Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Comment Edtech Budget topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Parents, staff press District 65 on spending, enrollment and EdTech privacy during packed public comment
Summary
More than two dozen parents and school staff urged clearer fiscal decision-making, asked the board to prioritize student‑facing services over administrative growth, raised alarm about enrollment declines, urged support for SACC and requested audits or opt‑out options for i‑Ready and other EdTech over data‑privacy and efficacy concerns.
At the start of the meeting more than two dozen people used the public comment period to press the board on a cluster of related concerns: the district's fiscal strategy and transparency, falling enrollment, the future of the SACC (school‑age childcare) program, and alleged privacy and effectiveness problems with the i‑Ready curriculum.
Speakers included district principals and administrators, parents and community activists. Multiple school leaders — including Nicole Fishman (principal, Nichols Middle School), Chris Lading (principal, Haven Middle School) and Chloe Battle (principal, Willard Elementary) — urged the board to stabilize governance, to communicate decisions promptly and to prioritize supports for students and staff.
Parents and advocates repeatedly called attention to the district's fiscal pressures and administrative costs. A speaker citing Studio GC and internal analysis said the district faces millions in cuts and large deferred capital needs; self‑described "data nerds" urged administrative headcount scrutiny and proposed internal benchmarking to identify safe savings without cutting student‑facing roles.
Several speakers from ScreenSense Evanston and other parent groups asked the board to audit i‑Ready and other online platforms and to adopt a parent opt‑out for the 2027–28 school year, citing a recent federal lawsuit alleging data collection and sharing by Curriculum Associates. One commenter asked whether the district had obtained parental consent under COPPA and FERPA; another urged the district to provide a paper/analog option while an audit proceeds.
Longtime SACC employees and parents asked the board to reconsider recent operational changes that eliminated summer and flex care options and described SACC historically as a self‑sustaining program that generated revenue; staff warned the changes would reduce access and stability for families.
Board members heard repeated requests for a frank, districtwide conversation about a potential capital bond referendum to address large near‑term needs, and for rapid, transparent decisions that balance financial sustainability with educational quality. The board responded in part by scheduling community input events and asking staff for specific cost and enrollment analyses ahead of June meetings.
The public comment period concluded after about an hour and a half of statements; board members and staff noted the comments would be part of the public record and used to inform upcoming SDRP and facilities decisions.
