March 20, 2011

Check out Chapman and Ekeberg’s websites. Ekeberg has made it clear on his website that the members of this community are not a part of his District 15 TEAM, and both of their websites make it clear that they do not want the public asking them any questions about their campaign: there is no email, phone, or other contact information for them on either website. To his credit, the third member of this troika, Dave Seiffert, does have contact information on his website. And of course, the Vote 1-3-5 website supporting Sriram, Herr and Iannuzelli has contact information.

Check out the websites here:



March 18, 2011

Here is a link to a new video that was sent to me today



March 17, 2011

I can’t very well criticize Chapman’s minions without taking a shot at the King himself. The reasons the Daily Herald gives for annointing Chapman are, to me, the very reasons why he should not be re-elected: he is “a former school superintendent with a long resume of community leadership”. As to the first qualification, does being the former superintendent of District 211, who led that District down a path of deficit spending and borrowing millions of dollars make him the best candidate in District 15? Does the fact that he has a long resume of community leadership entitle him to yet another public leadership role? What about his leadership role as president of the school board since 2008, during which time the District has approved employee contracts it cannot afford, attempting to issue $27 million in bonds it could not afford, spent $10,000 on attorneys fees to defend his role in “editing” board meeting minutes, and approving a $5,000 trip to San Francisco at a time the district is contemplating budget cuts? What kind of leadership has Chapman provided the District in the past? And why would this community want Chapman’s brand of leadership to continue? The Daily Herald has clearly lost its way.

Read the Herald endorsement here:


March 17, 2011

I paid a visit to Jim Ekeberg’s election website and I was disappointed, but not surprised, to see that Dr. Ekeberg does not consider the community to be a part of his “team”, which he defines as follows:


And yet the Daily Herald views Ekeberg as having “solid insights into the needs of the district”. Maybe they meant to say “district employees”. Oh well, I guess all of us hardworking taxpayers will just have to get used to sitting on the sidelines, watching the pros play the education game, because clearly there is no room on the “team” for us. We just get to keep paying for it.


March 17, 2011

I would love to have been a fly on the wall at the Daily Herald editorial board meeting to witness the “independent spirit” and “fresh ideas” that Dave Seiffert apparently displayed. You wouldn’t know such a thing existed from the responses he gave to the Herald’s candidate questionnaire, which can be viewed here:


March 17, 2011

The Daily Herald has retreated from its temporary position as champion of the taxpayer and advocate for open, transparent school board governance, by endorsing Chapmand Ekeberg and Seiffert.

As recently as last October, the daily Herald urged voters to vote “No” to the $27 million bond issue, stating “the whole project seemed like a rush job to cash in on federal dollars”. Back in July, the editorial board scolded the school board for signing a deal with former Superintendent Dan Lukich which contained a gag order, going so far as to write “It’s the taxpayers who are left gagging.” Yes, indeed, we are all left gagging today by the Herald’s incredibly stupid, hypocritical endorsement of the very people who brought us the ill-conceived bond issue and the secret Lukich deal.

Apparently the Daily Herald editorial board just fell off the turnip truck on the way into the big city from Podunk IL, (it’s a good thing too, because they could never survive in the big city) and they believe that Chapman and Ekeberg are born again fiscal conservatives who “share the challengers’ sense of urgency on financial matters and many of their best ideas on the district’s educational needs”. More accurately, Chapman and Ekeberg are pretending to share that sense of urgency, pretending to be serious about re-opening the teacher’s union contract, and pretending to care about what our kids learn in school. Remember, Chapman and Ekeberg voted against making strengthening the curriculum a core goal of our district. I think they voted “aye” to “ensuring that every member thinks the same thoughts, votes the same way as Chapman, and keeps their mouths shut in public” as a core District 15 goal. As for Dave Seiffert, the man can’t construct a simple grammatically correct sentence (see his Daily Herald candidate profile) – but then I suppose he will fit right in with a crew that doesn’t care about curriculum.

Maybe the Herald wants to keep the incumbents in power so that they can scold them in future editorials, make themselves look like champions of open government, and sell more newspapers. I can’t think of any other reason why the Herald would endorse the very people who are dragging District 15 into financial ruin. Can you?

Read the full endorsement here:


February 27, 2011

Maybe they are just getting old and forgetful, or maybe they just don’t want to remember, but it appears the Jerry Chapman and Jim Ekeberg have conveniently forgotten that they received over $31,000 in Union contributions in the 2007 school board election. When asked at a TOPPER candidate forum whether they had ever received contributions from the unions, Chapman mumbled something about possibly the union “did a mailing” for the friends of Bokor Chapman Ekeberg committe>

Well, let me refresh your recollection:

$3,000 from the ESPA
$2,000 from the SEIU
$1,000 from the NW Coalition for Quality Education which initially received said $1,000 from the teacher’s union
$3,500 from the Classroom Teachers Council PLUS
over $22,000 in “in-kind” contributions that were made on behalf of Bokor Chapman Ekeberg, including $1,000 paid to that venerable election law attorney Jim Nally.
Here are some more details:

$1,887.63 to obtain a copy of a “voter file”
$487.76 for photocopies
$780.00 for postage (ah, this is the “mailer”!)
$624.00 for more postage
$1,000 to Attorney Jim Nally
$17,000 to Morrissey public Affairs (they crafted the phone script for the political calls that were made by the teachers in the run-up to the election)

Bokor Chapman Ekeberg D-2 from 2007

Forget for a moment about the inherent conflict of interest in acceptin campaign donations from the same unions that you will be negotiating contracts with if you are elected. Do we really want to re-elect board members who can’t remember receiving more than $31,000 from the unions in a single election? People that forgetful should be at home tending their gardens, not pretending to be stewards of the taxpayers’ dollars.