McHenry County Blog

A press release from District 300:

Response to concerns about Board member’s comments

During the District 300 Board of Education meeting held on Wednesday, March 23, 2011, one of the Board members used profanity, which was picked up by the District’s digital recording system.

Some community members have expressed concern about the incident, and District leaders share their concern.

The District 300 Board meeting. Photo Credit: First Electric Newspaper.

The use of profanity is not tolerated in any of the content or communications that we post to our website, our social media pages (Facebook/Twitter), or our publications.

We would not tolerate or publish this type of language by anyone, including students, staff members, parents, or Board members.

We edited out the profane language and re-posted the rest of the recording to the website.

The unedited recording still exists and is being maintained as a public record, in accordance with the Illinois Freedom of Information Act (FOIA).

A question has arisen whether the vote taken by the Board that evening is affected by this incident.

The use of profane language, while unfortunate, is not illegal, and it does not nullify the outcome of the vote by the Board.

Board members are not staff members.

They are not hired or fired in the traditional sense.

They are unpaid volunteers who are elected by the community. The next District 300 Board election is on April 5, 2011.

The Illinois Open Meetings Act (OMA) does not require school districts to record their public meetings.

The only record the OMA requires of a public meeting is a summary/overview in the form of written minutes, which must be approved by the Board and published in a timely manner.

The fact that D300 leaders record our public Board meetings and began posting them to the D300 website in January goes well above and beyond what the law requires.

These recordings are posted on the D300 website as a public service, as part of the District’s ongoing efforts to make it easy for staff and community members to be involved and informed. D300 has been recognized at the state level and the national level for being leaders in public access and for exceeding the requirements of both the OMA and FOIA, as demonstrated by our ground-breaking FOIA webpage.

Board Member Monica Clark apologized for the incident.

“I completely regret my use of profanity at the Board meeting,” Clark said.

“I should have used better judgment in reacting to all of the comments that were being directed at me that night.

“I sincerely apologize for the stress that my use of profanity has caused my family, the school district and the community.

“This incident has unfortunately distracted from the very serious issues that our community continues to face regarding the financial health of our school district.”

It must be the silly season.

The Huntley School District 158 Board of Education has decided to allow convicted felons bid on contracts like the hurry up, rush, rush one for snow removal.

And Carpentersville District 300’s board has decided that the appearance of conflict of interest is, well, no problem. You can find reports of the in the Daily Herald’s

and Northwest Herald’s

Only the two newly-elected board members John Ryan, sponsor of the proposal, and Monica Clark, his running mate, voted for the language that would prohibit companies who contributed $5,000 to district tax hike committees from doing business with the school district for two years.

Read some of the comments from Daily Herald reporter Jameel Naqvi’s article:

“’This type of policy is hampering the business of the district,’ (Mary) Warren said, noting that the district already has issues receiving enough bids. ‘I think this is absolutely unnecessary.’

“Roeckner agreed.

“’We have never had this problem in our district,’ (Karen) Roeckner said. ‘I will still vote no.’

“Board President Joe Stevens echoed Warren’s and Roeckner’s concerns earlier Monday.

“’It’s fine for vendors to contribute to referendum campaigns,’ Stevens said. ‘I have not seen any evidence of “pay-to-play.”‘”

The Northwest Herald’s David Fitzgerald picked these gems up:

“’We hold ourselves to high standards, and we maintain our credibility by our actions,’ board member Mary Warren said.

“She added that the district’s current bidding process worked well and that campaign contributions all were open to the public for scrutiny.”

Fitzgerald then notes,

“The longest-sitting board members – Warren, Karen Roeckner, Anne Miller and President Joe Stevens – voted against the policy Monday night.”

I guess all the vendor contributions printed in McHenry County Blog (the ones Warren points out are “all open to the public for scrutiny”) here and here and here are just coincidences.

Not even a wink, wink, nod, nod.

And there should be no concern even though this school superintendent says soliciting vendors is a way to raise tax hike campaign money.

