Following this morning‘s article on Erin Chan Ding confirming, in her own words, her conflict of dually serving on the D220 Board of Education (BOE) while simultaneously running for a partisan Democratic office for Illinois House Representative in the 52nd District, we have received information obtained by a resident pursuant to a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request to D220.
These records confirm that D220 Superintendent Winkelman and BOE President Ficke-Bradford have used D220 taxpayer funds to obtain attorney opinions on Ding‘s ability to run for the 52nd District while simultaneously serving on the BOE. (The Observer queried in a recent article why taxpayer funds would be utilized by the D220 School District to obtain attorney opinions in this regard.) They further confirm that the BOE is engaging in closed door sessions regarding Ding and her campaign for the 52nd District. We posit whether this is a violation of the Open Meetings Act.
Ding is raising her own campaign funds for her run for the 52nd. Isn’t it more appropriate that Ding’s Erin for Illinois Campaign pay for these attorney consultations rather than the D220 taxpayers? Additionally, why would D220 need taxpayer paid attorney consultations related to BOE Policy and Code of Conduct questions?
Are we seriously paying attorneys to opine on whether a BOE Member has violated Board Policy or Code of Conduct? Does our Superintendent and BOE President need an attorney to tell them if a BOE Member has “surrendered her responsibilities to special interest or partisan political groups”? Do they need an attorney to tell them whether a BOE member has engaged in the “appearance of impropriety” or that she has used her “Board of Education membership for personal gain or publicity”? This is beyond absurd.
Additionally, these records show that these policy discussions are taking place behind closed doors rather than in front of the public? Isn’t policy something that should be discussed and set with full BOE participation and public scrutiny? Since when is the policy of how our duly elected officials conduct themselves in their duly elected positions determined without the public’s participation?
Craig and Sandra, we urge you to get back to the business of running the D220 School District instead of using your D220 positions and the taxpayer’s resources to engage in the partisan politics of the Ding campaign for the 52nd District.
Related: “Ding In Her Own Words – CONFLICTED!,” “District 220 Board of Education meets this evening (07.15.25)” “Ding Doubles Down,” “Ding’s D220 Deception,” “Chan Ding running in Democratic primary in 52nd,” “Three (3) Democratic candidates queued to run for the IL 52nd District House seat in 2026”