Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘AI’ Category

The Deepfake Nudes Crisis in Schools Is Much Worse Than You Thought

Posted in AI, Big Brother, Deception, Education, Ethics, News Media, Privacy, School Districts, TMI, Topics Of Interest, WIRED on April 20, 2026| Leave a Comment »

An analysis by WIRED and Indicator found nearly 90 schools and 600 students around the world impacted by AI-generated deepfake nude images—and the problem shows no signs of going away. | PHOTO-ILLUSTRATION: WIRED STAFF; GETTY IMAGES

By Matt Burgess | WIRED

It usually starts with a photo downloaded from social media.

Around the world, teenage boys are saving Instagram and Snapchat images of girls they know from school and using harmful “nudify” apps to create fake nude photos or videos of them. These deepfakes can quickly be shared across whole schools, leaving victims feeling humiliated, violated, hopeless, and scared the images will haunt them forever.

The deepfake crisis hitting schools started slowly a couple of years ago, but it has since grown considerably as the technology used to create the explicit imagery has become more accessible. Deepfake sexual abuse incidents have hit around 90 schools globally and have impacted more than 600 pupils, according to a review of publicly reported incidents by WIRED and Indicator, a publication focusing on digital deception and misinformation.

The findings show that since 2023, schoolchildren—most often boys in high schools—in at least 28 countries have been accused of using generative AI to target their classmates with sexualized deepfakes. The explicit imagery, containing minors, is considered to be child sexual abuse material (CSAM). This analysis is believed to be the first to review real-world cases of AI deepfake abuse taking place at schools globally.

As a whole, the analysis shows the worldwide reach of harmful AI nudification technology, which can earn their creators millions of dollars per year, and shows that in many incidents, schools and law enforcement officials are often not prepared to respond to the serious sexual abuse incidents.

Article continues here.

Read Full Post »

Editorial: As AI turns classmates into targets, schools and parents are playing catch-up

Posted in AI, Chicago Tribune, OP/Ed, School Districts on April 12, 2026| 1 Comment »

The sun sets on the Illinois State Capitol on Feb. 18, 2026, in Springfield. State lawmakers recently updated Illinois’ child pornography laws to include AI-generated images. (Brian Cassella/Chicago Tribune)

By The Editorial Board | Chicago Tribune

Every parent should be paying attention to what’s been going on at Lake Zurich High School.

In an April 2 communication to families, school officials said police are investigating allegations that students used artificial intelligence to generate and share explicit, pornographic images using the likeness of other students. District officials have said that no staff members directly viewed the images, underscoring both the sensitivity of the material and the limits schools face once a police investigation begins. The conduct itself dates to late February, but only came to light April 2.

Kids have been bullying each other since the dawn of human existence. These allegations are different. Imagine being a victim’s mother or father and having to console them, to strategize how to show their face back at school, to process the feelings of violation, embarrassment and sadness that inevitably follow such exposure. Imagine being the parent of the child who did it and will have to face the consequences.

What’s going on is an uncomfortable tension between two difficult truths. Victims of AI manipulation are suffering real harm, including humiliation and lasting emotional damage. At the same time, many of the teens responsible are not fully equipped to grasp the permanence and scale of what they’re doing.

Adolescent minds today have easy access to technology that can create and distribute images instantly, without clear or consistently enforced guardrails. Schools, laws and parents are still operating under rules built for a world where harmful images had to be shot, not fabricated, and where the consequences unfolded more slowly.

Last month, two teenage Pennsylvania boys received probation after generating hundreds of fake nude photos of classmates using AI. The boys were 14 at the time of the crime. Last year, police in Louisiana discovered several middle-school boys had been sharing AI-generated nude photographs of female classmates on Snapchat. Advocates say there are thousands of instances of AI targeting each year, and as the technology improves the problem grows with it.

A key challenge in attacking the problem is the nature of teenagers; their decision-making and maturity are still developing. In the same way we don’t expect kids to drink until they’re 21 or drive until they’re 16, we cannot expect all teenagers to make responsible decisions with tools this powerful.

Editorial continues here.

