John Devereux: Candidate profile

Bio

Name: John Devereux

City: Bartlett (26 year resident)

Office sought: School District U-46 School Board Member

Age (on Election Day): 52

Family: Wife - Niki, sons - James (21) & Peter (18)

Occupation: Chief Actuary, Ryan Specialty Group

Education: BS Actuarial Science - University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign

Civic involvement: Volunteered with Bartlett Park District over a period of about 15 years, active member of various school organizations, most recently, the leadership of the Bartlett High School Band Parent Organization for the last seven years. During these seven years, with the directors' support, we made great strides through the Band Parent Organization to increase parental engagement, coordinate effective communications, promote the profile of the band within the school and the Bartlett community, and to generally enhance the student experience.

Previous elected offices held: Current Member of U-46 School Board

Incumbent? If yes, when were you first elected? Incumbent, first appointed in June 2018

Website: www.jd-u46board.org

Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/JDevereuxU46Board/

Twitter: https://twitter.com/U46John

Issue questions

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

The success and well-being of our nearly 40,000 students form the foundation of what we expect from School District U-46. Accordingly, we need to see growth in academic progress across the district, improvements in early education, and broader / equitable access to programs. Some of these can be achieved through upgrades to facilities, additional focus on class sizes, further investments in student and teacher supports, and enhanced community engagement and outreach efforts. Ultimately, we need to explore and invest responsibly in proven and creative strategies. As ideas are researched, presented, and implemented, we (the U-46 Board Members) need to establish clear goals and metrics for success. Progress must be routinely monitored and measured and our investments and programs subjected to continuous evaluation. Finally, we need to do all of this in a disciplined manner, mindful not to increase the property tax burden on our area residents.

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?

It's important to acknowledge U-46's successes and the progress made, yet simultaneously, ask for more and jointly work on areas that need continued attention. We've seen successes in full-day kindergarten, academies and technical education, dual language programs, special education, one-to-one technology, and reductions in primary school class sizes. Yet with evolving college and career landscapes, we need to continuously evaluate progress and results at all levels. We must start with early education as reports suggests that most children aren't prepared for kindergarten. We need to expand community partnerships so that our students are better situated for educational success. We need to ensure proven, successful programs are maintained while considering and deploying new programs. For example, we need to critically examine Educational Pathways and, if it does makes sense, ensure its deliberate and well-executed implementation. Likewise, we need to continue to evaluate how to effectively use technology in the classroom, in ways that address different learning styles and appropriately prepare our students for 21st century opportunities and challenges. Finally, across all of these programs, efforts should be made to address the gaps in achievement across the district and to advance the prospects for all within the diverse U-46 community that we serve.

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.

Contributions to U-46 from local sources already exceed the local capacity and, as a longtime area resident, I understand the impact of property taxes on our community. As a result, I recognize that there is no appetite for growth in the local property tax burden. To address concerns over property taxes and inequities in school funding across the state, in 2018 the state of Illinois increased funding to local schools, including U-46, using an evidence based funding method. I applaud this progress and will support continued efforts to pursue equitable and adequate school funding from the state of Illinois. With these developments, the financial position and economic outlook for U-46 is markedly improved over recent years and we are presently well-positioned to make wise investments that can move U-46 forward. Yet, as financial constraints will always be present, I will encourage and support responsible use and allocation of resources. My career as an actuary has largely been in a governance function - I've had a fiduciary responsibility to ensure that my organizations are acting with due care in their processes and financial activities and I will bring that sense of stewardship to the U-46 Board.

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?

Neither I, nor any member of my family, is currently employed by or retired from a school district.

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?

Teachers and related support staff are responsible for the very significant tasks of educating and tending to the well-being of our nearly 40,000 students on a day-to-day basis. As a result, I believe they deserve our appreciation and respect. Further, as in nearly all situations, I believe attracting, empowering, developing, and retaining a top-tier workforce is critical to the success of our collective efforts. However, there are certainly economic limitations and we are further subject to regulations, restrictions, and mandates from the state. Further, the board, administration, teachers, and other district staff have a shared responsibility to be good stewards of community resources. With all of this in mind, during contract discussions, each side will need to make concessions in a way that is deemed fair for all constituent parties and in a way that best serves the interests of the students.

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?

It is well-understood that the state of Illinois faces significant financial difficulties due, in part, to pension liabilities. As a result, I believe that late-career salary adjustments that serve to substantially boost pension costs is not a financially sound course of action. Practices such as those presented in the question here should be carefully scrutinized and, if they put additional undue pressure on pension liabilities (and/or area property taxes), they should be avoided.