If the fact that Paul Tatelli was seen as lacking in expertise and knowledge of the school board issues was enough to flag as inappropriate, this entire thread should be wiped from Patch! The fact is, PAUL WAS NOT ENDORSED BY THE CAUCUS! A caucus made up of delegates from all corners of the district, chosen by the PTA's from all of the 11 schools. Paul is a one issue candidate and the caucus saw through his rhetoric to who he really is. He is not the right candidate for District 112!

I don't care if Paul wasn't endorsed by the caucus - I know him too and he's smart, balanced, and FAR from a "one issue candidate." The caucus is one small group of people, and last I heard, this is a democracy and one endorsement is just that - one endorsement. Plus, I heard there was a lot of politicking going on at that caucus.

That's what's great about our country - you have the right to your opinions as do I.

Unfortunately, while you say that the caucus is just "one small group of people" - I think it might be well worth your time to learn a bit more about the caucus process, or perhaps, participate yourself in 2 years before spouting off about "what you heard". And, if Paul wasn't intersted in the caucus' endorsement, why come before them at all to be considered?

For those of you who don' t know, the District 112 Caucus is made up of delegates chosen by each of the 11 schools in District 112, ensuring that there is an equal number of delegates and equal representation from all schools. Those people - all of those people - got together and voted on the three best candidates to endorse. It is a very fair and equitable process, and there was no politicking. Of the candidates presenting, Paul was the weakest. It's as simple as that.

You should check YOUR facts - actually, there weren't an equal number of delegates from all of the District 112 schools. Some schools had more delegates than others. Furthermore, in the instructions given inside the caucus before voting, the delegates were NOT told to vote for the three best candidates, in fact, they were encouraged to only vote for one in some cases, which may be a good idea if you feel strongly about one candidate during a general election, but is hardly appropriate for a caucus that has as its mandate to select the three best candidates. It really skews the voting . . . as you saw . . . you WERE there, weren't you?

I was most certainly there, and what you state is simply not true. All 11 schools were asked to submit 5 delegates and 2 alternates. Some schools did not have those numbers but that's the responsibility of that individual school, not of the caucus. Perhaps their PTA's should have told more residents to step up?

As far as the voting instructions given, delegates were absolutely NOT encouraged to vote for only one candidate. That is completely and utterly false. We were instructed to select UP TO THREE candidates, but could also choose one or two. Because I was there, I can tell you that most people chose three. The bottom line is this: in order to be selected by the caucus, candidates had to receive a 2/3 majority. Yumi Ross, Michael Cohn and Bruce Hymen received a 2/3 vote. Paul Tatelli did not.

Voters should know - Paul participated in an extremely important Strategic Planning Action Team that met weekly for several months to review buildings and technology to help the district establish it's long-term strategy. Paul has regularly attended school board meeting for over two years. Paul has met with district administrators to to lend his expertise in technology and will continue to be an asset to this board as they face the challenge of introducing various innovations to our schools and children while balancing the budget. HP is composed of bright independent thinkers who can make up their own minds. No matter how you slice it, the caucus members were selected not elected. Cast YOUR vote on April 5th.

Leslie, ALL of the 112 School Board candidates participated in the Strategic Planning Process. Paul is not alone in that. Michael Cohn and Yumi Ross have also regularly attended school board meetings, as has Bruce Hymen (as a member of the current board). This absolutely does not set Paul apart from the others.

You say that Highland Park and Highwood are composed of bright, independent thinkers - and I agree with you! No matter how YOU slice it though, of the 4 candidates seeking caucus endorsement, Paul's credentials were the weakest, as voted upon by members of his own community. It's as simple as that.

I have looked at all the Candidates for 112, and have found Paul Tatelli one of the best. I am not sure how the caucus comes to a conclusion, but in this case I feel they made a mistake. Paul will have my only vote for 112. Honestly Amy, most people don’t care who the caucus wants, they are too small of a group, and have their own agenda.

I respectfully disagree with you, Joe, as did Paul Tatelli when he sought the caucus' endorsement. If Paul didn't care about being endorsed, then why bother to go through the process at all?

