District 158, parents need to find middle ground

This month, officials in Huntley Unit District 158 have made an effort to improve their relationship with special education parents.

So far, the strategy appears to be off to a good start. At a series of meetings this month, District 158 board members and administrators have engaged in dialogue with parents about their concerns.

At the first meeting, Associate Superintendent Terry Awrey explained different types of decision-making to parents. As Awrey noted, it is important that parents and district officials understand the process that will ultimately be used to make special education decisions.

Parents need to understand that final decisions rest in the hands of empowered administrators and the board members who oversee them.

District officials need to appreciate that any decision must take into account the stated needs and wants of special-needs parents.

In the end, reasonable policies and decisions should fall somewhere between what parents want and district officials propose.

Officials have proposed spending half of the expected $1.6 million in federal stimulus funding for special education on areas other than special education.

I was a bit disappointed that Superintendent John Burkey, who is usually forthcoming, did not make this explicit at a meeting with parents on July 15.

"All of the (American Recovery and Reinvestment Act) money will be spent on special education," Burkey said. "Half of that can supplant (existing special education expenses)."

What he didn't say was that spending money on existing special education costs frees up money the district can spend elsewhere in its budget.

Comptroller Mark Altmayer, however, acknowledged that officials planned to use the stimulus money to plug budget holes this year.

District officials, though, need to do a better job of explaining to parents why they need the money this year. Parents, for their part, need to show why maintaining the district's financial health is not an appropriate use for the stimulus money and why the district's "funding cliff" argument lacks merit.

District officials argue they would face a funding cliff when new programs that were funded by federal stimulus dollars would suddenly find themselves without funding when the stimulus spigot is closed.

In this scenario, the district would be faced with several options, all of them objectionable: end the programs, cut from other areas to continue funding the programs, raise taxes or deficit spend.

For now, the large question of whether to use half the stimulus dollars elsewhere is looming in the background while officials and parents hash out the details of the half the district must spend on new initiatives.

Parents have proposed more staff training, technology and reading programs; district officials would spend the bulk on reading initiatives and much of the rest on technology and classroom equipment.

I will let you know what the district decides.