Yvonne Mayer said...
Please consider posting this as a free standing post. I published this on my Facebook Account this morning.
D181 Bond Accountability Committee UPDATE
For those of you who have been following the disappointing findings of the D181 Accountability Committee, below is a link to the draft Final Report that the committee members will be discussing on Monday, 9/25 at 5 pm at the Administration Center.
I say "disappointing" above, because no one in the community could have possibly expected the committee members to uncover documents that reveal that the superintendent had direction and knowledge to ensure that the Referendum Publication Notice be published in a timely and accurate manner, thus preventing all of the chaos that ensued from December 2016 through June 2017 in connection with the HMS project.
According to news articles published in the Doings and The Hinsdalean, the full BOE must now determine what actions, if any, if must take to ensure that there is true accountability.
I, for one, have confidence that the BOE will take approrpriate steps. The work done so far by at least 2 of the 3 committee members establish that they are taking the work of the committee seriously and are not going to condone any type of cover up in connection with the information they discovered. Contrary to what D181 Board Member Turek has publicly stated (and remember, he is not on the committee), the work of the committee was not a witch hunt. It was the work of a committee established and approved by the full BOE, as a condition of the settlement agreement arising out of the HMS litigation, litigation, which it now appears could possibly have been avoided if the superintendent had followed direction and once he did not, disclosed to the full BOE his "mistake."
http://www.boarddocs.com/il/hccsdil/Board.nsf/files/ARHCKY318098/$file/2017_09_23_Bond_Referendum_Review_Committee_Final_Report_with_Member_Comments_Redlined_%26_Highlighted.pdf
As one committee member has stated in the draft Final Report: ""It is this committee member’s opinion that the most serious issue this report addresses is Dr. White’s failure to disclose informaiton in connection with the publication error, where information was kept from the BOE for an extended period of time. The findings by two committee members upon close review of district-provided documents, showing that Dr. White was in fact informed of the publication requirements by the BOE’s legal counsel dating back to August 19, 2016, was not only unexpected but disappointing. Dr. White had a fiduciary responsibility to ensure the accurate and timely publication of the election notice and he did not meet that responsibility. What is at issue here is that throughout the process, Dr. White has not been forthright in sharing this information with the BOE dating back to December 2016. There have been a multitude of opportunities to share this information through the litigation process, during Accountability Committee meetings and in the reports generated by the district in response to questions raised by the committee. At no point did Dr. White come forward with this information. This has resulted in a loss of trust in his leadership. The implications of this should be discussed by the full board."
Here are links to the news articles referenced in the comment:
9/12/2017 Doings Article
Hinsdalean Article from 9/21/2017 edition
We have now had a chance to read the Draft Final Report the Committee will be discussing tomorrow. We would like to highlight some additional information.
The Draft Final Report outlines the following timeline for the committee's next steps:
It appears that only 2 of the commttee members, Jennifer Burns and Meeta Patel, proposed extensive additions to the 9/15/17 draft prepared by the administration. The third commitee member, Richard Giltner, only made 8 brief comments, 5 of which were his statement of disagreement with findings in the report. We are grateful for the additions made by Ms. Burns and Ms. Patel, since it is clear that the draft prepared by the administration did not provide the detail required for a report of this importance. In particular, the section of the report that addresses the Publication Error and Dr. White's failure to comply with the BOE's attorney's direction to ensure timely and accurate publication of the Rererendum Notice, and his failure to disclose this information to the full BOE, lacked sufficient detail to accurately describe the facts surrounding the committee's findings.
Of course, is anyone surprised by this?
We look forward to listening to the podcast of the meeting to hear what additions/deletions the 3 committee members decide should go into the FINAL report.
We would also like to point out that there are 3 agenda items of interest on the Agenda for Monday's Regular D181 BOE Business Meeting that may be related to the work of the Accountability Committee .
