Southern Illinois News

Illinois State Board of Education met Dec. 18.

Here are the minutes provided by the board:

1. Roll Call

Chair of the Board Dr. Steven Isoye called the meeting to order at 9:00 a.m.

Chair Isoye announced that the Board meeting was being audio-cast live over the internet and video recorded.

Chair Isoye asked the clerk to call the roll. A quorum was present with eight members attending in person. Superintendent Dr. Tony Sanders was also in attendance.

Members Present:

Dr. Steven Isoye, Chair of the Board

Dr. Donna Leak, Vice Chair

Dr. Christine Benson, Secretary

Dr. James Anderson

Dr. Sherly Chavarria

Roger Eddy

Laura Gonzalez

Dr. Patricia Nugent

Members Absent:

Dr. Anna Grassellino

Staff Present

Dr. Tony Sanders, State Superintendent

Jo Ireland, Board Services Coordinator

Kim Clarke, Executive Assistant to the State Superintendent

Isabel Schoeman, Special Assistant to the State Superintendent

Kristen Kennedy, Chief Legal Officer

Dr. Jason Helfer, Chief Education Officer – Instruction (virtual)

Dr. Matt Seaton, Chief Financial Officer (virtual)

Jennifer Saba, Chief Education Officer – Operations

Tassi Maton, Chief Internal Audit Officer

Melissa Oller, Chief Operating Officer

Edobor Efam, Chief Information Officer

Irma Snopek, Chief Policy and Communications Officer

Ann Whalen, Chief Advisor to Early Childhood Transition

David Turovetz, Director of Charter Schools

Dana Stoerger, Director of Legislative Affairs

Tiffany Burnett, Executive Director of Safe & Healthy Climate

Emily Fox, Director of Educator Effectiveness

Joyce Gronewold, Executive Director of Specialized Instruction

Tom Bazan, Director of Budget & Financial Management

Andrew Krupin, Director of Funding & Disbursements

Dr. Ronda Dawson, Executive Director of Teaching & Learning

Nick Heckel, Supervisor of School/District Improvement (virtual)

Dr. Nakia Douglas, Director of Special Education (virtual)

Lindsay Record, Press Secretary

2. Public Participation

Chair Isoye reminded those in attendance of the Public Participation Policy and the sign-up procedures for today’s meeting.

Jelani Saadiq, Director of Government Relations for Advance Illinois, spoke on the fiscal year 2026 budget. He acknowledged the forecasts for tighter funding in FY 2026 and budget cuts and emphasized that students and educators require additional funding for early childhood and K-12 education. He advocated that a $75 million increase in the Early Childhood Block Grant (ECBG), consistent with the governor’s year three of Smart Start Illinois, is critical to closing access and quality gaps in education across the state. He spoke on the long-term benefits of investing in early childhood education. Mr. Saadiq requested that the Board use the $75 million to expand full-day Preschool for All Expansion slots. He added that many in the field agree that an annual increase in Evidence Based Funding (EBF) of $350 million is critical but needs to be higher, which they spoke about at the ISBE FY 2026 budget hearings. He concluded by detailing the research supporting the positive benefits of EBF and expressing his appreciation for the opportunity to continue to invest state funds in pre-K to 12 education.

Clarissa Williams, Teach Plus Illinois Program Director and Education Leadership Coach, spoke on the Illinois Affinity Group Network. Ms. Williams was joined by Dr. Kristal Shelvin, Executive Director of Student Support for McLean County Unit 5 District and affinity group leader. Ms. Williams shared recent results of the summer 2022 implementation of the affinity group network. She stated that within the past school year, the network has supported over 500 educators of color from 52 districts across the entire state, exceeding initial grant goals, and that 97% of those engaged in the network were retained as Illinois educators. Dr. Shelvin spoke positively on her experiences facilitating and participating in these affinity groups and how they contribute to a sense of belonging and create a space for healing. Ms. Williams concluded by thanking the Board for their support for the past two years and expressed hope for continuing the partnership.

Dr. Christopher Murphy, Chief Strategic Growth & Communications Officer for Concept Schools, spoke on charter schools. He spoke in response to comments made during the November Education Policy Planning Committee Meeting of the Whole about how charter schools can contribute to the overall Illinois education landscape. He shared that at Concept Schools, they welcome opportunities to share best practices and articulated that one of their strengths is investing in strong educators who believe in their students and are trained to best support students. Dr. Murphy added that district school enrollment in Illinois has decreased since the COVID-19 pandemic, but charter school enrollment has remained stable. He said he was talking about the secret sauce that makes concept schools strong, charter school enrollment has remained stable in the state, speaking to the critical factor of school choice in engaging families and students. He added that the threat of closure for charter schools pushes them to be stronger and innovative, and he urged the board to continue supporting and fostering charter schools across the state.

Seat Vedziovski, principal of Horizon Science Academy (HSA) McKinley Park, spoke on their school expansion request. He spoke on the positive academic impact of HSA McKinley Park on the McKinley Park neighborhood and surrounding communities and stated that it has become clear that bifurcating their current campus is crucial to continuing to best support students. He explained that current student enrollment and demand is continuing to grow, and space constraints hinder their ability to provide the best education possible for all students. Mr. Vedziovski argued that moving HSA McKinley Park’s high school to the proposed vacant building would not only allow them to meet demand but also expand and improve their extracurricular and academic programs. He added that this move will allow the school to tailor the current facility to the needs of younger students when they have their own space as well.

Dr. Douglas Hamilton, Associate Superintendent of Southland College Prep High School, spoke on the renewal of Southland’s charter. He shared that Southland’s team had hoped for a 10-year renewal of their charter but will accept Dr. Sanders and the Boards’ recommendation for a 5-year renewal term. Dr. Hamilton told the Board that Southland’s administration will continue to do everything they can to provide the best education for their students and support students’ dreams, and he thanked the Board for their support.

