Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘What the Ficke (Bradford)?’ Category

Barrington area Democrats condemn Chan Ding mailers

Posted in 220, Barrington Education Association, Board of Education, Daily Herald, Deception, Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI), Dumb and Dumber, Dumb Bunny, Economy, Education, Elections, Ethics, FUBAR, Goat Rodeo, Illinois Federation of Teachers, Illinois State Board of Elections, Look For The Union Label, Mad Cows, Politics, Property Taxes, School Districts, South Barrington, Topics Of Interest, Unions, What the Ficke (Bradford)? on February 28, 2026| 3 Comments »

Erin Chan Ding, left, and Maria Peterson are Democratic candidates for the Illinois House 52nd District seat in the 2026 primary election.

By Steve Zalusky  | Daily Herald

The Barrington Area Democratic Organization condemned attack mailers from Erin Chan Ding’s campaign for the Democratic nod in the Illinois House 52nd District primary.

The mailers altered opponent Maria Peterson’s image, placing her head on another person’s body. They also included the phrase, “When Maria Peterson runs, MAGA wins,” along with a list of her past election losses.

“These tactics do not reflect the values of our organization or the spirit of Democratic leadership in our community,” organization officials stated in a press release.

Chan Ding and Peterson are competing to challenge incumbent Republican Martin McLaughlin in the fall election. Peterson narrowly lost to McLaughlin by 47 votes in 2024 and lost by 385 votes to Republican Dan McConchie in 2022.

Peterson called the mailers “Chicago-style politics” that don’t “fit very well out here.”

Chan Ding countered, claiming Peterson distributed an attack ad first in January that “went after my character.” Chan Ding is a Barrington Area Unit District 220 school board member who was criticized by colleagues after an investigation determined she had violated district policies by using school resources, property and social media for prohibited political campaign activities.

Article continues here.

Related: “The D220 Board of Ed gets another ‘F’ in accountability & transparency,” “School district’s parking plan defies logic,” “Zoning change defies village policy,” “District 220 Public Hearing December 16th re: ‘proposal to sell bonds of the District in an amount not to exceed $5,400,000’,” “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 »

District 220 Board of Education meets tonight

Posted in 220, Agendas, AI, Barrington Education Association, Board of Education, Conflict of interest, District 220 referendum, Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI), Education, Elections, Ethics, His Master's Voice, Illinois Federation of Teachers, Illinois State Board of Elections, Open Meetings Act, Politics, Property Taxes, School Districts, Unions, Video Recordings, Video Streaming, What the Ficke (Bradford)? on February 17, 2026| Leave a Comment »

The District 220 Board of Education meets this evening at 6:00 PM at the District Administration Center, 515 W. Main Street. Items on their agenda include:

  • FOIA Report
  • FOIA Report
  • Consideration to Approve Declaration of Property Surplus and Authorize its Sale or Disposal
  • Consideration to Approve the Public Release of the October 31, 2025, 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: “The D220 Board of Ed gets another ‘F’ in accountability & transparency,” “School district’s parking plan defies logic,” “Zoning change defies village policy,” “District 220 Public Hearing December 16th re: ‘proposal to sell bonds of the District in an amount not to exceed $5,400,000’,” “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 »

NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING VILLAGE OF BARRINGTON PLAN COMMISSION

Posted in Barrington High School, IDOT, Land Use, Property Taxes, Public Hearing, Real Estate, Transparency, What the Ficke (Bradford)? on December 29, 2025| 1 Comment »

