Richard Dreyfus talks about what the loss of schools and teachers who bring knowledge of our history to our future voting citizens means for our nation.
Richard Dreyfus talks about what the loss of schools and teachers who bring knowledge of our history to our future voting citizens means for our nation.
“As required, Teachers’ Retirement System used Illinois math to calculate the state’s contribution for fiscal year 2018 and came up with $4.56B. Using actuarial math, TRS also calculated that the state’s “full funding” contribution should be $6.88B.
This legal sleight-of-hand has been going on for 78 years — and counting. The deliberate and chronic underfunding of TRS since 1939 is the major reason the system carries an unfunded liability of $71B — one of the largest debts of its kind in the country.
Consistent underfunding is the reason that 80% of this year’s $4.5B contribution to TRS, or $3.7B, constitutes a payment on the unfunded liability. That eclipses the actual cost of teacher pensions for the year: $923M.”
Although the agreement described below might sound like a welcome relief to teachers, Gov. Rauner’s Turnaround Agenda pushed a local property tax freeze (pg. 9) and municipal bankruptcy (pg. 12) that may allow local municipalities to declare bankruptcy.
Currently, teachers’ pensions are protected at the State level:
For the foregoing reasons, the judgment of the circuit court declaring Public Act 98-599 to be unconstitutional and permanently enjoining its enforcement is affirmed.
The question is whether or not pensions funded locally will continue to be protected under state law if moved to the local level. Current legislation suggests they may not.
HB0298 will amend the Illinois Municipal Code. In provisions concerning finance, it provides that a municipality may file a petition and exercise powers pursuant to applicable federal bankruptcy law. Effective immediately.
The last action taken on this bill took place 1/10/2017 in the House: Session Sine Die.
HB2575 was introduced in the House on 2/8/2017.
HB2575 creates the Illinois Local Government Protection Authority Act. Provides findings of the General Assembly and establishes the Authority with the purpose of achieving solutions to financial difficulties faced by units of local government. Defines terms and creates a board of trustees. Sets forth the Authority’s duties and powers, including the ability to obtain the unit of local government’s records and to recommend revenue increases. Provides for a petition process, whereby certain entities may petition the Authority to review a unit of local government. Sets forth participation requirements.
Section 35 – Powers
The Authority shall have the power to:
m) Consider and make recommendations to the General
Assembly legislation regarding an economic safety net whereby
the State shall provide a set of fallback post-employment
benefits for employees in the event that a public employer has
not resolved the underfunding of its pension plan and
thereafter is unable to pay its retirees. The program shall use
the federal Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation* as its model.
Contractual benefits would have to meet affordability tests
prior to being approved for safety net funding. The outcomes of
the affordability tests may result in smaller benefit payments
that were initially promised to the employees by the defaulted
Section 40 – Petition and criteria
The Authority may exercise its authority over a unit of local government
under this Act, if the Authority is petitioned and the Authority
accepts the participation of the unit of local government
identified in the petition. The Authority has absolute
discretion regarding acceptance or denial of any petition and
participation of a unit of local government. The Authority
shall create rules regarding the petition, procedure, format,
and required documentation.
a) The following parties may petition the Authority:
(1) the Illinois Comptroller;
(2) a unit of local government;
(3) a Significant Past Due Creditor; or
(4) a pension fund.
If the Illinois Comptroller, a Significant Past Due
Creditor, or a pension fund petitions the Authority, their
petition shall include documentation of the unit of local
government’s approval of the petition and participation.
* The Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation (PBGC) takes over pension plans. The termination of a defined-benefit plan is initiated by the employer, either by a standard termination or a distress termination.
Under a standard termination, the employer must demonstrate to the PBGC that there are sufficient assets under the plan to pay all benefits owed under the plan to participants.
A distress termination occurs when the plan is being terminated but there are not sufficient assets under the plan to pay benefits.
Generally, the PBGC steps in to take over the administration of a pension plan when either a distressed termination is initiated by the plan sponsor or the PBGC determines that a plan will be unable to meet its obligations and mandates a takeover.