Related: “Lake Zurich mom calls for relocation of students accused in AI porn incident: ‘A deep violation of the girls’ personhood’”

Read Full Post »

Illinois lawmakers begin days of deep dives on data centers

Posted in AI, Capitol News Illinois, Data Center, Politics, Springfield on April 9, 2026| Leave a Comment »

Environmental advocates rally for greater data center regulation in Illinois at the Capitol on Wednesday. (Capitol News Illinois photo by Jenna Schweikert)

By Nikoel Hytrek and UIS Public Affairs Reporting (PAR)

SPRINGFIELD —Illinois lawmakers are digging deep on data centers, with a House committee hearing from mayors, labor groups, and agriculture representatives about the facilities’ local impacts in the first of three planned meetings.

Rep. Ann Williams, D-Chicago, the chair of the House Executive Committee, said she wanted to hear about the benefits and challenges of data centers as the General Assembly considers regulations like the POWER Act.

“Whatever we do here, we have to put people first,” she said. “We have to put communities first. Data’s important, business is important, revenues are important, but people must come first.”

Water use, energy use, noise and how community benefit agreements are constructed were the primary concerns lawmakers wanted to address on Wednesday.

Generally, the speakers acknowledged data centers are part of a growing economy and are needed to support technology like AI, cloud computing and data storage used by various industries, from education to health care.

Some cautioned against regulation, saying it could dissuade companies from investing in Illinois while others aired different concerns they’ve encountered.

An Illinois Senate committee has two data center-related hearings scheduled for later this week as well. Environmental advocates on Wednesday also lobbied in the Capitol for data center regulation.

Story continues here.

Read Full Post »

Over $100,000 in Special Interest Funding gifted to 220 Board member’s campaign in failed bid for State Rep job

Posted in 220, AI, Barrington Education Association, Board of Education, Conflict of interest, Data Center, Deception, District 220 referendum, Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI), Education, Elections, Ethics, Guest Essay, Illinois Federation of Teachers, Look For The Union Label, Politics, Pritzker’s Rules of Order, Property Taxes, School Districts, South Barrington, Springfield, Taxes, Unions, What the Ficke (Bradford)? on April 7, 2026| 1 Comment »

“As a resident of Barrington, IL, I am deeply concerned about the actions of one of our School Board members, Erin Chan Ding, who has admitted to violating School Board policy, using her position for personal gain and political leverage. Her recent activities have raised eyebrows in our community, as it seems she is prioritizing her run for the Democratic candidate for State Representative of the 52nd District over her duties and responsibilities to our children and community. The Board has already voted that she has flagrantly violated School Board policy.

School Board members should exemplify unbiased dedication to the educational needs and welfare of our students. However, it has come to light that this individual is leveraging her role for publicity to further her political career, diverting attention from our District’s educational priorities. Our students deserve leaders who are fully committed to their well-being, not those looking for personal advancement or caught in political machinations.

Evidence of this misuse includes multiple occasions where she solicited petition signatures during school events in violation of Board policies. She was warned by the Board President in July of the violations and her need to adhere to Board policies and she agreed to do so. Despite these admonitions and Chan Ding’s agreement to adhere to policy in July, she’s continued to repeatedly violate policy. The Board voted for remedial training as the consequence for her violations. This is not an acceptable response to her conscious decision to repeatedly violate the very policies she presided over as one of the 2 Board members on the Policy Committee; particularly where Chan Ding was warned by Board President Bradford publicly at the July Board meeting of the violations but continued violations despite the public admonitions.

Chan Ding’s interests align more with her political campaigning ambitions than with School Board responsibilities. Furthermore, decisions made on critical educational issues are now being scrutinized for potential conflicts of interest influenced by her political agenda. This is not the kind of behavior we can afford to permit, as it undermines the trust and integrity essential to governing bodies like our Board of Education.

Removing this member will not only help restore the Board’s focus on its core mission but also sends a clear message that our community will not stand for misconduct or exploitation of elected positions for ulterior motives. It’s crucial that our School Board reflects the best interests of our students and maintains an unwavering commitment to their education and growth.

Join me in calling for the removal of Chan Ding to ensure our Board remains a place for sincere, student-centered service. Let’s protect the integrity of Barrington’s educational system and hold our officials accountable. Sign this petition today to take a stand for our schools and community.”

Read more here.