It’s not a very high percentage of the money District 300 vendors receive.

But it certainly doesn’t look pure and clean like schools want taxpayers to believe they are.

It rather resembles Governor Rod Blagojevich campaign fund raising, doesn’t it?

Local dailies have pointed to the $5,000 that long-time school architect Burnidge Cassell Associates contributed at the official beginning of tax hike committee Advance 300’s campaign to hike taxes in 2006.

The Daily Herald even editorialized in favor of Ryan’s proposal.

So far, however, neither the Northwest nor the Daily Herald has picked up on District 300’s architect’s bragging about raising $100,000 for a district tax hike committees in letter dated February 25, 2005.

Here’s what was in the application for further work:

Whether impropriety or just bad judgment on the part of the vendor was involved in that 2005 request for “Architect Services for Life Safety Reporting,” it certainly smells.

Two of the board members who did not vote for the policy—Miller and Chris Stanton—indicated they had questions about enforcement. I believe Miller is an attorney and, in any event, a district willing to spend money keeping a citizen advisory board member from getting information expeditiously ought to be willing to spend some figuring out how to enforce conflict of interest language.

Maybe when September comes, the board will get more serious about an issue that helped defeat Board President Mary Fioretti.

= = = = =
The top photo is of Carpentersville School District 300 Board member John Ryan. Underneath is a shot of board members Mary Warren and Karen Roeckner. Board President Joe Stevens is to their right.

Below Stevens is board member Anne Miller.

It must be the silly season.

It must be the silly season.

The Huntley School District 158 Board of Education has decided to allow convicted felons bid on contracts like the hurry up, rush, rush one for snow removal.

And Carpentersville District 300’s board has decided that the appearance of conflict of interest is, well, no problem. You can find reports of the in the Daily Herald’s

and Northwest Herald’s

Only the two newly-elected board members John Ryan, sponsor of the proposal, and Monica Clark, his running mate, voted for the language that would prohibit companies who contributed $5,000 to district tax hike committees from doing business with the school district for two years.

Read some of the comments from Daily Herald reporter Jameel Naqvi’s article:

“’This type of policy is hampering the business of the district,’ (Mary) Warren said, noting that the district already has issues receiving enough bids. ‘I think this is absolutely unnecessary.’

“Roeckner agreed.

“’We have never had this problem in our district,’ (Karen) Roeckner said. ‘I will still vote no.’

“Board President Joe Stevens echoed Warren’s and Roeckner’s concerns earlier Monday.

“’It’s fine for vendors to contribute to referendum campaigns,’ Stevens said. ‘I have not seen any evidence of “pay-to-play.”‘”

The Northwest Herald’s David Fitzgerald picked these gems up:

“’We hold ourselves to high standards, and we maintain our credibility by our actions,’ board member Mary Warren said.

“She added that the district’s current bidding process worked well and that campaign contributions all were open to the public for scrutiny.”

Fitzgerald then notes,

“The longest-sitting board members – Warren, Karen Roeckner, Anne Miller and President Joe Stevens – voted against the policy Monday night.”

I guess all the vendor contributions printed in McHenry County Blog (the ones Warren points out are “all open to the public for scrutiny”) here and here and here are just coincidences.

Not even a wink, wink, nod, nod.

And there should be no concern even though this school superintendent says soliciting vendors is a way to raise tax hike campaign money.

It’s not a very high percentage of the money District 300 vendors receive.

But it certainly doesn’t look pure and clean like schools want taxpayers to believe they are.

It rather resembles Governor Rod Blagojevich campaign fund raising, doesn’t it?

Local dailies have pointed to the $5,000 that long-time school architect Burnidge Cassell Associates contributed at the official beginning of tax hike committee Advance 300’s campaign to hike taxes in 2006.

The Daily Herald even editorialized in favor of Ryan’s proposal.