Maytee Diez, principal of LEARN John & Kathy Schreiber Charter School, spoke on the renewal of LEARN Schreiber Campus’ charter. She provided the Board with details on the school as a whole, including their support of students’ social and emotional wellbeing in addition to their academic success, as well as the school’s accomplishment as the only charter elementary school to receive an exemplary summative designation on the 2023-2024 Illinois Report Card. She celebrated the success of her staff and educators and thanked ISBE, particularly Director of Charter Schools David Turovetz, for their partnership. Ms. Diez conclude by urging the Board to approve the 5-year renewal of LEARN Schreiber Campus’ charter.

Adam Seaney, Vocational Director at Galesburg Area Vocational Center (GAVC) and representative of Invest CTE, spoke on Career and Technical Education (CTE) funding. He advocated for an increase of $10 million in CTE funding for the FY 2026 budget to enhance the quality and reach of CTE programs. He additionally asked the Board for a $25 million annual allocation for area career centers and high school CTE program improvements and expansion, including infrastructure upgrades and expansion of CTE programs at area career centers and high schools. Mr. Seaney spoke on the positive benefits of CTE for individual students and the economy, arguing that budget increases would accelerate those benefits and address capacity issues. Chair Isoye reminded Mr. Seaney that he could submit additional comments to the Board by emailing Board Services Coordinator Jo Ireland at bireland@isbe.net.

Sara Yemm Witherell, General Manager of Yemm Automotive, spoke on CTE funding. She expressed her support for CTE programs. Ms. Yemm Witherell detailed that there is a critical need for a well-trained workforce due to a long-time shortage of qualified automotive technicians, which impacts the local economy and business capabilities. She spoke on her dealership’s newly developed internship with the GAVC and the opportunities it provides, stating that it has already yielded positive benefits for both the students and the dealership’s workforce pipeline. She said that this initiative is not possible without funding and asked the Board to increase CTE funding by $10 million and area career center funding by $25 million. She said that she is confident that this increase in funding will continue to yield positive benefits for the state and the students.

Erin Elswood, a representative of the Mascots Matter campaign, spoke on the Freeburg Community High School mascot. She told the Board that Freeburg High School’s mascot caricatures individuals with dwarfism, which is not only offensive but violates Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973. Ms. Elswood explained the discriminatory history of the term “midget” and articulated how the use of this mascot can harm students with dwarfism and create unsafe and inequitable learning environments. She expressed concern that Freeburg High School has not responded to any of the outreach from the Mascots Matter campaign and asked the Board to take immediate action.

Joey Palermo, a representative of Pegasus Manufacturing, spoke on CTE funding and the GAVC. He emphasized the transformative role that the GAVC plays in shaping the future of advanced manufacturing and automation and reshoring the industry to the United States. He argued that CTE training in automotive manufacturing prepares students not only for jobs but to become leaders of industry, providing them with a head start on accessing a high-quality career. He spoke on the partnership between Pegasus Manufacturing and GAVC and their belief that this investment will create a pipeline of a qualified and innovative workforce. He advocated for continued CTE funding and resources for GAVC.

Alyssa Phillips, Senior Education Attorney at the Chicago Coalition to End Homelessness, spoke on homeless education funding. She advocated for an increase of $5 million in the FY 2026 budget to support school districts serving students experiencing homelessness in Illinois. She reminded the Board that ISBE has not included state dedicated homeless education funding in its budget for over a decade and that federal funding for homeless children such as the American Rescue Plan – Homeless Children and Youth funds have ended. Ms. Phillips argued that the $5 million budget increase is necessary to support this often undercounted, underserved, and rapidly growing population. She expressed her belief that ISBE must include this funding in its budget to provide the required supports for their students’ success.

Chair Isoye thanked all public participants and again reminded them to send additional comments to Jo Ireland at bireland@isbe.net.

3. Resolution | Dr. Adina Hoover, 2024 Thomas Lay Burroughs Award Recipient

Dr. Benson read a resolution honoring Adina hoover, the 2024 Thomas Lay Burroughs Award recipient. Chair Isoye highlighted that Dr. Hoover is an emergency room pediatric doctor and takes care of children in all walks of life.

Dr. Benson moved that the State Board of Education hereby approves the resolution for Dr. Adina Hoover. Dr. Leak seconded the motion, and it passed by a unanimous roll call vote.

Dr. Hoover gave thanks to the Board for this award and for acknowledging those in a thankless role. She said she represents all school board members and recognized them for the hard work they do for their students. She additionally thanked the staff in her district, including Edith Courington, Amy Quattrone, and Superintendent Jack Baldermann who were present with her to receive the award.

4. Presentations

A. COGFA Revenue Estimates

The Commission on Government Forecasting and Accountability (COGFA) Executive Director Clayton Klenke, Revenue Unit Manager Eric Noggle, and Chief Economist Ben Varner presented on upcoming revenue estimates.

Mr. Klenke did a brief introduction and noted that despite recent economic challenges for the state and nation in recent years, Illinois’ economic performance and revenue receipts at the state level have persevered and met budgetary expectations. He noted, however, that that performance was partially supported by one-time revenues that will go away, and that in combination with other increased spending pressures has led to projections of a significant budgetary deficit compared to forecasted revenue streams in the coming year. He emphasized that today’s presentation would focus on revenue only, and that while models have predicted deficits in the past and there have been ups and downs, Illinois has remained resilient.

Mr. Varner gave an overview of the state of the economy. He stated that we are in the midst of a high inflationary period, and concerns about inflation are growing with the recent election of President Donald Trump. He then shared information on several economic indicators in the U.S. and Illinois. U.S. GDP growth is predicted to slow from an average of 2.7% for 2024 to 1.9% in 2025, and Illinois typically lags slightly behind the U.S. Additionally, the manufacturing Purchasing Managers’ Index (PMI) has shown contraction since November 2022, and demand remains weak as we enter 2025. The services PMI is experiencing extremely slow growth, and U.S. monthly job growth had significantly slowed by the start of 2024, which influenced the Federal Reserve’s decision to loosen their monetary policy. Mr. Varner noted that employment recovery in Illinois since the pandemic has been significantly delayed as compared to the nation as a whole, and recent months have shown weakness in job growth. Similarly, Illinois lags the country as a whole in unemployment rates and reported an unemployment rate of 5.3% in October, a 0.6% increase since the start of the year. He reported that unemployment is likely driven by a slow hiring rate rather than high layoffs. He said that average weekly earnings growth has stalled in FY 2024. Mr. Varner then discussed economic forecasts, including the consensus forecast.