Agenda Item 8B: Possible Legal Action regarding damages to the District
Agenda Item 8C: Board Attorney Legal Services Request for Proposal
Agenda Item 8D: Authorization to Engage Outside Legal Counsel for the Purpose of Providing Legal Guidance on Issues Raised by the Accountability Committee
Agenda Item 8B: Possible Legal Action regarding damages to the District
For Agenda Item 8B, Dr. White has prepared a Board Report that can be accessed at: Possible Legal Action report. We encourage our readers to read this fascinating report that, in our opinion, further evidences Dr. White's continuing refusal to accept responsibility for his role in the Notice Publication error. The board will be deciding whether or not to file a lawsuit against the Dupage Election Commission for its failure to publish the referendum notice in a timely manner. We now know that the Commission's error could have been prevented if Dr. White had followed the instructions given to him by the BOE's attorney. Once again, Dr. White's report fails to mention his role in the mistake and points the finger of responsibility only at the Commission when he states in his report:
D181 Bond Accountability Committee UPDATE
For those of you who have been following the disappointing findings of the D181 Accountability Committee, below is a link to the draft Final Report that the committee members will be discussing on Monday, 9/25 at 5 pm at the Administration Center.
I say "disappointing" above, because no one in the community could have possibly expected the committee members to uncover documents that reveal that the superintendent had direction and knowledge to ensure that the Referendum Publication Notice be published in a timely and accurate manner, thus preventing all of the chaos that ensued from December 2016 through June 2017 in connection with the HMS project.
According to news articles published in the Doings and The Hinsdalean, the full BOE must now determine what actions, if any, if must take to ensure that there is true accountability.
I, for one, have confidence that the BOE will take approrpriate steps. The work done so far by at least 2 of the 3 committee members establish that they are taking the work of the committee seriously and are not going to condone any type of cover up in connection with the information they discovered. Contrary to what D181 Board Member Turek has publicly stated (and remember, he is not on the committee), the work of the committee was not a witch hunt. It was the work of a committee established and approved by the full BOE, as a condition of the settlement agreement arising out of the HMS litigation, litigation, which it now appears could possibly have been avoided if the superintendent had followed direction and once he did not, disclosed to the full BOE his "mistake."
http://www.boarddocs.com/il/hccsdil/Board.nsf/files/ARHCKY318098/$file/2017_09_23_Bond_Referendum_Review_Committee_Final_Report_with_Member_Comments_Redlined_%26_Highlighted.pdf
As one committee member has stated in the draft Final Report: ""It is this committee member’s opinion that the most serious issue this report addresses is Dr. White’s failure to disclose informaiton in connection with the publication error, where information was kept from the BOE for an extended period of time. The findings by two committee members upon close review of district-provided documents, showing that Dr. White was in fact informed of the publication requirements by the BOE’s legal counsel dating back to August 19, 2016, was not only unexpected but disappointing. Dr. White had a fiduciary responsibility to ensure the accurate and timely publication of the election notice and he did not meet that responsibility. What is at issue here is that throughout the process, Dr. White has not been forthright in sharing this information with the BOE dating back to December 2016. There have been a multitude of opportunities to share this information through the litigation process, during Accountability Committee meetings and in the reports generated by the district in response to questions raised by the committee. At no point did Dr. White come forward with this information. This has resulted in a loss of trust in his leadership. The implications of this should be discussed by the full board."
Here are links to the news articles referenced in the comment:
9/12/2017 Doings Article
Hinsdalean Article from 9/21/2017 edition
We have now had a chance to read the Draft Final Report the Committee will be discussing tomorrow. We would like to highlight some additional information.
The Draft Final Report outlines the following timeline for the committee's next steps:
- *September 15, 2017 - Deadline for the administration to provide a draft report to the committee members. (This
document and the inclusion of all previous related materials is intended to meet that need.)
-
*September 22, 2017 - Deadline for the Committee to provide comments on the draft report (via individual response to
Dr. White).
*September 23, 2017 - Deadline for the administration to provide the committee with a document compiling the individual comments. -
*September 25, 2017 (5pm) - Committee meeting to review the final report.
