Lessons Learned from the School Board — the Hard Way.
CHAPTER ONE — The Whistleblower Letter Arrives from A. Friend
(Click to read Prologue here)
On
October 18, 2018, a letter was posted to Mr. Gerry Meister, an outspoken critic of the Township High School District 113 (District 113) School Board, particularly with regard to spending tax
funds. An architect, Gerry is known to ask questions and express concerns about the bricks and mortar
of our schools -- how they are maintained, renovated, razed, rebuilt or built,
as well as how the budgets for projects are managed. Gerry is one of the trio who
brought the "Cash & Carry" abuses to my attention.
The return address on the envelope read “Andrew Friend, 1040 Barry Bolek West,
Highland Park, IL 60035”. Of course, this was not a real person (think,
"A. Friend") or real address (the address incorporating the name of treasurer/CFO Bolek of the School District into the street name of the location of the administrative offices on Park Ave. West). The letter it contained was directed to me and Gerry, even though a copy was never addressed to my home. Gerry delivered a copy to me.
This was a powerful whistleblower letter making serious allegations. The authors (the Whistleblowers) displayed
genuine and reasonable fear of losing their jobs in retaliation by the School Board and
certain administrators. The letter was divided in sections, the first read: “District
113 Cover Up of Very Recent Crimes.” Following are excerpts from the first
page of the Whistleblower Letter:
“Hello Ms. Rade and Mr. Meister, We
are contacting you in strict confidence with the hope you will review
information being sent to you and assist with unveiling several very serious events
that are [allegedly] criminal and have occurred at District 113. Very recently,
as we are certain you are aware, our superintendent, Dr. Christopher Dignam,
left the district. What you are probably unaware of is the exact reasons he was
forced out, recent actions by the Board of Education (and specific members of
the board still in power), and the fear of remaining administrators that there
will be employment and legal consequences for sharing this information with
you...
“…We saw your blog article from the
summer and none of us knows anyone else to turn to for help or who to trust...
“…The [alleged] reason Chris
[Dignam] is gone is because he stood up to the Board of Education to move ahead
with pressing criminal charges against three former Highland Park principals
who [allegedly] all broke the law, but ... are all friends with Board of
Education members. The dozen-plus administrative team members left behind in
the district are terrified regarding what [allegedly] happened to Chris (any of
us could be next) and hope you can confidentially use this information to make
specific FOIA requests, ask specific questions at Board of Education meetings,
and perhaps work with the media to pressure the Lake County States Attorney’s
Office to move forward with the indictments and charges already brought to
their attention by the Grand Jury Subpoena received by the district earlier
this year...
“If you make FOIA requests and ask
questions, you will verify 100% of everything being shared with you. Chris
ended up losing his job for nothing, as all the [alleged] criminal wrongdoing
he [allegedly] uncovered has been [allegedly] covered back up by the Board of
Education because they are friends with the [alleged] criminals…”
“Please maintain this information
in confidence and verify what is being shared with you. Like Chris, none of us
want to lose our jobs or be targeted next." [Everything in brackets are my editorial comments.]
The
next seven pages were chock-full of hair-raising details alleging violations of
law by certain District 113 administrators, as well as providing details about the School
Board's response and alleged cover up.
Background and Overview
After their introductory comments, the Whistleblowers articulated their complaint. However, first, they provided a Background and Overview section before getting to the heart of the matter. They referred to a matter dating back to June 2016 stating that a HPHS principal had been investigated for [allegedly]
“forging” a fake teacher evaluation required by PERA
(Performance Evaluation Reform Act) law in Illinois. The teacher was absent on
the evaluation date and (bravely) complained up the line that the principal had (1) falsified her
evaluation document, (2) attested to a walk-through observation with her that
never happened, and (3) filed the falsified document with the State of Illinois.
