Four Evanston/Skokie D65 School Board members join, face cutting as much as $15 million
The new members, Patricia Anderson, Nichole Pinkard, Maria Opdycke and Andrew Wymer, replace more than half of the outgoing board. The previous four members declined to run for re-election after a turbulent pair of years that saw the district plummet into a financial deficit. The new board will be tasked with continuing the district's deficit reduction plan to cut between $10 million and $15 million in expenses for the next school year, likely continuing cuts in jobs, school closures and district-wide expense cuts.
Outgoing members Joey Hailpern, Biz Lindsay-Ryan, Soo La Kim and Donna Wang Su gave a final testimony about their time on the board, wishing the next board well and encouraging members to take on the work of an unpaid and sometimes thankless job.
'Despite the difficult years: the pandemic, the post-pandemic return to schools, the barrage of angry emails and threats — many with racist rhetoric and coded anti-Blackness— the misrepresented budget numbers and feelings of betrayal… despite all that, I don't regret having served' on the board, Kim said.
'Because despite all the resistance and heat from the community, we did also manage to do some worthwhile things: Updating the curricula, social studies, literacy, math and science — I think we touched them all — to be more rigorous, inclusive and evidence-based; reducing the racial disproportionality in discipline, expanding social, emotional supports, closing the opportunity gap in our early childhood programs, committing to sustainability goals, supporting translation services throughout the district and expanding dual language to middle schools, and of course, returning a school to the 5th Ward,' she said.
Lindsay-Ryan, who served on the board for 11 years, thanked the district's staff and her family for their support during her tenure on the board of education.
'We are navigating a world that wants to challenge so much of what we as a community hold dear. The level of external threat to the fundamentals of education is staggering, and the threat has been weaponized to attempt to stop us from caring for our most vulnerable,' Lindsay-Ryan said.
'We see educational institutions abandoning their values and in the process their constituents in an effort to mitigate the financial repercussions of having essential funding, only to have it withdrawn anyway. I urge our community and our next board to remain steadfast in its commitment to all out student success, to maintain an inclusive and safe environment where all students can thrive, and ensure that we prepare them to be global citizens that understand the realities of power, oppression and justice and how to engage in a world around them in ways that make everyone safe, respected, valued and included,' she said.
In the week prior to the new board, the U.S. Department of Education announced it would investigate a complaint of alleged racial discrimination filed on behalf of a white elementary school drama teacher, who alleged the district used educational materials containing social justice advocacy to discriminate against white employees and students, among other things.
Superintendent Angel Turner thanked the outgoing board members for their service to the board.
'Serving on the School Board is no small task. It requires time, thoughtfulness and a deep commitment to public service. Over the past several years this board has grappled with very complex and often difficult issues that have had a real impact on our students, our staff and families,' Turner said. 'Through it all, they have shown courage, compassion and a steadfast focus on what they believe is best for our children.'
Board president prevails after challenge
Board members Sergio Hernandez, Omar Salem and Mya Wilkins, who were not up for election this year, remain on the school board. Hernandez, the previous school board president, nominated himself to remain the board's president.
'I want to directly acknowledge that the past two years have presented some significant challenges, some of which I could have navigated better,' Hernandez said before a vote was called.
'Communication, both within our board and with the broader community, has not always met the standard our constituents deserve. I take full ownership and it is not fair to expect new board members to carry the weight of these complexities without clear leadership and structure.'
'I commit to making communication a top priority moving forward, ' he said.
Salem nominated himself as a the board's president too.
'I really want to kind of be this bridge here… having been on the board for two years, we have four new folks coming on, and I really just want to kind of balance the way we've done things while also making sure we have some opportunity for change. I think the community has made it clear we need some change,' Salem said. 'My goal really is just to ensure that every single board member has the opportunity to be heard internally within our board, but also externally within the community.'
In a 4-3 vote, Wilkins, Hernandez, Pinkard and Wymard voted for Hernandez to be the board's president.
Pinkard was voted unanimously as the board's vice president, running unopposed.