Distress terminations generally occur in conjunction with bankruptcy, but in most cases, a PBGC mandated takeover is the method by which the entity becomes responsible for a plan.
Post By: Illinois Policy Institute
RE: Illinois Policy Institute
• Meet the Little-Known Network Pushing Ideas for Kochs, ALEC
• Illinois Policy Institute (IPI)
• State Policy Network (SPN)
• Conservative Transparency
In the midst of Illinois’ pension crisis, River Forest District 90 has agreed to pay 100 percent of teacher contributions to the Teachers’ Retirement System – and it did so secretly
In Illinois, negotiations between local governments and government workers are done in secret. That’s a problem for taxpayers.
It means residents can be saddled with expensive contract provisions and can’t react until the contract is a done deal. And by then, it’s too late.
The latest example: River Forest District 90. That school district just renewed an agreement to pay 100 percent of teachers’ pensions contributions – the share the teachers are supposed to pay – as an additional benefit.
By law, teachers are obligated to pay 9 percent of their salary into the retirement system. But half of Illinois’ school districts take on that obligation themselves. Instead of having teachers contribute to their own retirement, the school districts agree to pay it for them.
Of course, forcing taxpayers to pay 100 percent of the contribution – while teachers themselves contribute nothing toward their retirement – isn’t the only issue.
A big problem is the secrecy of District 90’s negotiations. Bargaining between the union and school district happened away from public scrutiny. And that means taxpayers couldn’t find out the details of the deal until it was too late.
What’s more, the contract was negotiated under the leadership of School Board President Ralph Martire – whose own organization, the Center for Tax and Budget Accountability, or CTBA, is heavily funded by government unions.
That means taxpayers in District 90 were essentially left without true representation in the negotiation process.
As many know, raising public awareness regarding the hazards of transporting crude oil by rail was one of my top priorities as 2016 Candidate for Lake County Board, District 18. Although this issue is not related to my current campaign, it is still an issue for which I’m greatly concerned. Trains carrying highly explosive and toxic Bakken crude oil travel through densely populated areas, including our schools, and threaten the lives of well over 25 million Americans. Lake County Board Chair Aaron Lawlor, to date, has still not publicly addressed emergency preparedness in Lake County specific to this transport.
PHMSA, Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration, announced that it will be seeking comment on vapor pressure thresholds of crude oil, and will evaluate the potential safety benefits of utilizing a threshold in regulating the transport of crude oil and other dangerous materials.
The petition directly addresses the fact that despite recent derailments of trains carrying crude that have resulted in extraordinary explosions and uncontrollable fires, there is no federal limit on the vapor pressure of crude oil transported by rail. This means that we have an opportunity to push for DEGASIFICATION (Stabilization) of the Bakken Oil, which would lower the vapor pressure of the oil, and make it less flammable.
The comment period ends at 11:59p, (ET), May 19th, 2017. Comments can be simple or detailed – all are beneficial. You simply need to fill in your contact information, and then you may copy some of the talking points below and paste them into this link and send.
At the present, explosive Bakken Oil trains jeopardize 25 million people across the country living within the Oil Train Blast Zone. There are densely populated areas, including our schools, throughout Chicagoland and its collar counties that are within feet from highly flammable train routes.
Degasifying or stabilizing crude oil is a process where the explosive hydrocarbon gases, (Butane, Propane, Ethane, and Methane), are removed from the oil and stored on site, then these gases can be sold to local markets, and the oil can be transported by rail or pipeline more safely. Degasification lowers the Vapor Pressure (PSI) of the crude oil.
North Dakota has mandated a Vapor PSI for Bakken oil of fewer than 13.7 lbs. It is generally reported as measuring between 11 and 12 lbs.
• Texas Eagle Ford frack oil has a Vapor PSI of 8 lbs.
