Kelly Morrissey: Candidate profile

Bio

Name: Kelly Morrissey

City: Des Plaines

Office sought: District 62 School Board Member

Age: 38

Family: Patrick Morrissey (husband), two daughters (ages 8 and 4)

Occupation: District 207 Director of Personal Learning and Student Support

Education: BA Psychology (University of Dayton), MEd Principal Preparation Program (Concordia University Chicago), PhD Educational Psychology (Loyola University Chicago)

Civic involvement: Parent Teacher Committee Ways and Means Committee Chair (Forest Elementary School), Strategic Action Group volunteer (District 62)

Previous elected offices held: None

Incumbent? If yes, when were you first elected? N/A

Website: None

Facebook:

Twitter: @DrKMorrissey

Issue questions

What are the most important issues facing your district and how do you intend to address them?

We need clearer and more efficient systems to ensure that all learners are getting access to what they need in order to help them achieve their full potential, and clearer ways to communicate those systems and results to all stakeholders within the schools and the community. There are lots of great examples of curriculum, creative instructional practices, interventions, enrichment opportunities, etc. happening in District 62, but there may be inconsistencies in what students have access to, and what their outcomes are, when looking across the district as a whole.

How satisfied are you that your school district is adequately preparing students for the next stage in their lives, whether it be from elementary into high school or high school into college or full-time employment? What changes, if any, do you think need to be made?

I believe that many students leave District 62 well-prepared for success, but I think we could be more consistent and intentional with how their experiences are planned out over the grade levels. I would like to see the alignment mapped out carefully all the way from the Early Learning Center up to the transition from eighth grade into the high school district, to ensure that not only are the academic skills aligned well to build upon each other each year, but also that we are teaching skills such as organization, time management, self advocacy, respectful and cooperative interactions with others, etc. in a way that each stage of education is aligned to prepare students for the next. I would love to see systematic plans to help students learn and experience a wide variety of potential career interests, and to begin financial literacy education early on, to help them plan out their futures.

What budgetary issues will your district have to confront during the next four years and what measures do you support to address them? If you believe cuts are necessary, be specific about programs and expenses that should be considered for reduction or elimination. On the income side, do you support any tax increases? Be specific.

According to the District 62 Illinois School Report Card, and presentations made to the community by the Strategic Action Planning leaders, we are fortunate to be in good financial health. The School Board will need to monitor attendance projections and both federal and state funding changes to ensure the financial health remains stable, but I do not foresee any major budgetary issues in the next four years based on the information I have had access to. In general, I think district administrative teams and board members should always do a very careful analysis of spending, and look for creative ways to work within the current budget and/or cut other expenses, before considering cutting programs or staff, or asking for any tax increases.

Are you currently employed by or retired from a school district, if so, which one? Is any member of your direct family - spouse, child or child-in-law - employed by the school district where you are seeking a school board seat?

I am currently employed by Maine Township High School District 207, and was previously employed by Chicago Public Schools. No members of my family are employed by District 62.

As contract talks come up with various school employee groups - teachers, support staff, etc. - what posture should the school board take? Do you believe the district should ask for concessions from its employees, expect employee costs to stay about the same as they are now or provide increases in pay or benefits?

I would need more detailed information to answer this question in an informed way. Any time a district considers asking for concessions, there should be clear evidence indicating a serious financial need to do so, and prior to asking employees to make concessions, a careful analysis should be completed (and presented transparently)

of all spending plans, and where concessions have been made at the administrative level. Based on the financial health and projections of District 62, I would be surprised to find such evidence in the near future. The same careful consideration should be given before increasing pay or benefits. I would want to see detailed information that there is a need. In some cases, it can be difficult to fill positions and retain staff unless wages and/or benefits become more competitive, as people will make choices that allow them to care for themselves and their families adequately. In those cases, a careful analysis of the budget should take place to determine how money can be allocated differently, or nonessential spending cut from the budget, in order to make those changes.

If your district had a superintendent or other administrator nearing retirement, would you support a substantial increase in his or her pay to help boost pension benefits? Why or why not?

I would not support a substantial pay increase for an administrator nearing retirement simply to help boost his or her pension benefits. I am currently in a 10-month administrator position in District 207, and would find a bump in pay at the end of my career (especially with no other rationale or reason to merit it) unethical. Administrators have higher salaries (and thus larger pension benefits) than most staff members, so they already have a financial advantage without this type of end-of-career increase. Arbitrarily boosting pension benefits at the end of an administrator's career arbitrarily puts an extra strain on district resources (and thus taxpayers).