PEORIA -- Peoria School District 150 has branded former English teacher and frequent critic Sharon Crews a "recurrent requester" because district officials claim she has filed too many Freedom of Information Act requests in the previous year.
But alas for District 150, that's not true -- as Crews documented when she spoke to the Board of Education at its Oct. 11 meeting. Her remarks will be printed below, or you can hear them on the recording, also below.
Her "punishment" is that the district can take 21 days to respond to a request.
Of course, this is ridiculous -- district officials should be grateful to Crews who analyses what's really happening, as opposed to the rhetoric, by examining public records.
Why they screwed this up remains a mystery.
District 150 claims it wants transparency. But this is a sham. It has never made a move to reinstate live cable TV broadcasts of its meetings. It claims it's waiting for a call from the cable company, a call that never comes. But other Peoria organizations use cable broadcasts.
Here's what's really going on: the board killed the TV coverage because it does not like the critics that speak at board meetings during the public comment period. It tried to omit those for a while on the delayed TV broadcasts. But often that's the most interesting part of the meeting. That's why they are covered on this blog.
The board could also webcast the meetings live on its website, as other organizations do. It could use that as a teaching tool for students. That is never mentioned at board meetings.
Now the board is moving to hold one business meeting a month, and one 'committee of the whole' or discussion meeting a month. Alas for them, Illinois law requires public comment at all board meetings, the attorney told the board. (That's something the board has not been doing at other recent irregular meetings.)
At those meetings, the public comments will come after the discussion, instead of first, at the meeting, as occurs now.
Ugh! Now people will have to sit through the entire meeting just to make a comment to the board.
Board member Rick Cloyd suggested a trial run, by meeting on the fourth Monday of the month as a committee of the whole for four months, Nov., Jan. Feb. and March, to see if it works.
Other highlights from the public comments on Oct. 11:
Critic Terry Knapp pointed out that the teacher's union contract requires the union to meet with district officials, but there have been no meetings in two years.
Later Former board president Debbie Wolfmeyer said the board and union decided to waive that and not meet.
Knapp said teacher union president Bob Darling is ineligible to be a union member, because he was identified by Supt. Grenita Lathan as an administrator. Lathan later responded that an organizational chart that Knapp referred to just indicates Darling's responsibilities and not his actual title.
Hummm.
An employee at the Manual Academy for 7th and 8th graders told the board that the breakfast served to these students is inadequate, leaving them hungry, and bringing junk food such as bags of chips to school to supplement the breakfasts. The pupils are getting only a tiny wrapped pastry and orange juice which they must eat in the auditorium. They need cereal and fruit, she said.
Lathan later said the performance of the meal contractor Chartwell will be discussed.
Here's the audio of the public comments.
D150 Oct. 11
-- Elaine Hopkins
Here are the comments of Sharon Crews:
Fortunately, after I retired, I didn’t get out of the habit of documenting my dealings with District 150.
On October 5 I received the letter, passed out to you tonight, that states that District 150 is now restricting my freedom to write FOIAs to the status of Recurrent Requester.
First of all, I assume the new FOIA officer was asked to write the letter by someone with considerably more authority in District 150. She hasn’t been on the job long enough to make such an assessment, and the previous FOIA officer would have known better than to sign a letter containing accusations for which District 150 could not possibly have any proof.
I can, however, provide the documentation, which I have passed out to you tonight. There are three qualifications in the FOIA law that define a Recurrent Requester. I do not qualify on any of the three counts.
First, the letter states that I have submitted more than 50 FOIA requests in the 12 months preceding my last request. I have given you both my own account and my e-mail records, which show that from September 28, 2010, to September 28, 2011, I have submitted 31 requests. Therefore, you perhaps should start looking now for the non-existent 19 requests, in case the Attorney General asks for them.
As you will note, I did e-mail the FOIA site more often. The e-mails labeled as “not applicable” are most often my responses to e-mails sent to me by the FOIA officer, asking questions about my FOIAs or telling me when my FOIAs would be ready.
Secondly, the letter states that I submitted more than 15 requests within a 30-day period. In fact, the numbers submitted per month are 2, 5, 1, 5, 1, 5, 2, 2, 0, 0, 6, and 2. Six—one time--was the most I ever submitted in a month—that’s not even half of 15.
Thirdly, the letter states that I submitted more than 7 requests within a 7-day period. Take a look at the dates I have given you. A couple of times I did write 5 within 7 days—but 5 isn’t the new 7.
My punishment, as stated in the letter, is that District 150 now has 21 business days to respond to my requests. Obviously, none of the restrictions mentioned should apply since the entire letter is full of nothing but false accusations. At best, it was written with someone’s proverbial fingers crossed.
My September 28th FOIA asked for the cost of the social studies books and the science books purchased for this school year. On August 8, I submitted a FOIA requesting information, regarding the purchase of all instructional materials, including textbooks. I received no information with regard to the social studies books and the science books. Therefore, my September 28th FOIA specifically mentions those books. Why are you so reluctant to provide information about these transactions to which references have already been made publicly? I have also previously asked for information with regard to the possible connection between the purchase of these books and Dr. Owen Roberts. That FOIA request was still pending when I last spoke to the Attorney General’s office.
At the last board meeting, I heard Dr. Lathan tell the bus drivers in the audience that their negligence was the reason for the need for an outsourced bus company. Scheduling problems, late buses, not enough buses or drivers, longer walks to buses created by route changes—those are problems created by management decisions—they are out of the control of drivers. Can any of you document the same level of problems with buses before schools were closed and a new director came to town? Please demand documentation to support such accusations.
The desire to operate under the radar and with no criticism is becoming more and more apparent. I am hearing much above and under the radar that disturbs me.
A fairly strong rumor is that principals have been told that they are to be very, very cautious about suspending students. As long as people have scanners, the news of police being called to District 150 sites can’t be stifled. By noon on Tuesday I had heard of the melee at Manual and the call for police with tasers to report to Manual. A couple of weeks ago, reports of police being called to both Woodruff and Manual were reported. Peoria High has had its share of fights, also. Are any of these offending students being sent to the alternative site now at Woodruff?
I may be a recurrent pest, but I am not a recurrent requester.