• West Texas oil comes in at 3-4 lbs. PSI
• Gulf of Mexico oil is 3.33 lbs. PSI
• Bakken crude oil transported on the train that destroyed Lac Megantic, Quebec was measured at 10 PSI.
Our National Vapor Standard should fall between 4-8 lbs., following the lead of Texas since they have the longest history of degasifying oil, and their oil trains have not been exploding into uncontrolled fires upon derailment.
“Stabilization / Degasification” could make Bakken crude safer to transport, (vapor pressure is lowered from 13.7 psi to 6-8 psi with a 74 F flashpoint). Although there are no studies to support its effectiveness in rail transport safety, Texas has a long history of the use of mandated degasification/stabilization of crude oil for both rail transport and pipeline transport. Therefore, we can defer to their experience in this field.
Texas is the second largest area in the US with shale formations that are being fractured using horizontal drilling technology. There have been (zero) explosive fires after train derailments of Texas frack oil (8 PSI), whereas there have been dozens of explosive fires after derailments of trains carrying ND frack oil (13 PSI). Saudi Arabia has also been routinely stabilizing their oil before transport, for decades. The technology necessary for degasification/stabilization is well known and available in ND.
The PHMSA notice of rule-making follows a petition last year from New York’s Attorney General to implement nationwide a Reid Vapor Pressure of less than 9 PSI for crude oil transport by rail.
Politics are in play in the US, steering the Federal Government towards allowing more pipelines and away from oil by rail (VIEW: Desmog Blog article, Why Is the Exxon-Funded Heartland Institute Now Calling Oil Trains “Dangerously Flammable”?) – but pipelines should not be carrying explosive crude either. Texas mandated the degasification of its oil primarily for pipeline safety.
Please implement nationwide a Reid Vapor Pressure of 4-8 PSI for crude oil transport by rail and pipeline, which complies with the NY AG request of less than 9 PSI. Chicagoland and its collar counties have a vested interest in trying to decrease the dangers of these Bakken Oil trains to our densely populated communities!
Articles and Resources:
Federal agency looking at pressure limits on Bakken oil trains:
RON SCHALOW: Exploding Trains Aren’t Funny
Why Is the Exxon-Funded Heartland Institute Now Calling Oil Trains “Dangerously Flammable”?
I noticed many missing faces in my classes Thursday, Feb. 16. When I asked my students during the first period where the rest of my class was, they told me, “Today is ‘A Day Without Immigrants.'”
There has been heightened concern among my students and their families as a result of our new President’s policies on immigration. One of my Muslim students told me how relieved she was that her mother arrived back from Morocco only days before President Trump signed an executive order to ban people from certain majority-Muslim countries from coming into the U.S. My Hispanic students have asked me for documentation from the school that includes their picture and personal information to prove residency and to show they are students attending a public high school.
A Day Without Immigrants was in protest of President Trump’s administration and highlighted the need to, “expand policies that stop criminalizing communities of color,” as stated by Erika Almiron, the director of a Philadelphia-based nonprofit.
As an educator, I was deeply saddened on My Day Without Immigrants. Our President’s policies have faces attached to them, and these faces were missing from my classroom. My students are afraid and are calling out for help. We are living in “The Land of Plenty,” and we are “A Nation of Immigrants;” yet, we still have not learned to share. As a nation, we have taken a step backward.
Because my students and their families need information regarding their rights, I contacted Maryam Judar, Executive Director and Community Lawyer from Citizen Advocacy Center, regarding the deportation issue. Ms. Judar stresses the need for school policies that protect our students. Below is information she provided – please share.
I am so sorry to hear that students are foregoing school because of the issue of deportation. A few things:
(A) I know there were rumors about immigration checkpoints on CTA, but the CTA quelled these by posting on their website what is really happening (random checks for explosives).
So it may be rumors that you could check for their veracity.
(B) I think that there needs to be policies developed at schools to protect students:
Berkeley School District in California just passed a policy, and I have attached it here, and there is the page on their website where they talk about it.
