva_schools_review_enrollment/
http://www.redorbit.com/news/education/652918/geneva_school_officials_make_pitch_for_more_space/
http://www.redorbit.com/news/education/909843/full_speed_ahead_in_geneva_dist_304/

Karen Moore, that was excellent research -- great independent fact searching! According to the Chronicle story, Rebecca Allard, who now works for Park Ridge Community Consolidated District 64 was singled out by Dr. Kasarda for recognition in his November 2006 report as she "assembled much of the information upon which this demographic study is based". Ms. Allard said "she could not say who approved the decisions to put enrollment numbers higher than the Kasarda report in the referendum materials....I absolutely deny ever being a part of falsifying numbers." Even though the 2006 Kasarda report RECOMMENDED following the B projection of a total of 345 students for the next 5 years, she told Mill creek residents in September 2006 that "“If we don’t build this school what we will see is increased class sizes throughout the district”? So she was following her own high numbers, provided them to Dr. Kasarda, then "someone" decided to ignore Dr. Kasarda's recommendation and use high numbers for the April 2007 referendum? The articles are interesting as they reflect the "hype" that accompanied this referendum. I urge everyone to read page 18-20 of Dr. Kasarda's report at the link I have posted. We can't undo this but next, is how to fix this? Can the administration make the necessary cuts to bring tax relief? Instruction costs have increased 20% in the same timeframe, can we freeze them for a while? The School Board directs the administration; will they insist on reductions?

We taxpayers, voters and non voters alike have some part on this mess as well. All parents, and most Geneva taxpayers, wanted the best school experience possible for Geneva kids. We elected people who had big egos but no financial (BOTTOM LINE) skills. And boy did they build. They built the most expensive schools possible and staffed them with overabundant and overpaid administration. The fact that the growth forecasts were overzealous is not the big problem in the long run. At some point the Geneva schools will probably be right-sized. The biggie was that the cost per square foot spent was outrageously high. And, the overage of administration staff was icing on the cake.

We need a new slate of School Directors, we sure do. And we taxpayers need to understand that a highly effective school system does not mean we have the most costly system. Geneva's school facility cost per student, and their annual operating cost per student are way above national averages. We need goals to increase school effectiveness, while at the same time, decreasing building costs and annual operating costs. Finally, we do not want a School Board that is shrouded in secrecy, and we taxpayers need to "peal the onion" until every school cost and issue is understood by all.

Dwight,
Could you provide the source or possibly a link to where you found the information that Geneva's "school facility cost per student" and "operating cost per student" are "way above" the national averages? I know the state issues Illinois School Report Cards https://www.geneva304.org/Report_cards/documents/2011GHSReportCard.pdf which shows "Instructional Expenditure per Student" and "Operating Expenditure per Student" and compares them with the state averages. Neither of which are "way above" even the state averages. Instructional Expenditure per student is actually below the state average. So I am curious where you find national averages and do they take into account the cost of living differences between the different regions of the country. For example the cost of living in California is significantly higher than a North Carolina and others. Would love to find out your source, that would be very informative.

It's nice to see a few new names speaking up. I my opinion there probably is no answer that the school board can give that will satisfy the taxFacts folks. As a few of the core group have posted that nothing short of a mass resignation would suffice. It's not about answers it's about getting control of the board.

But I have to say that in my opinion the board has completely mishandled this issue. I think they believe it will go away. But the taxFacts folks have made it clear that they are not going to let this die. Many of them are retired and have a lot of time that they can spend on posting and going to the meetings. This administration and board needs to hire a consultant or speak with some attorneys to figure out how they can manage thos particular issue and the ongoing barrage which is and will continue from the taxfacters.

