EDITORIALS

A Delicate Balance

In the next few weeks Evanstonians will get to weigh in - and City Council will vote - on both the lakefront master plan and the proposal for a 49-story mixed-use high-rise in the downtown area. In essence, both the lakefront and the downtown are public places.

Even though the location of the high-rise is privately owned, the downtown area is, as City officials have been saying for the past few months, everybody's downtown. And most of the lakefront, with its five beaches and tree-lined parks, is open to all.

The two sites are very different. The downtown area is a place to meet and to dine; it is a place to be enriched and a place to be entertained. The lakefront is a place that offsets this activity by offering solitude and recreation: quiet walkways, bicycle paths, picnic areas, beaches and the lake itself.

But both are parts of Evanston, and, as such, should be considered together as residents take on the challenge of ascertaining the functions and the future of each.

With close-packed neighbors on three sides, the City has no place to "sprawl" except upward. In terms of space and when trying to attract commerce, Evanston has only height and density to trade.

We have made concessions. The result is our busy but often congested, thriving but not wholly charming, downtown.

Even under our present zoning code, developers James Klutznick and Tim Anderson could build as massive and dense residential/retail development as David Hovey built at the corner of Elgin Road and Benson Avenue.

Given the fact that our downtown is and appears likely to continue to be a hot commodity, it is imperative that we pay attention to the metamorphosis of our City.

At this point, there is no going back. From being a slow-paced city of easy tolerance and intellectual curiosity, we have suddenly become - let's face it - hip and attractive, a place to spend an entire evening.

How we manage this popularity - accommodating shoppers and diners as well as the new residents - is a challenge for everyone in Evanston.

But this new status should give us a little more leverage. At this point we should be able to be choosy, saying "yes" only to acceptable proportions, scale and character (of design and business) in downtown.

The increased in lights, shadows, traffic and crowds in the downtown area will reverberate throughout Evanston, making it even more critical that our vision for the future of the downtown take into account what we want for the lakefront.

While we do not want Evanston to become "Chicago North," we can learn some lessons from our southern neighbor. From the rubble of the Chicago fire came the idea for Grant Park and the concept of keeping the lakefront clear of commercial and other buildings, and open for the people.

Chicago and Evanston have both done a pretty good job of preserving the lakefront. The passing of time makes our forebears' efforts seem even more foresighted and valuable. Let us take our time and deliberate carefully, in the hope that future generations will say the same about the decisions we as a City face.

Locked In

By Charles Wilkinson

My inner guru has a way of catching my attention at the oddest times. This morning, for instance, at 3:47 a.m., he woke me with the idea for this column. I was dreaming of a good friend, who over the years has given me a sense of life and self I would not otherwise have.

When we first met, well over 20 years ago, he frightened me with his gruffness and what I thought was anger. He came at me in therapy as a businessman, doing what good businessmen do when they have a problem - demanding answers. His problem was marital, familiar to many marriages, but particularly vexing to him.

An outdoorsman and, as anyone who knew him would attest, a man's man, he was more frustrated than angry, more direct than demanding - and relentlessly honest. He came alone the first time, but it was obvious his problem belonged to the marriage, not just to him.

They were new empty-nesters and he, more than she, wanted to reclaim a life of his own. He also wanted to find a freedom he had put on hold. But they both were still locked into patterns that had defined their family for years.

The busy-ness of raising children defined their lives of doing things together and as a family that worked well for those years. But with their children grown up and gone, the man and his wife began to bump into the differences between them.

It did not take long for both of them to realize those differences would not go away. They worked hard to confront the patterns of the past and eventually claimed a freedom, uncomfortable at first, for their separate selves while maintaining the connecting points of their marriage. In the process they found their own answers while I, in retrospect, gained some insights for my retirement years.

The poet John Ciardi, in "Most Like an Arch This Marriage," describes marriage as "a lock in time." It is what every love story should be. But marriage itself was never meant to be a lock-up, where two disappear into one.

Truth is, even in marriage two stay two when it comes to differences. The work is in recognizing and living with them, since differences rarely disappear. In healthy marriages, living with differences does not mean merely tolerating or putting up with them. It means being clear about them, respecting and making room for them, specifically those that define a person.