I'll just remind you again, the caucus is made up of 5 delegates and 2 alternates from each school across District 112. Is it small? Sure - but it is a representative sample of our population throughout Highland Park and Highwood, and Paul was unable to convince this core group of his qualifications. And, the caucus' only "agenda", as you put it, is to find and endorse the most qualified candidates to serve on the school board, which we did when a majority of 2/3 voted for Michael Cohn, Yumi Ross & Bruce Hymen.

And lastly, I'll just say, if you want to know how the caucus comes to a vote in the future, I would highly encourage you to volunteer to serve on the next one. I found it to be a thoughful and honest process amongst people who were really invested in getting the best candidates selected and elected to serve for our children. Just a thought.

I'm really humored by Amy and her constant rebuttals to everyone's comments :) I know the Tatellis well. I will be voting for him, without hesitation, and I encourage you to, as well. He has been attending both formal board meetings and working board meetings consistently for three years now. He has been drawn in by the process and goes because he's interested in it, not surprisingly, having 2 Kindergarteners and a 3rd grader, and his wife on the PTA board. Two years ago, all four members elected to the board were new. This election, Dr. Hymen is the only incumbent running. But with Paul's attendance at both the board meetings and the committee of the whole meetings every other week for three years, he will bring some institutional history to the board. He comes from a family of educators; his mom was a principal at a bilingual school in Chicago back when that was truly a pioneering concept. I think he is going to be a great school board member.

I'm glad I humored you with, as you put it, my constant rebuttals. If you don't want to hear from me, don't respond.

The other candidates, Bruce Hymen, Yumi Ross and Michael Cohn, also have very strong connections to Highland Park, and have attended board meetings. Attending board meetings and a wife on the PTA are not remotely the most important qualifications for a school board member, nor does it give you "history" as you imply. But hey, it's a free country. Vote for whomever you'd like as I plan to as well.

I too will be supporting Paul Tatelli. I strongly believe that his experience and expertise in technology is exactly what District 112 needs as the BRD process continues. Our children's brightest future relies on their need to not only understand technology but utilize it on a daily basis. Paul understands this concept and will be an advocate for technology on behalf of our children.

By attending all the board meetings for the past 2 1/2 years and serving on an Action Team .... many people dropped out of the process because of the extreme amount hours of work and dedication it took...Paul knows the philosophy and politics of the district and is 100 percent ready to step into the role as a board member today...no background catch up for him...no caucus endorsement needed here!

Most importantly, I know because of Paul's upbringing by two educators, he will represent ALL children's best interest and not just a few. I can leave the ballot box proud knowing that I cast a vote not only for my children's future, but also my neighbors children and the children who live two blocks away and the children on the other end of town. Highland Park is a wonderful and diverse city, Paul Tatelli is the person to represent our children and their future.

Kristin, you commented, "no caucus endorsement needed here!" -- then why seek it in the first place? It's simple. Paul wanted the endorsement because he knows that it means that his community agreed that he would be their choice as a board member. And he wasn't! He was the bottom vote-getter out of the candidates seeking endorsement. And now, because he didn't get the endorsement, he and his supporters are running around saying no one cares about the caucus and who needs a caucus. Seems a bit hypocritical, don't you think? I personally want someone on my school board with more honesty and integrity than that, and who won't change his tune mid-stream.

Yes, Amy that is exactly why I plan on voting for Paul Tatelli...for his honesty and integrity. Luckily we live in America and all have the constitutional right for free speech....but I have often noticed that those that "protest so much" have a personal agenda and angry rhetoric and slander helps no one, especially the candidates that you support...it just turns people off from voting for those people. As you have must have noticed, no one who has commented on Paul's behalf have demonstrated any anger or malice toward the other candidates ...they have only voiced there choice.

I'd actually like to see one of you answer Amy's question about why Paul sought out caucus endorsement but now feels it's irrelevant!!

