Did Barsanti just suggest that Spahr's Integrity Saved Erwin & Gaffney from a Fraud Charge?

Barbara Erwin's been gone from the west Chicago suburban school district 303 for a couple of months now and it appears St Charles folks are about ready to get over it.

This from the Kane County Chronicle:

D-303 needs some help

Doing what the public wants would seem to be a tenet of any government body.

But so should making sure personnel files stay in a school district’s hands, following the Illinois Open Meetings Act, and not giving a superintendent 340 days of sick time.

Sadly, these are all tenets that School District 303 fell on the wrong side of with former Superintendent Barbara Erwin at its helm.

In the aftermath of the Erwin saga, the public’s trust in the district might have been at an all-time low. And so begins the rebuilding process.

Sounds like Scottsdale.

Recently in WestChiTown

Citing the fact that Barbara Erwin and Jim Gaffney's attempt to add 85 sick days (worth thousands of dollars) to Erwin's account was unsuccessful, State's Attorney John Barsanti told the Kane County Chronicle, “It’s not fraud. It’s not theft. Barbara Erwin didn’t get those days, so it doesn’t matter.”

Not the kind of line Sam Spade would have delivered.

I'm no lawyer, so maybe somebody can straighten me out here, but wasn't Barsanti only looking for attempted fraud to begin with? It sure doesn't seem Bobbie Raehl was under any false impressions. It was pretty clear that District 303 Human Resources Director Tony Spahr foiled whatever plot was afoot. There's Spahr's statement and the Gaffney memo; which confirms.

One asssumes that if Tony Spahr had bent to Barbara Erwin's pressure (and/or followed the memo Jim Gaffney says he signed but did not write) and credited her account with 85 sick days in opposition to Illinois state law - then that would have been something Barsanti could do something about!?

If that had happened, I'd bet a nickle it would have gotten pinned on Tony Spahr.

Sweet deal for the folks at the top of the food chain.

But as things are, Barsanti can't find a problem; and he's really looked. Barsanti said that he examined statutes ranging from fraud to official misconduct but found that no charge applied to the situation. Hard to believe; but, maybe so.

School board member cleared

in memo investigation

GENEVA - No charges will be filed against a member of the St. Charles school board following an investigation into a memo, signed by him, that indicated the board had approved additional sick-day credit to a former superintendent.

The Kane County State’s Attorney’s Office investigated a complaint brought against school board member Jim Gaffney, who signed the undated memo about sick days for then-Superintendent Barbara Erwin.

“Nothing fit,” State’s Attorney John Barsanti said...

There's really no statute governing attempted fraud in Illinois? ...seems surprising.

If the law dictionary is correct and property is 'anything that is owned by.. [an] entity,' then - isn't money property?

Have I mentioned that I'm not an attorney? I'm not. And I didn't spend much time trying to find an applicable statute, but I am curious...and skeptical. It wouldn't take much to convince me that government money was government property. Or, did the Illinois legislature really mean real estate?

(720 ILCS 5/46‑1.1)

Sec. 46‑1.1. Fraud on a governmental entity.

(a) A person commits the offense of fraud on a governmental entity when he or she knowingly obtains, attempts to obtain, or causes to be obtained, by deception, control over the property of any governmental entity by the making of a false claim of bodily injury or of damage to or loss or theft of property or by causing a false claim of bodily injury or of damage to or loss or theft of property to be made against the governmental entity, intending to deprive the governmental entity permanently of the use and benefit of that property.

(b) Sentence.
(1) A violation of this Section in which the value of the property obtained or
attempted to be obtained is $300 or less is a Class A misdemeanor.
(2) A violation of this Section in which the value of the property obtained or attempted to be obtained is more than $300 but not more than $10,000 is a Class 3
felony.
(3) A violation of this Section in which the value of the property obtained or attempted to be obtained is more than $10,000 but not more than $100,000 is a Class 2 felony.
(4) A violation of this Section in which the value of the property obtained or attempted to be obtained is more than $100,000 is a Class 1 felony.

(Source: P.A. 90‑333, eff. 1‑1‑98; 91‑232, eff. 1‑1‑00.)