There is a freedom to be found in one's later years, even in marriage. If the love story is truly a "lock in time," such freedom can hold a sense of new life, both for the marriage and the differences within it.

Beast That Taunt, Daunt and Haunt

By Peggy Tarr

I had planned to write about something else, but after listening to the lamentations of several people about beastly situations, I decided to put my planned writing aside and offer a catharsis for those suffering at the hands of beasts.

In recent years, there has been much written about bullies, examining and reporting on the phenomenon in various countries. Unfortunately, this phenomenon crosses all nationalities, colors, sizes, ages, sexes. An equal opportunity phenomenon! Humans in action! However, some countries and some leaders excel (to be greater than, not better than) in bullying, and we don't have to go out of our country to witness this.

But the people talking to me about their situations were focusing on their everyday work environments the daily, have-to-work-for-a-living bullying. Bosses who put them down in front of others was a common complaint.

Another was supervisors/managers giving each other the isn't-this-person-a-joke look or sneer during meetings.

Without a doubt, companies that empower emotionally dysfunctional people (bullies) are making a commentary on the company's well-being (or more accurately, its lack of well-being).

It still amazes me how people claim to be civilized but constantly display barbaric behavior (e.g., not greeting personnel; demoting/not promoting persons based on age, sex, sexuality, color, ethnicity, etc.; withholding needed materials; refusing to recognize/not giving the floor to a person during meetings; giving a person jeering/insulting looks; belittling/snickering at a person or sharing a isn't-this-an idiot look with another; dismissing/discrediting/stealing a person's suggestion; withholding information; looking a person up and down as though the person is up for sale, etc.).

Movies frequently showed bullies as oversized kids. Well, we know that stereotype's not right. Universally, bullies are immature, insecure minuses whose desire to prove their worth through bullying only reaffirms their dysfunction. Bullies who physically abuse children or adults are another story.

Beast: originally, any animal except man; a person who is brutal, gross or vile.
Catharsis: the purifying or relieving of the emotions by bringing them to consciousness or giving them expression.
Taunt: to reproach scornfully.
Daunt: to make afraid or discourage.
Bully: a person who hurts, frightens, or browbeats those who are smaller or weaker (ironically, originally bully meant sweetheart, lover).

Letters to the Editor

LETTER FROM SHARON SHEEHAN
Dear Members of the District 65 Community:

Dear Members of the District 65 Community:

In April 2005, more than 6500 Evanston/Skokie voters elected me to the District 65 Board of Education on a message of "Vote for Change," to change some of the practices at District 65.
It is now apparent that, despite my best efforts and those of by far the top vote-getters in the last three School Board elections, change will not come. Because, under these circumstances, I cannot fulfill the mission I was elected to pursue, I am hereby tendering my resignation as a member of the District 65 Board of Education.

I came to this Board with the expectation that District 65 could indeed be "the Lighthouse District," that it could provide its students with outstanding educational leadership.  I was naive enough to think that we could have leadership that actually relied on sound information and judgment to plan ahead for the fiscal and instructional needs of our District. 

I believed - and I still believe - that we can do better than a leadership that lets more than 500 students leave our District virtually unacknowledged, with no analysis of the causes and no planning for the consequences. 

I believed - and I still believe - that we can do better than a leadership that watches our technology age into obsolescence and then suddenly asks for millions of dollars while saying, "Give us the money and we'll show you a plan."

I have been told that my expectations for our district are too high.

I do not believe that we can ever expect too much for the education of our children.  We may not achieve all that we aim for, but that is no excuse for not aiming high. Sadly, this is not the prevailing view among either the elected or the appointed leadership of this District.

I cannot accept that what we have is "good enough" and still remain true to my personal ideals and to those who elected me to pursue them.

The highest quality education is, and long has been, the focus of my aspirations.  I will continue to pursue such excellence in my professional career as a teacher, where, I now know, unlike my position as a Board member, I can have some hope of success.
-- Sharon Sheehan

On Supt. Murphy Contract Renewal
Dear Editor:

We understand that the District 65 Board is scheduled to vote on a proposal to extend Superintendent Hardy Murphy's contract for an additional three years at its Sept. 24th Board meeting.  A three-year extension would extend Dr. Murphy's contract from June 2009 to June 2012.