“It is the general policy of the District not to allow any individual or organization to enter a school site if the educational setting would be disrupted by that visit. Because the Governing Board believes that ICE activities in and around schools, early education centers, and adult school facilities would constitute a severe disruption to the learning environment and educational setting for students, any request by ICE to any District personnel to visit a school site shall be immediately forwarded to the Superintendent for review and consultation with legal counsel, to ensure the safety of all students, as well as compliance with Plyler v. Doe and other applicable state and federal laws.”
I think that we need to get our school districts to adopt this kind of policy. I am cc’ing Terry Pastika here, one of our board members and former long-time Executive Director who has opened a sister organization in Berkeley, and she brought the new policy to my attention.
(C) As for immigrant students’ right to attend public schools, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Plyler vs. Doe (457 U.S. 202 (1982)) that undocumented children and young adults have the same right to attend public primary and secondary schools as do U.S. citizens and permanent residents. Like other children, undocumented students are obliged under state law to attend school until they reach a mandated age. As a result of the Plyler ruling, public schools may not:
Students without social security numbers should be assigned a number generated by the school. Adults without social security numbers who are applying for a free lunch and/or breakfast program on behalf of a student need only indicate on the application that they do not have a social security number.
Changes in the F-1 (Student) Visa Program do not alter the Plyler obligations to undocumented children. These changes apply only to students who apply for a student visa from outside the U.S.
Finally, school personnel — especially building principals and those involved with student intake activities — should be aware that they have no legal obligation to enforce U.S. immigration laws. (U.S. Supreme Court, 1982)
I’ve attached an English/Spanish flyer that discusses these issues, which I found from the Oregon State Dept. of Ed.
(D) The attached Dear Colleague letter from the DOJ and DOE that also outlines students’ rights.
Let me know if there is anything else I can do for you.
Executive Director/Community Lawyer
Citizen Advocacy Center
“Unless someone like you cares a whole awful lot, nothing is going to get better. It’s not.” ~Dr. Seuss
CROSSROADS FUND: Immigration Raids – Update From Our Grantees
ICE Raid Hotline: 1-855-435-7693
Often, we hear about skyrocketing costs to taxpayers caused by inflated public salaries, benefits, and pensions. Let’s face it, if our legislators didn’t target teachers and other public employees for the Illinois Debt Crisis, they would have to take a scrutinizing look in the mirror. Teachers make great scapegoats, but how about we consider the facts and make up our own minds about this issue.
To do this, we need to travel back in “pension-funding time.” Let’s start at the root cause that created the original 1995 $20B deficit in the state’s five public employee retirement systems: the State Employee Retirement System (SERS), the Downstate Teachers’ Retirement Systems (TRS), the State Universities Retirement System (SURS), the Judges Retirement System (JRS), and the General Assembly Retirement System (GARS).
The reality behind this $20B shortfall is a structural deficit in Illinois taxing policy, “historically, the Illinois state fiscal system has failed to generate the revenue needed to cover both the inflationary increase in the cost of maintaining public services from year to year and the full employer contribution required to fund pensions. So, rather than cut services, the state usually chose to underfund its employer contribution. Over time, this chronic failure to make the full employer contribution is the primary reason for Illinois state government’s predicament today, facing the worst unfunded pension liability in the country,” (Center for Tax and Budget Accountability, CTBA).
Problem Number 1: Illinois legislators did not plan for inflation.
To appropriately address inflation, the state had three options:
A. Cut Services
B. Increase revenue by raising income and/or sales tax
C. Underfund State’s employer contribution
And what option did our legislators select? Option C.
Anyone who has responsibly and consistently balanced a budget knows expenses must be equal to or less than revenue. There are two basic ways of doing this:
A. Revenue is equal to or less than Expenses
B. Revenue plus Debt is equal to or less than Expenses
And what option did our legislators select to address the 1995 shortfall? Yes, Option B.
Problem Number 2: Illinois legislators exacerbated their $20B debt problem.
