Photos
About 600 more Highland Park voters cast ballots for or against District 113's $133 million capital improvement referendum than in the mayoral race in Tuesday’s election.
In the contest for mayor, 9,543 people voted for either mayor-elect and councilwoman Nancy Rotering (4,945) or councilwoman Terri Olian (4,498), while 10,118 made a choice for (4,237) or against (5,881) the referendum.
While voters rallied against the referendum question, they elected four District 113 School Board members who favored it: incumbents Marjie Sandlow and Michael Smith along with new members David Small and Debra Hymen.
“People chose those who recognized how important it is to do the work,” District 113 Board member Annette Lidawer said. “Those who voted against the plan still recognized there is a need. They voted against the plan.”
Mayoral candidates react
One person who was not surprised was Rotering. After knocking on more than 2,000 doors in her quest to become Highland Park’s first female mayor, she heard again and again how important the school spending issue was to voters.
“For a lot of people this (referendum) was a black or white question,” Rotering said. “For mayor, people have to be more introspective to make a decision.”
Rotering's opponent, on the other hand, didn't expect to hear that more voters cast ballots for or against the referendum than for either mayoral candidate. She felt both the mayoral contest and the school improvement vote were critical issues for the community and would like to have seen a smaller gap.
“This local election is very important,” Olian said. “I would have hoped the voters would have fully researched the mayor’s contest and voted.”
Pete Koukos was also surprised by the totals. A former Highland Park city councilman and Moraine Township assessor, Koukos currently leads Education First, the advocacy group opposed to the referendum.
“I would have thought the mayoral (race) would have had more votes,” Koukos, 79, said. After reflecting for a moment, he added, “People my age, who never voted against a referendum before, voted no.”
Working towards a better plan
Koukos expressed a desire to work with the District 113 Board to develop a plan to make needed improvements to Highland Park and Deerfield High Schools. He said his group opposed the proposed plan, but favored improving the facilities.
Lidawer has already heard from members of Education First. A number of them want to work with the board to develop a plan the voters will approve in March, 2012, when Lidawer has promised a new proposal would be before the voters.
“People from Education First have reached out to me to say they want to work on a new plan together,” Lidawer said. “They need to be a part. We have to hit the ground running and reach out to everyone.”
Lucy
12:53 pm on Friday, April 8, 2011
This week a heating unit fell and almost hit a student at HPHS on the head. Earlier this month, my daughter's swimming class was canceled due to "black muck" in the pool.
Thanks Pete Koukos! During my walking campaign in my neighborhood, his name kept coming up over and over. Maybe it was because of the lovely message he kept leaving. He needs to get to work on the "better plan" now!! In this community with all the affluence, we have a school with a facility you would find in the city of Chicago. Shame!
David Greenberg
4:40 pm on Friday, April 8, 2011
We've never been told why the pool was cloudy earlier in the month (it was never reported that there was "black muck"). I surmised that it may have been a power-related issue, such as the one that caused a blackout at DHS over a weekend... New pool, old pool, power issues are always going to be a problem - unless you want to spend a ton of money to put the filters on a backup power generator.
It's unfortunate to hear about the heating unit falling - but I agree with Pete - that's a job for the maintenance personnel.
Certainly you are comparing HPHS to one of the fine magnet schools in the City of Chicago...
Pete Koukos
4:10 pm on Friday, April 8, 2011
Dear Lucy,
It's called maintenance.
Beth
7:16 am on Saturday, April 9, 2011
Pete, I hold you personally accountable for a new "better" plan. If your response above is any indication of the quality of that plan, I think we are in trouble! I think you owe the community your own opinion letter detailing how you and Education First are planning on creating the "better" plan that you have been advertising. I look forward to your explanations.
Beth
7:19 am on Saturday, April 9, 2011
And my apologies if you've already written this letter and I missed it. Please direct me to it if I missed it. Thanks!
Lucy
4:20 pm on Friday, April 8, 2011
I am waiting to hear about your new plan. I'll look for you at future meetings.
Lucy
5:29 pm on Friday, April 8, 2011
The "black muck" was described by my freshman at HPHS. The point is that swimming class could not be held. I am not an expert. (Unlike most of the no voters that have been posting on these sites over and over) I trust my elected officials and the consultants that they selected to come up with the plan. I did not concern myself with all the details since I am not an architect or any type of expert in school facilities etc.