Three new District 65 School Board members, Katie Bailey, Bonnie Lockhart, and Keith Terry, took office only four months ago, on May 15, 2007.  We feel it is improper for the District 65 Board to be taking a vote on this important matter at this time.  Rescheduling the vote until the end of the 2007-2008 academic year would allow these new Board members time to draw more informed, experienced opinions.  It would also give the full Board a chance to gain additional perspective on progress towards the four goals for 2007-2008 and time to consider the future.

Selecting a Superintendent for our District is the foremost responsibility of the District 65 Board of Education.  We owe the new Board members, and those that supported them, the opportunity to gain twelve months experience before voting on this important topic.  To rush this decision is unnecessary and irresponsible. 
-Kim Reynolds

And More on Supt. MurPHy Contract Renewal
Editor:

I read with interest in the Evanston RoundTable that the board will be voting on a proposal to extend Superintendent Hardy Murphy's contract for an additional three years.

Rather than extending Dr. Murphy's stay, I hope that the District 65 Board will  begin a search for a new superintendent. 

Hardy Murphy, over the course of his tenure, has created an atmosphere of disorganization and conflict.  Rather than working in an organized constructive fashion and creating a school district that Evanstonians can feel confident in, Murphy has created an atmosphere that pits Gen Ed against TWI against ACC;  additionally, programs are whipped together, and as a result, a mediocre education for our children. Additionally, a strong curriculum of differentiation is not in place. It is important that all students, from those that struggle to those that work above grade level have the approriate materials, challenges, successes and encouragement, but I am sure if there was, it too would be mediocre. Our children deserve better than this.   

D65 should have better leadership at its helm.

While we are still Evanston residents, after a dissatisfying 2ND grade year and a bleak look at what D65 has to offer gifted children, we have opted to send our son to a private school. Unsurprisingly, at this school, we have met other former D65 families. 

Recently, I have spoken with parents of different racial and economic backgrounds who have either left Evanston, have gone the private school route, or are checking out private schools for next year.  Dissatisfied with the status quo, parents are pulling their children out of D65 schools.
  
In the past, I have heard some parents say, "Let them leave. It's more money for the students that stay."   This is short-sighted thinking.  Families that remain in Evanston and opt for the private schools are also the same people that will vote down any future referendum.  Additionally, families leaving the schools does not bode well for an already poor real estate market.  It's common knowledge that the quality of the schools is a major factor for families moving into a community.  The quality of our schools should be a reason for people to move to Evanston - not leave.

The Evanston Public School System is an issue not only for D65 families, but all residents.  The quality of education affects the sale-ability of our homes.

Rather than pitting the parents of the different programs against each other and creating a district that is not functioning cohesively, why not hire a leader that can help create strong programs that we all can be proud of and the children will benefit from?  For the amount of money we pay in real estate taxes, Evanston schools should exemplify best practice models.  Why settle for mediocrity?  Our tax dollars need to be better utilized, and the taxes we pay should not be used to pay a salary of $198,981 plus $33,000 in housing and car allowances to an individual who creates discord and promotes mediocrity..
- Rebecca Groble Hull

State Reps to Hold Meetings on Impact of State Budget
Editor,

You may know that this year's state budget process was especially challenging, with lengthy budget negotiations continuing throughout most of the summer.

The final budget, however, provided funding for crucial services for youth, seniors, developmentally disabled individuals, crime prevention and environmental protection.

Regrettably, Governor Blagojevich has amended the budget to reduce or eliminate funding for existing programs and important local services.

To help our constituents better understand the impact of the Governor's budget vetoes on programs and services in the north suburbs, we invite you to join us at a public hearing on Tuesday, Sept. 25, from 4 to 6 p.m. at the Northbrook Village Hall, 1225 Cedar Lane. For more information, please call 847-433-9100.

We hope to see you there.
--State Representatives
Julie Hamos - 18th,847-424-989
Karen May - 58th, 847-433-910
Elaine Nekritz - 57th, 847-257-045

What You Probably Don't Know
About the No Child Left Behind Act
Editor:

As a member of Veterans for Peace, I have been involved in counter-recruiting for the past two years. We advise students on how they may serve their country in ways other than the military. We are not anti-military. We simply want to make sure that our young people have thought through what they are doing.

