Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Budget topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Evanston speakers press school board for budget transparency, urge pause on closures
Summary
Community members told the Evanston CCSD 65 board that proposed multi‑million‑dollar cuts and school closures demand public clarity; speakers also pressed for fair contracts for support staff and urged the board to follow voter preferences in filling a vacant seat.
Dozens of residents and educators used the board’s public comment period Monday to demand clearer numbers and a public discussion about steep budget cuts and pending school‑closure decisions. Kelly Post, speaking for more than 700 educators, warned, “There is no scenario in which cutting 10,000,000 from next year's budget will leave any student, program, or school untouched.”
Several speakers focused on how potential cuts would affect historically marginalized students and the district’s support staff. Morgan Tao, a fifth‑grade teacher at Washington Elementary, said support staff “are essential” and stressed they have been working without a contract, calling for the board to finalize closure decisions so it can prioritize negotiating fair pay and stability for those employees.
Terry Shepherd, chair of the NAACP education committee, framed the debate about closures in historical terms and urged the board to take responsibility for long‑running equity concerns, while urging the board on an impending appointment to “make the correct decision of who can best lead our district.” Lindsay White asked the board to be transparent about specific dollar amounts and whether the shortfall should be considered an emergency, citing a figure she said amounted to $3,670,000 in cuts to programming and staffing.
Parents and neighborhood advocates also urged the board to respect voter preferences in filling a vacant seat and to open meetings to the public where budget deliberations occur. Several speakers tied current budget choices to earlier decisions, including past loan agreements and contracts, and urged the board to explain the financial assumptions underpinning its proposals.
The board did not respond during the public comment period; staff later proceeded to scheduled presentations and agenda items. The board convened its discussion items after public comment and later approved construction and transportation contracts during the same meeting.