Related: “New Evidence of Chan Ding’s Policy Violations and Conflicts of Interest,” “Candidate Erin Chan Ding’s opinion on Data Centers,” “Barrington area Democrats condemn Chan Ding mailers,” “The D220 Board of Ed gets another ‘F’ in accountability & transparency,” “School district’s parking plan defies logic,” “Zoning change defies village policy,” “The Real Issue in Barrington 220 Isn’t Parking or Levies — It’s Leadership Culture,” “Change.org Petition: ‘For the Resignation of Erin Chan Ding ~ D220 Resources are Not for Political Campaigns’,” “BOARD OF ED VOTES, MEMBER CHAN DING MADE FLAGRANT POLICY VIOLATIONS – Part 2,” “BOARD OF ED VOTES, MEMBER CHAN DING MADE FLAGRANT POLICY VIOLATIONS,” “Erin Chan Ding: The violations just keep piling up…,” “Erin Chan Ding starring in another episode of, ‘Rules For Thee But NOT For Me…’,”  “District 220’s Lack of Transparency (Updated),” “District 220’s Lack of Transparency,” “Ding Politicking on School District Property,” “Dual School Board and State Rep Positions Legally Incompatible,” “D220 Abuses Taxpayer Funds in favor of Partisan Campaign,” “Ding In Her Own Words – CONFLICTED!,” “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”

Read Full Post »

Do you trust our Board of Trustees? We don’t. But you decide for yourself once we have finished. (Part 4)

Posted in AI, Audio Recordings, Clown Car, Comprehensive Plan, Crime, Data Center, Deception, Dumb and Dumber, ePacket Agendas, Ethics, FOIA, Intergovernmental agreements (IGA), Land Disconnection, Land Use, Lennie, New Normal?, Newsletter, OMA, One Barrington Hills, OP/Ed, Open Meetings Act, Perjury, Plan Commission, Politics, Privacy, Property Taxes, Real Estate, Simple Minds, Taxes, Topics Of Interest, Transcripts, Transparency, Village Attorney, Village Board, Village Clerk, Village Code, Village Director of Administration, Village Government, Village President, Zoning Board on April 3, 2026| 3 Comments »

Village of Barrington Hills board members (l-r) JC Clarke, Laura AB Ekstrom, Brian Cecola, Marsha McClary, David Riff and Jessica Hoffmann. Not pictured: Thomas Strauss.

Our Village Board of Trustees met Monday evening. This marked the third meeting since their December 2025 meeting when residents were blindsided to learn, “110 Acre AI data center campus pitched to Village Board.”

The first speaker Monday night expressed their continued dissatisfaction with the Board as follows:

“All right. Good evening. My name is Aaron Becker. By now you probably know who I am.

I’m speaking tonight in regards to the Village attorney’s letter in response to my questions from January 27th,and I’ve got a couple other comments as well.

I really appreciate the Village responding in righting to my quick response. However, I ask respectfully and directly why several of my explicit questions and requests were not answered at all. They were just omitted, so… .

The response explains why it believes its past actions were lawful, but it does not confirm whether any of the safeguards I requested would be implemented. My question tonight is simple: was the omission intentional?

In the Village Summer 2021 newsletter, residents were told by Trustee Ekstrom, she’s not here today, and I’m going to quote her, ‘Most residents know that they can attend the Village Board meetings, many may not realize that committee and commission meetings are also open to the public. Our Village is a community above all else and having input from our residents reflected in our decision making is not only welcome but encouraged.’

I’ll say this much, I genuinely appreciate that perspective and I believe her. With that in mind, here’s some feedback:

Please confirm that all off-record communications with Brennan Development Group will stop.

Please stop project specific merit discussions absent of formal filings.

Please confirm that unsupported tax claims will not be repeated by the Village without substantiation.

Please confirm that records will be preserved.

Please do everything in your power to maintain true independence of the Plan Commission.

I’d also like the Board to reflect on some of the statements Board of Trustees members have made in the past. In the same Summer 2021 newsletter, residents were told by Trustee Strauss that quote, ‘We live in a special community, and the Board is committed to maintaining our heritage.’