The reason for this letter is to inform readers that Section 9528 of the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 requires schools to provide private information about your children to military recruiters unless you opt out in writing. You can do this by completing an opt-out form provided by your child's school or by contacting the American Friends Service Committee.

For information about counter-recruiting visit the Northwest Suburban Peace and Education Project at their website at www.nwsubpep.org.
--Rick Davis

Manipulation of Illinois School Test Scores Makes Real Change Unclear
Editor:

On Aug. 14, the News Hour on PBS reported on how public school test scores can be manipulated to appear better than they really are. While several states were used as examples, Illinois' manipulations were mentioned several times.

People differ on the value of tests, but the results should be accurate and complete.

If the scores of Evanston students were subject to any of these manipulations, the School Boards owe it to the parents and taxpayers to publish the revised statistics in the same papers in which they were originally published.

Some of the issues with the scores are as follows:
1. Schools can add a "confidence interval" to scores. For example, if a score of 50 is required and the student had a score of 25, they could add as much as 30 points "confidence interval" and the student would "pass." In a political race you might hear a report of 40 percent of voters +/- 2 points -- not 30.
2. Schools can exclude groups that are not large enough. For example, if they set 40 as the number of Hispanic students to qualify, and they only have 35 students, that group would not be reported in their statistics -- they are "invisible." The results should report all students whether they in a "large enough" group or not, otherwise we can't really judge success.
3. The state [City?] can create and report results of its own test. There are numerous examples of states showing their own results as ranking them at the top, but national tests showing that state at the bottom.
4. It was not clear, but it sounded like schools can choose to report by groups and never give the individual ranges for all students.
5. Recently the "Pass" level of tests has been lowered. Results should be stated in terms of the original "Pass" level so parents and taxpayers can compare apples with apples.
6. Schools have "back-loaded" the standards; the 2014 (?) goals have been weighted to see the major part of the improvement in the latter years instead of a steady level of increase compliance/improvement in each year.
--John Fuqua

Public Input Needed Before D65 Board Votes on Renewing Superintendent Contract
Editor:

I recently heard through the parents' "buzz" that District 65 Board will be voting on the renewal of Dr. Hardy Murphy's contract for Superintendent in the next two weeks. Considering that the Superintendent is accountable to students, parents, teachers and staff members in District 65, I am very surprised the Board is not publicizing this news formally to the public.

Moreover, I am very disappointed that the Board will not be taking the "pulse" of the school community to help them assess their view of his performance. It would really benefit the community if not only the Board but also the principals, teachers, parents, and other administrators had an opportunity to assess Dr. Murphy's performance.

Such a 360-degree review of an executive-level employee is now common practice in most organizations. Why should our Superintendent be immune to a thorough evaluation of his performance?

What is also disturbing is the urgency with which District 65 Board is pushing through the contract-renewal agenda.As it stands, Dr. Murphy's present contract will not expire till June 30, 2009. And we are voting now, three years early, to extend his contract for three more years, till June 30, 2012?

Five and one-half years seems like an awfully long time for an organization to lock into any key individual. Even the U.S. president only gets four years, and he gets voted in three months before he takes office.A few may then say that it takes some time for a Superintendent search, and thus there is the need for action now.

But, as exemplified by the Board of District 202, when the last Superintendent of 202 left earlier than expected, it took the Board of 202 a few months for the whole process - the search, interview, public input and the final vote.

Why does District 65 need to act on a renewal contract so far ahead of time?

What is going on here?
--Dr. Thawivann Spalding

Leadership, Not Contract Extension, Needed at D65
Editor:

I am strongly opposed to extending Dr. Murphy's contract. As a District 65 parent, I have not been happy with how he has made decisions, especially for our school at Oakton.

We need new leadership, we need someone who will earn the respect of parents, teachers, staff and Board Members, and I have found little evidence to support that Dr. Murphy has been able to do this.

It's time for new leadership.
-Robyn Hurtig

Objects to Cartoon
Editor:

I have always appreciated your complete and even-handed coverage of Evanston news. But that cartoon (p 7, 09/05 issue) struck me as being way below the belt. How are football games "harmful to people in the area"?