Mr. Noggle discussed state general revenue funds. He shared that state general revenue funds have essentially doubled since 2004, and revenue has remained strong since the pandemic. He continued that the Revenue Assumptions for the FY 2025 Enacted Budget anticipate revenues of nearly $53.3 billion, which is an increase of $692 million compared to the FY 2024 actual total revenue. He broke this amount down by revenue stream. He then added that the FY 2025 General Funds Budget Plan predicted a $13 million surplus at the end of the fiscal year. Mr. Noggle included information on how the FY 2025 General Funds Revenue was adjusted from around $52 billion to the goal of around $53 billion. He shared that so far, Illinois is on pace to reach the desired amount of general fund revenue for FY 2025 despite being slightly down at this point in the year at about 1.5% year-to-date decline. He said that there is currently worry about sales tax revenue being down as compared to last year. He explained that the state relies heavily on personal income tax for revenue, and sales tax can be an indicator for how income tax will perform in the future, so the state is hoping for a turnaround in sales tax trends soon.

Employment can also influence income tax, but employment growth has significantly slowed, and wages have leveled off as well, which can lower income tax revenues. Overall, Mr. Noggle said his team does not expect high revenue growth in FY 2026, despite revenues remaining high. His team will not publish an official revenue estimate until March 2025, but the Governor’s Office of Management and Budget (GOMB) predicted flat revenue for FY 2026 in a walk-down published in November, and they also predict a budget deficit of $3.2 billion.

Dr. Leak commented that the presentation was very comprehensive and she appreciates the inclusion of lottery, gaming and cannabis factors.

Mr. Eddy thanked the presenters and asked if the expenditure numbers were provided to them, and Mr. Noggle replied that these were the numbers provided by the Governor’s office in November. Mr. Eddy noted that there is a projected expenditure increase of 3.8% for K-12, and Mr. Noggle agreed that he is also seeing that but his team is not responsible for expenditure predictions. Mr. Eddy then asked if the anticipated spending of $56.393 billion is consistent with the total spending increase of about 4% for education. Mr. Noggle said there is a predicted increase of around 6% in overall spending and he would have to do separate calculations for the education portion. Mr. Eddy noted that other categories had a projected spending increase higher than 4% but wanted confirmation that the Governor’s office is expecting a 4% increase in K-12 spending. Mr. Noggle agreed he is interpreting the data similarly.

Dr. Anderson asked if retirement income is included in the projections for individual income tax. Mr. Noggle replied that the state does not tax retirement and Social Security income and that amount is subtracted before individuals pay their state taxes. Dr. Anderson asked if there is currently an aging retirement population, and Mr. Noggle replied that he believes the retirement population is growing as individuals start to live longer, so that is an increasing amount of tax revenue lost.

Mr. Eddy asked what a 1% increase in income tax yields in revenue after considering that the decrease in money kept by individuals could affect sales tax. Mr. Noggle estimated that a 1% increase would bring in $4-5 billion in revenue, and Mr. Eddy commented that is a significant amount of revenue. Mr. Noggle added that the partial dependence of the state on income tax somewhat stems from the fact that income tax can be a growing revenue source, while other revenue sources do not grow.

Dr. Sanders thanked the presenters for their presentation, particularly their explanation of the corporate personal property replacement tax. He further thanked them for volunteering their time to assist the Board as they develop their budget. Other Board members expressed their thanks as well.

B. FY 2026 Budget

Director of Budget & Financial Management Tom Bazan and Director of Funding & Disbursements Andrew Krupin presented on the FY 2026 budget development. Before the presentation began, Dr. Sanders noted that Chief Financial Officer Matt Seaton was joining the meeting online. Mr. Bazan additionally commented on how the presentation from COGFA provides necessary context to his presentation with Mr. Krupin.

Mr. Bazan first showed the Board a history of previous Board budget increase recommendations and what was actually provided by the legislature, with the board recommending an increase of about $500 million and the legislature providing an average increase in the same range. He explained notable differences between Board recommendations and legislature enactments and pointed out an overall pattern of the legislature and governor supporting an increase in K-12 funding over the past several years.

Mr. Eddy asked if the total amount of revenue provided shown on the slides is solely state sources or a combination of federal and state sources. Mr. Bazan answered that the slide only shows general funds increases.

Mr. Bazan continued by showing projections in the GOMB’s annual Illinois Economic and Fiscal Policy Report for PreK-12 education estimated increases. He said the report consistently projects an increase in funding for education annually, showing that not only is the GOMB projecting a continued increase in commitment to K-12 education this year but they have also done so in the past.

Mr. Bazan then showed the Board data from the FY 2026 budget hearings, highlighting the large increase in requests made this year and the great interest from the public in K-12 education. Mr. Bazan explained that taking the sum of the modes of requests for each budget category, the ISBE team found that over $2 billion of increased funding was requested by the public this year. He then showed that the most common requests were for Social Emotional Learning Hubs, the Resilience Education to Advance Community Healing Statewide Initiative, EBF, CTE, and Truants’ Alternative and Optional Education.

Mr. Krupin discussed the mandated categorical (MCAT) programs that compose a large portion of the ISBE budget, specifically preliminary projections for the FY 2026 budget. He explained how he reached these projections and shared that preliminary projections identify a need for an additional $142.2 million to maintain proration in FY 2026 at the FY 2025 level. He then shared that in order to reach the FY 2025 Board recommended proration, preliminary projections identify a need for an additional $355 million. Mr. Krupin then stated that of the $355 million increase across all line items, approximately $142 million is attributable to an increase in the claim costs from year to year and $213 million is attributable to closing the proration gap.