Barsanti told the Chronicle that "he does not normally comment publicly on complaints filed with his office or their investigations." It's not completely clear why he made a special exception in this case. After receiving a written complaint, Barsanti’s office investigated that matter and examined criminal codes for an applicable charge, Barsanti said.

As it is, Spahr refused to misuse taxpayer dollars and Barsanti can't find a crime.

The Education Commissioner that could have been

The Kentucky Board of Education is still on the fast track to replace almost-Commissioner Barbara Erwin. The board promises to correct past failings and fully vet the next group of finalists. Good for them.

I'm not crazy about the board's effort to find a new commissioner in the fall of the year - especially not on the eve of a gubernatorial election. But let's hope there are still qualified candidates in the mix, who have not been driven off by the months of missteps, empty proclamations and uncertain direction. Let's hope the board's judgment will improve as their process improves.

Let's hope.

Life with Barbie

Another glimpse into what life might have been like with Barbara Erwin as Kentucky's Education Commissioner arose this morning in Chicagoland.

As his reelection campaign nears its conclusion, Kane County (Illinois) State's Attorney John Barsanti has launched yet another investigation into alleged "misuse of public funds" surrounding Barbara Erwin's 2004 contract in St Charles. Kentucky School News and Commentary reported on the controversy at the time.

An incredibly credible source in St Charles told KSN&C, in April, that Erwin pressured Human Resources staff to add 85 sick days to her account starting in 2004 - a year earlier than her contract allowed.

The story goes like this: After only a few weeks on the job, new HR director Tony Spahr started getting pressure from Erwin - first orally - then, after he reviewed her contract and refused to add the days - she gave him a memo signed by past board chair James Gaffney, and directed Spahr to add the days again.

Spahr sought legal advice and refused yet again. Erwin suggested he should start looking for work elsewhere - which he ultimately did.

In mid August, former District 303 school board President Bobbie Raehl took to police and county prosecutors a copy of the memo that she says showed “behind-the-scenes business.” Barsanti apparently reponded by offering a seminar to public officials on how to avoid trouble under the Open Meetings Act.

But the tenacious Ms. Raehl persisted.

“Personally, I feel it’s attempted fraud and it’s a violation of the Open Meetings Act,” Raehl said in August.

Gaffney denies writing the one-sentence memo that states that the school board agreed in 2004 to award nearly a year in sick days to its then-superintendent saying, - wait for it - “I didn’t write the memo; I just signed it.” (Ahhhh. I love the sound of lame excuses in the morning. It sounds like...'I didn't present at the conference, but I did sign off on it.')

Now, two months later, Barsanti has apparently decided he has what he needs to proceed.

This from the Daily Herald:

Dist. 303 under investigation again

The Kane County state's attorney has asked the St. Charles school board to turn over closed session materials from 2004 as part of an ongoing investigation into possible wrongdoing.

The probe was prompted by an individual allegation of illegal activity on the board since 2004, State's Attorney John Barsanti said Thursday.

This is the second time this year the county's highest-ranking law enforcement official has investigated such a complaint on the school board. A similar probe led school officials to admit in June that they violated the law in 2005 by approving an administrator's contract extension without a public vote.

On Thursday, Barsanti declined to name a complainant or discuss the nature of the latest investigation.

But former school board president Bobbie Raehl took responsibility for the complaint, saying she specifically asked prosecutors to look into the conduct of her former colleague and current board member Jim Gaffney.

Raehl, who also sparked the earlier investigation this year, said she believes Gaffney tried to use his power as a public official to get extra sick days for former Superintendent Barbara Erwin so she could become vested in the state pension system.

Raehl cites an undated memo bearing Gaffney's signature along with a note to district officials, saying the board agreed to credit Erwin with 340 sick days as part of a contract agreement in 2004, when actually Erwin's sick day allotment was not approved and did not start accumulating until 2005.

"There was an attempt to get (Erwin) vested by Jim (Gaffney)," Raehl said. "It was a misuse and an attempted misuse of public funds."

Gaffney did not return a phone message seeking comment Thursday.