My neighbors and I who have lived in "the area" for years love the fall football game atmosphere and certainly have never been "harmed" in any way. We saw the stadium complex when we bought our homes and knew what went on there.
-- Frederica Whiting

Suffredin Co-Sponsors Work Day at Harms Flatwoods
Friends:

On Saturday, Sept. 29, from 9 a.m. to noon, I am co-sponsoring a workday at Harms Flatwoods with Commissioner Gregg Goslin and the North Branch Restoration Project in honor of National Public Lands Day.

National Public Lands Day is the nation's largest hands-on volunteer effort to improve and enhance the public lands American's enjoy. To learn more about this annual event, visitwww.publiclandsday.com.

Harms Flatwoods is located in Skokie, bounded by Golf, Harms, Old Orchard and Woods Road. The work-day activities will be in the southeast corner of the area.

Volunteers of all ages are encouraged to join us for as long as they wish to participate. All tools and supplies will be provided. To register, contact Mike Gwinn at 312-603-6383 or by email at mgwinn@sufferdin.org. Student groups are asked to register their participation by Sep. 27.

Thank you in advance for your support of our Forest Preserves.
--Larry Suffredin,
Cook County Commissioner

Readers: 'Improper' to Extend Murphy's Contract Now
Editor:

We understand that the District 65 Board is scheduled to vote on a proposal to extend Superintendent Hardy Murphy's contract for an additional three years at its Sept. 24 Board meeting. A three-year extension would extend Dr. Murphy's contract from June 2009 to June 2012.

Three new District 65 School Board members, Katie Bailey, Bonnie Lockhart, and Keith Terry, took office only four months ago, on May 15, 2007. We feel it is improper for the District 65 Board to be taking a vote on this important matter at this time.

Rescheduling the vote until the end of the 2007-2008 academic year would allow these new Board members time to draw more informed, experienced opinions. It would also give the full Board a chance to gain additional perspective on progress toward the four goals for 2007-2008 and time to consider the future.

Selecting a Superintendent for our District is the foremost responsibility of the District 65 Board of Education. We owe the newBoard members, and those that supported them, the opportunity to gain12 months' experience before voting on this important topic. To rush this decisionis unnecessary andirresponsible.
-- Mahmoud Ajamia, Francine Allen, Michael Allen, Kris Anderson, Jan Ashton, John Bates, Jane Berkley, John Berkley, Bill Boyce, Kristin Brown, Cheryl Chamberlain, Jean Fies, Steve Fiete, Cathy Giella, Evan Girard, Michael Girard, Henry Godinez, Nancy Godinez,Liz Goldenberg, Cathy Grimsted, Sarah Hanson, Birdy Holzmueller, Keith Holzmueller, Kim Hoopingarner, Amy Howard, Karen Johnson, Chris Kenney, Maureen Kenney, Julie Kimmel, Teresa Klier, Thomas Klier, Henry Kohn, Laura Kristek, Beth Lange, Lisa Levy, Gretchen Livingston, Kathleen Long, Nicole Marks, Perry Marks, Marjorie MacLean, Robyn McMurray, Elizabeth Meadows, Anne Murdoch, Caitlin Nichols, David Nichols, Elizabeth Quinn, William Quinn, Steve Reinfranck, Deborah Schultz, Paul Schultz, Elaine Siegel, Elizabeth Smiley, Rachel Sobel, Tim Sonder, John Spalding, Dr. T. Spalding, Amy Teschner, Maret Thorpe, Lois Trautvetter, Lohra Vogel, Michael Walker, Jim Young, Karen Young, Jacqueline Shohet Zabin and Lilliana Barro Zecker.

Veteran Responds to Fountain Square Articles
Editor:

Here is a veteran's perspective to the article "Once Upon A Time in Evanston" written by Janet G. Messenger and printed in the Sept. 5 issue of the RoundTable.

The article is well-written. However, the history of Fountain Square, the Veterans observances and the veterans' memorials are intertwined and I was disappointed at some omissions and inconsistencies. For example, in parts of the article the author extols the memorials, but then she concludes that the memorials should be moved to a drainage canal site on land that is not owned by the City of Evanston. It certainly raises the question whether the history was written merely as a guise to attack the veterans' memorials.

Memorial Day observances have continued in Evanston since 1867, the year before General John Logan (National Commander of the Grand Army of the Republic) proclaimed May 30, 1868, as Memorial Day.