Mr. Bazan gave a quick overview of member initiatives, which are typically not included in the Board recommendation but are legislative priorities added through the legislative process. He highlighted a key takeaway that since FY 2022, the total amount of member initiatives has increased from about $4 million to nearly $71 million in FY 2025 appropriations. He concluded with an overview of the budget process going forward, focusing on next steps of the superintendent’s recommendation in January 2025 and the compilation of ISBE’s budget book in February 2025. The Governor will deliver his budget address in February, the legislature will pass the budget in Spring 2025, and the Governor is expected to sign the budget in Spring/Summer 2025 to be enacted in July 2025.

Mr. Eddy thanked Mr. Bazan and Mr. Krupin for the presentation and asked if it was accurate to say that the expected amount for member initiatives and payout of those initiatives could affect the percentage that is enacted in MCATs by a reduction in total available funds. He clarified that he was wondering how the additional money allocated to member initiatives by the legislature affected ISBE’s ability to meet MCAT payments. Mr. Bazan explained that it may affect legislative decision-making, but by the time the money gets to ISBE, funds for member initiatives are provided in a separate appropriation from MCAT funds. Mr. Krupin said that the funding of member initiatives could affect the amount of money going to other purposes. Mr. Eddy asked for confirmation that member initiative funding could reduce ISBE’s recommended amount of proration by those funds being used elsewhere in the education budget. Mr. Krupin emphasized that ISBE receives those appropriations separately, so ISBE must administer funds in the way they are decided during the budgeting process. Dr. Sanders said that is not certain that the member initiative funds come out of the education portion of the budget and some member initiatives can fall on other agencies. Mr. Eddy asked if the large increase in funding for member initiatives would mean there is generally less money available to fund MCATs, potentially causing the prorated amount for something that is mandated to go up by spending money on something that is optional. Dr. Leak attempted to clarify Mr. Eddy’s question for the Board and ISBE team. Mr. Eddy clarified that the legislature has every right to make those decisions, but he hopes it is understood that when those decisions are made, there is less revenue available to provide school districts with necessary services and reimburse them for costs they have incurred because of ISBE mandates. Dr. Sanders stated the ISBE team’s appreciation for the Board’s consistent stand on member initiatives and zeroing them out of the budget, which sends the message that the Board believes in supporting EBF and MCATs, while funding member initiatives is up to the legislature.

Dr. Chavarria asked for clarification on the Special Education Orphanage MCAT, namely who receives those services and what services are reimbursed under that line. Mr. Krupin explained that those are payments to districts educating children with IEPs who are under the care of DCFS or residing in group homes, as well as reimbursing the education of children in foster care. Dr. Chavarria asked what the differential cost of educating a child in foster care is, and Mr. Krupin articulated that there are costs for the group homes and foster families that are not all covered by local tax dollars.

Dr. Chavarria then asked what is driving the increase in claim costs in Special Education Transportation. Mr. Krupin said he and his staff found a consistent increase in contractual costs, which stems from many factors including the driver shortage and an increase in students qualifying for that transportation. Dr. Chavarria replied that she asked the question because she is curious about how much of the increase is driven by additional students requiring the transportation versus increases in the cost of transport for the same number of students and stated her belief that both merit serious consideration.

5. Closed Session

Mr. Eddy moved that the State Board of Education go into closed session for the following exception items:

A. The appointment, employment, compensation, discipline, performance, or dismissal of specific employees, specific individuals who serve as independent contractors in a park, recreational, or educational setting, or specific volunteers of the public body or legal counsel for the public body, including hearing testimony on a complaint lodged against an employee, a specific individual who serves as an independent contractor in a park, recreational, or educational setting, or a volunteer of the public body or against legal counsel for the public body to determine its validity. However, a meeting to consider an increase in compensation to a specific employee of a public body that is subject to the Local Government Wage Increase Transparency Act may not be closed and shall be open to the public and posted and held in accordance with this Act. 5 ILCS 120/2(c)(1)

B. Litigation, when an action against, affecting or on behalf of the particular public body has been filed and is pending before a court or administrative tribunal, or when the public body finds that an action is probable or imminent, in which case the basis for the finding shall be recorded and entered into the minutes of the closed meeting. 5 ILCS 120/2(c)(11)

He further moved that Board members may invite anyone they wish to be included in this closed session. Dr. Nugent seconded the motion, and it passed with a unanimous roll call vote.

The open meeting recessed at 10:57 a.m. to go into closed session. The open meeting reconvened at 11:28 a.m.

6. Public Participation

There was no further public participation.

7. Consent Agenda

Chair Isoye reviewed the items under the Consent Agenda. Dr. Nugent asked Chief Legal Officer Kristen Kennedy a confidential legal question. Dr. Nugent requested that item E from the Consent Agenda be pulled and moved to a separate vote. Chair Isoye clarified that no approval for motion amendment was necessary because there was not a motion created yet.

Dr. Leak moved that the State Board of Education hereby approve the Consent Agenda items A-D and F. Ms. Gonzalez seconded the motion, and it passed with a unanimous roll call vote.

The following motions were approved by action taken in the Consent Agenda:

Approval of Minutes

*Plenary Minutes: Nov. 21, 2024

The Illinois State Board of Education hereby approves the Nov. 21, 2024, meeting minutes.

Approval for Publication

*Approval for Publication – Part 25 (Educator Licensure) Various Changes

The State Board of Education hereby authorizes solicitation of public comment on the proposed rulemaking for:  Part 25 (Educator Licensure) Including publication of the proposed rules in the Illinois Register to elicit public comment.

Contracts & Grants Over $1 Million

*Approval to Release and Award a Notice of Funding Opportunity/Request for Proposals for McKinney-Vento Homeless Children and Youth Grant Program-Lead Area Liaisons

The State Board of Education hereby authorizes the state superintendent to release a McKinney-Vento Homeless Children and Youth Grant Program – Lead Area Liaisons NOFO/RFP and to award funds to successful applicants. Seven areas, including City of Chicago SD 299, are expected to receive McKinney-Vento Homeless Children and Youth Grants. The amount awarded will be $4 million per year for each of three years, totaling $12 million over the grant period (FY 2026 - FY 2028).