Raehl, who lost her seat to Gaffney in the spring election, said she wanted to report the allegation months ago, but wasn't able to obtain the memo in question until late July. She said she had no choice but to turn it over to authorities. "When it comes to honesty and integrity, there is no room for compromise," Raehl said.

District 303 Superintendent Don Schlomann, who replaced Erwin in July, said the district was cooperating with the state's attorney.

Specifically, the board has been asked for tape recordings of four closed session meetings in early 2004 and minutes from several other closed sessions during the same time frame, he said.

School officials already have given the meeting minutes to investigators, but are still reviewing the legality of turning over tape recordings that may contain student and
employee information that must remain confidential, according to Schlomann.

Barsanti said he hopes to complete the investigation in the coming weeks.

Imagine what might have been...

Keith Travis still chair of the board. Barbara Erwin just completing her first whirlwind tour of the state preaching the social gospel of success as measured (twice) by new testing system. A few defections from the department of education (no reflection of the new commish), quickly replaced by former Erwin buddies. Board members happier than ever with their choice for Commissioner. Then, the other shoe drops.

The board may not have fired her, but it can sure count itself lucky that she quit first.

Erwin's missing personnel file: Unresolved, but the story still won't go away

The police recently dropped their investigation into Barbara Erwin's missing personnel file.

I should drop it too, but the story won't quite die.

Having interviewed everyone who was still in town, apparently the only remaining prospect for the district and police was to subject central office employees to lie-detector tests. Schlomann demurred. He couldn't use any information obtained that way anyhow. I doubt the authorities seriously suspected any central office personnel of being the perpetrator.

I have a hard time imagining some file clerk making off with a precious souvenir of the Erwin era in Illinois - the now famous contract amendment #2 notwithstanding.

Now the Kane County Chronicle published two tid bits from the failed police search in today's paper.

• The St Charles police investigation confirmed that the "locked" storage room was accessible by a master key after hours.
• Investigators tried to reach Erwin multiple times but did not receive a response. Her home telephone in St. Charles has been disconnected.

Why wouldn't Erwin return a call to the police? What would you have done?

Am I mistaken, or did Barbara Erwin have means, motive and opportunity?

These are exactly the elements of investigation someone like Hercule Poirot would have used to solve tricky cases. But that's fiction.

In reality, the police have probably gone as far as they should go based on the evidence they have.

But now comes the rumor that Erwin's file is also missing

from her superintendency in Scottsdale!

A Kentucky School News and Commentary reader mentioned this a while back - and honestly - I blew it off. I took a quick peek at the Arizona Republic and couldn't find anything (in about a minute) verifying such a claim and quickly stopped looking. Now, sources tell me evidence is on the way.

I'll keep you posted if things develop.

In the meantime...can anyone tell me why State's Attorney John Barsanti is blowing off Bobbie Raehl?

Post Mortem on the Erwin contract mess in St Charles

What follows are two editorials form WestChiTown papers. One opines that State's Attorney John Barsanti did not go far enough to protect the public interest and calls for resignations. The other seems to want to get over it as soon as possible, and calls for the Board to quickly rebuild trust, or else resign.

Who's right? Who's wrong? I'm not totally sure, but it seems to me that the "players" are not all equal.

Let's review:

Barsanti's solution seems an effort to find a middle-ground that upsets the fewest people in advance of his reelection bid. It looks like real action, without actually doing anything more than hurting school board members reelection chances. If Barsanti did more than listening to the tape and reading school board documents, it's not clear. Were district officials even interviewed?

One of his solutions - training in open meetings law - is laughable. Knowing the law wasn't the problem. Board members knew it when they broke it.

Apologizing for the wrongdoing is nice. But what impact does it really have? It would be a lawless society if folks were routinely allowed to escape consequences by simply apologizing. Gaffney never did apologize, did he?

As for the publication of the meeting tape - that should have some real impact - assuming St Charles voters care enough to act. It is direct evidence of a willful disregard for the law by a majority of the board and strongly implicates Mary Jo Knipp.

Barsanti's reelection campaign ought to show him as a smart, articulate and friendly kind of fellow. Running as a strong "law and order" type of candidate might not provide an appropriate level of truth-in-advertising.

Are all players equal?