And Trustee Riff said, ‘I would like to make certain that we remain focused on the budget, protect our residential zoning rights (or rather zoning laws), and ensure that our community remains safe and secure for all residents.’

So those are strong words. And they matter. So I’ll ask each of you as Trustee members, do you believe that based on all of the emails we have now seen and read that you have honored those commitments? That you are protecting our residential zoning rights. And that you are maintaining our heritage as a Village.

I’ll be honest, I don’t. I read all the emails. I don’t believe it.

You have to go to bed at night. You have to look yourself in the mirror and say that you believe you’ve protected the residential zoning rights with your actions and your words.

My wife spoke last month about actions and words and holding people accountable when their actions and words don’t align. And that’s what we’re here doing asking of our leaders for continuity between their actions and their words.

That’s all I’m asking. When you say you’re going to do something, follow through and do it. Please.

So, to summarize, respond to the five requests I had in the letter either acknowledging you made a mistake and how you’re going to fix it, or that you made no mistake.

Either way we deserve clarity we deserve responses to those.

That’s my comment. Thank you very much.”

The audio recordings from the March 30, 2026, Board of Trustees meeting can be found here.

Related: “Do you trust our Board of Trustees? We don’t. But you decide for yourself once we have finished. (Follow-up),” “Do you trust our Board of Trustees? We don’t. But you decide for yourself once we have finished. (Part 3),” “Do you trust our Board of Trustees? We don’t. But you decide for yourself once we have finished. (Part 2),” “Do you trust our Board of Trustees? We don’t. But you decide for yourself once we have finished. (Part 1),” “110 Acre AI data center campus pitched to Village Board”

 

Read Full Post »

Restoring Integrity to the School Board ~ A Seat is a Trust, Not a Consolation Prize

Posted in 220, Barrington Education Association, Board of Education, Conflict of interest, Data Center, Deception, District 220 referendum, Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI), Education, Elections, Ethics, Goat Rodeo, Illinois Federation of Teachers, League of Women Voters, Legal Expenses, OP/Ed, Politics, Property Taxes, School Districts, South Barrington, Springfield, Taxes, Unions, What the Ficke (Bradford)? on March 20, 2026| Leave a Comment »

Erin Chan Ding posted the following to her Facebook followers Tuesday:

While Chan Ding claims to be ‘honored’ to continue her service on the Barrington 220 Board of Education, her actions during her failed primary campaign suggest she has forgotten who she truly serves.

By using District resources to fuel a partisan run—earning her an official ethics sanction—and subsequently accepting campaign donations from the very union whose contracts she must impartially negotiate, she has created a profound conflict of interest.

Most disappointingly, she has let down the constituents who elected her on the fundamental promise of nonpartisan leadership. A school board seat is a sacred trust meant for the advocacy of students, not a political steppingstone.

To treat the Board as a ‘consolation prize’ after a partisan defeat, while carrying the weight of these ethical breaches, is a disservice to every voter who expected her to put our schools above her own political ambitions.

Related: “Chan Ding, Teachers Unions losers in IL 52nd District Primary Election,” “New Evidence of Chan Ding’s Policy Violations and Conflicts of Interest,” “Candidate Erin Chan Ding’s opinion on Data Centers,” “Barrington area Democrats condemn Chan Ding mailers,” “The D220 Board of Ed gets another ‘F’ in accountability & transparency,” “School district’s parking plan defies logic,” “Zoning change defies village policy,” “The Real Issue in Barrington 220 Isn’t Parking or Levies — It’s Leadership Culture,” “Change.org Petition: ‘For the Resignation of Erin Chan Ding ~ D220 Resources are Not for Political Campaigns’,” “BOARD OF ED VOTES, MEMBER CHAN DING MADE FLAGRANT POLICY VIOLATIONS – Part 2,” “BOARD OF ED VOTES, MEMBER CHAN DING MADE FLAGRANT POLICY VIOLATIONS,” “Erin Chan Ding: The violations just keep piling up…,” “Erin Chan Ding starring in another episode of, ‘Rules For Thee But NOT For Me…’,”  “District 220’s Lack of Transparency (Updated),” “District 220’s Lack of Transparency,” “Ding Politicking on School District Property,” “Dual School Board and State Rep Positions Legally Incompatible,” “D220 Abuses Taxpayer Funds in favor of Partisan Campaign,” “Ding In Her Own Words – CONFLICTED!,” “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”