So far, however, neither the Northwest nor the Daily Herald has picked up on District 300’s architect’s bragging about raising $100,000 for a district tax hike committees in letter dated February 25, 2005.

Here’s what was in the application for further work:

Whether impropriety or just bad judgment on the part of the vendor was involved in that 2005 request for “Architect Services for Life Safety Reporting,” it certainly smells.

Two of the board members who did not vote for the policy—Miller and Chris Stanton—indicated they had questions about enforcement. I believe Miller is an attorney and, in any event, a district willing to spend money keeping a citizen advisory board member from getting information expeditiously ought to be willing to spend some figuring out how to enforce conflict of interest language.

Maybe when September comes, the board will get more serious about an issue that helped defeat Board President Mary Fioretti.

= = = = =
The top photo is of Carpentersville School District 300 Board member John Ryan. Underneath is a shot of board members Mary Warren and Karen Roeckner. Board President Joe Stevens is to their right.

Below Stevens is board member Anne Miller.

It must be the silly season.

While my email was in limbo last weekend I guess I missed this clearance of newly elected District 300 school board members John Ryan and Monica Clark.

Hearing Officer Tony Morgando wrote two long paragraphs about Nancy Zetter’s complaint, which you can see here. I shall break them up to make them easier to read on this screen.

“A review of the documents and statements in this matter clearly establishes the Family Taxpayers Network, as a major funding source in the campaigns of Mr. John Ryan and Ms. Monica Clark.

“Both candidates indicate acceptance of yard signs from the Family Taxpayers Network promoting their campaign in mid-March, 2007, at a cost of $1,320. The parties to the complaint were in agreement that the campaign mailer/postcard produced by the Family Taxpayers Network was received by residents in the district on April 10th, or 11th, 2007, at a combined cost of $2,539.32.

“The respondents state that the notification of the in-kind contributions was received on April 27th (Ms. Clark) and April 30th (Mr. Ryan).

“Based upon these dates, it appears the candidates were liable to file a Statement of Organization (From D-1 ) ‘within 10 business days of the creation of such committee’, 10/ILCS 5/9-3. It is the opinion of the Hearing Examiner, that both candidates filed their Statement of Organization within the statutory time limit.

“Also, based on the dates presented above, it appears the candidates were not liable to file a Pre-Election Report for the April 17th, 2007, election, as such reporting period, January 1st, – March 18th, 2007, was prior to the creation of date of the political committees: April 30th, 2007 (Mr. Ryan) and April 15th (Ms. Clark).

“The Hearing Examiner feels the Complainant had reasons to believe violations of the Disclosure Act had occurred, therefore it is the opinion of the Hearing Examiner that the complaint was filed on justifiable grounds, but recommends no further action on the Board be taken on this matter.

“The Hearing Officer further recommends that the Board in its Final Order, serve notice upon the Respondents that as candidates they ‘have the responsibility to report such in-kind contributions or expenditures from the donor if it actually knows or reasonably should have known from the facts available to it that an in-kind contribution had been made in its behalf’, Adm. R&R 100.120.”

So, it turns out pretty much as predicted on McHenry County Blog right after Zettler filed her complaint.

Let me repeat what I said then:

I can understand Zettler’s frustration.

During the three Republican primary elections I was under siege by Personal PAC, their mailings and phone calls did not show up in campaign disclosure forms until after the primary election.

I think they should show up ahead of the election, but that, apparently, would require a change in state law.

Maybe Zettler’s lobbying can be expanded from trying to raise our income taxes to changing the campaign disclosure laws.

I’d be happy to join her in such an effort.

In this case, however, one would have to be blind not to figure out that the Family Taxpayers Network was helping Clark and Ryan.

Take a look at the return address on the literature.

I’d add that learning who is paying for a campaign is the purpose of the Campaign Disclosure Act and Zettler and anyone who could read knew it as well.

= = = = =
You can click on the recommendations to make it large enough to read.

While my email was in limbo last weekend I guess I missed this clearance of newly elected District 300 school board members John Ryan and Monica Clark.

