The District 220 Board of Education meets Monday at 7:30 AM at the District Administration Center, 515 W. Main Street. Items on their agenda include:
- Personnel Report
- Consideration to Approve Intergovernmental Agreement for Reciprocal Reporting Between the Village of Barrington and Barrington CUSD 220
- Consideration to Approve School Resource Officer Agreement Between the Village of Barrington and Barrington CUSD 220
- Consideration to Approve of Written Decision Regarding Uniform Grievance Procedure Complaint Concerning a Board Member
- Consideration to Approve the Public Release of the June 10, 2026, Uniform Grievance Procedure Investigation Report and Findings
A copy of the agenda can be viewed here. The meeting will be live streamed on the district YouTube channel.
Related: “Over $100,000 in Special Interest Funding gifted to 220 Board member’s campaign in failed bid for State Rep job,” “New Evidence of Chan Ding’s Policy Violations and Conflicts of Interest,” “The D220 Board of Ed gets another ‘F’ in accountability & transparency,” “The Real Issue in Barrington 220 Isn’t Parking or Levies — It’s Leadership Culture,” “BOARD OF ED VOTES, MEMBER CHAN DING MADE FLAGRANT POLICY VIOLATIONS – Part 2,” “BOARD OF ED VOTES, MEMBER CHAN DING MADE FLAGRANT POLICY VIOLATIONS,” “District 220’s Lack of Transparency (Updated),” “District 220’s Lack of Transparency”
Are you kidding me? Who is violating board policy now? Not that Erin Chan Ding ever stopped 🙄
WHEREAS, on April 22, 2026, the District received a formal complaint via email from an individual seeking to remain anonymous alleging that Board member Erin Chan Ding (Ding) violated Board policies in connection with her campaign for Illinois State Representative. This is the second complaint received against Ding. The first complaint was dated September 29, 2025 with the Board issuing its decision on November 18, 2025. This new complaint alleges that 1) Ding created a conflict of interest by refusing to recuse herself from the Board vote in its decision on the first complaint, 2) Ding misappropriated District achievements for her personal partisan gain by posting them on her campaign website, 3) Ding refused to remove District content from her campaign website despite repeated requests to do so and training for Ding by the Board attorney, 4) Ding was not candid with investigators regarding the removal of District content from her campaign website, and 5) Ding improperly received campaign contributions from various labor and/or education organizations affiliated with the Barrington Education Association. WHEREAS, the complaint was assessed under the Board’s Uniform Grievance Procedure outlined in Board Policy 2:260. Pursuant to Board Policy 2:260, the complaint was assigned to an outside investigator who prepared a report with findings and recommendations for the Board. The law firm of Robbins Schwartz was assigned as the outside investigator and delivered a report to the Board President and Superintendent dated June 10, 2026. The report was provided to the Board the next day. WHEREAS, the complaint was evaluated and investigated in light of the following Board policies or laws:
• Board Policy 2:105 – Ethics and Gift Ban
• Board Policy 2:80 – Board Member Code of Conduct
• State Officials and Employee Ethics Act – 5 ILCS 403/5 et seq.
• Public Officer Prohibited Activities Act, 50 ILCS 105/0.01 et seq. WHEREAS, the investigators interviewed Ding and evaluated numerous documents including the complaint, emails, and text messages. Consistent with Board Policy 2:260, the complaint was evaluated under a ‘preponderance of the evidence’ standard. Under this standard, the burden of proof is met when the evidence shows a greater than 50 percent chance the allegations are true. WHEREAS, the investigative report includes the following findings:
• There is sufficient evidence to conclude that Ding violated Board Policy 2:80 when she decided not to recuse herself from the vote on the first complaint as that created the appearance of a conflict and an appearance of impropriety.
• There is sufficient evidence to conclude that certain social media posts still present on Ding’s active campaign pages have the appearance of impropriety in violation of Board Policy 2:80.
• There is not any evidence to suggest a violation of Board Policy or law based upon Ding’s receipt of campaign contributions from labor and/or education groups including those affiliated with the Barrington Education Association.
• The conduct complained of in this second complaint is substantially the same as the allegations of the first complaint, and that Ding did not adequately adjust her behavior to the directions and expectations provided by the Board in its decision and training following the first complaint.
NOW THEREFORE, having evaluated the report in its totality and in consideration of the facts and circumstances, the Board makes the following findings and decisions:
• The Board ACCEPTS the finding that there is sufficient evidence to conclude that Ding violated Board Policy 2:80 when she decided not to recuse herself from the vote on the first complaint as that created the appearance of impropriety.
• The Board ACCEPTS the finding that there is sufficient evidence to conclude that Ding violated Board Policy 2:80 when she allowed certain social media posts to remain on her active campaign website.
• The Board ACCEPTS the finding that there is not any evidence to conclude that Ding violated Board Policy or law based upon her receipt of campaign contributions from labor and/or education groups including those affiliated with the Barrington Education Association; however, the Board expects Ding to consider recusing herself from Board deliberations and action on substantive decisions related to Barrington Education Association and Barrington School Employees Organization collective bargaining agreements.
• The Board directs Ding to remove from her campaign website any references to District achievements and expects Ding to decline to vote on any matter coming before the Board which is likely to create the appearance of impropriety.
• The Board considers it is appropriate that Ding reimburse the District for the costs of investigating and adjudicating this second complaint alleging violations of Board policy, especially given that the complaint largely involves Ding’s failure to follow the direction and training from the first complaint. In lieu of reimbursement, The Board requests Ding write a letter of apology and seek IASB or District Approved Ethics Counseling on their own time and at their own expense.
• The Board Secretary is directed to provide a copy of this decision to the Complainant, Ding, and the outside investigator.
• In accordance with the Enforcement provision of Board Policy 2:105, the Board Secretary is directed to notify the Lake County State’s Attorney of the decision.
ADOPTED this 29th day of June 2026, by a roll call vote as follows:
All BOE Members present voted in the affirmative. The purple coward didn’t show up, probably because she knew she wouldn’t be able to refrain from creating another conflict of interest and voting, like she did last time. Barry didn’t show up either.