School Board Candidate forum

By: Diane Benjamin

Dennis Grundler showed how a candidate forum should be run today! The audience submitted questions to him in writing and then he asked them. MANY more topics were covered this way with close to zero waste of time. This way is much more informative than most debates where one person creates questions they want asked. (WGLT/League of Women Voters)

I’ve got close to 2 hours of video, no I won’t be posting it all. One thing was very clear. Four Unit 5 candidates want to represent the students, parents, and taxpayers. They are Brad Wurth, Mollie Emery, Dennis Frank, and Amee Jada. They do not support the referendum and would not cut programs for students. All think future revenue needs considered before raising property taxes.

Alex Williams wants the referendum to pass and believes in DEI. Mark Adams doesn’t have children yet and wants the referendum to pass. Steve Mackowiak wants the schools to teach essentials and not all the indoctrination extras. He needs more experience, but Steve received the longest applause for his common sense. If he is not elected he needs to run again in 2 years.

Start with 2 videos. The first one is Kelly Pyle and Amy Roser answering a question posed to them as incumbents. Both have known the district has a “structural deficit” since they were appointed in 2018. They want the referendum to pass to solve it. The district has a working cash bond instead of fixing the deficit. Unit 5 has enough cash for at least a couple of years.

In the second video each is asked if a tax hike is the only way to solve the problem.

17 thoughts on “School Board Candidate forum

  1. Unfortunately I’m still waiting on Wurth and Frank to propose anything that backs their position. Their approach seems to be, “We just won’t cut things you like.” without offering solutions. If you want a primer on how not to talk to PTO groups, follow how they are doing. Same with Williams and Adam’s. Emery and Jada are just silent, seemingly hoping hitching their wagons to Wurth and Frank will win it for them.

    Unless you’re able to make changes at the level of state requirements, an approach needs to be to raise revenues and make cuts. Carlock should be closed. Nobody is saying that right now because they know Carlock will vote. You are asking others to subsidize ridiculously small classrooms there. If you are truly about eliminating wasteful spending, that has to be #1.


      1. Unit 5 said Carlock would close without additional revenue. It needs to close regardless unless Carlock citizens want to pay the difference in costs or form their own elementary SD.


  2. Not so sure about Wurth, Jada, Emery, and Frank. They say they want to represent the community, which is great, but they’re also calling for more e-learning. As a Unit 5 parebt, I don’t want more e-learning after the past few years. Im confident I’m in the VAST majority of parents on that one.

    And the company that they put forward as an ideal example of e-learning, Imagine Learning, has LOTS of references to DEI on their website, stating that a DEI steering group has input on all their products. Seems like this e-learning is just a trojan horse for more DEI. Would have thought we’d have been able to find TRUE conservative candidates who weren’t just pushing more of the same.

    Would also love an answer from them about how e-learning saves money. They seem kinda skimpy on the details. I’d love some fiscally conservative candidates, but this group just doesn’t seem to have any answers other than spending MORE money on e-learning.


      1. Never said they weren’t clowns, too. I’m just calling out our “conservative” candidates, because I’m sick of us having to settle for clowns of our own.

        First it was Josh Barnett, who finally came out as what he truly is, a Democrat. Then it’s Connie Beard, propping up liberals like Straza. Now it’s just these 4 clowns calling for more e-learning and pushing for a DEI-centric company to control curriculum. I’m just done. They want my vote, put up real conservatives.


          1. Anything about cleaning the filth out of the libraries, getting CRT out of our classrooms, or their thoughts on comprehensive sexuality education? I can guess what the liberal, Union-endorsed candidates said, but wondering what the “conservatives” had to say.


              1. Please share those videos ASAP then. Because all I’ve heard so far and seen in those videos and reasons NOT to vote for the other candidates.

                Nothing has been offered up about why THOSE 4 are actually worthwhile or even deserve to be called CONSERVATIVE


  3. These “conservative” candidates are morons. Real conservatives have been fighting since covid to keep schools open IN PERSON and not have our kids trapped in front of a screen all day. The other four may be for the stupid tax raise, but at least they’re realistic and aren’t for this nonsense digital learning crap. Kids should be in school, with other kids, in the classroom, on the playground, etc.


  4. Northpoint Mom here! Also agree with JT. Wasn’t at that event today, but was in the PTO meeting last week. 😬 Cringy. That was the best way to describe them. The four of them were squabbling with each other throughout. Did not seem on the same wavelength.

    They do need more on cuts. Love, Love,Love that they’ll keep band and sports. But what will you cut? 🤷 The district’s deficit is wider than the Grand Canyon and transparency and a plan would go a long way to securing votes.

    Still hopeful *fingers crossed* but they need to polish up a bit. Also, one of them needs to stop saying that he’s running as a Republican when he talks to people. This is about our kids, not political parties.

    Rant Over!

    Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s