Here are some veterans' celebrations and occasions I wish she had chosen to include:

The Centennial Fountain in Fountain Square was dedicated July 4, 1876; hence the name Fountain Square. The first Armistice (now known as Veterans Day) was celebrated there in 1919. On June 1, 1944, the honor roll next to the fountain displayed 72 names of the war dead. A procession more than a mile long passed by.

In 1945 the Garden Clubs of Evanston supported a new Veterans Memorial at the present plot.

In 1946 V-E Day and V-J Day were celebrated at the Square with throngs filling the area.

In 1947 General Charles Gates Dawes, former vice president of the United States stated, "The Memorial is appropriate in every way to its purpose of honoring those who gave their lives for their Country."

George Haskell, chairman for the Memorial Committee stated, "In World War II alone, more than 7,000 men and women from Evanston gave their service to the military forces. More than 220 of these could not return. Our City had several thousand of its soldiers and sailors serving in World War I. More than two score of these failed to return, and this City played its full part in the Spanish-American War, and also in the Civil War."

Civic, religious and industrial leaders, as well as local institutions such as the Chamber of Commerce, Northwestern University, the Lions Club and the Rotary Clubs, all supported the idea of a war memorial at Fountain Square.

On Nov. 17, 1949, a granite memorial was dedicated on the present site.

In 1951, on April 27, Douglas MacArthur, General of the Army, honored Evanston by placing a wreath on the Memorial. Among his words were these: "If the fathers and mothers of the boys from Evanston who made the supreme sacrifice in the War wish me to lay a wreath on this Memorial, that is the least I should do."

In November of 1951 a stone tablet commemorating the visit of the General was placed at the base of the flagpole.

The present Memorial, dedicated on July 4, 1976, is configured in a 9,200-square-foot park consisting of three free-standing columns with five plaques with brass embossed names of each of Evanston's 351 Gold Star Veterans and three octagonal fountains with reflecting pools.

Having lived in Evanston for 85 years, I must reply to certain statements made by Ms. Messenger. She writes: "In 2003 the Square was officially renamed Fountain Square-Veterans Memorial Plaza, but the name never took."

Is Ms. Messenger privy to information that is not available to anyone else? Is she aware that prior to 2003 most new residents knew the site of the memorial but they did not know the location of Fountain Square?

"The fountain at Fountain Square should be a symbol of Evanston, of its people, its achievements and its aspirations."
The Memorial has a great cultural impact by educating generations about the struggles of Evanston's 351 Gold Star Veterans who fought, bled and gave their lives for each Evanstonian to be free and to be able to pursue his/her aspirations in the community as it is known today.

Ms. Messenger quotes a long-time Evanston resident saying she never loved the war memorial fountain as much as she did the Centennial fountain.

I assume the purpose of this quote and Ms. Messenger's comment is to express opposition to the Memorial. I feel that no number of fountains of types of fountains can equate to the life of one Gold Star Veteran.

Sadly, at this time when most communities are improving and expanding their memorials, Evanston's veterans must be continually on the alert for individuals planning ways to remove the memorial from a site of prominence and perhaps even from a site of visibility.
-- Robert A. Larson, WWII Veteran

Ed. Note: Ms. Messenger's history articles are written to be illustrative, not inclusive. They appeared in the Aug. 22 and Sept. 5 issues of the RoundTable.

Janet Messenger replies: Through the years, Fountain Square has been used for myriad community purposes, including honoring the contributions of our military in times of war. Like other grateful Evanstonians, I am happy to salute Evanston's war dead in a prominent way.

However, Fountain Square is small and the war memorial big, which has led to many recent suggestions to change the Square and possibly relocate the war memorial. The idea of creating a veterans' memorial park on the south side of the canal west of Green Bay Road came up in response to other suggestions. A canal park site would be beautiful, easy to reach, highly visible and large enough for parades, picnics and annual Memorial Day and Veterans Day ceremonies. In addition, veterans have a meaningful connection to this site, where scores of Evanston veterans lived after World War II.

Concerns About D65's Racial Recruitment at Willard
Editor:

Below is a copy [edited by RoundTable staff] of a letter I wrote to the District 65 School Board.