 

Read Full Post »

Chan Ding, Teachers Unions losers in IL 52nd District Primary Election

Posted in 220, Associated Press, Barrington Education Association, Board of Education, Conflict of interest, Data Center, Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI), Education, Ethics, His Master's Voice, Illinois Federation of Teachers, Illinois State Board of Elections, Look For The Union Label, Politics, Property Taxes, School Districts, South Barrington, Springfield, Taxes, Unions, What the Ficke (Bradford)? on March 18, 2026| Leave a Comment »

 

Related: “New Evidence of Chan Ding’s Policy Violations and Conflicts of Interest”

Read Full Post »

New Evidence of Chan Ding’s Policy Violations and Conflicts of Interest

Posted in 220, AI, Barrington Education Association, Board of Education, Data Center, Deception, District 220 referendum, Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI), Elections, Ethics, Guest Essay, Illinois Federation of Teachers, OP/Ed, Politics, Property Taxes, School Districts, South Barrington, Springfield, Taxes, Unions, What the Ficke (Bradford)? on March 17, 2026| 3 Comments »

$20,000 in Special Interest Funding & Continued Violations of Public Trust

By Better Barrington | @Change.org

Thank you for standing with us as we hold our elected officials accountable. We have a critical update regarding the petition for the resignation of Erin Chan Ding from the Barrington 220 Board of Education.

Despite previous reprimands by the Board of Trustees for “flagrant violations” of school board policy, public records now reveal a deepening web of financial conflicts that directly undermine the neutrality of our district’s leadership.

The newest Schedule A-1 filings for Chan Ding’s political campaign reveal a massive influx of cash from organizations that represent the very interests she is tasked with negotiating against on behalf of taxpayers:

  • $10,000 from the IPACE (Illinois Professional Action Committee for Education). In Barrington D220, the Barrington Education Association (BEA) is the local teachers union. BEA is an affiliate of the Illinois Education Association which operates IPACE as its political arm.
  • $10,000 from the Lake County Federation of Teachers Local 504 COPE PAC.
  • Public Endorsements: Her campaign is now openly touting endorsements from the IEA and the Illinois Federation of Teachers—entities representing over 240,000 educators statewide.

Why This Matters: A Breach of Board Policy

District 220 policies are not suggestions; they are the ethical framework that protects our schools from partisan capture. Chan Ding is in direct conflict with:

  • Policy 2:105 (Ethics and Gift Ban): Sets strict standards to prevent conflicts of interest and ensure public trust.
  • Policy 2:80 (Board Member Oath & Conduct): Explicitly mandates that members avoid the appearance of impropriety and refuse to surrender responsibilities to “special interest or partisan political groups.”

In her first Board of Ed campaign, when called out for taking $750 in donations from IPACE, Chan Ding told the Chicago Tribune she would not approve contracts that raise taxes, yet her voting record tells a different story. She has consistently voted for the maximum tax levy every time it has reached the floor.

Accepting $20,000 from unions that negotiate directly with the Board of Ed is not just a “political choice”—it is a disqualifying conflict of interest. A Board Member cannot serve two masters. You cannot be a neutral steward of taxpayer funds while being funded by the organizations seeking those same funds.

We continue to call for the resignation of Erin Chan Ding to restore integrity to the D220 Board.

  1. Share this update: Post this on Facebook, X, and local community groups.
  2. Attend the next Board Meeting: Let your voice be heard during public comment.
  3. Email the Board: Remind them that Policy 2:80 must be enforced, not ignored.