After this issue there will be others that they will generate. Coultrapgate is coming, ITgate is around the corner and the pending budgetgate is sure to generate attention. This has been going on for years. It's hateful and ugly and I hope it stops. District 304 is so important to our community for a number of reasons. It's a shame. :(

GenevaTaxFACTS isn't responsible for the problems over the enrollment numbers, the 2006-07 board members and administration are the responsible parties. Because of statements made at the March 17, 2012 retreat meeting by the superintendent and a former board president, I asked a very simple question. The videotape of the meeting shows the superintendent saying that they have always used Dr. Kasarda's series B projections and then the board member states that she is happy to hear they didn't use the most aggressive numbers. Listen to the tape by going to section 4.3; which is 3 hours and 12 minutes into the meeting http://www.genevataxfacts.org/School-Board-Meetings/03-17-2012.html
The board & administration owns this problem and I'm tired of GenevaTaxFACTS being blamed for "hateful and ugly" actions. The GenevaTaxFACTS group is different than the school board, we are a group of individuals that speak for ourselves. I don't control anything that any other taxpayer says, nor should I. The board acts, votes and speaks as a group and then complain that they are being personally attacked. That is not true. The board, as a group, is being asked questions on their actions, which every Geneva resident has the right to do. No individual school board member is being attacked and for them to claim so only takes the focus off the real issue - they have not answered the original question of why the numbers they claimed where Dr. Kasarda's series B were not. Listen to the tape.

This is not about TaxFacts. It's not about the school board. It's not about the quality or value of our schools. It is about a discrepancy between enrollment figures provided by a consultant and enrollment figures used to support the referendum. We have no definitive answer for how the referendum figures were chosen. Nor do we have any confirmation as whether or not the figures were intended to be used or if they were considered accurate by an authoritative source. The problem is that there is no one to stand by the figures used. There should be public records, minutes of meetings, resolutions, something that provides some history of how this decision was made and approved. If we cannot accurately track the decision-making process then we are in danger of losing control of it and we will be stuck with decisions no one can explain, much less defend. The board needs to review the situation and define policy that will prevent similar problems from occurring in the future.

Maybe the biggest lesson to come out of this is to only accept advice / recommendations from professional experts who are paid (and can the be held accountable) for their services. Had that happened, there would be a clear record and no "gotcha" error that fuels accusations of "fraud" and consipiracy.

How ironic is it that the Tax"FACTS" group has suggested on many occasions that there should be more volunteer advisory groups that could create similar situations?

Gentlemen, I clearly stated that I believe the board and administration has mishandled this issue. They have been under seige now for at least two years or so. I went back in the minutes to 2010 and it was getting so bad that then president of the board stilth had to warn the audience that heckling and cat calling was not going to be tolerated.

I think they have had it. They have been beat down meeting after meeting after meeting. And we only see a small part of it. We don't get the phone calls, emails, etc... We don't sit through the meetings and take the beatings. It's really sad because these are good people. They are socially and fiscally responsible. They are budget hawks and as a registered democrat I never thought I'd be rooting for a group of staunch conservatives. But there you have it.

Wheather it's intentional or not the result has and will be diminished participation from the community as a whole. Three and possible four of the members who's terms are coming up in April will not ibe running for the board. They have had it! We will be lucky if we have a choice come April. But rest assured taxFacts will have candidates at the ready. It's no secret.

This administration and board desperately need professional consultation. Very few public bodies will or have had to deal with this type of assault and barrage. It's not going to stop and they need to get there message out.

Out of characters,

John Rice

Furthermore, Board Pres Gross needs to get control of his meeting. there is no reason to allow your board to be brow beat into submission. I realize he's trying to play nice and tries to make a light joke here and there but I think he needs to start using that gavel and taking control. My wife commented that there was no way Mayor Burns would tolerate what's been going on. Even Mr. McQuillan takes full control of his meetings.

There is a code of conduct that is supposed to be followed at these meetings. If that code is breached then the individual should be asked to excuse him or her self from the meeting. If they don't comply then the police should be called to assist. No more outburst to get a spine and no more reading open letters attacking a specific group or individual.

Ok that's enough for the today. I'm going to enjoy my fathers day with my son and wife.