'As we transition into a new era of leadership, District 65 faces significant challenges and opportunities to rebuild trust across our community. I believe that strong strategic and collaborative board leadership is essential to supporting the superintendent and advancing our mission of opportunity, equity and excellence for all students,' Pinkard said.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
San Francisco Chronicle
25 minutes ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
Harvard scientists say research could be set back years after funding freeze
CAMBRIDGE, Mass. (AP) — Harvard University professor Alberto Ascherio's research is literally frozen. Collected from millions of U.S. soldiers over two decades using millions of dollars from taxpayers, the epidemiology and nutrition scientist has blood samples stored in liquid nitrogen freezers within the university's T.H. Chan School of Public Health. The samples are key to his award-winning research, which seeks a cure to multiple sclerosis and other neurodegenerative diseases. But for months, Ascherio has been unable to work with the samples because he lost $7 million in federal research funding, a casualty of Harvard's fight with the Trump administration. 'It's like we have been creating a state-of-the-art telescope to explore the universe, and now we don't have money to launch it,' said Ascherio. 'We built everything and now we are ready to use it to make a new discovery that could impact millions of people in the world and then, 'Poof. You're being cut off.'' Researchers laid off and science shelved The loss of an estimated $2.6 billion in federal funding at Harvard has meant that some of the world's most prominent researchers are laying off young researchers. They are shelving years or even decades of research, into everything from opioid addiction to cancer. And despite Harvard's lawsuits against the administration, and settlement talks between the warring parties, researchers are confronting the fact that some of their work may never resume. The funding cuts are part of a monthslong battle that the Trump administration has waged against some the country's top universities including Columbia, Brown and Northwestern. The administration has taken a particularly aggressive stance against Harvard, freezing funding after the country's oldest university rejected a series of government demands issued by a federal antisemitism task force. The government had demanded sweeping changes at Harvard related to campus protests, academics and admissions — meant to address government accusations that the university had become a hotbed of liberalism and tolerated anti-Jewish harassment. Research jeopardized, even if court case prevails Harvard responded by filing a federal lawsuit, accusing the Trump administration of waging a retaliation campaign against the university. In the lawsuit, it laid out reforms it had taken to address antisemitism but also vowed not to 'surrender its independence or relinquish its constitutional rights.' 'Make no mistake: Harvard rejects antisemitism and discrimination in all of its forms and is actively making structural reforms to eradicate antisemitism on campus," the university said in its legal complaint. 'But rather than engage with Harvard regarding those ongoing efforts, the Government announced a sweeping freeze of funding for medical, scientific, technological, and other research that has nothing at all to do with antisemitism.' The Trump administration denies the cuts were made in retaliation, saying the grants were under review even before the demands were sent in April. It argues the government has wide discretion to cancel federal contracts for policy reasons. The funding cuts have left Harvard's research community in a state of shock, feeling as if they are being unfairly targeted in a fight has nothing to do with them. Some have been forced to shutter labs or scramble to find non-government funding to replace lost money. In May, Harvard announced that it would put up at least $250 million of its own money to continue research efforts, but university President Alan Garber warned of 'difficult decisions and sacrifices' ahead. Ascherio said the university was able to pull together funding to pay his researchers' salaries until next June. But he's still been left without resources needed to fund critical research tasks, like lab work. Even a year's delay can put his research back five years, he said. Knowledge lost in funding freeze 'It's really devastating,' agreed Rita Hamad, the director of the Social Policies for Health Equity Research Center at Harvard, who had three multiyear grants totaling $10 million canceled by the Trump administration. The grants funded research into the impact of school segregation on heart health, how pandemic-era policies in over 250 counties affected mental health, and the role of neighborhood factors in dementia. At the School of Public Health, where Hamad is based, 190 grants have been terminated, affecting roughly 130 scientists. 'Just thinking about all the knowledge that's not going to be gained or that is going to be actively lost," Hamad said. She expects significant layoffs on her team if the funding freeze continues for a few more months. "It's all just a mixture of frustration and anger and sadness all the time, every day." John Quackenbush, a professor of computational biology and bioinformatics at the School of Public Health, has spent the past few months enduring cuts on multiple fronts. In April, a multimillion dollar grant was not renewed, jeopardizing a study into the role sex plays in disease. In May, he lost about $1.2 million in federal funding for in the coming year due to the Harvard freeze. Four departmental grants worth $24 million that funded training of doctoral students also were cancelled as part of the fight with the Trump administration, Quackenbush said. 'I'm in a position where I have to really think about, 'Can I revive this research?'' he said. 'Can I restart these programs even if Harvard and the Trump administration reached some kind of settlement? If they do reach a settlement, how quickly can the funding be turned back on? Can it be turned back on?' The researchers all agreed that the funding cuts have little or nothing to do with the university's fight against antisemitism. Some, however, argue changes at Harvard were long overdue and pressure from the Trump administration was necessary. Bertha Madras, a Harvard psychobiologist who lost funding to create a free, parent-focused training to prevent teen opioid overdose and drug use, said she's happy to see the culling of what she called 'politically motivated social science studies.' White House pressure a good thing? Madras said pressure from the White House has catalyzed much-needed reform at the university, where several programs of study have 'really gone off the wall in terms of being shaped by orthodoxy that is not representative of the country as a whole.' But Madras, who served on the President's Commission on Opioids during Trump's first term, said holding scientists' research funding hostage as a bargaining chip doesn't make sense. 'I don't know if reform would have happened without the president of the United States pointing the bony finger at Harvard," she said. 'But sacrificing science is problematic, and it's very worrisome because it is one of the major pillars of strength of the country.' Quackenbush and other Harvard researchers argue the cuts are part of a larger attack on science by the Trump administration that puts the country's reputation as the global research leader at risk. Support for students and post-doctoral fellows has been slashed, visas for foreign scholars threatened, and new guidelines and funding cuts at the NIH will make it much more difficult to get federal funding in the future, they said. It also will be difficult to replace federal funding with money from the private sector. 'We're all sort of moving toward this future in which this 80-year partnership between the government and the universities is going to be jeopardized,' Quackenbush said. 'We're going to face real challenges in continuing to lead the world in scientific excellence.'