Related: “Candidate Erin Chan Ding’s opinion on Data Centers,” “Barrington area Democrats condemn Chan Ding mailers,” “The D220 Board of Ed gets another ‘F’ in accountability & transparency,” “School district’s parking plan defies logic,” “Zoning change defies village policy,” “The Real Issue in Barrington 220 Isn’t Parking or Levies — It’s Leadership Culture,” “Change.org Petition: ‘For the Resignation of Erin Chan Ding ~ D220 Resources are Not for Political Campaigns’,” “BOARD OF ED VOTES, MEMBER CHAN DING MADE FLAGRANT POLICY VIOLATIONS – Part 2,” “BOARD OF ED VOTES, MEMBER CHAN DING MADE FLAGRANT POLICY VIOLATIONS,” “Erin Chan Ding: The violations just keep piling up…,” “Erin Chan Ding starring in another episode of, ‘Rules For Thee But NOT For Me…’,”  “District 220’s Lack of Transparency (Updated),” “District 220’s Lack of Transparency,” “Ding Politicking on School District Property,” “Dual School Board and State Rep Positions Legally Incompatible,” “D220 Abuses Taxpayer Funds in favor of Partisan Campaign,” “Ding In Her Own Words – CONFLICTED!,” “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”

Read Full Post »

Do you trust our Board of Trustees? We don’t. But you decide for yourself once we have finished. (Follow-up)

Posted in Agendas, AI, Audio Recordings, Clown Car, Data Center, Deception, Dumb and Dumber, Ethics, FOIA, Intergovernmental agreements (IGA), Land Disconnection, Minutes, Newsletter, OMA, One Barrington Hills, OP/Ed, Open Meetings Act, Plan Commission, Politics, Privacy, Property Taxes, Public Safety, Real Estate, Simple Minds, Taxes, Topics Of Interest, Transcripts, Transparency, Village Attorney, Village Board, Village Code, Village Director of Administration, Village Government, Village President, Zoning Board on March 13, 2026| Leave a Comment »

There was no mention of the data center discussions which began in October in President Cecola’s quarterly Village Newsletter distributed last week. So much for transparency.

Last week we published a series of editorials to enlighten residents on the, “110 Acre AI data center campus pitched to Village Board.” We referenced Freedom Of Information Act (FOIA) records we obtained, and several people have asked if they might obtain a copy.

Those records we were provided, edited only to eliminate redundancy such as multiple copies of the “Data Center Overview,” can be found here.

Related: “Do you trust our Board of Trustees? We don’t. But you decide for yourself once we have finished. (Part 3),” “Do you trust our Board of Trustees? We don’t. But you decide for yourself once we have finished. (Part 2),” “Do you trust our Board of Trustees? We don’t. But you decide for yourself once we have finished. (Part 1),” “7 things to know about Illinois data centers,” “Data Center group concerned over pause,” “110 Acre AI data center campus pitched to Village Board”

 

Read Full Post »

Do you trust our Board of Trustees? We don’t. But you decide for yourself once we have finished. (Part 3)

Posted in AI, Audio Recordings, Data Center, Ethics, FOIA, Intergovernmental agreements (IGA), Land Disconnection, Land Use, Minutes, OMA, OP/Ed, Plan Commission, Politics, Privacy, Property Taxes, Public Safety, Real Estate, Simple Minds, Topics Of Interest, Transparency, Village Attorney, Village Board, Village Code, Village Director of Administration, Village Government, Village President, Zoning Board on March 6, 2026| 2 Comments »

Source: Brennan Investment Group December 15, 2025 presentation to the Barrington Hills Board of Trustees

Last month during the February 23rd Board of Trustees meeting, Trustees and attendees heard public comments from:

  • Carson Rice
  • Karen Trzaska
  • Julie Becker
  • Austin Becker, and
  • Aaron Becker

This marked the second Board meeting since the now infamous, “110 Acre AI data center campus pitched to Village Board,” was made public and residents were afforded an opportunity to share their thoughts. To follow are the Public Comments of one resident who spoke after having benefit of the review of records received from a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request for documents related to the Data Center pitch:

“I’m Karen Traska… It’s kind of good that I’m following him because I might have a few of your answers.

You know, before I came here, I was pretty mad. And now I’m standing in front of you guys and I’m sad. Like, I’m really sad.

Last time I was standing up here, we were talking about this data center that came out of nowhere, right? It just sort of popped up. They just showed up like 5 minutes before the meeting. It wasn’t on the agenda because, you know, they just kind of showed up, and, the last time I was here, I was also waiting for my FOIA request, and I got my FOIA request.

So turns out, October 8th, our Village Administrator, Anna Paul, put a meeting in the calendar with the Brennan Investment Group and what seems to be their attorneys for the data center. October 21st, you guys had the meeting with Brennan.