Happy fathers day to all you Dads. Happy grilling :)

Rice

John, Thank you for your post. We lived in a community in NY that faced a similar situation. My wife and I served on the school district "Facilities Utilization Committee" and my wife on the Board of Ed.

Unless you have been there you have no idea how complex and difficult it can be to plan for future growth. Projections from experts, cities, developers, and on and on are as contradictory and ephemeral as next year's stock market predictions. We spent years at it and just as well have made our decision by throwing a dart at the chart.

There was a self appointed group called TAX-PAC that scrutinized every Board decision, criticized every move, and always had the "right answer"----in hindsight.

I agree that the Geneva Board of Ed has not handled the explanation and public fallout of this situation well. My wife can tell you from experience that when a Board is under this kind of attack being absolutely open can get you into much more trouble than being silent.

In Illinois our volunteer Board members can be sued as individuals for decisions that they make and any member of the public can bring a civil suit for any reason that they wish, valid or not. The cost of defending oneself is the same, guilty or innocent. As any attorney will tell you, when faced with that prospect, keep your mouth shut!

We are facing a tax problem. Attacking the Board will make it worse. Working together in the spirit of a community willing to make compromises might help.

Thanks Colin nice To see your post's. You come across as very reasoned and sensible. Your experience from out east gives a bit of insight. Thank you for sharing.

To me it's all such a non issue. Coultrap needed to be replaced its a mess and was probably way over due. Without Fabyan our elementary schools would be bursting at the seams. Some of the neighborhoods out west are not yet fully developed. Shodeen is starting up development on one of his unfinished projects. I don't know how it will impact enrollment but my guess is that in a few years we're going to be very happy that the referendum passed and we built and upgraded our schools.

All of this is about nothing more than finding sticks to beat this board. It's about grinding an ax with a democratically elected board. The core of taxFacts group Isn't even on speaking terms with most of the current board. It appears from the forum that taxFacts is getting counsel and guidance from the heartland institute. The heartland institute have school districts squarely in there sights.

Dist 304 hire some professional help so that you can address these issues.

Rice

John wants the board and administration to hire professional help. Is that in addition to PMA & William Blair Company that already are hired? Those two "consultants" are part of the reason we have non-callable 9% bonds. Isn't the board supposed to represent the taxpayers? Shouldn't we be able to answer questions?
The solution is that someone on the current board needs to stand up and say no to the administration when they propose more increases in next year's budget.
As to who advises GenevaTaxFACTS, Heartland institute has never contacted us nor have we contacted them. I didn't met the guest speaker at our town hall meeting until that night. I knew that he works with "For the Good of Illinois" and I support that group's efforts. I didn't know what he was going to say other than it was going to be about what is happening across the state.
As to my relationship with current board members, how do you know who I do and do not speak to? Did you know that I sent an e-mail to the board president the day after the town hall thanking him for attending and offering to sit down and discuss anything that was discussed? Communication goes two ways, they have my contact information.
John, it might be best if you listen to both sides of a situation before you make assumptions and then share that as truth. No individual or group is under siege. Also, the majority of GenevaTaxFACTS people are not retired. We couldn't if we wanted to, we have high property taxes to pay.

Actually the idea of the having all of the current school board resign because of false information being given several years ago to get something approved at great taxpayer expense is intriguing. Could we also apply this same concept to Congress for approving the multi-trillion dollar Iraq War under the premise that Iraq had "weapons of mass destruction"? The possibilities are endless.

It will also identify the system is broken. If the Board gets away with not being held accountable for their behavior why should they implement any policies or voting for that matter? Why have them? Is it not their purpose to be the utilization and checks and balances for us taxpayers so this type of incidence does not occur? Furthermore, is it not their responsiblity to disclose all evidence to the public specifically when opting for a referendum? Perhaps you are missing the point here. They wanted to pass this referendum no matter what or how the transaction came about. They had the PACs behind them to benefit from it.