Wall Street Journal
2 hours ago
- Wall Street Journal
No Alzheimer's Drug for Old Men?
Increasing evidence shows that anti-amyloid Alzheimer's treatments can slow disease progression and give patients years more of quality time with loved ones. So will the Trump Administration at long last drop the Biden rules that restrict access to these medicines? Two studies presented at the Alzheimer's Association International Conference last week show that the benefits of amyloid-clearing monoclonal antibodies by Eli Lilly and Biogen-Eisai grow over time. The drugs slowed cognitive decline in clinical trials used for Food and Drug Administration approval by some 25% to 36% over 18 months. In follow-up studies, these benefits doubled at three years for Lilly's treatment and roughly quadrupled over four years for Biogen-Eisai's. That's great news for patients.
New York Post
4 hours ago
- New York Post
Anti-Israel activist Mahmoud Khalil argues Oct. 7 terror attack was ‘desperate attempt' by Palestinians to ‘break the cycle'
Anti-Israel activist Mahmoud Khalil argued Tuesday that the heinous Oct. 7, 2023, Hamas terror attack on Israel was a 'desperate' moment Palestinians 'had to reach' in order to be heard. The former Columbia University student, who was detained for over three months by the Trump administration for his prominent role in antisemitic campus protests, offered his thin rationale for the deadliest terror attack on the Jewish State in an interview with New York Times journalist Ezra Klein, who repeatedly asked Khalil to clarify his remarks. 3 Khalil blamed Israel for the Oct. 7, 2023, Hamas terror attack, arguing the Israeli government was 'absolutely ignoring Palestinians' during Abraham Accord negotiations ahead of the massacre. Getty Images Advertisement 'To me, it felt frightening that we had to reach this moment in the Palestinian struggle,' Khalil said, when asked about what he was thinking on the day of the attack that killed more than 1,000 people in Israel, mostly civilians. 'I remember I didn't sleep for a number of days, and Noor [Khalil's wife] was very worried about my health. It was heavy. I still remember. I was like: 'This couldn't happen,'' he added. 'The Ezra Klein Show' host followed up by asking: 'What do you mean we had to reach this moment? What moment is this?' Advertisement 'You can see that the situation is not sustainable,' Khalil responded, referring to tensions between Israel and Gaza and the West Bank in the run-up to Oct. 7. 'You have an Israeli government that's absolutely ignoring Palestinians,' he argued. 'They are trying to make that deal with Saudi and just happy about their Abraham Accord without looking at Palestinians — as if Palestinians are not part of the equation. They circumvented the Palestinian question.' 'It was clear that it was becoming more and more violent. By Oct. 6, over 200 Palestinians were killed by Israeli forces and settlers. Over 40 of them were children. So that's what I mean by: Unfortunately, we couldn't avoid such a moment.' Klein later asked Khalil if he felt the attack was something 'Hamas must have wanted' to drag Israel into an all-out war or rather an event 'that needed to happen to break the equilibrium.' Advertisement 'It's more the latter — just to break the cycle, to break that Palestinians are not being heard,' Khalil argued. 'And to me, it's a desperate attempt to tell the world that Palestinians are here, that Palestinians are part of the equation.' 'That was my interpretation of why Hamas did the Oct. 7 attacks on Israel.' 3 The Trump administration claims Khalil was engaged in activities 'aligned with Hamas' at Columbia University. James Keivom 3 Khalil has previously refused to condemn Hamas. AFP via Getty Images Advertisement Khalil declined to characterize the attack as a 'mistake,' when asked by Klein, but acknowledged that 'targeting civilians is wrong.' 'Unfortunately, these horrible things happened, but we cannot ask Palestinians to be perfect victims,' the activist continued. Khalil was arrested by federal immigration authorities on March 8 and spent 104 days at a Louisiana detention center as the Trump administration fought to deport the Syrian-born permanent resident. The administration said Khalil, who is now suing the federal government for $20 million over his detainment, engaged in activities 'aligned to Hamas.' Last month, in a heated CNN interview, Khalil flatly refused to condemn Hamas over the Oct. 7 attack – calling the question from host Pamela Brown 'disingenuous.'