The State Board of Education further authorizes the state superintendent to execute grant agreements within defined parameters to any entity eligible to receive more than $1 million for a single award or over the life of the grant.

Approvals

*Approval of Appointees to the State Educator Preparation and Licensure Board

The State Board of Education hereby authorizes the appointments of the following nominees to the State Educator Preparation and Licensure Board:

• Jeannine Woods, an elementary school teacher in Chicago Public Schools, as a representative of classroom teachers from IFT. (Term will end June 30, 2027.)

• Josephine Tabet Sarvis, Ph.D., director of the School of Education at Dominican University, as a representative of administrative or faculty members of private colleges and universities. (Term will end June 30, 2026.)

*Approval of Settlement Agreement and General Release: Hubbard v. ISBE, Cent. Dist. Ill. Case No. 3:20-cv 03300

The State Board of Education hereby authorizes the State Superintendent to execute the Settlement Agreement and General Release, and related payment forms in Hubbard v. ISBE, case number 3:20-cv-03300, in an amount not to exceed $62,500.

Chair Isoye removed item 7.E Approval to Release and Award an FY 2026 Early Childhood Block Grant NOFO/RFP for Prevention Initiative 0-3, Preschool for All 3-5, and Preschool for All Expansion Years 3-5 from the consent agenda at Dr. Nugent’s request and conducted a separate vote on this item.

Dr. Leak moved that the State Board of Education hereby authorizes the state superintendent to release and award a fiscal year 2026 Notice of Funding Opportunity (NOFO)/Request for Proposals (RFP) for new and/or expanding Prevention Initiative (PI) 0-3, Preschool for All (PFA) 3-5, and Preschool for All Expansion (PFAE) 3-5 programs. Dr. Anderson seconded. Dr. Leak asked for confirmation that this item is solely to release a NOFO/RFP and not to approve the awarding of funds to school districts yet. Dr. Sanders answered that this vote would allow him to issue the grants to school districts and providers. He asked Ms. Kennedy if any grants over $1 million would still have to be approved by the Board, and Ms. Kennedy said that is not the case. The motion passed with 6 roll call votes and Dr. Leak and Dr. Nugent abstaining.

8. Approval of Charter Renewal Decision for Southland College Prep Charter High School Dr. Chavarria moved that the State Board of Education hereby approves the renewal of the charter for Southland College Prep Charter High School for a five-year term at a funding level of 100 percent of the Per Capita Tuition Charge of the resident district, with an enrollment cap of 600 students. The State Board further authorizes the state superintendent and legal officer to commence negotiations with Southland College Prep Charter High School to determine all other terms of the charter renewal agreement. Dr. Nugent seconded.

Dr. Leak stated that her subsequent comments were applicable to both items 8 and 9. She stated her support for innovation and providing best practices for school districts across the state of Illinois, but she expressed her belief that it is incomprehensible to penalize 1% of Illinois school districts by overriding their local school boards and forcing them to take on an additional school while reducing their funding. She emphasized her support for charter schools and recognized the benefits they have brought to numerous children but clarified her support is only when charters’ success does not come at the expense of local school districts and children in those schools. Dr. Leak expressed her stance that states should own state-authorized charter schools so that the state can dictate who attends and avoid penalizing one school district for an individual charters’ authorization. She then provided detail on the original charter act passed in 1996 and its intention to give local school districts the opportunity to innovate in education while maintaining control over that educational entity, but state-authorized charters remove that control from local districts. She recalled previous conversations with Mr. Eddy about fixed costs to maintain a school that do not decrease when a student leaves to attend a charter school, and yet decreases in funding for district schools do not account for this. Dr. Leak pointed to the Illinois Mathematics and Science Academy as a separately funded state school that any child across the state can attend. She acknowledged that charter schools are not selective, but they still require parents to actively participate in the education of their students, and the same effort is not required of parents in local school districts. She urged the Board to take action regarding how state-authorized charter schools are funded and clarified that she asked for items 8 and 9 to be removed from the superintendent’s consent agenda to encourage the Board to take ownership of the role they play in this issue. She reaffirmed that she is thrilled for students thriving in these charters but her heart breaks for students in district schools that are being penalized.

The motion passed with 7 roll call votes. Dr. Leak abstained from the vote.

9. Approval of Charter Renewal Decision for LEARN John & Kathy Schreiber Charter School Ms. Gonzalez moved that the State Board of Education hereby approves the renewal of the charter for LEARN John & Kathy Schreiber Charter School for a five-year term at a funding level of 100 percent of the Per Capita Tuition Charge of the resident district, with an enrollment cap of 600 students. The State Board further authorizes the state superintendent and legal officer to commence negotiations with LEARN to determine all other terms of the charter renewal agreement. Dr. Nugent seconded.

Dr. Leak repeated that her comments from item 8 apply to this item as well. Dr. Anderson asked if when a local district says they cannot afford a charter school in their district they must submit a supporting budget. Dr. Leak answered that they do submit a supporting budget and undergo an entire process to make their case.

The motion passed with 7 roll call votes. Dr. Leak abstained from the vote.

10. Discussion & Approval

A. Approval of the Spring Session Legislative Agenda

Executive Director of Legislative Affairs Dana Stoerger and Irma Snopek discussed this item. Chair Isoye reminded the public that there was a robust discussion on this item during the previous day’s Education Policy Planning Committee meeting of the whole.

Dr. Nugent stated that she was informed this morning that the verbiage in the community college partnership measure was changed to no longer make partnerships compulsory and asked if the packet provided to the Board contains the updated verbiage. Ms. Snopek clarified that the verbiage in the packet is not updated but the legislative affairs team will be making the partnership optional in its proposal.

