But Dave, what about the concernt that the board told us they were using the mid-range enrollment projections when they were promoting the referendum, when they actually used their own numbers which were far greater than the professional consultant's highest projections?

I believe the true numbers that Dr. Kasarda provided were not made available to the public until recently, so there is now way that even the most vigilant citizen could've known.

Weren't we lied to? How can we trust anything they say going forward?

I think Mr. Erickson has his head in the sand. Our local governments are doing almost as good a job of hiding their wrong doing as the state. Mr. McQuillan and the group he works with presented excellent evidence of this. Just because Mr. Erickson chooses to ignore the facts does not make them less true. I also take great offense to his comment calling the other members of the group "disciples" of Mr. McQuillan. He in no way has tried to deify himself. He is not preaching. He is doing his duty as a resident of Geneva exposing important information to the tax payers that the City, and Mr. Erickson, would prefer they did not know. Obviously there are many who agree and support his efforts.

I think Dave's point here is that TaxFACTS is making a mountain out of a molehill—and that volunteers and school officials sincerely believed the numbers they presented. Both points have merit. That said, there is very little doubt the numbers were inflated to support the referendum passage. What we haven't heard from any school official or administrator is an apology or a mea culpa.

Just a note of clarification: Both Bob McQuillan and I ran for the school board (and we were defeated). We were warning the taxpayers of this school district about the dangers of overspending and debt a long time ago and were ignored. Other candidates who promoted expansion were elected. That was during the "sweetheart" years of a supposed good economy. Well, times have changed. And yes, there ARE bad guys in this enrollment-gate situation. Someone or some group of people purposely misled (lied) about enrollment numbers. It happened. Let's not sugar coat the situation, because the brunt of the debt is bearing down on us.

Dave, your defense is one that won't work, shooting the messenger is wrong. I was at the referendum meeting at the Heartland School and listened to the presentation. I believed the enrollment numbers were true, why would I think the numbers were inflated above an expert's projections? The information passed out stated that Dr. Kasarda verified the numbers.
Dave, one other thing that you forgot to mention but was mentioned at the Geneva School Board meeting on January 8, 2007 and is listed below in the minutes.
BOARD MEMBER COMMENTS AND REPORTS
Burns reported that she and Selakovich will be the Board member liaisons for the referendum. She reported that three couples have come forward to lead the April 2007 Referendum Campaign; David and Glenda Creighton, Dave and Sue Erickson, and Gerry and Cathy Ostergard. You were involved with Citizens for Excellent Schools, you where one of 6 spokespeople. So Dave, where did the inflated numbers come from? I ran for school board in 2005 on the platform that we were spending too much money. I came in 5th of 8 and 4 seats were open. I didn't spend a dollar on signs and other promotional material, I went to forums and told it like it was. People, I guess, weren't ready to listen. Some spent more than $300 on signs. Why would anyone spend a dollar to get elected to a position that pays you nothing. Running for school board isn't a popularity contest, it was an expensive lesson for taxpayers to learn.

Dave
You asked where was I during during the referendum of 2007. According to the minutes of the February 27, 2006 school board meeting, I was there:

Bob McQuillan commented on the following: This is the second most difficult decision the Board will have to make after boundary decisions. He expressed concern about trying to maintain equity between elementary buildings. He felt the Coultrap building is the best school in the community and they are talking about closing and relocating it. He felt we may never solve our needs if we try to reach or have equity between the elementary schools. He appreciated that the Board may hold back on a decision about a new elementary school at Fabyan because he felt we needed to look at the net growth; i.e., new enrollment vs. number of students leaving the district. He wondered if we only needed a new elementary school in LaFox vs. one in LaFox and one on the Fabyan site, however, he felt that the district had obtained the Fabyan site for a very good price. He felt that the closing and relocation of Coultrap would be a tough sell in the community when it is a good elementary school and a new school would cost $19 million. He asked why it was necessary to redo the middle school “turn around” before it was even opened or completed.
Dave, that's were I was. I was questioning the spending habits of the Geneva School District in 2006 and no one listened. I didn't have a "band of disciples," in 2006, I was one voice.

Read the 2006 Master Facilities Plan. Coultrap Elementary was used as the template for all other elementary schools. The master plan compared the facilities that Coultrap had and made sure that every other elementary school in the district had the same facilities. Then they recommended that Coultrap be replaced with the new Williamsburg School. It is all there in the 2006 Plan. Now we told that $10 million would have brought Coultrap up to standards! Isn't it odd that Coultrap had all the things an elementary school needs and yet was vacated. The superintendent is also on record, several times, saying that once Coultrap was vacated the City of Geneva would not allow it to be used as an "attendance center" (school) ever again. That statement is not true. The city has no authority over school buildings and how they are used. Geneva Taxpayers were sold a bill of goods on the 2007 referendum. And no one is providing straight answers.