-
*September 29, 2017 - Deadline for the administration to create the final report, as stipulated in the settlement agreement.
*October 20, 2017 - Deadline for the final Committee meeting, as stipulated in the Settlement Agreement.
Of course, is anyone surprised by this?
We look forward to listening to the podcast of the meeting to hear what additions/deletions the 3 committee members decide should go into the FINAL report.
We would also like to point out that there are 3 agenda items of interest on the Agenda for Monday's Regular D181 BOE Business Meeting that may be related to the work of the Accountability Committee .
Agenda Item 8B: Possible Legal Action regarding damages to the District
Agenda Item 8C: Board Attorney Legal Services Request for Proposal
Agenda Item 8D: Authorization to Engage Outside Legal Counsel for the Purpose of Providing Legal Guidance on Issues Raised by the Accountability Committee
Agenda Item 8B: Possible Legal Action regarding damages to the District
For Agenda Item 8B, Dr. White has prepared a Board Report that can be accessed at: Possible Legal Action report. We encourage our readers to read this fascinating report that, in our opinion, further evidences Dr. White's continuing refusal to accept responsibility for his role in the Notice Publication error. The board will be deciding whether or not to file a lawsuit against the Dupage Election Commission for its failure to publish the referendum notice in a timely manner. We now know that the Commission's error could have been prevented if Dr. White had followed the instructions given to him by the BOE's attorney. Once again, Dr. White's report fails to mention his role in the mistake and points the finger of responsibility only at the Commission when he states in his report:
"The sale of bonds was delayed due to an error by the DuPage County
Election Commission with the posting of the referendum publication notice. This error resulted in subsequent
litigation and an eventual settlement between the District and plaintiffs. As a result, the District was not able to sell
the needed bonds, and construction was delayed. There have been costs associated with the delayed construction."
In our opinion, it is truly disgusting that he does not even drop a footnote into his report and acknowledge his role in not preventing the mistake. Fortunately for the District (according to the report), because of the delay in selling the bonds, there was a reduction in the bond interest rates that will actually save the district $5.6 million in debt service, so the error did not actually cost the taxpayers any money in connection with the sale of bonds. In light of this fact AND the Accountability Committee's findings on Dr. White's role in not preventing the mistake, in our opinion it would be an utter waste of taxpayer dollars for the District to sue the Dupage County Election Commission. Anyone who has been involved in a lawsuit knows that during discovery, the August 19 and August 23 emails between Dr. White and the lawfirm would have to be produced and would provide a basis for the Commission to file a Motion to Dismiss. While Dr. White recommends that the BOE not pursue litigation due to the $5.6 million in savings to the district, it should be clear to everyone that an equallty important reason is that the District's position has been compromised.
We hope the BOE calls Dr. White out for not being completely transparent in his Board Report in describing ALL THE CIRCUMSTANCES surrounding the publication error.
Although there was a reduction in bond interest rates and resulting debt service savings due to the delay in selling the bonds, in fact there were actual monetary costs incurred as a result of the delay in the HMS project, delays which we now know COULD HAVE and SHOULD HAVE been prevented had the BOE's attorneys' checklist in the August 19, 2016 letter been followed.
Per Dr. White's report, the district incurred $881,803 in additional actual costs resulting from the HMS project delay due to the publication error. $56,760 of this amount is for legal fees paid to Hauser and Izzo, the firm that was handling matters related to the DuPage Election Commission's mistake before the BOE hired a pro-bono attorney to take over the case.
According to the cost chart in the report, a portion of the legal fees is for work done by Hauser and Izzo in connection with the "Referendum Review Committee" (which we assume means the Bond Accountability Committee since there is no other referendum committee).