Dr. Hardy Murphy recently asked inthe Sept. 10closed-session School Board meeting to open up discussion of extending his contract into 2012 with a vote to take place at the Sept. 24 meeting.

It is outrageous that his personal contract take precedence over everything that is happening at the District 65 schools at the very beginning of the school year. Under Dr. Murphy's leadership our District has suffered, and it's time to start talking about a change in leadership, not an extension in the current one.
Perhaps an extension needs to be made now "before the bodies start showing up" (as Dr. Murphyallegedly said jokingly in that first closed sessionmeeting).

When will our children and their education take priority in this district?

It's time for the parents in this district to be heard and it's time for the School Board to start listening.

Letter to the Board:
I am a lifelong Evanston resident who attended Willard School, and I currently have three childrenattending District65 schools. Ialso have two young children who may attend District 65 schools. The decision has yet to be made, especially in light of what has happened to our district in recent years.

I have heard that Dr. Murphy and his administration have been seeking out the Fifth wardAfrican-American families at Willard byphone and offering them placement at King Lab magnet school to help alleviate the large class sizes at Willard. This would also eliminate the need to open another classroom and hire another teacher.

Can you please explain to me why this has occurred? We are already looked uponas a heavily white, non-diverse school, which many in the community sneer at.... Now, we come to find out that Dr. Murphy had these calls made only to African- American families. And yes, we know these phone calls have since stoppedbecause word got around, but it does not excuse these callsbeing made in the first place.

After the TWI fiasco, one would think that the District would have prepared itself better before the school year started.

...It's disgusting. It's discriminatory, and this is the kind of behavior that is ruining Willard's positive reputation for excellent education.We are called racist, sheltered, non-diverse, snobby and marked as that mostlyall-white schoolon the North side. ... And these phone callsonly add fuel to that fire. The District is making us look bad. They already took away our wonderful ESL program. And now, they'retrying to decrease ourAfrican-American population. Anexplanation needs to be given to the Willard community and the community in general.

The closed-door session that took place last week to discuss the extension of our Superintendent's contract into 2012 is also being talked about. Our District, the face of it andits entire perceptionhas changed over the years ... and not for the better.

The District and the School Board have a responsibility to be held accountable for what has happened here.

It's a realshamehowour District has changed over the years - politics over children and politics over education.

There needs to beserious thought put into extending Dr. Murphy's contract to 2012. The time has cometo start putting this District's students and their families first again.
-- Elizabeth M. Quinn

Too Soon to Extend Contract For Superintendent
Editor:

After extending SuperintendentMurphy's contract through 2009, the School Board is now scheduled to vote on a further extension through 2012. He would receive more than five years of additional guarantees grantedover a short span of time, the latest by a freshly elected Board.

I will not offer a specific opinion on Dr Murphy's effectiveness, and I am content to concede that he has, at a minimum, met the expectations of this Board and the most recent one. I am further sure that he is absolutely committed to the success of his leadership and the School District, going forward

I do, however, feel strongly that a high- profile, well compensated public position such as this one should be competitive, with strong ongoing incentivesto achieve results considered excellent by the community being served.

I do not feel these goals are necessarily consistent with the extension given previously, combined withthat being considered at the present time.

While I am sure Dr Murphy is dedicated to the goal of excellence in Evanston's schools in any case, irrespective of the length of his contract, professionals in all walks of life perform at their best when they are asked to continue to demonstrate results in order to receive rewards.

The extension of his contract for this desirable position through 2012, inmy opinion, is a significant reward thatI am sure Dr Murphy would agree, requires exceptional results.

While it would not be fair to Dr Murphy to delay such a consideration until the end of 2009, a new School Board, bolstered by the knowledge gained after an additional year of partnering with him, will be better able to assess his performance fairly, and then consider whether an extension past 2009 is warranted, and for how many years such an extension should be given.

Additionally, specific goals can be set for the coming year for Dr Murphy, so that he will be very clear on what the Board and the Evanston community will consider success, so that his focused attention can be on meeting those objectives.

By operating in this fashion, the Board is best able to insure that rewards will be merit based, and the results achieved will advance the quality Evanston's public education offering.
--William A Martin

Why Extend Contract Now?
Editor:

The misdirection and lack of leadership by the administration of Dr. Hardy Murphy is simply astonishing. And now, a year early, the new School Board is busy preparing a vote for an early contract extension? This is why we voted for new voices on the Board?