Amy has not once sounded angry to me, nor has she slandered anyone in any of her posts - rather told the plain facts about how a candidates gets endorsed and the reasons Paul was not selected. I happen to agree with you when you say that often when people "protest so much", that they have a personal agenda...but it is you protesting about Paul rather than the other way around.

Miles and I don't know each other. Outside of the comments on this site, we've never met in person. Saying I'm "widely ignored" is interesting - the give and take commentary between other persons and myself would seem to indicate otherwise. But to each, his or her, own...

That was mean. David is the only person running for election that really states his opinions, like him or not, you know where he stands.

The League of Women Voters guide: http://lwvhp.org/files/voters_guide_2011.pdf

Unfortunately, I am unaware of any unbiased articles. I know that both candidates have detailed information on their websites. You might also look to newspapers like the Patch and HP News to see who they endorse.

They also are having either listen and learn or area coffees over the next few weeks as well, if that helps.

Welcome new HP resident. You won't find an unbiased article at the site referenced by Walter, just another propaganda piece by a candidate. Just as you said, it is very difficult to find any actual article on either of the two candidates that is not an opinion piece by one supporter or another.

Perhaps we can challenge PATCH's editor Jacob to actually have a journalist/reporter (not an opinion writer such as Mr. Brill or a frequent online article poster) interview the two candidates about their positions and why they believe they are best suited to be Mayor of Highland Park. Perhaps if they are asked the same set of questions we can then see their differences clearly. What do you say, Jacob?

My apologies to Walter -- it is actually Lee's comment below that I meant to refer to earlier. Sorry, Walter!

Patch has actually done some Q&A with the candidates, e.g.
http://highlandpark.patch.com/articles/mayoral-candidates-take-your-questions

I have to admit, watching these dynamic threads evolve as regularly as I do, it's a pretty cool feeling to get pulled right into it, so thank you Karen for doing so.

Months ago, I sent a reporter to shadow both Terri Olian and Nancy Rotering for a full day. The reporter (who doesn't live in Highland Park) wrote in-depth features on each candidate that Patch will be publishing soon. It's not the same as a questionnaire, but I think it will allow readers to get to know the candidates much better than a questionnaire could.

That said, there are still weeks before the election, so if readers don't feel informed even after the features are published, I'm more than happy to reach out to the candidates with a questionnaire and publish that as well.

Thanks again for the question, and for reading.

-Jacob

I think the Patch should publish a candidates questionaire, assuming they did one. Ed's idea about the LWV might be the same thing.

I know that the HP News will probably be running something this week based on a questionnaire they distributed to Council and Mayoral candidates.

Having served with Tony on the Plan Commission, I highly recommend him for your consideration. He is open minded, intellegent, a good listener and a good leader. He will make an excellent City Council member.

Wow, I've noticed you have quite the imagination, Mr. Zaremski, as well as opinions. I've read the pieces you reference and have read your Trib Local pieces (it almost seems like you write for both) and have found it interesting that all Terri can do is pick apart another's ideas without providing her own.

Nancy Rotering began her campaign early against an incumbent Mayor (and not because she wanted to just remain in local government but) because she believes our City can be run better and has followed her convictions and shown leadership where others on the council have not. My vote is for the leader with fresh ideas and courage to stand behind them. As a Trib Local posting I just read said -- "HP needs less late nights and more productive days to fix our issues!" Join me in voting for Nancy Rotering if you want to see that happen!

I have felt for some time that Nancy is the candidate of the very angry voter. Nothing but attack, attack, attack. The comments between the mayoral candidates is so sickening that I cannot believe this is Highland Park.
I am a supporter of Terri Olian and she is by far the most sophisticated and elegant of the two.
I have known Terri for the past 5 1/2 years since moving here from New Orleans. I know of no one else who has done more to make Highland Park a great place to live.
Please, please, stop the negativity!
Joe Wallace

I have both of her statements from facebook saved:There She Goes Again and There She Goes Again; Yet Again. Unfortunately I am not real computer savvy or I would copy them here but I am working on it. Everything in both articles can be substantiated by the city records.