Also, I have never personally said that board members should be fired. Others have called for their resignation and that is their right. It is interesting that the School Board has never responded to any postings on the Geneva Patch but individual members do make comments on non-school board related things.

Well there you go:

By Dave and Sue Erickson,
Co-chairpersons, Geneva Citizens for Excellent Schools

District needs approval, funding for master plan

There are few communities with the charm and ambiance of Geneva. It is a quality community where people come together to work, raise families or retire. The most important foundation to a strong community begins with strong schools. The good news is that our community and school district can only get so big and the end is in sight. We are land locked on all four sides.

While the city of Geneva is almost built out, the school district is much larger. Randall Road is the center line of Geneva School District 304 with a substantial amount of land still being developed. As that area of our school district grows, so does the need for additional schools.

cont.

During the last boundary change, the school district was criticized for not having a plan for the future of our school district. As a result, the administration, in conjunction with private citizens and other professionals, crafted a master plan for our future. The master plan includes replacing Coultrap with a new school on the Williamsburg site, building a new school on the Fabyan site to accommodate some of the new housing growth to the west, and life health and safety upgrades to most of the other schools in the district.

This thoughtful master plan is structured so as not to increase the tax rate but rather retire some existing debt and extend the length of the debt over a longer period of time so as to allow future homeowners help carry the load.

The school district has done their part by providing the necessary plan; it is now our duty to give them the permission and funding to carry out this thoughtful plan. If we continue to wait, we face higher construction costs, overcrowded schools, and possible redistricting again.

Let’s join together as a community and vote YES for our future

By Dave and Sue Erickson,
Co-chairpersons, Geneva Citizens for Excellent Schools

Aha! Mr. Ericsson's involvement is promoting the ridiculously expensive referendum has been revealed!
Bob and I have both been candidates for the District 304 School Board. I think that gives us some "street cred" on the issues we're discussing here. People need to step up and volunteer to serve our community and look out for the best interests of the taxpayers.

Dave Erickson wrote, "...Bob McQuillan and his band of disciples."

Seriously, Dave? That's how you want to have an intelligent dialogue about this? Looks like if you can't address the issues, the best plan is to trivialize the messenger.
Disappointing.

I think I'm proud to be a Bob disciple....especially since Bob wants truth and fiscal responsibility. Wow, what revolutionary concepts!

Boy, there sure were a lot of vendors contributing big bucks to Geneva Citizens for Excellent Schools according to this article!
http://www.genevataxfacts.org/attachments/article/73/Holinger-Conflict%20of%20Interest.pdf

Dave:
I agree with the first part of your article, that the solution is not to replace the current Board. The second part, as to where were the opponents of the referendum, as well as who fudged the numbers, is irrelevant. Irrelevant because everyone is spending too much time and effort trying to affix blame to someone. I have even seen some posters suggesting legal/criminal actions. Why not shift all this effort and energy to coming up with a plan for the future? I think the Board, as well as concerned taxpayers, should both present alternatives. Specifically, we should see what the cost savings would be if we were to close a school. What would the savings be if class sizes were increased by some level? What items are included in expense budgets that are discretionary? If we had a detailed list of expenditures, I think a dialogue about the necessity of the expenses would be beneficial. Each line item would need to be justified. These discussions would be meaningful to me, not the finger pointing accusations. I respect the school board members, and know most of them to be thoughtful, caring, Geneva parents. Let's change our discussion to be about the future, and be positive.

Mitotero
I could not agree with you more - we need to focus on the future and find ways to provide relief to the taxpayers. I disagree that the past isn't important. It is obvious that the administration and board of education have no intention to provide a logical answer to the simple question: "You said you used series B but in reality you used numbers higher than the experts "absolute maximums." How did that happen? They have not answered that question, instead they have said a variety of things that don't make sense. So, as far as I'm concerned, they have had their opportunity to answer and that boat has sailed.
Now for solutions. To my knowledge, I'm the only person who has publicly announced a plan to control the spending with the 5-5-5 plan. Don't know if it will work but it is a possible solution. The administration and board hasn't even said that they plan to reduce spending. According to the proposed budget for operation/maintenance and transportation, expenses will increase in 2012-13. Someone on the board needs to take control and demand that the administration bring a certain level of cuts (2%, 3%, 5% or whatever). There will be residents that will not agree with any level of cuts, no matter how high property taxes go. They don't understand the role of a public school system. It is not all about your child, it is about providing an education to the entire community based on it's needs. Not your individual needs.