…November 10th, Brennan followed up with Anna to see what the feedback was. A week later, November 17th, Board of Trustee meeting. It wasn’t on the agenda. It wasn’t brought up.

December 15th, 2 months after the meeting, Board of Trustee meeting again. It wasn’t on the agenda, but now, as we all know, a 25-minute presentation discussion, but apparently not even some of the trustees knew about it until that moment. Community didn’t know about it. We couldn’t show up to listen or engage. It wasn’t until mid-January that word really gets out to the community.

All hell breaks loose, right? We’re all here at the meeting, January 26th. And President Cecola, Brian, you sat here and repeatedly stated that no one, no one on this Board wanted a data center, right? No one wanted it. And nobody raised their hand, contradicted him. No one said, well, actually, no, I did.

Well, Tuesday, December 16th, the day after the presentation with Brennan, Trustee Strauss, who’s not here unfortunately, to Wes Levy, the Village Treasurer, and Anna Paul, the Village Administrator.

Wes, nicely done last night. Can you ask Anna to share the information we received last night from Brennan Investment Group about a possible data center development?

Levy responds, hi, Trustee Strauss. Anna brought this one to my attention a couple weeks ago. I am sure there will be concessions and property tax forgiveness as part of a deal to bring them in, but if they do come, it will be significant revenue.

Then Strauss emails Cecola,

Brian, my opinion is we need to take this very seriously. Opportunities like this do not surface often. We would need to make certain we can lock up the project and the necessary requirements short-term and long-term, but based on the location, I believe the developer is for sure going to be very open to making concessions.

Same time, Trustee Hoffman was sending an article citing energy usage concerns. Thank you.

And Strauss replied with an article of his own regarding some small town in Quincy, Washington, and how they love the data center. He shared,

I have done a lot of research the last 2 days, and these centers are legit. Below is a small community and the impact that I sent to Brian yesterday. And it was all these statistics. To which then Trustee Clarke responded, Thanks. I agree with Trustee Strauss.

That’s just what was sent to me. There were 2 emails with a staff member and the attorney not sent to me, apparently due to some attorney-client privilege, which I don’t understand because I thought the village was the client, like the residents were the client, but maybe not. I will be asking about that later.

Allegedly, other conversations were had off record with more than just Strauss and Clarke being in favor of the data center. Allegedly, allegedly, allegedly.

I do want to thank Trustees Ekstrom and Hoffman, whether in emails that I received or in public meetings in front of all of us, or both, for standing up for our Village and its unique character, as well as for calling for transparency, not just in the community but within your own Board. I hope in the future we can go back to the transparency that we had with our previous Village President.

Again, this whole thing makes me really sad. So that’s all I have to say. Thank you.”

A transcript of comments from the February 23rd Board meeting can be found here, and the audio recordings of the entire meeting can be found here.

The Village posted the following after the February 2nd Special Plan Commission meeting was cancelled:

“Based on initial feedback, the developer for a possible data center in the Village of Barrington Hills has decided not to go forward with a presentation at the informational Plan Commission meeting.

At this time, the Village considers this matter closed and does not anticipate any further discussion.”

Few if any believe the matter to be closed.

As an aside, the Plan Commission last met on October 2nd, 2025, just six (6) days prior to the Brennan meeting being scheduled by the Village Administrator, per FOIA documents obtained. See Draft Minutes of the October 2, 2025, Meeting.

We thought the timing to be interesting. We also find it interesting that the FOIA records show no evidence of contact between the Village and Brennan Investment Group in advance of October 8th, 2025, when the Village scheduled the October 21st, 2025, meeting. Nothing. No emails with introductory materials, no emails confirming the meeting.

Editorial note: In “Part 1” of our series we neglected to include the “Data Center Overview” posted by the Village on January 16th, 2026. This has since been corrected.

Related: “Do you trust our Board of Trustees? We don’t. But you decide for yourself once we have finished. (Part 2),” “Do you trust our Board of Trustees? We don’t. But you decide for yourself once we have finished. (Part 1),” “7 things to know about Illinois data centers,” “Data Center group concerned over pause,” “110 Acre AI data center campus pitched to Village Board”

Read Full Post »

Older Posts »