I don't think so.

Mary Jo Knipp: Her mission clearly had more to do with keeping Barbara Erwin happy than it did with protecting the public interest. She knowingly violated the law, and aside from being outed, receives no punishment. At some point, however, she did receive a job with the district under Erwin's tenure. Her public comments make her sound as unembarrassable as James Gaffney.

James Gaffney: If there is a "Dick Cheney Public Relations Award" Gaffney ought to be a strong contender. His hard-headed failure to acknowledge his own culpability is shameful. He blames the whistleblower, rather than the culprit. He never apologized - voting No on the resolution - failing part of the agreed settlement with the state's attorney.

On the other side:

Bobbie Raehl: She asked the right questions and got smacked for it. She warned the board only to be rebuked and belittled. Then, she apparently chose not to undermine the majority of the board by going along as best she could, until she couldn't anymore.

Somewhere in between:

Kathy Hewell and Christopher Hansen: It was Hansen who raised the issue of a public vote in the closed session - only to be told by Knipp that it was not a problem; invoking the advice of some attorney. He saw his error, regretted it, and quickly got on the right side of the issue along with Karla Ray. Hewell was slower to come around.

And behind the scenes:

Barbara Erwin: Outgoing superintendent who receives a promotion, big salary plus thousands of dollars worth of sick days for her trouble. She, too, apparently tried to hide public information from the taxpayers. Who else could have placed her contract in her personnel folder - in a deliberate effort to conceal it?

My stand: While the players served on the same board they are not all equal. Sanctions should have been stiffer against Knipp and Gaffney...and maybe Hewell. Barsanti's solution was about right for Hansen; other board members. Voters ought to thank Raehl, and regret their vote for Gaffney. Erwin's own involvement should have gotten a closer look.

~

This from the Kane County Chronicle:

No trust in D-303

The St. Charles school board violated the public trust on April 11, 2005, when it voted illegally on a contract extension for superintendent Barbara Erwin.

The audacity of that violation remained unclear until this week.

A recording of the closed session meeting that night reveals board members purposefully discussing how to conceal their shady decision to give Superintendent Barbara Erwin an astounding perk, 85 sick days for every year of her contract.

Board members blatantly violated the Open Meetings Act, and attempted to intimidate the one board member, Bobbie Raehl, who resisted the action.

Among the most fundamental rights of Americans is the right to open government. In this case, the school board knowingly denied the public the right to know how its tax dollars were being spent.The board members who were in the room that night and who still are on the board today – James Gaffney, Christopher Hansen and Kathleen Hewell – should immediately resign their seats so the board can begin to try to regain the public trust.

Also, John Reichling and Mary Jo Knipp, who were in the room that night as board members and who are today employees of St. Charles School District 303, should resign their jobs or be removed from them.The district must cut ties with those who participated in this meeting.

Kane County State’s Attorney John Barsanti has told the board to issue a public apology, to release the tape of the closed session, and to attend training on open-meetings and open-documents law. We’re not sure that’s enough.

The law allows for a misdemeanor to be charged against those who violate the Open Meetings Act – it carries a maximum sentence of a year in jail and a fine – but that option is rarely taken by state’s attorneys.

Don Craven, a lawyer who specializes in media law and who is retained by the Illinois Press Association, said he can remember two instances in the last 25 years in Illinois when a prosecutor charged a public official with a crime for violating the Open Meetings Act.“It never happens,” Craven said.

This is indeed a litmus test for the St. Charles community. If this blatant disregard for open government infuriates you as it does us, we urge you to contact the following district officials, whose phone numbers and e-mail addresses are published on the district’s Web site:
Jim Gaffney(630) 761-5000mailto:761-5000James.Gaffney@d303.org
Kathleen Hewell(630) 464-0117mailto:464-0117Kathleen.Hewell@d303.org
Robert Lindahl(630) 673-7617mailto:673-7617Robert.Lindahl@d303.org
Scott Nowling(630) 254-5004mailto:254-5004Scott.Nowling@d303.org
Karla Ray(630) 513-8121mailto:513-8121Karla.Ray@d303.org
Lori Linkimer(630) 584-5929mailto:584-5929Lori.Linkimer@d303.org
Christopher Hansen(630) 584-5516mailto:584-5516Christopher.Hansen@d303.org

Go to board meetings and tell them that St. Charles deserves better.What disturbs us most about the recording is the repeated reminder to keep the public in the dark about the contract extension. After the vote, just before the meeting adjourns, Raehl points out that the document is available by a Freedom of Information Act request.