Here's what going on in the trenches. By now, you might have heard about the phone calls made to Fifth Ward families whose children attend Willard in grades that are overcrowded.

These D65-directed calls inviting kids to switch to the magnet schools went only to our black families until one of the Board members - possibly aware of legal, if not PR ramifications - ensured the District called all the families in the grade. But the damage was done: Because of the administration's actions, Fifth Ward families were made to feel unwelcome at Willard.

My son graduated from Willard last spring. At summer camps, he was harassed by boys who said he went to the "white school." Willard, they said, hates black people and kicks them out. There are real-world consequences to his decision-making; I hope other kids will not be harassed for the actions of his administration.

And in the meantime, the classroom overcrowding at Willard continues. Isn't forward-thinking and long-range planning part of an administrator's job?

Are the Board members discussing Dr. Murphy's failings as a communicator or his dispassionate engagement, with no interest in what parents have to say?

The appallingdecision-making that placed TWI at the District's smallest facility and this year's racial-targeted phone calls are but two examples of the glaring failure of Dr. Murphy to really understand this "community of learners." He treats us - parents, PTA leaders and volunteers - as children.

I urge the Board not to renew his contract, or at the very least, to postpone such important decision-making until the end of the school year.
-Jan Ashton

Curious Timing for Contract Extension for Superintendent
Editor:

Apparently the District 65 School Board will soon consider extending the contract of Superintendent Hardy Murphy; the timing is curious. His current contract runs through June 2009, so it is hard to figure out why this discussion needs to happen now.

As a parent of two students at Oakton Elementary School, I am concerned that our school did not meet all the Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) targets established under the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB).

There is a troubling achievement gap between African-American/black and white students in our District. At Oakton, we've seen Dr Murphy take action to close this gap - changing personnel and instituting the African Centered Curriculum (ACC).

Our community supports these changes and we are working together to make sure they have the desired effect: making sure every student exceeds NCLB standards. But shouldn't the Board wait and judge Dr. Murphy on the results, not just his intent?

Dr Murphy has led the District since 1999 with mixed results. As June 2009 approaches, the Board may well decide that he's the best person for his job. But let's take the time to see how his decisions play out for our children before moving ahead on a new contract.

At a minimum, waiting to the end of this academic year will allow the Board's new members time to get acquainted with how Dr Murphy is running the District.

Our kids have just returned to school and their achievements this year will not be measured by tests given this month, but at the end of the academic year. Let's judge Dr Murphy the same way.
-Kevin Taglang<

'Opening Night'? An End to Evanston, Says Reader
Editor:

Kick out those low-income families. Build 523-foot-tall buildings.

Point skyward, look skywards, but never see friendliness again.

What are we doing tothis City?

I grew up here. Went to ETHS. Moved back here to "my little city," and now I will not stay.

Growth without reason or real thought is what City government and those elected are giving us.

And each of "you" continues to vote these clowns into office.

They have divided us into groups, and we then fail to act for the total community.

Look at all the issues Evanston is facing, and then look into a mirror.

I see more taxes, poor planning and more of whatever this Council wants to force-feed us.

It is sad.
--Michael Sultan

Wait Before Extending Murphy's Contract
Editor:

I read with deep concern reports that the newly seated District 65 School Board intends to extend the current Superintendent's contract to 2012 at its next scheduled meeting on September 24th. During the recent campaign for the District 65 Board, the candidates uniformly ran on a platform of bringing greater unity to the Board process and improving the working relationship between the Board and the Superintendent. It would be a grave mistake, therefore, to begin this Board's four-year tenure with a potentially split vote on the most divisive issue confronting the District 65 community.

During the recent campaign, several of the candidates expressed the desire to make District 65 a "beacon of excellence" and a model for how a multi-income, multi-racial school district can succeed and thrive in the face of substantial educational challenges. In this spirit, it is critical for the new Board to spend the next year setting a collective vision for our children. If the new Board is given the time to work together with the Superintendent, this would represent sound public policy and the Superintendent's contract extension can be considered in due time. Evanston deserves a model educational system and a Board that brings this great community together.
-- Neal Brady