WE ARE SPEECHLESS! Actually, we are not speechless and have the following to say:
1. How dare Hauser and Izzo charge the district any legal fees resulting from the publication mistake? We now know that they failed to tell the BOE of the existence of the August 19 and 23rd letters, of Dr. White's fiduciary responsibliity to ensure timely and accurate publication of the notice, of Dr. White's failure to do so and Dr. White's failure to so inform the BOE. The lawfirm should not financially benefit from its failure to inform it's CLIENT -- the BOE -- of any of this.
2. Similarly, how dare Hauser and Izzo charge the district any legal when they sat silently at the July 26, 2016 Committee meeting and did not disclose the existence of the checklist THEY had sent Dr. White on August 19, 2016, when the issue of a checklist was discussed by the committee.
It seems pretty clear that the BOE should refuse to pay these legal bills!
Further, in our opinion, it also seems clear that the $881,803 in additional costs to the district ALL COULD HAVE BEEN AVOIDED had Dr. White followed the instructions he was given in the August 19, 2016 email from Hauser and Izzo, the BOE's attorney.
We hope that one or more BOE members point all this out during Monday's meeting.
Agenda Item 8C: Board Attorney Legal Services Request for Proposal
According to Dr. White's Report to the BOE which can be accessed at Report on Board Attorney Request for Proposal, it appears the BOE is considering hiring a new attorney to represent them.
THANK GOODNESS!!!!
While Dr. White suggests that the reason is because "[i]t has been many years since the District has reviewed Board legal services," we would not be surprised if the real reason is that the BOE realizes it has been ill-served by Hauser and Izzo. Clearly, one would expect the BOE's attorney to inform it when the Superintendent did not follow it's instructions, since any instructions given to the Superintendent from the BOE's attorney are actually instructions from the Board of Education. But Hauser and Izzo failed to do so in connection with the publication error. While one Accountability committee member has stated in her comments to the Draft Final Report that there has been a "loss of trust" in the superintendent, the same is obviously true of the law firm.
We hope the BOE does follow through and hire a new law firm. That would be one act of accountability that is a slam dunk!
Agenda Item 8D: Authorization to Engage Outside Legal Counsel for the Purpose of Providing Legal Guidance on Issues Raised by the Accountability Committee
The final item on the BOE's Regular Meeting agenda that relates to the work of the Accountability Committee is 8D. No documents or reports are included on board docs for this item, but the title explains it. Obviously, the BOE must thoughtfully consider what actions, if any, to take against the superintendent in connection with the findings of the Accountability Committee Meeting. This will require consultation with an attorney, and it obviously cannot be the attorneys at Hauser Izzo, who have been compromised by the firm's failure to inform the BOE of the August 19 and 23, 2016 letters.
At this time we will refrain from commenting on what actions we personally think the BOE should take to hold Dr. White accountable. The BOE's "personnel" discussions will all have to take place in executive session, and the community may never know what they actually discuss. Instead, we will all have to patiently wait to learn what, if any, actions they take, because if they do take any action, the action will need to be approved in open session at a future meeting.
Until then, STAY TUNED and SPEAK OUT!
In our opinion, it is truly disgusting that he does not even drop a footnote into his report and acknowledge his role in not preventing the mistake. Fortunately for the District (according to the report), because of the delay in selling the bonds, there was a reduction in the bond interest rates that will actually save the district $5.6 million in debt service, so the error did not actually cost the taxpayers any money in connection with the sale of bonds. In light of this fact AND the Accountability Committee's findings on Dr. White's role in not preventing the mistake, in our opinion it would be an utter waste of taxpayer dollars for the District to sue the Dupage County Election Commission. Anyone who has been involved in a lawsuit knows that during discovery, the August 19 and August 23 emails between Dr. White and the lawfirm would have to be produced and would provide a basis for the Commission to file a Motion to Dismiss. While Dr. White recommends that the BOE not pursue litigation due to the $5.6 million in savings to the district, it should be clear to everyone that an equallty important reason is that the District's position has been compromised.
We hope the BOE calls Dr. White out for not being completely transparent in his Board Report in describing ALL THE CIRCUMSTANCES surrounding the publication error.