Dr. Chavarria asked why the motion included in the item memo is more limited than the agenda items included in the packet provided to the Board and requested it be clarified what exactly the Board will be voting on at this meeting. Ms. Snopek answered that her team wanted to be sure to inform the Board of the many initiatives that ISBE is doing to align with its goals and strategic plan, but not all are legislative in nature. Dr. Nugent requested confirmation that not every initiative included in the packet is legislative and Ms. Snopek confirmed that only the items labelled as legislative require legislative action. Dr. Chavarria asked if the motion pertains to the items that are marked as legislative within the packet, and Ms. Snopek said yes. Mr. Eddy asked if the upcoming vote would be solely on the legislative priorities contained in the packet, and Ms. Snopek said that is correct, adding that the packet includes further research and data to explain why ISBE would like to move forward with the proposed legislative agenda items.

Mr. Eddy emphasized that he does not want to repeat the same conversation had in the Education Policy Planning Committee meeting of the whole the day prior but that he cannot support the agenda unless there is clarification surrounding the solutions related to the banning of expulsions and student ticketing. He reiterated that his concerns center around the state’s responsibility to create the safest possible environment for students, and he believes that in order to do that, local officials must have the power to make difficult decisions. He noted that the packet mentions that of the 50 states and the District of Columbia, 16 have restrictions on expulsion, and he requested more information about results of those measures and alternatives to expulsion provided in those states. He emphasized that without that information, he does not feel comfortable completely taking a disciplinary tool away. He continued to speak on the matter of student ticketing, saying that he does not believe that public schools should minimize the importance of adhering to the law or provide students with a space where they feel safe to violate the law. At the same time, he agreed that student ticketing should not be used as a disciplinary measure, and he expressed discomfort in supporting a measure through which local law enforcement and school resource officers (SROs) feel they cannot do their jobs. He requested the consideration of removing the student discipline and student ticketing measures from the legislative agenda so that he could vote in support of the remaining legislative priorities.

Dr. Sanders thanked Mr. Eddy for his feedback. Dr. Sanders then corrected himself from the day prior when he said that two kindergarteners were expelled in the past year; in reality, the data shows that it was one first grader and one second grader that were completely denied access to school. Mr. Eddy asked if there were three students total disciplined at this level among those age groups, and Dr. Sanders confirmed that there were two completely barred from school and one kindergartener who was given alternative programming. He added that there were also 7,097 suspensions at that grade level within the same school year. He argued that this is the right action to take and reminded the Board of the thorough research on the school to prison pipeline and racial disparities in schools, emphasizing this is an equity issue and this is a stance the Board must take. Mr. Eddy reminded Dr. Sanders and the Board that it is not an individual but a team of school administrators and board members who decide to expel a student, and students and parents have the right to make their case and undergo due process. He cautioned against eroding the ability of elected officials to protect their community and stated that if he knew more details about K-2 alternatives, he might be able to vote in favor, but at this time he is not prepared to do so.

Dr. Anderson replied that research shows that implicit bias plays a large role in which students are ticketed. Mr. Eddy clearly stated that he does not support racial bias, Dr. Anderson clarified that there are other types of bias at play as well, and Mr. Eddy said he would like to address these disparities, but he is not sure this is the right way to do so. Dr. Anderson explained research from the Yale University Center for Child Study that demonstrates that educators are more likely to expect unruly behavior from Black male students, which can lead to harsher disciplinary measures for those students. He encouraged the Board to take action. Mr. Eddy agreed that there are issues that must be solved but argued that this blanket recommendation banning all expulsions in grades K-2 is not particular to racial bias but has the potential to threaten student safety; he said he is not prepared to strip school districts of that authority and he would like to speak more to individuals in the field about it. He once again emphasized that he supports the remaining measures in the motion outside of student discipline and student ticketing.

Dr. Leak recalled that in the conversation the day prior, the Board and legislative affairs team reached the conclusion that the language for this legislative agenda item would surround providing students in grades K-2 with alternative supports instead of expelling them without educational alternatives. Ms. Snopek replied that the legislative affairs team did consider that conclusion and that is why they included the provision that if the bill passes, ALOP funds will be accessible for grades K-2, which is currently not allowed below grade 5. Mr. Eddy confirmed that that provision is included in the packet, but said he needs to understand better how those two provisions work together to allow districts to remove a student with due process while also providing them with alternative services. Dr. Sanders stated that nothing prevents districts from taking that action currently, and Mr. Eddy replied that nothing requires the districts to take that action and there could be legislation that requires school districts to provide alternatives without taking away their right to expel. He said he may feel comfortable with this measure in the future, as well as with the student ticketing measure, but not until these details are ironed out.

Ms. Snopek clarified regarding student ticketing that the ISBE team is not attempting to take away power from law enforcement when students break the law, they are just trying to close a loophole; the law already prohibits school personnel from issuing fines, so they should not be able to refer students to another entity to deal specifically with disciplinary consequences. Mr. Eddy asked if this means that if a school administrator witnesses a student breaking the law, they are unable to contact law enforcement. Dr. Sanders reminded the Board of the history of this issue: Ticketing was not an issue in schools before Senate Bill 100, but Public Act 456 made school administrators feel as though they could not properly discipline students for a variety of offenses, so there was a shift across the state to increase the number of local ordinances to make behaviors that were previously considered school discipline matters illegal on school grounds. He emphasized that those behaviors, such as vaping on school grounds, should remain school discipline matters and students should not be fined for them. He clarified that there are exceptions to this ruling for behaviors that administrators are legally required to report to law enforcement, such as distribution of drugs on school grounds, that are not student ticketing issues to begin with. He agreed with Dr. Anderson’s earlier point that there are racial disparities in ticketing in schools and that must be addressed, but that doesn’t take away the power of law enforcement to do their job if they see a crime occur.

Mr. Eddy asked if Dr. Sanders is arguing that if the law is broken on school grounds, there should not be the same consequences for breaking the law. Dr. Sanders said this is not removing consequences altogether and schools will issue consequences with disciplinary measures. Mr. Eddy stated that there were unintended consequences of Senate Bill 100 and there will be unintended consequences with this measure that will erode the authority of local powers, and that it will be beneficial to everyone for students to understand that there are consistent consequences for breaking the law.