An independent law firm, Robbins Schwartz, was retained to investigate the facts. The investigation determined that, indeed, the principal had falsified the teacher’s observation in
violation of the PERA law and the Illinois School Code. According to the Whistleblowers, the Principal "received a Warning Resolution as a result of the investigation that took place. This [investigation] cost taxpayers approximately $15,000. The Warning Resolution was issued on July 11, 2016 for deceptive practice with a one week unpaid suspension. [The Principal] could have been fired but since the district had been up in arms just a year prior over previous superintendent George Fornero firing the former HPHS principal Brad Swanson, the Board of Education directed Chris to issue the Warning Resolution. Board members were also friends with [the Principal]."
Later, in researching the Whistleblowers claims through FOIA (Freedom of Information Act) requests to District 113 and the LCSA's offices, a document was discovered that confirmed the Warning Resolution. Robbins Schwartz determined the Principal had intentionally
falsified a teacher’s walk-through observation as contained in a December 6, 2017 letter to
Michael G. Nerheim, then Lake County States Attorney (LCSA). Robbins Schwartz wrote that
former Superintendent Dignam issued the Principal “a Confidential Memorandum
and Final Warning Resolution that detailed the investigative findings,
identified conduct deficiencies which, if not remedied, could result in charges
for dismissal, issued directives for improvement, and placed the [the
principal] on a five-day suspension without pay.” (Letter, Robbins Schwartz
lawyer to Michael G. Nerheim, Lake County State’s Attorney, 12/06/2017, RE:
Township High School District 113 — Records Destruction).
In this same letter, Robbins Schwartz continues "It is our understanding that [Principal] was vocal about his displeasure with this investigation and discipline, telling his administrative team that he had been disciplined for 'getting the date wrong' — not the truth, which was that he had falsified the walk-through observation in its entirety."
Children
are suspended from school for bad behavior, but a principal being suspended? Suspended for just five days without pay for falsifying records as well as violating of PERA
law? One can only wonder who was advising this School Board, and who on the board was supportive of this decision.
The Whistleblowers convey that the Principal returned to work as
usual, and into the next school year, but was "angry all school year and told all of his assistant principals, and retiring administrators (assistant superintendents Barry Bolek, and [others]) that he got written up because he simply 'got a date wrong.'" Clearly the Whistleblowers knew the real facts, and, likely, so did many teachers. Perhaps even some residents and students were aware? Quite the
message the School Board sent with its "Principal suspension." This is taking place in a community where we say, “Character Counts" and some of us wonder, does it really matter to our leaders?
The Whistleblowers state that in March 2017, the Principal announced his
plans to leave the district, having secured a position as principal of a school
in another suburb. One is left to wonder whether the School Board gave the Principal a
great recommendation, or if certain members of the Board did this on their own
initiative. Surely it is difficult to get another position as a principal without a good recommendation.
So
ends Chapter 1. Readers may ponder: Should residents be informed whenever a principal or assistant
principal has engaged in some conduct worthy of an unpaid suspension or termination, such as falsification of records? Is suspension ever an appropriate discipline for a superintendent, principal or assistant principal — anyone at the top of the administration? If so, is suspension ever an appropriate discipline for a school administrator or teacher who has intentionally violated State laws and regulations for educators?
Readers may have noticed that, so far, this report redacts the name of the Principal, and two Assistant Principals. There are various reasons for omitting their names — protecting them is not one of them. In essence, this report is not about the school administrators but is focused entirely on the actions of the School Board.
In every organization, every school district, the tone is set
at the top. It appeared from the outset of the Whistleblower Letter that the tone at the top of District 113 was creating an environment in which staff and educators who are trying to protect the School District are fearful of retaliatory discharge, and the ones who aren't doing the right thing are supported by the School Board. Was it a superintendent or a School Board that was creating a toxic environment? Lessons learned. Create an environment where whistleblowers can share information about wrongdoing anonymously and without fear, and trust that a School Board will do the right thing. A School Board has to earn that trust and, once lost, it may take a long, long time to earn it.
Chapter 2 will cover the next section of the whistleblower letter sent to Gerry and me:
Criminal Acts and Cover Ups.
Links to all chapters of this report:
