Teacher in Nearby District Supports Referendum: Letter

The following letter was written and submitted by Marcy Turner.

Let me begin with a bit of background: I grew up in Highland Park in Sherwood Forest. I attended Green Bay from kindergarten through 2nd grade, at which point it was closed. I attended Indian Trail for grades 3 and 4, and Elm Place for grades 5 through 8. I practiced law for around 10 years, then returned to my true passion: teaching. I am currently a middle school Spanish teacher in Glenview. I served on the SCFFAC for a few months at the very beginning, but was forced to resign due to several back surgeries. I have 2 children in the district: 1 in 8th grade at Edgewood, and 1 in 5th grade at Red Oak (yes, I live in the neighborhood which will be home to the new middle school campus should the Referendum pass, and yes, I am still FOR it).

I would like to take this opportunity to express my feelings (both personal and professional) as to why it is vital that people vote YES for the Referendum. Perhaps the best way to do this is to address the concerns (and simple untruths) that people against the Referendum have

expressed.

1. Why this plan? Why aren’t there other options?

This was NOT a hasty decision nor was it rushed in any manner. In fact, the SCFFAC postponed putting the Referendum on the ballot for a full year (it was originally slated to be on the ballot in the Spring of 2015) in order to develop new options and exhaust all possible resources as a means to come up with the best possibilities. The process started as far back as 2009, when the Green Report, providing key facts about the sad state of the majority of the schools, was published. You can see the Master Report here: http://www.nssd112.org/files/_xGJXx_/eec5bd37b67357d03745a49013852ec4/Master_Plan_Report_120809.pdf

Using this information, the SCFFAC came up with more than 50 possible options for reconfiguration, and did not settle on a final option until thoroughly and passionately dissecting each possibility (both financially and from an academic standpoint) and allowing the public to voice their opinions. People may not like this plan, but it is the best option available based on a multitude of expert opinions and black and white financial information.

2. The middle school campus will be terrible for my kids because it is too big.

First off, if you take the time to actually read the information about the middle school campus, you would see that in reality it is like several small schools in one big location. Not only are the 5/6 and 7/8 wings totally separate, within those buildings students will have the opportunity to develop strong relationships with peers from a wide range of social and economic backgrounds.

This is just as important (if not more important) than academics, as it prepares children for life in the real world outside the bubble of Highland Park.

Those that argue that the large number of kids will prevent their children from making a sports team or being cast in a school play express a valid concern. However, we are fortunate to have a multitude of options available in our area at a wide range of costs (from Park District to club leagues and everything in between). Additionally, part of the plan for the new school is to include intramural sports for 5th and 6th graders, which currently is not an option for most kids in these grades. There will always be other options for children to play on teams, but if this Referendum does not pass, there are no other realistic options for children to get the best education in state of the art facilities. Ask yourself this: is it more important for my child to make the school sports team or to be prepared both socially and academically to be a successful adult and a good citizen? I choose the latter.

3. My children will be harmed being bussed in from all over HP.

My honest reaction to this is “oh, please!” Come on people, let’s get real: riding the bus to school is the least of our concerns. How many of you allow your very young children to ride the bus for 45 minutes to an hour each way to Banner Day Camp? Plenty, I am sure. And why do you allow this to happen? Simple: because in your opinion Banner is the best camp, so who cares if your child has to ride the bus a little longer? It is simply a double standard to complain about a child being on a bus to middle school for 30-45 minutes (if even that long, as per current board guidelines the maximum time would be 45 minutes), yet send your far younger kids on a bus for a much longer amount of time for camp. Moreover, consider how fortunate we are to live in a community that provides safe bussing. Would you prefer to be one of the millions of children forced to take public transportation or even walk several miles to school?

I was bussed from Sherwood Forest to Green Bay starting in kindergarten. Do you know what I remember? I remember that the very best days were the ones when I’d get a seat over the wheel well or in the very back of the bus so every bump felt much bigger, and I could compete against my friends for who could bounce the highest when we crossed the bumpy bridge over

41. I hardly think the bus negatively impacted my development.

Further, kids are resilient. What do I remember about my entire school being merged with Indian Trail at the start of 3rd grade? Simply the fact that I still have close friends to this day whom I met in 3rd grade.

4. It costs too much money over too long a period of time.

Does this plan cost a lot of money? Absolutely. But how can we put a price on education? We are in this position because nothing was done sooner; can you imagine the cost should the Referendum not pass and schools become in further disrepair? Not to mention the issue of safety. The fact is that the majority of the schools in HP are unsafe for our children and inaccessible by those with disabilities. Between asbestos, dilapidated structures, absence of sound fire protection, and lack of air conditioning (to name just a few), we are putting our children in jeopardy every single day that they attend school.

And let’s not forget the fact that in addition to providing safer facilities for our children, one of the primary reasons that change is needed is the fact that the District’s financial reserves are nearly depleted and will be within the next 2 years if nothing is done. The Referendum will ultimately save the District nearly 117.5 million dollars. If you look at comparable districts it becomes patently clear that having 12 buildings for the number of students currently enrolled is not necessary. Take Glenview 34 (which happens to be the district in which I work), for example.

In 2014 Glenview 34 had 4923 students enrolled and a total of 8 buildings. Compare this to NSSD 112 in 2014: 4180 students and a total of 12 buildings. That’s right: 112 had 743 fewer students than Glenview, yet 4 more buildings. The same scenario is true for several other neighboring districts. Yet these other districts are all highly rated and their students extremely successful; this proves that less buildings can ultimately only help the district and its students, not harm it.

Is the Referendum perfect? No. What is “perfect” to one person is often horrendous to another.

There is simply no way to make everyone happy, and at the end of the day we, as adults, must stop thinking only about ourselves and start thinking of our children and grandchildren. Is some additional traffic annoying? Sure. However, I’d venture to guess that most people would agree that safety outweighs “annoying,” and I would hope that when this safety pertains to our children this would hold even more true.

For those complaining that you don’t like the proposed plan, let me ask you this: did you volunteer your time to serve on the SCFFAC? Did you take the time to attend community meetings to truly educate yourselves or are you just basing your opinion on what other people are preaching and the fact that you don’t like change? Please don’t say, “well, I would have, but I just didn’t have the time,” because if something is important enough that you can publicly complain about it, you can make time. I work full-time, am on the PTA Exec Board, am a Room Parent, am the team manager for my daughter’s club travel soccer team, and have to do everything else that 2 kids require on a daily basis. This did not stop me from giving up my

precious little free time on nights and weekends to serve on the SCFFAC Here is the reality: this Referendum is the best possible solution for our current situation. This was determined after countless hours of research, expert opinions, comparisons with other districts, and extensive analysis of the District’s financials. If it does not pass, we are setting our community back even farther, and jeopardizing the futures of not only our children, but also their children and the children of generations to come. After growing up in HP I couldn’t wait to return to raise my own kids here, and love the fact that a substantial number of my classmates returned as well. Sadly, this will inevitably no longer be the case if change does not happen.

Who wants to raise their kids in a district with overcrowded, unsafe buildings that lack the technology needed for our students to compete with neighboring districts?

The District is not making threats; it is merely stating the facts. If the Referendum does not pass, schools will close, class sizes will dramatically increase, programs will be cut, and students will be stuck attending schools with far less resources, no air conditioning, and outdated safety equipment. Can you truly look yourself in the eye and say that increased traffic, giving up your Starbucks once a week to pay a bit more in taxes, or your child having to ride a bus is more important than their health, safety, and overall wellbeing? If so, then by all means vote no. If not, then I implore you to put our children first and vote yes.