- Academic Dr. Duke Pesta speaks against Common Core, part 2
- Rockford Record Crawl 2014 celebrates music, indie retailers
- Early voting continues after ballot error corrected
- Caruana outpacing Springer in money race for sheriff
- Week 8 NFL picks: Lions, Packers will continue to share NFC North lead
- Impacts of low oil prices
- Monica Lewinsky takes aim at online bullying
- Beware of online Halloween scams
- Rockton Lions raise funds for Talcott Free Library during Oct. 10 Candy Day
- Former Belvidere North teacher pleads guilty to sex charge
Clarification about District 205’s weekend conference in Chicago
By Joe McGehee
In the Jan. 20-26, 2010, issue of The Rock River Times, a report from 13-WREX TV was cited regarding Rockford School Board members and District 205 officials spending $17,300 to attend a weekend conference in Chicago.
The TRRT article stated the conference “…was in regard to the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator…to help board members better understand each other.” The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator session was one seminar hosted as part of the conference, which included other sessions.
The article also stated, “WREX also showed the text of a letter sent by Rockford Board of Education Secretary Alice Saudargas…” based on WREX’s original online story, which attributed the letter to the “board secretary.” After speaking with Saudargas and WREX, it was determined WREX’s original online report was incorrect, and Saudargas, who is the board secretary, did not send the letter. WREX has since updated its online version of the story. TRRT’s updated version at rockrivertimes.com reads as follows:
“WREX also showed the text of a letter sent by an executive coordinator to the school board to those who attended the conference. The letter indicated an urgent need for those who attended the conference to reimburse the district for their personal expenses, including spouses’ dinners, in-room movies and other charges because an FOIA request had been filed seeking information about the trip.”
TTRT regrets any inconvenience or confusion these portions of the article may have caused.
From the Jan. 27-Feb. 2, 2010 issue