“When we hired Dr. Erwin, we discussed the idea of her contract and the terms within her contract, that we knew it was FOIA,” Gaffney says. “But we were not going to push the idea that is was FOIA because we did not want people to know about it. You want to push it, that’s your business, OK?”

At another point, an unidentified male says: “It is public record, but we don’t want to make it public record. I don’t think we want to tell anybody.”After the vote, Knipp can be heard asking for a copy of the contract from someone.“I don’t think this is anything you want in anybody’s hands,” Knipp says.“And remember, this is closed session,” a woman replies.“Exactly,” Knipp says. “If someone wants to go for it ... It’ll be interesting to see if somebody asks for it.”

Two months ago, school board candidates campaigned largely on a theme of restoring the public’s trust. That job has just become more important and more difficult. This meeting happened two years ago.

What else have taxpayers been kept in the dark about?

Executive sessions let elected officials discuss sensitive issues without the need to tiptoe around questions. They should be used for frank, honest discussion about issues such as lawsuits, land acquisition and employees. And the rules governing them should be strictly followed. The public trusts that its city councils and its school boards are using their time out of sight honestly and within the scope of the law.

We no longer can be confident of that in St. Charles District 303. How can this be mended and who can mend it?Gaffney, Hansen and Howell can begin the process by resigning. Knipp and Reichling can further it by resigning their district jobs.And residents of St. Charles – the people who pay for this school system and the people whose children are affected by the actions of this board – should not sit idle and wait for someone else to fix this disaster. They should get vocal, get involved and let the school board know they deserve better.
~
And this from the Daily Herald.

Open meeting law violation creates serious trust issue

That some elected officials betray the trust of the people who elect them is old news.

Still, each new incident is troubling, all the more so when the betrayers are persons whom you know as parents of students, friends or neighbors. Because community members generally applaud these folks for voluntarily assuming the daunting task of shaping our youths’ education, it is indeed distressing when they conduct business in secret and try to keep it that way when knowing full well it is the public’s legal right to know what transpired.

Based on proceedings of the past month regarding Superintendent Barbara Erwin’s departure, it is hardly shocking that an audio tape of an April 11, 2005, St. Charles school board meeting confirms that members knew they were violating the Open Meetings Act when crafting her contract. But while this confirmation is not jarring, it is nonetheless maddening.

The tape probably would not have surfaced if former board President Bobbie Raehl had not recently brought media attention to it.

The tape shows that the board OK’d a contract sans open-meeting vote because members knew that portions might make voters ill, especially the granting of 85 sick days, apparently meant to help Erwin reach a pension after working a certain number of years in Illinois.

The sting of the contract’s effect on voters was softened when Erwin opted to leave for the top state education post in Kentucky, meaning that her sick day bonanza apparently will not boost her retirement income as long as she does not return to another job in Illinois.

But when hearing board member Jim Gaffney on tape saying, “If they find out about it, they find out about it. … But I don’t think we should tell anybody,” we find it tough to trust anything he would say on behalf of the board again.

We agree with Gaffney, whom we endorsed in the April elections, on one count: We wouldn’t have wanted anyone to know we had crafted such a ridiculous number of sick days in the contract, either.

But his comment was a slap in the face to voters and an indication that he either doesn’t think residents are smart enough to be told about such matters, or that they would catch on quickly and question it in public. Who does Gaffney think “they” are, if not the voters who elected him to represent their best interests openly and who also pay the freight for whatever contracts the board negotiates?

If Gaffney and current president Kathy Hewell can’t quickly grasp the seriousness of their roles on the board, particularly when it comes to making information about salaries and contracts public, then they should step aside and let someone else get involved who embraces the basic tenets of a public’s right to know.

