Over the past few years, I’ve had my share of heated interactions on social media. Looking back, I realize I didn’t always respond thoughtfully. At times, I spoke impulsively when restraint and context would have been wiser. I’ve said things I regret and engaged in ways that now make me cringe.
Initially, I didn’t think my opinions carried much weight. I underestimated the power of my words, as the reactions and repercussions over the last several months has proved. That realization led me to start this blog. While I’m still as opinionated as ever, the personal attacks directed at me, my husband, and now my daughter, have been eye-opening. Moving forward, I will strive to move forward to constructively share perspectives rooted in my experiences as a long-time community member, advocate, volunteer, and, yes, wife to a school board member, to address the concerning gaps in the current narrative.
I am not running for office, and my husband wasn’t planning to seek reelection. For 14 years, he has dedicated countless hours each day to this district, helping it grow and thrive, and he’s been ready to pass the baton. Neither Jeff nor I are politicians—our only goal has always been to give back to the community that has meant so much to us over the past 20 years.
With that in mind, it begs the question: why invest so much time, energy, and hostility into orchestrating a smear campaign? Am I really that unlikeable? Likely. But what does that have to do with my husband? Is it because, in his role as board president, he attended a meeting to hold a rogue board member accountable—a member who knowingly broke their oath of office, acted with intent (twice?), and jeopardized student privacy and the integrity of the district? That seems unlikely. Is it something I’ve said in an “open” forum, sharing my personal opinion? Has the need to silence me fueled these efforts? Or is it something else entirely? I often rely on the principle of Occam’s Razor: the simplest explanation is usually the best. With that in mind, I’d like to tie my perspective and experience into the fact-based information I’ve committed to sharing.
This year, the Central Teachers Association (the “CEA”), the districts union representing over 300 teachers within our district, and supported by the Illinois Education Association (the “IEA”), the state’s largest union, will see their current three-year contract come to an end. Negotiations for the next contract, as part of the collective bargaining process, are expected to begin in the coming months.
As taxpayers, what we should really be asking is:
- Does the relationship between the CEA and that of the current school board candidates or future members of the school board represent a conflict of interest?
- Who benefits from removing a seated board member with a strong grasp of numbers, extensive negotiation experience, and a productive working relationship with the current, experienced superintendent?
On August 15, 2024, “Build a Better District” hosted a “How to Run for the Board of Education” event, led by Dave Chapman, President of the CEA, and Tony Malay, the IEA Director for our region. While not inherently inappropriate, it’s evident which side stands to benefit—and it’s not the taxpayers. Teachers’ unions hold significant influence in local elections, actively working to elect union-endorsed candidates who often bring pro-union perspectives to policy decisions and collective bargaining. This involvement allows unions to shape decisions on leadership, salaries, and benefits to their advantage. It’s worth noting that the bulk of the ~300 CEA CCUSD301 members don’t live within the district or contribute to its tax base, adding another layer of complexity to their outsized role in these elections.
To break it down:
- Why the CEA’s Opinion Matters. Teachers enjoy strong public trust, with a survey showing 55% of American adults viewing them as trustworthy. While opinions of teachers’ unions aren’t as glowing, most voters still believe they have a positive impact on schools. This public support gives teachers’ unions significant political leverage. Research shows that 76% of union-endorsed school board candidates who win elections tend to support collective bargaining more favorably than those who lose.
- Why the CEA Cares. School boards with more union-backed members are far more likely to pass policies and agreements that benefit unions.
- Why the CEA Wants to Influence the Board. By getting involved in elections, endorsing specific candidates, or working to remove those who challenge their agenda, the CEA can shape policies to its advantage. However, this approach often overlooks other stakeholders, particularly the taxpayers, who are ultimately funding these decisions.
When the interests of educators and students align, the resulting influence can drive the creation of more effective policies. However, when these interests diverge, the political power of unions may lead elected officials to prioritize the needs of school employees over those of students. Research indicates that union endorsement decisions are often motivated by self-serving financial considerations, rather than by the incumbent’s track record in improving student academic outcomes.