Anyone who has responsibly accessed credit knows borrowing to cover an expense is feasible ONLY when future expenses can be maintained, or reduced until the debt is covered.
For easy math, let’s suppose I earn a monthly salary of $100 and my living expenses are $100; yet, my car had a flat and I had to put $25 on a credit card in order to purchase a new tire.
$100 monthly Revenue
-$100 monthly Expenses
$0 – Balanced Budget
Until: Additional $25 Borrowed + $5 Interest ($30 Debt)
In order to pay for the debt I’ve created, I need to reduce my living expenses by $5 for 5 months in order to pay off the $25 of debt AND I must reduce living expenses by $5 for an additional month in order to pay interest on the $25 I borrowed.
$100 monthly Revenue (6 months)
-$95 monthly Expenses (6 months)
+ $5 payment on $ 25 Debt + $5 Interest (6 months)
$0 – Balanced Budget = repayment of $30 Debt
Unfortunately, our legislators didn’t choose either of these reasonable options. Their ‘fix’ looks more like the scenario below:
$100 monthly Revenue
$100 monthly Expenses
+ $1 payment on $25 Debt + $5 Interest
– ($1 + $24 Debt + $6 Interest) = $31 Debt
A responsible ‘fix’ would resemble the following scenario:
$100 monthly Revenue
$80-$90 monthly Expenses
+$10-$20 payment to Savings
$0 – Balanced Budget + Plenty of Money Left Over!
It should be public savings accumulating over time, not public debt. It is these public savings that should be accessed in times of need or expansion – not public debt, which quite obviously serves the interests of the banking industry but certainly not those of the public! It’s no wonder the banking industry contributes heavily to political campaigns.
Yes, this representation is simplistic, so let’s look at how our legislators addressed their shortfall.
Our Legislators’ Solution
Problem Number 3: The Edgar Ramp Balloon Mortgage on Steroids
In 1996, the ‘fix’ came with a name, the Edgar Ramp. The basic premise was to reduce pension payments at the plan’s onset and then steadily increase them over time. Edgar’s plan didn’t structurally reform pensions; instead, it temporarily pushed the problem off and left the financial burden for later legislators to address.
An article in Crain’s by Dave Mckinney argues,
“For more than a quarter-century, governors and state legislators, Republicans and Democrats alike, made a series of financially toxic moves in the pension systems for state employees and public school teachers. Proposals to fix the perennially underfunded pensions were based on botched calculations—or no calculations at all—and were driven by misguided rationales that weren’t fully vetted.”
Chan, a Chicago securities defense lawyer and former SEC administrator, describes the ramp as a “balloon mortgage on steroids. You already know you have a hole. But instead of filling it, you decided to make it deeper.”
Problem Number 4: Continuation of Flawed Tax System
Overspending on state services is not the cause of the state’s long-term fiscal problems. Rather, the driver has been Illinois’ flawed tax code, which does not comport with the modern economy (p3, CTBA). Tax revenue hasn’t grown at a rate sufficient to cover the increased cost of delivering the same level of services from one year to the next (p4, IL 2015 CAFR).
Who benefits from these tax breaks … and who doesn’t (statistics from CTBA)?
In 2011, Illinois had the lowest number of state workers per 1,000 residents of all 50 states. Despite having the 5th largest population, Illinois annually ranks in the bottom 10 states in service spending.
CTBA (2009) ‘Debunks’ popular myths regarding the Illinois Debt Crisis:
MYTH: Illinois has too many public employees.
REALITY: Illinois actually ranks 49th among the states, next to last in the nation, in the number of state employees per capita. Historically, Illinois has not been a high public employee headcount state. Instead, Illinois is mostly a grant-making state – that is, rather than hire state employees to provide services; Illinois disburses grants to independent providers such as Lutheran Social Services or Catholic Charities, which in turn deliver the service to the public.
MYTH: Public employee benefits are too generous.
REALITY: For most Illinois public employees, their pension is all they receive upon retirement (this is true concerning teacher pensions) – fully 78% are not covered by and do not receive Social Security. This is unlike workers in the private sector, who receive both Social Security and private retirement benefits.
