McHenry County Blog

Yesterday I showed you the terse resignation letter of Huntley School District 158′s Special Education Director Cheryl Kalkirtz.

As you can see from this article, District 158 seems to have a difficult time keeping such employees.

But, back to the question:

Does the Huntley School District need a full-time “certified” Special Ed Director?

My research says it doesn’t.

It doesn’t even need the part-time one it recently hired.

The reason is because Huntley School District 158 is a member of SEDOM, the Special Education District of McHenry County, and its Superintendent, Kathy Wilhoit, has the necessary “endorsement.”

Superintendent Wilhoit wrote,

“Regarding requirements, if a district has a full time special education administrator, that person must have a state director of special education endorsement.  If the position only works with special education part time, the endorsement is not required.“All districts who are members of a special education cooperative operate under the director of the cooperative as the state approved special education director.”

Indeed, Wilhoit told me she signs all the state grant applications.

So, it appears that Kalkirtz’ leadership abilities could have been utilized with no problem from Springfield by just changing her title.

That still leaves the question of why there was a parting of the ways.

The rationale used to appoint a part-time Special Ed Director was that she had the proper “endorsement.”

As you can see from Superintendent Wilhoit’s statement, that was not necessary.

Even though Karen Aylward’s appointment as Interim Director seemed to run into problems when it was discovered she did not have the endorsement, Wilhoit’s endorsement would cover for her with only a title change.

A May 2009 memo to Huntley District 158 from the State Board of Education should have made that clear. In part, it reads:

The above regulatory citation at 23 IAC 226.800(g)(3) also requires that “Each school district, or the cooperative entity of which it is a member, shall employ a full-time director of special education…” (emphasis added)

I did notice that all of Huntley’s “Assistant Director” of Special Ed job titles were changed to “Coordinator” after I pointed out the day of the meeting, citing state law, that all Directors and Assistant Directors have to have an endorsement for Director of Special Education.

This wasn’t the original plan, as evidenced by the planned personnel changes that were in the original board packet.

What did come out was Supt. John Burkey’s having to admit the lengthy amount of time that it takes for the State of Illinois to review and approve a Director’s endorsement.

This pretty much debunks any implication or cover that Cheryl Kalkirtz had to be let go or had to resign from the district because she didn’t officially have a director’s endorsement yet.

Maybe the real reason will come out later.

Kalkirtz’ on the job performance was well respected and Burkey publicly pretty much ruled out any inappropriate behavior on Kalkirtz’ part.

It is entirely possible and looking more and more likely every day that Kalkirtz did everything right, disclosed everything up front about not officially having a Director’s endorsement and was performing admirably in her job every day. For whatever reason, parents were told she had that endorsement.

So what’s left?

Is it possible Burkey got more than a little irritated that Kalkirtz was a professional who was good at advocating for her special services students.

If that’s not how a superintendent really wanted someone to perform in that position, it might be like having two tectonic plates awaiting a breaking rupture.

So far, there has been no tsunami bigger than the one that hit Hawaii. But you can bet similar swift underground waves are still bouncing around the District 158 basin.

It is so unusual for a middle level school administrator in Illinois to leave in the middle of a school year contract, that barring death, indictment or felony arrest.  It’s safe to describe what is now publicized as a resignation was apparently the result of an an internal power struggle, which Burkey won.

Whether the students will end up on the winning side remains to be seen.

When I filed a Freedom of Information request for board emails, I saw no indication that Burkey had informed board members prior to the resignation.

Based on people talking about how Burkey begged Kalkirtz to stay in January and then, weeks later, he accepted her resignation, you may want to wager an abrupt turn occurred.

Coincidentally this apparently happened after Burkey got his new three-year contract.

Without first informing the school board or parents, the Huntley School District has filed a plan with the Special Education District of McHenry County (SEDOM) outlining how Federal Stimulus money will be spent under the Individual Development Education Act (IDEA).

You remember that the administration recommended spending only half of the $1.6 million on what most people would consider special ed purposes.

The board, with administrators present, spent two nights getting input from parents.

I detected sincerity from Board President Shawn Green when he spoke of his concerns about that diversion of money from special ed kids.

Now, without board approval–at least in an open meeting–and with an unfilled promise for a parental survey (see below for what is contained on the bottom of minutes below; click to enlarge the image), a plan for how to spend the Federal funds has been filed in Woodstock.

ARRA Funds

• A survey was passed out to attendees and will also be on the district website. Staff and parents will have the opportunity to complete the survey online. Datesto be determined.
• Outcome of the survey should be ready for the October School Board meeting.

Supt. John Burkey had District 158 file a plan with SEDOM to spend the IDEA ARRA (American Recovery Re-Investment Plan) stimulus funds without as much as telling parents about last Friday’s deadline.

It is hard to believe that school administrators didn’t knew about the deadline and would be telling parents a survey would be taken, tempting them to think they would have input on such a plan.

The district hired a new attorney, a specialist in Special Ed, who promptly told parents how trust is important.

Maybe the trust speech should have been shared more broadly.

There are so many questions

• Whose name is on the document?
• Is it Director of Special Services Cheryl Kalkirtz’?
• Was Kalkirtz following orders about what was in the submission, risking insubordination if she didn’t send in the document as instructed? Or was she the author and decision-maker behind its entire content?
• Whose idea was it to keep the plan and its submission deadline secret from the board and parents?

Board President Green assured parents they would have input into any plan.

Since the parents’ survey has not been completed, it would seem that parental input has gone by the wayside.

But, since the plan hasn’t been made public yet, who knows?  Maybe some of the verbal advice from the Special Ed Moms and Dads was followed.

Keeping key information from the public was a cornerstone of the referendum tax hike deception of 2004.

Five years later, it appears similar practices live under a new administration.

As a former government official, I can tell you that individuals act with impunity when they are certain there will be no potential negative consequences if they get caught.  (If you need a high profile example, think of Governor Rod Blagojevich before his arrest.)

It seems to me that the school board has been hung out to dry…assuming they have not been informed of the content of the report.

Certainly, if the board majority has approved what has been submitted in their names, special ed parents will wonder when and where that approval occurred.

Any approval out of public view would challenge the mandate of the Open Meetings Act.
 
So, let’s assume the Open Meetings Act was obeyed.

Who, then, has concocted this secret plan?

Will that person or persons be punished or rewarded?

There does seem to be some irony that Federal government officials can’t keep a military recommendation about the need for more troops for Afghanistan a secret, yet Huntley’s school administration thinks it can keep a spending plan secret from residents until after going through the motions of taking a survey.

It will be interesting to see to school administrators explain the getting of input after, instead of before the plan was sent to SEDOM.

It will also be interesting to see whether newspapers’ editorial staffs give District 158 a pass, not to mention how reporters will cover the story.