Although there was a reduction in bond interest rates and resulting debt service savings due to the delay in selling the bonds, in fact there were actual monetary costs incurred as a result of the delay in the HMS project, delays which we now know COULD HAVE and SHOULD HAVE been prevented had the BOE's attorneys' checklist in the August 19, 2016 letter been followed.
Per Dr. White's report, the district incurred $881,803 in additional actual costs resulting from the HMS project delay due to the publication error. $56,760 of this amount is for legal fees paid to Hauser and Izzo, the firm that was handling matters related to the DuPage Election Commission's mistake before the BOE hired a pro-bono attorney to take over the case.
According to the cost chart in the report, a portion of the legal fees is for work done by Hauser and Izzo in connection with the "Referendum Review Committee" (which we assume means the Bond Accountability Committee since there is no other referendum committee).
WE ARE SPEECHLESS! Actually, we are not speechless and have the following to say:
1. How dare Hauser and Izzo charge the district any legal fees resulting from the publication mistake? We now know that they failed to tell the BOE of the existence of the August 19 and 23rd letters, of Dr. White's fiduciary responsibliity to ensure timely and accurate publication of the notice, of Dr. White's failure to do so and Dr. White's failure to so inform the BOE. The lawfirm should not financially benefit from its failure to inform it's CLIENT -- the BOE -- of any of this.
2. Similarly, how dare Hauser and Izzo charge the district any legal when they sat silently at the July 26, 2016 Committee meeting and did not disclose the existence of the checklist THEY had sent Dr. White on August 19, 2016, when the issue of a checklist was discussed by the committee.
It seems pretty clear that the BOE should refuse to pay these legal bills!
Further, in our opinion, it also seems clear that the $881,803 in additional costs to the district ALL COULD HAVE BEEN AVOIDED had Dr. White followed the instructions he was given in the August 19, 2016 email from Hauser and Izzo, the BOE's attorney.
We hope that one or more BOE members point all this out during Monday's meeting.
Agenda Item 8C: Board Attorney Legal Services Request for Proposal
According to Dr. White's Report to the BOE which can be accessed at Report on Board Attorney Request for Proposal, it appears the BOE is considering hiring a new attorney to represent them.
THANK GOODNESS!!!!
While Dr. White suggests that the reason is because "[i]t has been many years since the District has reviewed Board legal services," we would not be surprised if the real reason is that the BOE realizes it has been ill-served by Hauser and Izzo. Clearly, one would expect the BOE's attorney to inform it when the Superintendent did not follow it's instructions, since any instructions given to the Superintendent from the BOE's attorney are actually instructions from the Board of Education. But Hauser and Izzo failed to do so in connection with the publication error. While one Accountability committee member has stated in her comments to the Draft Final Report that there has been a "loss of trust" in the superintendent, the same is obviously true of the law firm.
We hope the BOE does follow through and hire a new law firm. That would be one act of accountability that is a slam dunk!
Agenda Item 8D: Authorization to Engage Outside Legal Counsel for the Purpose of Providing Legal Guidance on Issues Raised by the Accountability Committee
The final item on the BOE's Regular Meeting agenda that relates to the work of the Accountability Committee is 8D. No documents or reports are included on board docs for this item, but the title explains it. Obviously, the BOE must thoughtfully consider what actions, if any, to take against the superintendent in connection with the findings of the Accountability Committee Meeting. This will require consultation with an attorney, and it obviously cannot be the attorneys at Hauser Izzo, who have been compromised by the firm's failure to inform the BOE of the August 19 and 23, 2016 letters.
At this time we will refrain from commenting on what actions we personally think the BOE should take to hold Dr. White accountable. The BOE's "personnel" discussions will all have to take place in executive session, and the community may never know what they actually discuss. Instead, we will all have to patiently wait to learn what, if any, actions they take, because if they do take any action, the action will need to be approved in open session at a future meeting.
Until then, STAY TUNED and SPEAK OUT!