Hearing Officer Tony Morgando wrote two long paragraphs about Nancy Zetter’s complaint, which you can see here. I shall break them up to make them easier to read on this screen.

“A review of the documents and statements in this matter clearly establishes the Family Taxpayers Network, as a major funding source in the campaigns of Mr. John Ryan and Ms. Monica Clark.

“Both candidates indicate acceptance of yard signs from the Family Taxpayers Network promoting their campaign in mid-March, 2007, at a cost of $1,320. The parties to the complaint were in agreement that the campaign mailer/postcard produced by the Family Taxpayers Network was received by residents in the district on April 10th, or 11th, 2007, at a combined cost of $2,539.32.

“The respondents state that the notification of the in-kind contributions was received on April 27th (Ms. Clark) and April 30th (Mr. Ryan).

“Based upon these dates, it appears the candidates were liable to file a Statement of Organization (From D-1 ) ‘within 10 business days of the creation of such committee’, 10/ILCS 5/9-3. It is the opinion of the Hearing Examiner, that both candidates filed their Statement of Organization within the statutory time limit.

“Also, based on the dates presented above, it appears the candidates were not liable to file a Pre-Election Report for the April 17th, 2007, election, as such reporting period, January 1st, – March 18th, 2007, was prior to the creation of date of the political committees: April 30th, 2007 (Mr. Ryan) and April 15th (Ms. Clark).

“The Hearing Examiner feels the Complainant had reasons to believe violations of the Disclosure Act had occurred, therefore it is the opinion of the Hearing Examiner that the complaint was filed on justifiable grounds, but recommends no further action on the Board be taken on this matter.

“The Hearing Officer further recommends that the Board in its Final Order, serve notice upon the Respondents that as candidates they ‘have the responsibility to report such in-kind contributions or expenditures from the donor if it actually knows or reasonably should have known from the facts available to it that an in-kind contribution had been made in its behalf’, Adm. R&R 100.120.”

So, it turns out pretty much as predicted on McHenry County Blog right after Zettler filed her complaint.

Let me repeat what I said then:

I can understand Zettler’s frustration.

During the three Republican primary elections I was under siege by Personal PAC, their mailings and phone calls did not show up in campaign disclosure forms until after the primary election.

I think they should show up ahead of the election, but that, apparently, would require a change in state law.

Maybe Zettler’s lobbying can be expanded from trying to raise our income taxes to changing the campaign disclosure laws.

I’d be happy to join her in such an effort.

In this case, however, one would have to be blind not to figure out that the Family Taxpayers Network was helping Clark and Ryan.

Take a look at the return address on the literature.

I’d add that learning who is paying for a campaign is the purpose of the Campaign Disclosure Act and Zettler and anyone who could read knew it as well.

= = = = =
You can click on the recommendations to make it large enough to read.

I received this email yesterday after John Ryan returned from his Chicago hearing before the State Board of Elections hearing officer Tony Morgando:

Both Monica & I were completely exonerated. Or to put it in the parlance of the Hearing Officer, “No grounds exist that this matter be referred for public hearing”.

It was unfortunate that we had to be drawn into an unnecessary game of sour grapes.

We knew we acted appropriately and are gratified that the Board of Elections agreed.

What’s done is done.

We can now move forward with the tasks we were elected to perform.

I called Morgando to ask the results and, as I expected, he said that his recommendation on the complaints by attorney Nancy Zettler against the Family Taxpayers Network, plus District 300 board candidates John Ryan and Monica Clark, would be made to the Elections Board at its next meeting.

No details until then.

But, what Ryan writes sounds reasonable, as I wrote when I first heard of Zettler’s complaint.

Let me repeat what I said:

I can understand Zettler’s frustration.

During the three Republican primary elections I was under siege by Personal PAC, their mailings and phone calls did not show up in campaign disclosure forms until after the primary election.

I think they should show up ahead of the election, but that, apparently, would require a change in state law.

