Hinsdale 86’s Pandemic Action Defended

HINSDALE, IL – A lawyer for Hinsdale High School District 86 argued last week the school board was simply giving direction to the superintendent when it voted 4-3 last November against the official's proposal to go fully remote for two weeks.

The board gave no public notice about the coming vote, despite requirements under the state Open Meetings Act.

Shortly afterward, Patch wrote a story about the open meetings issue and interviewed a lawyer from the Elmhurst-based Citizen Advocacy Center. The group later filed a complaint with the attorney general against District 86.

Earlier this month, the attorney general found the board acted improperly by voting on an issue that was not on the meeting agenda.

At last week’s school board meeting, district attorney Steven Richart said he feared the effects of the attorney general’s opinion.

“What I’m concerned about is that the board, as the employer, is there to provide feedback to the administration. If this opinion is cited in future proceedings by the attorney general’s office, it’s going to carry over a standard that chills and prevents discussions at the board table of proposed actions by the administration,” Richart said.

While Richart described the board’s action as direction, it had many of the appearances of a vote. Each member weighed in on whether to go fully remote for two weeks and then said yes or no to the administration’s proposal. At one point, then-board President Kevin Camden told a member her vote would be “recorded as yes.”

When board members were done, Camden reported the tally and called the outcome “direction to the administration.” He then said it was rare the board did not follow the administration’s recommendation. He also said it was rare the board split 4-3 on an issue.

The next day, the district issued a statement by Superintendent Tammy Prentiss that reported the decision as a 4-3 vote.

In a letter to the attorney general, Richart said the authority whether to go fully remote for two weeks rested with the superintendent. But he acknowledged Camden’s wording gave indications that the board was the decision-maker.

“To be sure, the Board President did at times seem to speak as if the final decision on this matter rested with the board, and he referred to the Board as 'voting' on the matter,” Richart said. “But neither the courts nor the Attorney General’s office have always deemed every ‘vote' as an action.”

Richart praised the district’s openness with the public.

“In general, the Hinsdale school board, which I have worked with for the past several years, is probably the most transparent district that I work with in posting lots of information for the public,” he said.