A Taxpayer's Guide to Surviving CUSD 200: Part V

Fellow taxpayers, we have several election issues to clarify and Tuesday is coming soon. So let's get started.

First off, you've been sold a bill of goods. The upcoming referendum is not "For the Kids" as the old saying goes. Don't let your heartstrings guide this decision. Treat this more as a scam you'd prefer not to be on the losing end of.

The upcoming referendum is a cleverly disguised fundraiser tied to a pension problem introduced (in part) by (in part) the four incumbents seeking re-election on Tuesday.

What do I mean?

I say "introduced (in part)" because these incumbents (thankfully) only vote for *our* district superintendent’s salary package. Given the power to do so for other superintendents around the state, they would have brought Illinois not merely to where it sits now financially (in 50th place out of 50 states) but rather down to the level of a few banana republics further south (both geographically and financially). So our CUSD 200 board is not responsible for the entire debacle. But just think what they could have done with greater responsibilities!

Think I'm kidding around? Follow this link.

Who voted to give former CUSD 200 Superintendent Catalani $380,000 in salary for his last year of employment a few years back?

Um... the incumbents running for re-election this Tuesday.

Voters, do you want some more insanity? Re-elect Joann Coghill, Barbara Intihar and Ken Knicker.

Oh... and also Brad Paulsen, anointed successor to another incumbent who voted for Catalani's salary.

I said this insanity was introduced by (in part) the above four incumbents. That's because nine fools voted in that salary package, and only four of them are represented in this coming election. (Three in the same flesh and blood and one as a new reincarnation.)

Best I can tell, all but possibly one of the above four incumbents was present for and voted in favor of Catalini's salary package. (If I'm confused, perhaps someone who knows the history better than I do can clarify.)

But we have a lot of ground to cover, so let's move on.

I said that this referendum is actually a Jumbo Pension Bailout. Why?

Well here's where things get a little interesting, because Brad Paulsen seems to have suffered a brief moment of transparency during the recent debates.

Here's the link, and if you listen in at the 49 minute and 40 second mark, you'll hear him answer the following question:

"How can the school district plan for potential changes with state pensions that may place a greater burden on the district, and would you support a tax rate increase to cover that as a solution?"

Now nothing in that question should direct our thoughts to this upcoming Jefferson referendum, right? Wrong.

Brad, in his answer, describes the linkage:

It is certainly hard to predict what Springfield's going to do. ... I know in our five-year financial projections it is planned for... I think it's very critical that we protect our current fund balance, and continue to build that in the event that something different comes out of Springfield, and that certainly ties to the Jefferson question..."

Certainly indeed!

Let me translate that into a lay taxpayer's English. CUSD 200 is planning for a pension problem over the next five years. Upcoming pension reform might require CUSD 200 to pay for things like former superintendent Catalani's $237,000 annual retirement pension. And free healthcare. Stuff like that.

Of course serious pension reform will require serious cash. So CUSD 200 wants to keep cash on hand.

So they don’t want to spend their own money on Jefferson. They want to spend yours.

Here we need to digress a bit.

You see, CUSD 200 wants you to think they have no cash.

But they do have cash. A lot of it. They said so themselves just last year. Exhibit A shows that the state of Illinois gave CUSD 200 $14 million in 2012 as a construction grant, and Exhibit A shows CUSD 200 suggesting it might be used for the Jefferson rebuild.

So what changed in the last twelve months?

Financially? Nothing.

The only thing that changed is that CUSD 200 got a brilliant idea. If Illinois paid for Jefferson the first time around, perhaps local taxpayers can be pursuaded to pay for it a second time.

How awesome would that be?

So yes, dear voters, it’s not a Jefferson Preschool Building Referendum. It’s a Jumbo Pension Bailout referendum. JPBR. Same initials. Different concepts.

CUSD 200 already have money for Jefferson. What they want now is money for the Pension storm coming down the pike.

But I’m not done with the incumbents just yet. Let's test their claims to transparency. There are four days left. How many incumbents will respond to one ore both of the following questions?

Question #1: Apparently Naperville recently finished an early childhood center too. Here’s a link to the article I’m looking at. So their project cost $11M and was for a 48,000 square foot building. The one you guys want us to pay for is only 20 percent bigger, but the price tag is about 60 percent higher. Why is this?

Question #2: ONLY 20 PERCENT BIGGER? As I understand it, Naperville has about 18,000 students. CUSD 200 has about 13,500 students. So why would we need a substantially bigger building than the one they built for a district that is 33 percent larger than CUSD 200?

There are other questions we might as of our incumbents. (For example, we might ask how Naperville did in 2010 for $11M what we were going to pay $14.3M to do back in 2009. Ah yes, Superintendent Harrris. Must be inflation.)

But we'll keep the list short. Two questions. Voters, don't hold your breath waiting for answers. Not from incumbents, anyway. Momentary lapses of Transparency don't persist for long. Not at CUSD 200.

Voters, there are five non-incumbent candidates to choose from. Vote for some combination of them. But please don’t vote for incumbents. We deserve better.

So let’s end this blog series on a humorous note. Brad Paulsen finished his answer to that pension question with the following words…

In terms of "Would I support a tax-rate referendum?" I would put that at the very bottom of my list and look for all other creative solutions to explore and work together to find other alternatives.

I am reminded of the old Monty Python skit...

"We could tax all foreigners living abroad!"

Failing that, we could always foist a Jumbo Pension Bailout Referendum onto CUSD 200 taxpayers and call it the Jefferson Preschool Building Referendum.

Votes will never look past the initials JPBR anyway.

It's for the kids. That's all voters have to know.