REALITY: Switching to a defined contribution plan from a defined benefit plan cannot reduce or eliminate any of the unfunded pension liability that Illinois owes to its five public employee pension systems.
The stateʹs duty to maintain pension benefit levels for its public employees is directly mandated in the Illinois Constitution. Specifically, Article XIII, Section 5 of the Illinois Constitution provides, “Membership in any pension or retirement system of the State, any unit of local government or school district, or any agency or instrumentality thereof, shall be an enforceable contractual relationship, the benefits of which shall not be diminished or impaired (emphasis supplied).”
Irrespective of the nature of the plans going forward – the only way to address the unfunded pension liability is to find a rational way to pay it. The problem cannot be legislated away. [Although legislators haven’t stopped trying, even after the IL Supreme Court ruled legislation as unconstitutional – discussions regarding the transfer of pension responsibility to the local level are currently taking place]
MYTH: Placing new public sector employees into a defined contribution system would save the state money.
REALITY: A switch to a defined contribution plan for new employees would not save the state of Illinois money. In fact, a switch to a defined contribution system would likely increase costs; defined contribution systems have significantly higher annual administrative costs than fully funded defined benefit systems.
According to the Investment Management Institute, the operating expense ratio for defined benefit plans averages 31 basis points (31 cents per $100 of assets); the average for defined contribution plans is three to six times higher, at 96 to 175 basis points.
To put that in context of the Illinois pension systems, the administrative costs of a defined contribution system would in all likelihood cost taxpayers anywhere from $275 to $610 million more annually than the state’s current defined benefit systems.
Compounding the Problem
Problem Number 5: Decline of Returns on Investment (RoI)
Mitch Vogel, former President of the University Professionals of Illinois, IFT Local 4100, and former member of the State Universities Retirement System (SURS) Board of Trustees, explains, “When our pension funds were created, it was under the constitutionally-mandated assumption that the funding would come from a so-called ‘three-legged stool’:
1) the employee
2) the employer (the State of Illinois)
3) returns on investments made by duly-appointed pension boards”
He asserts, “When it comes to funding Illinois’ public pension systems, we have done our part. Our elected officials have not, and they’re overwhelming to blame for the funding problems the systems face.”
He then points out, “Some experts have estimated that [pension] systems would be holding billions more in assets today if state lawmakers and City of Chicago officials hadn’t declared years of pension “holidays” which underfunded the system, at a time when the ROI was in double digits, no less. Had the required payments been made during this lucrative time, just imagine how the systems would have flourished.”
Additionally, “In an attempt to compensate for the lack of state funding, our pension boards have diversified and developed more investment options. For example, the less risky Fixed Income funds, which previously accounted for the majority of the investments, now account for only 1/6 to 1/5 of total holdings. Real Estate has grown to almost 10% of the portfolio. And the largest growth has been in Equities (U.S. and international).”
Problem Number 6: Political Interference
Vogel contends there is cause for two concerns:
In an even more blatant move, last year the Governor appointed Sandy Stuart to the TRS Board. Stuart is the former Illinois Republican Party finance chairman who gave more than $150,000 to Rauner’s gubernatorial campaign and more than $1.5M to Republican candidates or conservative super-PACs on the state and federal levels. His family foundation has also donated more than $100,000 to groups like the Illinois Policy Institute and the Manhattan Institute, which oppose defined-benefit public pension plans.
Also, on the Illinois State Board of Investments, Rauner’s newly-appointed members voted to replace its investment consultants. The new consultant and board members immediately changed policies and asset allocations, resulting in large fund losses compared to previous years and the other state pension boards.
The decline of RoI by the TRS pension fund due to unsuccessful investments in riskier hedge funds supported by new Rauner appointees to the pension board is an important issue for everyone, not just teachers. The less Illinois pension funds gain through investments, the more costs that land at the feet of the taxpayer.