I was also too busy prior to the election to take the time to respond to all of your BS, Mr. Greenberg. Don't even get me started on this Becker architect who does residential work and claims to know all about the needs of the school. I voted YES because I wanted the work done and I trusted my officials at 113.
David Greenberg
7:53 am on Saturday, April 9, 2011
I can think of three things right off the bat that could be considered "black muck". Filter material, stuff in the pipe that backflowed, rubber seal that broke... You are correct, the class couldn't be held. But new filter or existing, it's a mechanical device - things will happen that are unexpected. Do the filters need some repairs? Yes. Should they be? Yes. And that's not my analysis, it's in the report from the District's own pool consultants...
I don't know what you'd consider "BS" from me. I voted NO because I wanted the needs handled, but not the wants.
Mara Meyer
9:25 pm on Friday, April 8, 2011
Thanks Lucy!
Susie Millie
8:42 am on Saturday, April 9, 2011
We are very lucky to live in a community with wonderful resources and talented residents. I am a board member of one of the largest social service agencies in the country. Our staff and consultants frequently come up with wonderful plans to rehab facilities and/or build new facilities. The staff at our agency is comprised of largely social workers, and D113 staff is largely educators. Consultants have one view, often driven by their fee structures. We recently completed an $18 million project on 50+ acres with pools, classrooms, ball fields and more. The project bids originally came in much higher. But when our board members got involved, they challenged the consultants and saved over 30%. Our board members happen to be among the largest residential and commercial landlords in the US. They knew the practical solutions and real costs. We recently did a rehab project to enhance the green facets of a building. Bids came in at $500,000-$900,000. One of our board members recently completed a similar project, sent over his contractor and we got the work done for $375,000, all while meeting exacting State of IL standards. I know there is much passion on this referendum issue, but I think the professionals in our community–the construction experts, architects, commercial landlords, etc. who took the time advised us we needed a better plan. I am hopeful the staff and board at D113 will now accept and work with the talented residents we have to facilitate the changes we need.
Ellen
10:11 am on Saturday, April 9, 2011
Susie - I appreciate your comments and totally understand where you are coming from. My question to you is exactly who are the professionals/experts in our community who have built schools in the past? Who did you listen to when persuaded to think that they knew more than a school board /administration that has been working at the schools for years?
The referendum costs were an estimate - if it had passed it would be sent out to bid. If they could do the improvements for less money, and hopefully that was their goal, the remaining money would go back to the taxpayers. They were ready to challenge the bids, they hadn't even had them yet! Now the process has to start all over to pass another referendum and interest rates and costs are going up as we speak. That is IF a new one gets worked on as promised by Education First. Things at the schools are still continuing to deteriate and in between band aids are going to still have to be done.
Ellen
8:46 am on Saturday, April 9, 2011
Pete - Please let us know when you meet with the board - so we all have an opportunity to hear what your new plan looks like - the one you promised to the community. Also let us know how the new "committee" is going to be formed so we can all have an opportunity to be part of it if we choose. I assume you will post it on your website or here in patch.
Also - re maintenance - I don't think the schools can know ahead of time when something falls or breaks. I know in my old house I never know when something really old is going to break. It just happens. I think if a student should ever become injured because of something upexpected falling or breaking, our community would feel really sad. They wouldn't just reply - maintenance.
jim longman
11:12 am on Saturday, April 9, 2011
Pete:
You ran a very effective campaign and leveraged your experience on the city council and as an Assessor, combined with your plege to "get to work on a better plan" to defeat the Dist 113 Referendum. I have a couple of questions for you:
1) I assume you are the same Pete Koukos who supported and ran the campaign for the Park District of Highland Park supporting the 37 million dollar beach referendum, that would cost average taxpayers "a cup of Starbucks a day". Please explain why you were in favor of the beach referendum and not the school referendum.
2) Many on this site have asked you for your better plan for Dist 113 schools. Some are suggesting that many in your group don't want any referendum plan and that Education First is only interested in defeating referendum proposals and cutting the districts budget (lower teacher salaries, cut teachers, eliminate programs, larger class sizes) to fund any requirements in capital expenditures. At some point, you will be asked to get involved in a new plan. I think the readers here would like to know exactly what your "real" vision is for our schools. It's clear that your group does not want the Dist 113 community to have similar facilities to our peers. It's one thing to poke holes in a plan that has been submitted. Being part of the solution is a much more daunting task. Are you up for it? Do you really care? These readers want to know.
Anne
12:38 pm on Friday, April 15, 2011
There will be no plan, that is obvious