The Herald-News • Sunday, October 11, 2015
|GETTING STARTED
2
Lawmaker files bill on school closure process State Sen. Michael Hastings says bill would provide more transparency, accountability By FELIX SARVER fsarver@shawmedia.com NEW LENOX – A state lawmaker unveiled last week a proposed measure he says would provide more transparency and accountability from school districts considering closing an academic building. The bill, which state Sen. Michael Hastings, D-Tinley Park, said he filed Oct. 2, would amend state law to include provisions concerning school action and facility master planning that would apply to any district where the board has voted to approve closing a school. He said in a post on his Facebook page the proposal will officially be read into Senate records Oct. 20. If passed, the bill would apply to any school district whose board voted to approve a school closure after July 1. Hastings said it would not reverse Lincoln-Way High School District 210 board’s decision to close North high school in an effort to resolve its financial crisis. “It could have an impact, yes, but not in the fact that it would reverse their decision,” Hastings said. The bill was influenced by the financial problems at the school district and anger from
Shaw Media file photo
People fill the auditorium in August during a Lincoln-Way Community High School District 210 Board of Education meeting in New Lenox. The board voted to close Lincoln-Way North during the meeting. A state lawmaker unveiled Thursday a proposed bill he says would provide more transparency and accountability for school districts considering closing an academic building. residents. Hastings said he’s been contacted by hundreds of Lincoln-Way parents and residents who were upset by the board’s decision. “They have a lot of issues and a lot of complaints,” he said. Lincoln-Way Board President Kevin Molloy said he was
favorable to the legislation because Hastings is trying to create a solid process for closing a school. He also had respect for Hastings since he was once a school board member for Orland Park-based District 230. “He has a lot of credibility with his colleagues down in Springfield and I think when
he speaks down there, he’s going to have a majority of the ears in a bipartisan way in what he has to say,” Molloy said. Hastings said he’s worked with state education experts and Lincoln-Way parents – including those who live in the boundaries of North high
school – on Senate Bill 2183. One of the most important parts of the bill is that public hearings would be required to be handled by an independent hearing officer in the event of a school closure, Hastings said. The No. 1 complaint he said he has heard from Lincoln-Way parents is that they weren’t listened to by district officials. Another state lawmaker proposed legislation Oct. 5 also influenced by Lincoln-Way. State Rep. Margo McDermed, R-Mokena, proposed a resolution to have the Illinois Auditor General conduct a performance audit for the school district. Superintendent Scott Tingley and Molloy were concerned about how the bill would affect their own efforts for a forensic and external audit. Molloy said McDermed’s bill would require the district to spend additional money and Tingley has said administrators would only want one audit done once rather than pay for it twice. “We’re not in a holding pattern that we weren’t in based on the timing of her bill,” Molloy said. A call Friday afternoon to McDermed was not immediately returned.
Economic development director not a dead issue in Joliet By BOB OKON bokon@shawmedia.com JOLIET – The City Council decision last week to hold off on special taxing districts did not necessarily kill economic development initiatives planned for 2016 – but it does mean officials could look elsewhere for funding to implement them. “I would like to hire an economic development director,” Mayor Bob O’Dekirk said Monday. O’Dekirk made economic development a campaign issue when he was elected in April. But the city will have to find other ways to fund an econom-
ic development director after the plan to create Special Service Areas was dropped. SSAs create special taxing districts for designated areas. A special property tax applied only to that district raises money to be used for the area. The proposal was on the agenda for a vote Tuesday that would have set in motion the legal process for eventually setting up the SSAs for 2016 taxes. The mayor said two suggestions by Councilman Larry Hug should be considered as officials look for alternatives. Hug wants the city to look at its own planning and development department staffing as well as re-examine how it
spends money on economic development, including $1 million spent on various entities in the downtown business district and Joliet’s share of funding the Will County Center for Economic Development. “We have to take a hard look at some of the other private organizations that receive subsidies from us and do economic development,” Hug said. “I don’t think we’re getting the biggest bang for our buck.” The city is in the process of preparing a budget for 2016. Hug said it’s a good time to look at how the city spends money related to economic development. The proposed taxing dis-
tricts would have generated $308,000 a year, and the money would have been used initially to hire an economic development staff focused on the SSAs, which would have been around the Louis Joliet Mall, along the Jefferson Street corridor, and in a wide area of the south end of Joliet. Hug said the city should look for ways to fund an economic development staff to work on all sections of Joliet. He wants the city to reconsider $600,000 a year that goes to the Rialto Square Theatre, noting that money often is called an investment in the downtown business district. Hug also wants the city to
re-examine $400,000 spent with the City Center Partnership, which promotes downtown. Hug also wants the city to look at the $125,000 a year that now goes to the Will County Center for Economic Development. O’Dekirk in retrospect said the SSA proposal was rushed. Asked if he would pursue it again, he said, “Maybe, but if we’re going to do it, I think we have to get some community buy-in. I definitely would do it differently.” But council members, some of whom said the proposal also took them by surprise, voted, 8-0, to remove the item from the agenda.