Why the sudden interest in school board candidacy?
Interest may be sparked by President Trump’s recent nominee for Education Secretary, Betsy DeVos, who was described in a Washington Post article as, “a former Republican Party chairwoman in Michigan and chair of the pro-school-choice advocacy group American Federation for Children, and a shining light to members of the movement to privatize public education by working to create programs and pass laws that require the use of public funds to pay for private school tuition in the form of vouchers and similar programs.”
Another reason could be House Bill 229, legislation recently signed by Governor Rauner that grants to the McHenry and Lake County Boards the same consolidation powers as granted to DuPage County three years ago under a pilot program.
Perhaps it’s our governor’s Turnaround Agenda, which also gives more power to local governments along with a proposal that “explicitly authorizes” a municipality’s ability to seek relief under Chapter 9 of the Bankruptcy Code with “no requirements, pre-conditions or other limitations.”
Moving more authority in decision-making over to local school boards isn’t a new conversation. In a 2013 Daily Herald interview, Kathy Brown, an incumbent running for Lake Zurich Unit District 95 Trustee stated, “The most significant budgetary issue facing our District is the Illinois pension crisis. The shifting of the pension burden to local districts will have a significant financial impact on all school districts.”
Then, of course, there is the federal, state, and local debt problem. Our Federal government, for example, spent $4.3T on expenses, collected $3.7T in revenue, and carried $18.3T of debt in 2015. Illinois spent $75B on what should have been a $71B budget addressing $141B of debt. Lake County paid approximately $405M in expenses, collected $444M in revenue, and carried $247M in debt. In 2015, 27% of the State budget provided funding for education, and only 2% of Federal funding was used to support educational services.
While all of this may certainly be enough to get educators “rattled,” they can only speculate at this point what the future holds for public education. Undoubtedly, there’s a heightened concern revealed in the record turnout of candidates running for school board positions, myself included.
This could possibly be one of the most important, if not THE most important, school board race I’ve witnessed in my lifetime. I strongly urge voters to scrutinize candidates and make sure they represent local attitudes. One helpful tool is Illinois Sunshine, which tracks political donations that may influence a candidate’s agenda. MapLight also offers a variety of voter resources.
Post By: Daily Herald
Concerns over state school revenue may be one of the reasons 240 Lake County residents have decided to run for school board positions in the spring election, school officials said.
The large turnout of candidates shows up in races through the county but is particularly evident in several particular districts. For example, 11 candidates are seeking five board seats at Woodland Elementary District 50, nine have filed for four seats at Grass Lake Elementary District 36, and eight candidates have filed for two board seats at the College of Lake County.
Lake County Clerk Carla Wyckoff said her office is trying to determine if the number of candidates makes the April 4 consolidated election the largest school election in county history.
Roycealee Wood, the Lake County Regional Superintendent of Schools, said concern over state revenue seems to be one of the driving forces behind the large turnout.
To read article in its entirety, view: 240 candidates to run for Lake County school board seats
The Letter to the Editor below, written by Jane Partridge from Lake Forest, goes on to ask some hard hitting questions about the state of Lake County’s emergency preparedness. At the Daily Herald interview to which this LTE refers, I asked the question, “Who’s job is it?”
I received no answer.
My answer is this: “I’ll take it.”
Post By: Daily Herald
Photo: William Hejl
Regarding a recent Daily Herald article, I take exception to Aaron Lawlor’s passing the buck about protecting the people of Lake County.
There are five railroad tracks with thousands of tank cars passing through Lake County while carrying millions of gallons of oil. These accidents-waiting-to-happen traverse over 25 communities from Barrington to Winthrop Harbor and Highland Park to Antioch.
Is each community individually supposed to deal with safety, traffic, pollution issues caused by the trains? Most communities, grappling with limited resources and influence, are unable to deal with potential catastrophes. The county should spearhead efforts to improve safety standards and mitigate impacts.
To read this Letter to the Editor in it’s entirety, please view: Lawlor not leading on rail safety