Dr. Anderson shared his experience that only certain children are turned into law enforcement for discipline matters while others are able to escape consequence free. Mr. Eddy said that is a different issue that must be addressed. Dr. Anderson stated he does not like that only some kids will suffer because the law is not enforced even-handedly and we must put an end to it, and Mr. Eddy said he does not support that either, but the solution is not to eliminate the law altogether.

Dr. Chavarria commented that the Board has consistently prioritized local control and autonomy in its decision making, but it also has a strong commitment to equity and to support students to reach their potential. She stated that both the student discipline and student ticketing measures put in protections to curb practices that penalize students and don’t support them, and for that reason she believes they are reasonable agenda items. She added that she trusts that the feedback brought forward by the Board will inform the language written in the bills and there will be opportunities to have the field inform the final recommendations made, and for those reasons she is very comfortable supporting both measures.

Mr. Stoerger acknowledged Mr. Eddy’s feedback and read the drafted bill language to him to demonstrate that the measure would not prevent school officials from enforcing the law. He argued that infractions of the law should be handled as such, but students should not be ticketed or fined for a dress code violation. Mr. Eddy asked if students have actually been ticketed by local police for dress code violations, and Mr. Stoerger said potentially yes. Mr. Eddy asked if he had any actual instances of ticketing for dress code violations, and Mr. Stoerger said he would have to look into that example in particular but there have been instances where students have been ticketed for behaviors that are not technically against the law. Mr. Eddy stated that he is hesitant to craft public policy based on potential scenarios that have not happened. Dr. Sanders brought up the fact that the law prevents police departments from punishing kids for truancy, but ProPublica has shown that schools have worked with law enforcement to issue tickets for truancy. Mr. Eddy agreed that ProPublica’s findings are concerning but would like to address those issues directly. He requested to read through the proposed legislation directly once it is better developed but he cannot yet vote in favor and would like the Board to consider voting on the other agenda items separately so he can vote in favor of those he supports.

Dr. Nugent expressed concern that the legislative team has drafted verbiage for the proposed legislation that the Board has not seen yet. Ms. Snopek clarified that the legislative affairs team continues to work on legislative language up until the point that it must be filed, and after Board approval, they hope to engage stakeholders in the process. She emphasized there is no final language for any proposed legislation, and there are other legislative agenda items that they continue to work on that will be brought to the Board in the future but are not yet ready. Dr. Nugent asked if the Board will not be able to review these agenda items after they approve them, and Dr. Sanders replied that the Board will continue to have opportunities to conduct legislative review and see the developed language; the Board is approving the legislative affairs team to move forward in having discussions about these items, but no legislative approval is guaranteed, and many other stakeholders must provide input as well before the Board will see more fully developed proposed legislation. Ms. Snopek emphasized that all the ideas behind the team’s proposals are included in the Board packet and that the student ticketing measure is simply to prevent school officials from referring students to outside law enforcement to issue fines as disciplinary consequences, which is already prohibited by law, but it is still happening.

Mr. Eddy asked for confirmation that the student discipline measure would ban expulsions for students in grade K-2 with no exceptions. Dr. Sanders confirmed that is correct and that any provisions about opening up ALOP funds and requiring push-in services would be in the same packet. Mr. Eddy then confirmed that the student ticketing measure would not change any existing law about issuing fines and those preventative laws can still be enforced. Ms. Snopek confirmed that fines from school personnel are already prohibited by law, which is not being changed, but 12,000 tickets have still been issued since the passing of that law, and Black men are twice as likely to receive tickets than white men. She reiterated that under the law, discipline is a matter to be dealt with by the school district and not by an outside entity. Mr. Eddy confirmed that under this measure those 12,000 tickets could still be written. Ms. Snopek said yes, as long as school personnel are not going around the law prohibiting fines and calling in outside entities to issue fines for discipline matters. Mr. Eddy said he does not support that, and he supports upholding the law. Ms. Snopek agreed that her team also supports upholding the law. Mr. Eddy argued that the effect of this legislation is to tell school officials they cannot call law enforcement if they witness a law being broken. Ms. Snopek emphasized that the law would only address student ticketing as a disciplinary consequence and that discipline should be dealt with by the school. Mr. Eddy stated that breaking laws should be dealt with by law enforcement, and Ms. Snopek said that is not said in the proposed legislation, they are only trying to prevent fines as a form of student discipline. Mr. Eddy said he would be interested in reading the final language, but he does not want to be on record supporting something that erodes local officials’ authority to enforce the law. He added that he respects those with different opinions.

Dr. Anderson said that there is nothing included in the proposed measure that prevents law enforcement from enforcing the law. Mr. Eddy then asked what the measure would change. Dr. Sanders repeated the findings of the ProPublica article that school officials are calling in law enforcement to handle school discipline measures.

Mr. Eddy asked if there is likely a list of behaviors that are disciplinary in nature that are also against the law, and ISBE would be telling local officials that for those instances they should not call law enforcement. Dr. Sanders replied that the law is very clear about what behaviors school officials must call law enforcement about, but some behaviors are discretionary, and more districts use that discretion to call law enforcement. Mr. Eddy asked if we want to take that discretion away from school districts, and Dr. Sanders said that is correct. Mr. Eddy said he does not support that. Dr. Sanders said he would love to see updated data from ProPublica, and more school districts and law enforcement might deserve more credit than we are currently giving them in moving toward restorative practices, which should be encouraged. Mr. Eddy asked for confirmation that right now the statute permits municipalities to create ordinances that require fines when violated, and if that’s a problem, why are we not dealing with the issue through the statutes that allow fines for certain offenses. He reiterated that he does not approve of a governing body interfering with the discretionary agency of local districts who might be perfectly fine without interference.

Dr. Nugent asked for clarification on whether ALOP funds would be extended to grades K-3 or grades K-4. Jen Saba clarified that currently ALOP funds go down to grade 4 but rules dictate that they can only be used for push-in services in grades 4 and 5. This measure would allow ALOP funds to be used for push-in services for grades K-3 as well. Dr. Nugent asked if pull-out services are currently allowed in grades 4 and 5, and Ms. Saba said no.