Maybe Zettler’s lobbying can be expanded from trying to raise our income taxes to changing the campaign disclosure laws.

I’d be happy to join her in such an effort.

Here is the detailed article about Zettler’s complaint.

I received this email yesterday after John Ryan returned from his Chicago hearing before the State Board of Elections hearing officer Tony Morgando:

Both Monica & I were completely exonerated. Or to put it in the parlance of the Hearing Officer, “No grounds exist that this matter be referred for public hearing”.

It was unfortunate that we had to be drawn into an unnecessary game of sour grapes.

We knew we acted appropriately and are gratified that the Board of Elections agreed.

What’s done is done.

We can now move forward with the tasks we were elected to perform.

I called Morgando to ask the results and, as I expected, he said that his recommendation on the complaints by attorney Nancy Zettler against the Family Taxpayers Network, plus District 300 board candidates John Ryan and Monica Clark, would be made to the Elections Board at its next meeting.

No details until then.

But, what Ryan writes sounds reasonable, as I wrote when I first heard of Zettler’s complaint.

Let me repeat what I said:

I can understand Zettler’s frustration.

During the three Republican primary elections I was under siege by Personal PAC, their mailings and phone calls did not show up in campaign disclosure forms until after the primary election.

I think they should show up ahead of the election, but that, apparently, would require a change in state law.

Maybe Zettler’s lobbying can be expanded from trying to raise our income taxes to changing the campaign disclosure laws.

I’d be happy to join her in such an effort.

Here is the detailed article about Zettler’s complaint.

The Northwest Herald’s David Fitzgerald had a story Friday about District 300’s most vocal tax hiker–Nancy Zettler–having filed a quarter inch thick complaint against District 300 board victors Monica Clark and John Ryan, plus Jack Roeser’s Family Taxpayers Network.

I’m not about to pay for a quarter inch of paper at 25 cents a page, so an exploration of the charges will have to wait.

The motivation might be that John Ryan successfully complained about lawyer Zetter’s group not having followed the law. The Advance 300 tax hike folks somehow managed to forget that District 300 School Superintendent Ken Arndt gave $600 to the tax hike committee.

They only forgot for about five months, though.

So, here we are, what, three weeks after the campaign and the tax hike committee’s spokesman is apparently bitter about the trouncing her candidates took.

Oh, I forgot.

The tax hike committee didn’t take sides it this election.

They sat on their over $42,000 and just ran a cheap web site campaign.

Or, maybe we’ll see money was spent on other things when its spending report is filed.

I talked to Ryan Firday night and he told me that he had just learned that his committee had spent more than $3,000 recently and filed the necessary registration form with the State Board of Elections on April 30th.

Zetter filed her complaint a couple of hours later, he said.

Is that a coincidence or what?

The NW Herald’s article reports that the Family Taxpayers Network misreported “$1,320 each for yard signs and paid for campaign literature to be mailed out,” according to the article.

Board member-elect Monica Clark got off the best comment:

“Her efforts to discredit me before I have even been officially sworn into the office voters selected me to serve is petty, vindictive and childish.”

The State Board of Elections hearing is scheduled for May 15th.

I can understand Zettler’s frustration.

During the three Republican primary elections I was under siege by Personal PAC, their mailings and phone calls did not show up in campaign disclosure forms until after the primary election.

I think they should show up ahead of the election, but that, apparently, would require a change in state law.

Maybe Zettler’s lobbying can be expanded from trying to raise our income taxes to changing the campaign disclosure laws.

I’d be happy to join her in such an effort.

In this case, however, one would have to be blind not to figure out that the Family Taxpayers Network was helping Clark and Ryan.

Take a look at the return address on the literature.

Come to think of it, Zettler probably included that as evidence in her complaint.

The Northwest Herald’s David Fitzgerald had a story Friday about District 300’s most vocal tax hiker–Nancy Zettler–having filed a quarter inch thick complaint against District 300 board victors Monica Clark and John Ryan, plus Jack Roeser’s Family Taxpayers Network.