I want to make one thing absolutely clear: I am not ‘anti-teacher’ or ‘anti-union.’ For the past 20 years, I’ve actively worked and volunteered to support our teachers, our district, and the needs of our students and community. In my opinion, our administration and teachers are deeply underappreciated, understaffed, underpaid, and in urgent need of every additional facility, resource, and funding opportunity we can provide.
My approach has always been simple: ‘Tell me what you need.’ That’s why I loved being part of the PTC and Boosters—it allowed me to support our educators directly. Ironically, it’s also why I’d make a terrible school board member, because I genuinely want to give teachers everything they’re asking for. I believe they’ve earned it and deserve it. Their job is incredibly challenging, exhausting, and often thankless, and I deeply appreciate the tireless hours they dedicate to our students.
However, and I cannot emphasize this enough: serving on a school board carries a different responsibility. It requires balancing the needs of educators and students with the interests of taxpayers. There must be a counterbalance to ensure fairness and sustainability for the entire community.
School board members play a key role in contract negotiations alongside the skilled legal teams representing the CEA and IEA. These negotiations shape important decisions about policies, salaries, stipends, bonuses, benefits, retirement plans, professional development, workload, schedules, class sizes, prep time, and tenure. When the board is handpicked to align with union demands, it primarily benefits the CEA. In a state where collective bargaining laws already heavily favor unions, this is something taxpayers should pay close attention to.
Illinois’ collective bargaining laws are structured in a way that tends to favor the negotiation process for government worker unions, which can create challenges for taxpayers. For example:
- Right to Strike. Illinois law grants most government workers, including teachers, the legal right to strike, which is relatively uncommon among U.S. states. This provides teachers’ unions with significant leverage during negotiations. If an agreement cannot be reached at the bargaining table, unions can threaten to strike, which may disrupt services and place additional pressure on districts to meet union demands.
- Broad Scope of Negotiable Terms. Illinois law permits government worker unions to negotiate a wide range of terms, including salaries, benefits, and working conditions. While this flexibility allows unions to advocate comprehensively for their members, critics argue it can lead to lengthy negotiations and benefits that may be considered more generous than those typically offered in the private sector.
- No Limits on Contract Length. Unlike many other states, Illinois does not impose limits on the duration of labor contracts negotiated between public-sector unions and employers. While longer contracts can provide stability, they can also lock taxpayers into costly agreements that may become challenging to sustain if economic conditions change over time.
Contract negotiations between school districts and teachers’ unions are conducted behind closed doors, leaving taxpayers in the dark about the details of the deals they’ll ultimately fund—until it’s too late. It’s natural for the CEA to support candidates they believe will represent their interests. However, if we’re serious about addressing tax concerns, we need school board members who prioritize taxpayers and students over satisfying union preferences.
To be clear, this isn’t about excluding union supporters from the school board. The First Amendment protects the rights of expression and association, and those perspectives have a place at the table. However, it’s important to highlight the union’s role in electioneering so the public can understand the connection between teacher union-backed candidates and labor-friendly agreements that may come at taxpayers’ expense.
School boards and superintendents are entrusted to represent the diverse interests of all stakeholders—students, parents, teachers, and the broader community. Their primary responsibility is to ensure that the education system is equitable, effective, and focused on what truly matters: student success. While teachers’ unions play a vital role in supporting educators and advocating for their needs, their priorities do not always align with those of students, parents, and the wider community.
By fostering transparency, accountability, and balanced representation, we can create an education system that serves everyone and remains focused on its ultimate goal: the success and well-being of our students.
Today I leave you with: “Education is the most powerful weapon which you can use to change the world.”
Research Links
Still the Ones to Beat: Teachers’ Unions and School Board Elections | Manhattan Institute
School board races have always been political – Mackinac Center
Rigged: How Illinois’ labor laws stack the deck against taxpayers | Illinois Policy
Purposeful Perspectives 
Leave a comment