District 300 needs to look beyond classroom

If the vote tallies are any indication, the recent cuts in Community Unit District 300 were no easy decision.

At its latest meeting, the school board voted to lay off another 27 nontenured teachers at the end of this school year.

For technical reasons, there were several motions, and they all passed by a 4-3 vote. In each case, Dave Alessio, Anne Miller and Chris Stanton were in the minority.

The vote totals reflect a philosophical difference on the board. The majority, it seems, places a premium on balancing the budget next year based on the best data the district has available at the time.

Board President Joe Stevens has probably been the most forceful of this group. On Monday, he said, "I don't think that we can dig ourselves into a hole that we cannot dig ourselves out of."

The minority believes there's a certain point at which the damage to classroom education outweighs the need to present a balanced budget - especially based on information that changes by the week.

Alessio summed up the minority position when he said, "We can't just shut down the district for a year."

There's some merit to both sides of the debate.

As Stevens and others rightly point out, if the district doesn't lay off enough employees by a state-mandated deadline, it could find that its revenues don't cover its expenses and be forced to borrow to cover payroll, touching off a dangerous spiral of debt.

Of course, if the district finds itself with more cash than anticipated - as it would if Gov. Pat Quinn's budget proposal turns out to be a ploy to pass a tax increase or prompt real solutions - it can always rehire teachers.

In fact, that's what the district plans to do. Officials said Monday they plan to rehire 51 teachers for next year. While no one said this explicitly, I imagine the district would hire back more employees if it has unanticipated vacancies or more cash than expected.

As for the minority, the recent presentation by the district's staffing committee was a perfect illustration of their argument. That report showed class sizes will rise across the district, with some classes at the high schools expected to have more than 40 students.

The critical point to note is that it doesn't have to be that way - as board members Karen Roeckner and Chris Stanton pointed out recently. Which is to say, there are other places the district can cut that would have less of an impact on classroom instruction.

Superintendent Ken Arndt rightly noted that sports and other extracurricular activities are an important part of the district's educational mission.

But at a certain point, the harm to classroom education outweighs the benefits of keeping the extras untouched.

When more than 40 students are expected in some classrooms next year, I think it's fair to say we're at that point.