Taxpayers can't afford Dist. 220 raises

It was interesting - and disheartening - to see Wednesday's (11/4/09) above-the-fold story on foreclosures just above its story on Barrington District 220's 3.9% (to start) raise for its teachers. In a time when thousands are losing their jobs and homes, school districts, dependent upon tax revenues to fund their budgets, still think raises are the order of the day. Where, pray, do these well (often, over)-educated and supposedly intelligent educators think this money will come from? And just how insensitive can they get?

Do teachers deserve raises? Probably. So do the rest of us. Do they work hard? Probably. So do the rest of us. Have their personal expenses gone up? Probably. So have the rest of ours. Would it be prudent, in the face of lowered tax revenues, to forgo raises for a year or two in order to be part of the solution instead of a huge part of the problem? Absolutely. But I'm not shocked that once again, teachers have stepped up to the bar and demanded money, money, and more money.

So, teachers, the last question I have is, Couldn't you go without at least the 3.9% greed increase during a time when the funds needed to pay that increase means yet another homeowner might lose his home to foreclosure? To anyone who accepts this filthy lucre in their next paycheck, shame on you. To the District 220 employee who loses his job because of it, my sympathies go out to you.

Pat Fuller

Elk Grove Village