The board as a whole is now in apology mode, saying it won’t allow this kind of the conduct again. Board member Chris Hansen has made it clear he’s glad the board’s conduct has been made public and sounds willing to take the heat that will follow. That’s much better than Gaffney’s attempt to deflect the problem off on the “previous board,” as if he weren’t a member of that board and instrumental in persuading colleagues to keep things quiet.

While board members are saying they won’t let something like this happen again, we don’t foresee any rush to eliminate secret meetings when discussing something like a superintendent’s contract. So, it’s left to District 303 residents to decide whether they trust the board or not — and that would be on two points.

First, do they trust the board to reveal the information that they are obligated by law to share? Second, do they trust the board to avoid granting inflated pay or benefits that would heighten the feeling among taxpayers that elected officials are bent on trying to pry money out of their pockets that isn’t vital to providing students a quality education?

Put us in the category that says the board has to earn its trust back — and quickly.
~

Kane Countychronicle readers respond:

AreYouKiddingMe wrote on Jun 28, 2007 8:45 AM:
" Thank you for allowing your readers to "hear for themselves" what went on behind close doors. It is time for parents of students in CUSD 303, and this taxpaying community to let their voices be heard and put a stop to this unethical handling of our educational system. How unsettling to this reader to wonder what other issues have been "secretly" decided upon illegally. "

wedeservebetter wrote on Jun 28, 2007 2:24 PM:
" The only way our school district can recover from this problem is to get rid of the problems (Gaffney, Hewell) and staff (Knipp, Reichling). What is the process for a citizen directed "Vote of No Confidence?" I'd be happy to lead it! There has to be an impeachment process out there! "

myidea wrote on Jun 28, 2007 2:51 PM:
" Gaffney needs to go and Hewell can follow him. Knipp was clearly granted special status from her favors to the superintendent. She has no education. "

AreYouKiddingMe wrote on Jun 28, 2007 5:05 PM:
" Can anyone tell me then the bottom line cost we are losing by paying Erwin for this illegal contract? Also, who and how much we paid the search firm to find her or was she related to Gaffney, Knipp, Hewell or Reichling? Makes you wonder....... "

i care wrote on Jun 28, 2007 8:17 PM:
" I have not heard of any relationships between Erwin and Gaffney etc. Something to think about though, maybe she is related to one of them "

i care wrote on Jun 28, 2007 8:19 PM:
" I seem to recall another Gaffney story, during the last referendum attempt. He and Erwin thought it best to pay rush fees to architechs to redesign the middle/grade school design. Well, that was a waste, I think a hundred fifty grand, because the referendum failed anyway. Why would anyone pay to redraw plans in a hurry when there is no money to pay for the project? That was real good thinking. Anyone remember the specifics? "

AreYouKiddingMe wrote on Jun 28, 2007 9:35 PM:
" "i care" that is so interesting that you bring that up please go to Illinois State Board of Elections and click on committees then ID #8696 and review D-2 Semiannual Report 1/1/06 to 6/30/06 listing who contributed to the last referendum. Wight and Company gave $3,000 back in February 2006 to Citizens for Excellence in Education CUSD 303. The list also included Aramark Management Services $1,000 contributed on 4/15/06, B&B Enterprises $1,000, Fox Creek Limited Partnership $1,000, James Gaffney $500, Kathy Kaiser $300, Prairie Lakes Investment Group $1,000, Melanie Raczkiewicz $200, St. Charles Education Association $3,000, SouthHampton Homes of Fox Creek $500 and St. Charles Education Support Professionals $1,000. The report reflects a total of $12,500 in contributions. D-2 Pre-election report 2005 CE dated 1/24/05 to 3/6/05 lists Barbara Erwin contributing $500, Hestrup & Associates $2,000, Jim Keen $250, Mass Collection $550 Mendel Plumbing & Heating $1,000, Melane Raczkiewicz $200, St Charles Education Association $2,000 and Wight & Company contributing $5,000 on 2/7/05. This by no means deems any wrongdoing but it begs to question where the "citizens" were. "

spike797 wrote on Jun 28, 2007 10:44 PM:
" Excellent coverage of the issue - thanks Chronicle Editors! I'd like to know more about Erwin's son doing an internship for White Architects. I'd like to know more about Knipp's education, since she is paid as a top level Asst. Dean with a college education. This is just the tip of the iceberg where Gaffney and Hewell and Erwin are concerned. The rest of the story needs to come out. It would be great if all of you concerned citizens joined forces because school boards are practically untouchable. "