Dr. Anderson commented that the Board can continue to think of different scenarios of student discipline and ticketing, but they need to look at what the record reflects and decide to take action. Mr. Eddy asked how these measures change the record of bias, adding that he would not be opposed to a policy that directly addresses the bias, but this is a proposal that does not directly target those issues. He clarified that his vote is not against addressing racial bias and he does not believe this measure directly addresses racial bias. Dr. Anderson encouraged the Board to consider the complexity of the situation and other forms of bias, including gender bias, at play. Mr. Eddy thanked Dr. Anderson for the clarification but restated that he does not think this proposal directly addresses the bias.

Dr. Leak reread the charter school measure aloud and emphasized that the funding of state-authorized charter schools is also an issue of local control and equity in which ISBE overrides the decision making of a local school district and elected school board. She stated that she understands that this measure is a first step to addressing that problem but emphasized her desire to continue the discussion of how these schools are funded. She additionally stated that she does not believe that any charter schools will take the opportunity to go under district control, so the Board must continue to assess what funding is taken away from a school district when a charter school is authorized by the state in their area. She encouraged the examination of fixed costs in districts that are impacted and recalled school districts that have repeatedly sought out Board help in addressing this issue. Dr. Sanders repeated that he would meet with the legislative affairs team and Dr. Seaton to discuss options moving forward. Ms. Snopek asked if school districts have authority to tell charter schools how to spend their funds if they are a district school. Dr. Leak said yes, if they are a district-authorized school, they allocate their own funds to the charter and control that process, but when the state takes over, money is withheld from the school district and the district has no authority over how that money is spent. Dr. Sanders added that district-authorized charter schools have a contract with the district that specifies how the budget is developed, but there are parameters to how much money is given; within those parameters, charter schools usually have discretion on how to spend the money, but typically a budget is submitted to the district, or they have conversations about the budget. Ms. Saba confirmed that the contract lies with the district in the case of a district-authorized charter school.

Chair Isoye stated that voting in favor of this item gives the agency permission to begin negotiation on what the legislation should look like, knowing that the final legislation could look very different from what is discussed today, or it may not go anywhere. He added that if the Board does not approve this item, the agency will not pursue these measures further. He acknowledged that everyone has different views on each measure and because of that, he will move forward with the vote without separating out individual agenda items. Mr. Eddy asked if his request to separate out certain items is denied by the Chair, which he would respect. Dr. Isoye said that under parliamentary procedures, there can always be an amendment to a motion. Mr. Eddy said that is not necessary.

Dr. Nugent moved that the State Board of Education hereby approves the following agency-initiated proposals for the 2025 spring legislative session: Licensure; Student Discipline; Educator Misconduct; Learning Partners; School Code Cleanup; Charter Schools; Community College Partnerships; Student Ticketing. Dr. Anderson seconded the motion. The motion passed with 7 roll call votes, and Mr. Eddy voted no.

B. Approval of an Amendment to the ESSA State Plan

Executive Director of Data, Accountability, and Assessment Rae Clementz discussed this item.

Chair Isoye reminded the Board and listeners that this item was discussed the day prior during the Education Policy Planning Committee Meeting of the Whole.

Dr. Anderson moved that the State Board of Education hereby authorizes the state superintendent to submit the proposed amendment to the ESSA State Plan to the U.S. Department of Education. Ms. Gonzalez seconded the motion. Dr. Nugent thanked Ms. Clementz for providing the Board with the redlined version of the memo to save them time searching the ISBE website for information. The motion passed with a unanimous roll call vote.

11. Announcements and Reports

Superintendent/Senior Staff Announcements

Dr. Sanders thanked the Board and ISBE team members who attended the Triple I Conference in November and said that he received positive feedback on the visibility of the agency at the event. He then shared he visited ROE 17 of Bloomington to see the math instruction and professional learning they are doing in their schools and expressed appreciation for their work. He concluded by discussing his visit with Chair Isoye to the Education Commission of the States (ECS) Winter Commissioners Meeting as a new member of the steering committee and future issues committee.

There were no senior staff announcements.

Chair of the Board’s Report

Chair Isoye also discussed attending the ECS conference with Dr. Sanders and praised the event for presenting on a wide range of topics and gathering a diverse group of attendees. He added that the National Association of State Boards of Education is considering a new member initiative at about the same time as ECS in which they navigate how to partner with other agencies instead of replicating their practices. He acknowledged the many students, teachers, and administrators are approaching exam season and winter break and wished them and the ISBE team a relaxing holiday season.

Member Reports

Dr. Leak complimented the ISBE staff for the sessions they held during the Triple I Conference and the positive feedback they received for making voices in the field heard. She also discussed the statewide Multilingual Illinois/ESSA Conference that occurred the week before the Board meeting in which 341 schools from 167 districts were celebrated for their improvement. She thanked the agency for being cognizant of recognizing improvement because it is more often that the news highlights negatives. Dr. Sanders gave thanks to The Center and conference sponsor Pearson.

Ms. Gonzalez added that the Illinois Resource Center has been an incredible resource for ELL educators and expressed her gratitude for the opportunity to attend conferences like the Multilingual event. She thanked all ISBE team members that she saw at the conference and noted that not every state provides opportunities like this, making her feel lucky to be in Illinois.

Dr. Nugent announced that she received an invitation from the Director of Early Learning at NASBE to participate in an early childhood education focus group study. The group will convene in January.

12. Information Items

ISBE Fiscal & Administrative Monthly Reports

Freedom of Information Act Monthly Report

ISBE Quarterly Staff Demographics Report

13. Motion for Adjournment

Dr. Leak moved to adjourn the Dec. 18, 2024, meeting of the Illinois State Board of Education. Mr. Eddy seconded the motion, and it passed with a unanimous roll call vote. The meeting adjourned at 12:48 p.m.

https://go.boarddocs.com/il/isbe/Board.nsf/files/DCKLWK586CB4/$file/DRAFT%20Plenary%20Minutes%20-%20December%2018%2C%202024.pdf