I’m not about to pay for a quarter inch of paper at 25 cents a page, so an exploration of the charges will have to wait.

The motivation might be that John Ryan successfully complained about lawyer Zetter’s group not having followed the law. The Advance 300 tax hike folks somehow managed to forget that District 300 School Superintendent Ken Arndt gave $600 to the tax hike committee.

They only forgot for about five months, though.

So, here we are, what, three weeks after the campaign and the tax hike committee’s spokesman is apparently bitter about the trouncing her candidates took.

Oh, I forgot.

The tax hike committee didn’t take sides it this election.

They sat on their over $42,000 and just ran a cheap web site campaign.

Or, maybe we’ll see money was spent on other things when its spending report is filed.

I talked to Ryan Firday night and he told me that he had just learned that his committee had spent more than $3,000 recently and filed the necessary registration form with the State Board of Elections on April 30th.

Zetter filed her complaint a couple of hours later, he said.

Is that a coincidence or what?

The NW Herald’s article reports that the Family Taxpayers Network misreported “$1,320 each for yard signs and paid for campaign literature to be mailed out,” according to the article.

Board member-elect Monica Clark got off the best comment:

“Her efforts to discredit me before I have even been officially sworn into the office voters selected me to serve is petty, vindictive and childish.”

The State Board of Elections hearing is scheduled for May 15th.

I can understand Zettler’s frustration.

During the three Republican primary elections I was under siege by Personal PAC, their mailings and phone calls did not show up in campaign disclosure forms until after the primary election.

I think they should show up ahead of the election, but that, apparently, would require a change in state law.

Maybe Zettler’s lobbying can be expanded from trying to raise our income taxes to changing the campaign disclosure laws.

I’d be happy to join her in such an effort.

In this case, however, one would have to be blind not to figure out that the Family Taxpayers Network was helping Clark and Ryan.

Take a look at the return address on the literature.

Come to think of it, Zettler probably included that as evidence in her complaint.

A District 300 Friend of McHenry County Blog came up the question of who will be the next District 300 school board president:

With the stunning victories of John Ryan and Monica Clark in the District 300 school board elections this week, it will be interesting to see who will succeed defeated Board Member Mary Fioretti as the President of the D300 School Board. 

Ryan and Clark, along with the other two winners on Tuesday, Chris Stanton and Joe Stevens, will join School Board Members Anne Miller, Mary Warren and Karen Roeckner on the new board which will be sworn-in next month.

So among these 7 board members, who will be the next president?

While it is unlikely newcomers Ryan, Clark, Stanton, as well as Stevens will ascend to leading the D300 board meetings, which of the other 3 would, or should, be the next D300 board president?

Between the 3 choices, this “Friend of the Blog” would prefer Anne Miller, who, given her election to the School Board in 1997, is the longest-serving member of the D300 Board.

Miller, who is an attorney by profession, would bring a legal mind to the head of the school board table, and she would help guide the D300 board in keeping in compliance with various laws, most notably the Open Meetings Act and Freedom of Information statutes.

Anne Miller

While Miller was initially elected to the D300 board with the backing of the then Citizens Organized for Responsible Education (CORE), a previous incarnation of Advance 300, Miller’s outspokenness during her first term, most notably her standing up to CORE during the high school boundary changes debates of 1999, made her a target for defeat by the former leaders of CORE during the 2001 School Board elections, when a slate led by Mary Warren and Richard Traub were running.

Miller survived the electoral opposition to her first term and served with both Warren and Traub on the School Board, and was re-elected to a 3rd term in 2005 when all of the D300 school board members won election/re-election without opposition.

Miller has never served as D300 School Board President, but given her legal background and her seniority of service, this makes Miller the best candidate, in my own honest opinion.

What does everyone else think?

= = = = =
The photograph is of District 300 board member Anne Miller.