AreYouKiddingMe wrote on Jun 28, 2007 11:33 PM:
" "spike797" I agree, this district has tried for too long to intimidate anyone from having a voice and even more insulting is the 3 minutes of eye rolling and paper shuffling they do when a community member brings forth their concerns at a board meeting. I for one would like to join that citizen force and stand up for change - where do we meet? "

i care wrote on Jun 29, 2007 6:50 AM:
" " I recall the 2005 school board elections. My memory is that the candidates had literature on themselves. Also, there were forums for the candidates to answer some questions in front of the public. My memory is that Ms Knipp had no college degree listed on her paper work and her occupation was a customer service rep or receptionist, something like that, for a seed company. Anyone else remember this? That was in 2005 so she could have went to college since then, night school I guess. OR she doesn't have a degree or she didn't want to list a degree on her campaign literature or tell anyone she had one at the forums. Anyone know? " "

School board member says two-year-old tape shows willful violation of law in Erwin contract dispute

‘It’s time to come clean’ in St. Charles

In a stunning development, a former School Board President in St Charles told the Daily Herald that a tape recording exists which shows the St. Charles school board knew it was breaking the law two years ago when it silently extended Superintendent Barbara Erwin’s contract behind closed doors.

The Daily Herald reports:

Despite the current board having heard the recording last week, however, members have yet to turn it over to the state’s attorney’s office, which is investigating a possible Open Meetings Act violation in 2005, Karla Ray said.

Ray, who was not on the board for the meeting in question, said she came forward with the information because she’s fed up with rampant secrecy on the board and “it’s time to come clean.”

The existence of direct evidence of a willful violation of the Open Meetings Act has the potential to raise the stakes for board members who were involved - and has left present board members looking to find a way out to the mess they have inherited.

In an interview this morning with Kane County state's attorney John Barsanti, Kentucky School News and Commentary learned that the board's intent will be a major factor that guides his response.

Kane County Regional Superintendent Clem Mejia opined to the Kane County Chronicle that voiding the agreement would be an extreme measure on the part of Barsanti. “I’m going to draw on the 20-years I’ve been in office: If there was a violation, the state’s attorney would send a very stern letter stating ‘Don’t do it again,’” Mejia said.

When asked about this, Barsanti said, "I don't know what exactly what he's referring to and I can't speak for other state's attorney's offices."

Barsanti went on to clarify: "Obviously, there's different levels of violations to the Open Meetings Act. The statute in Illinois gives me a lot of discretion as to what to seek. I can do nothing. ...I can seek damages, and also in certain situations...it can be a violation of the law; a misdemeanor...to violate the Open Meeting Act. And it depends a lot on exactly what happened. If it's an inadvertent mistake - you didn't list it on the agenda, or you didn't publicize it with enough time - this happens quite often, there are inadvertent mistakes - and most of the time, I'm not interested in assessing any heavy sanctions on something like that because most of the things can be redone and re-ratified, and everything can be made just as it should have been...when it's based on a mistake.



"Now, if I was presented with a situation where it was a willful violation - somebody willfully tried to avoid what I believe the Open Meetings Act was there to ensure; that there's an open discussion of ideas - and that certain dispositive action has been taken in secret without the input from the public, and without some public knowledge of it - if I thought that was the situation...in my mind that's different, Barsanti said. And I think I'd have to start thinking whether more severe types of sanctions would be requested."

"Now what Clem is talking about, I imagine, is in his experience, most of these these violations are inadvertent," Barsanti said.

Barsanti expects to receive all materials from District 303 by Wednesday. He is aware of today's story in the Daily Herald but said, "that tape hasn't gotten its way here yet. They have until tomorrow to give us a copy of that tape. ...Then we'll make our decision as to what we're going to do."

When asked what would happen if the item did not appear on the board's agenda, and if it appears to be a willful violation, Barsanti said, "I think we have to look at the whole thing. But the action can be voided. The action can be voided. That's one of the things that can happen."

“The public is not informed,” Ray said. “What I’m seeing is not a very transparent process.”

In an e-mail sent to board President Kathy Hewell on Saturday and to the Daily Herald on Monday, Ray wrote that the “secret conduct of the board is wrong and embarrassing.”

She also said the public should know there was a “willful violation” of the Open Meetings Act in 2005, when Erwin’s contract was extended without a public vote.

Ray said the board’s attorney made that conclusion Friday after the board listened to a recording of the April 11, 2005, closed meeting. She would not elaborate about the contents of the tape.

Hewell declined to respond to many of Ray’s comments, citing legal advice.

She did say, though, that “‘willful’ is a completely inaccurate” way of describing any illegal action that might have taken place two years ago.

“If there was, it’s going to be up to the state’s attorney to determine,” she said.

Mary Jo Knipp, who was board president in 2005 and signed the contract extension, said the debate has become a “personal vendetta” and declined to discuss Ray’s comments specifically.

“Nothing was done maliciously or illegally,” she said. “This reeks of nothing more than a personal vendetta, and if that is the case, I will be having nothing to do with it in any way, shape or form.”

Last week, the board met three times in closed session to discuss the possible ratification of the two-year-old agreement with Erwin, who is leaving the district next month.

It failed to take any action.

The contract, which credits Erwin with 85 sick days a year, came into question when outgoing board President Bobbie Raehl pointed out it was never publicly approved.

...[Ray] said some members want to see whether ratifying the contract now would essentially correct a past violation.

“My feeling is you cooperate,” Ray said. But “this is not being taken seriously.”

Hewell would not confirm or deny Ray’s assessment of the situation. She said the board plans to meet again Friday to discuss the issue in closed session.

“This is a board, and the board speaks with one voice in its votes,” she said.

Erwin probe set to begin, Regional Superintendent says honor contract and move on

Kane County Regional Superintendent Clem Mejia told the Kane County Chronicle that the St. Charles school board should uphold the previous board’s intentions and move on.

“I say honor the contract. ... Dr. [Barbara] Erwin didn’t do anything wrong,” Mejia, whose tenure ends June 30, said Friday. “It’s on both sides; that’s why you have contracts. They’re there to be honored, whether it’s one day, one year or 10 years.”

But Erwin's contract amendment two is under investigation by Kane County state's attorney John Barsanti, and that outcome is uncertain.

Mejia says voiding the agreement would be an extreme measure on the part of Barsanti, since such drastic action is only taken after multiple Open Meeting Act violations.

Mejia apparently did not say how many violations of the Open Meeting Act should be tolerated before the law is enforced, but he offered a sense of what constitutes business-as-usual.

“I’m going to draw on the 20-years I’ve been in office: If there was a violation, the state’s attorney would send a very stern letter stating ‘Don’t do it again,’” Mejia said.

Sweet.

Barsanti allowed District 303 extra time to gather the necessary meeting agendas, minutes and recordings of the closed session conversations, and said he expects his office will begin their inquiry soon. He has declined to issue a timeline on how long the review will take.

Despite the impending investigation and the many hours she has spent with fellow board members trying to ratify Erwin’s contract, District 303's Board Chair Kathleen Hewell says the district has inherently approved the contract by granting Erwin 85 sick days credit since 2005.

If the investigation finds fault with district's processes, the district could be issued civil sanctions, including fines, or have the contract voided, Barsanti said.

Unless the contract is declared valid as of the date written, the board may still be subject to penalties for officially ratifying a contract, in 2007, that includes an excessive number of sick days in violation of PA 94-004.

Erwin’s original contract would have expired on June 30, but the amended contract (signed before June 1, 2005) extended the agreement until 2010. If she remains an employee of the district after July 1, she stands to have another 85 sick days credited to her account. Her last day in the district is now said to be July 13th.

The Illinois State Board of Education declined to comment citing a lack of information. An attorney with the Illinois Association of School Boards also was unavailable for comment on Friday.

This from the Kane County Chronicle.