DOCKET NUMBER: PC 25-07
SUBJECT PROPERTY ADDRESS/DESCRIPTION: 616 W. Main Street, Barrington, IL 60010
PIN(s): 13-35-401-068, 13-35-401-069, 13-35-104-006, 13-35-104-001 AND 13-25-104-022
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
LOTS 26 AND 34 IN CHICAGO HIGHLANDS SUBDIVISION BEING A SUBDIVISION OF PARTS OF SECTION 26, 27, 34 AND 35, TOWNSHIP 43 NORTH, RANGE 9 EAST OF THE THIRD PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF RECORDED MARCH 27, 1901 AS DOCUMENT 81144 IN LAKE COUNTY, ILLINOIS, LYING SOUTHERLY OF THE SOUTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY OF THE CHICAGO AND NORTHWESTERN RAILWAY AND LYING NORTHERLY AND EASTERLY OF THE EASTERLY AND NORTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY OF HART ROAD EXCEPT THAT PART OF LOTS 26 CONVEYED TO THE COUNTY OF LAKE PER DOCUMENT 7461083 RECORDED JANUARY 31, 2018;
TOGETHER WITH LOT 33 IN SAID CHICAGO HIGHLANDS SUBDIVISION EXCEPT ALL THAT PART FALLING WITHIN PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY AND ALSO EXCEPT ALL THAT PART THEREOF FALLING NORTHERLY OF THE SOUTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF THE CHICAGO AND NORTHWESTERN RAILWAY AND ALSO EXCEPT THAT PART DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS TO WITH: BEGINNING AT THE INTERSECTION OF THE EAST LINE OF SAID LOT 33 AND SAID SOUTHERLY LINE OF THE CHICAGO AND NORTHWESTERN RAILWAY RIGHT OF WAY; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY LINE FOR 302.95 FEET; THENCE SOUTHERLY 531.0 FEET TO AN EXISTING IRON ROD; THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY FOR 265.1 FEET TO THE EAST LINE OF SAID LOT 33; HENCE NORTH 448.09 FEET TO THE POINT OFBEGINNING OF SAID EXCEPTION;
TOGETHER WITH LOT 42 IN SAID CHICAGO HIGHLANDS SUBDIVISION EXCEPT ALL THAT PART FALLING WITHIN PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY;
TOGETHER WITH LOT 14 IN WALNUT GROVE SUBDIVISION BEING A SUBDIVISION OF A PART OF LOT 2 IN THE COUNTY CLERK’S DIVISION OF THE EAST HALF OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 35 IN TOWNSHIP 43 NORTH, RANGE 9 EAST OF THE THIRD PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF RECORDED AUGUST 14, 1924 AS DOCUMENT 244450, ALL IN LAKE COUNTY, ILLINOIS.
HEARING DATE: January 13, 2026
TIME: 6:30 p.m. or as soon thereafter as the Agenda permits.
LOCATION OF HEARING: Village Board Room, Village Hall Second Floor, 200 South Hough Street, Barrington, IL 60010
OWNER OF RECORD: Barrington School District 220, 616 W. Main Street, Barrington, IL 60010
APPLICANTS: Sarah Lager, 616 W. Main Street, Barrington, IL 60010 and Carrie Matlock, DLA Architects, Ltd., Two Pierce Place, Suite 1300, Itasca, IL 60143
REQUEST: The applicant is requesting to amend the existing special use planned development previously granted pursuant to Ordinance Nos 98-2759, 99-2789, 01-2936, 08-3432, 12-3690, 18-4020, and 22-4184 in order to seek approval for several building and site modifications including two building additions, an outdoor classroom addition, renovations of the existing building, new monument and building signage, reconfiguration of the parking area in front of the main entrance, and other site improvements including landscaping. The Petitioner is also seeking approval of the revised layout for the potential future signalized entrance, subject to IDOT approval. The Petitioner is requesting exceptions from: ZO Table 9.12 Maximum Building Height; ZO Section 4.11-19.C Internal Parking Lot Landscaping; ZO Table 4.16-B-1 Permanent Freestanding Signs – General Requirements; ZO Table 4.16-B-4 Permanent Monument Signs – District Specific Requirements; ZO Table 4.16-D-1 Permanent Wall Signs General Requirements; as well as other such zoning permission relief as may be related to this application as discovered in the public hearing process on the subject property legally described above. The subject property is zoned P-L: Public Lands District and is located in Neighborhood 4. The 2021 Comprehensive Plan designates the subject property for Public/Institutional.
Copies of each of the applicable documents are on file and are available upon request. The Village of Barrington is subject to the requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990. Individuals with disabilities who plan to attend this meeting and who require certain accommodations in order to allow them to observe and/or participate in this meeting, or who have questions regarding the accessibility of the meeting or the Village’s facilities, are requested to contact the Village Clerk’s Office at 200 S. Hough Street, Barrington, Illinois 60010 or call at (847) 304-3400 promptly to allow the Village to make reasonable accommodations for those persons.

ALL INTERESTED PARTIES ARE INVITED TO BE HEARD.
Dan Hogan, Chairperson
PLAN COMMISSION
200 S. Hough Street, Barrington, Illinois 60010
Published in Daily Herald Dec. 29, 2025 (316852)

Read Full Post »

Build 220 Deserves the Same Transparency Taxpayers Are Being Asked to Fund

Posted in 220, Barrington Education Association, Barrington High School, Board of Education, Deception, District 220 referendum, Education, Ethics, Illinois Federation of Teachers, Letters to the Editor, Look For The Union Label, New Normal?, OP/Ed, Politics, Property Taxes, Real Estate, School Districts, SNAFU, South Barrington, Taxes, Topics Of Interest, Transparency, Unions, What the Ficke (Bradford)? on December 28, 2025| Leave a Comment »

To the Editor,

As Barrington 220 considers additional tax levies and future capital commitments, the community deserves a clear, accessible understanding of how recent voter-approved funds have actually been spent. Over the past several months, I have reviewed hundreds of pages of publicly available contracts, FOIA disclosures, construction work orders, and financial ledgers related to the Build 220 program. Several findings stand out and merit broader public awareness.

First, district records show that construction management overhead for Build 220 projects significantly exceeds common industry benchmarks. For K–12 CM-at-Risk projects, management overhead and fees typically fall in the 10–15% range. However, Barrington 220’s own Project Work Orders (PWOs) show overhead levels ranging from approximately 23% to as high as 28%, with some smaller project segments exceeding 30% (See: Build 220 — Construction vs. Overhead).

Key takeaway: On approximately $33 million of PWOs, overhead and soft costs account for an estimated $7–9 million. These percentages are nearly double typical industry norms and warrant closer public review

On just four major PWOs totaling roughly $33 million, this translates to an estimated $7–9 million spent on management reimbursables, contingency stacking, insurance loadings, fees, and pre-loaded allowances rather than direct construction labor or materials. A visual summary of this comparison is attached for readers.

Second, architectural and engineering fees have exceeded the district’s own contractual cap. The master agreement with the district’s architect set a limit of 7.4% of the construction budget, which equates to approximately $9.5 million based on the district’s budget reconciliation. Yet the district’s accounts receivable ledger shows approximately $11.7 million paid to date — an overage of more than $2.2 million (See: Build 220 — Architectural & Engineering Fees).

Drivers of the overage include: duplicated planning across firms, over-scoped civil engineering bundles later credited back, optional enhancements not included in referendum language, and avoidable redesigns

This increase appears tied to duplicated planning work across multiple firms, over-scoped civil engineering packages later reduced through credits, optional enhancements not included in referendum messaging, and avoidable redesign costs. At no point has the community been presented with a cumulative report showing how or why the 7.4% cap was exceeded.

Third, many costs that function like change orders were embedded directly into base contracts as lump-sum allowances — including webcams, temporary occupancy setups, traffic control, and other vaguely described “reimbursables.” Without a publicly released change-order ledger, taxpayers cannot easily determine which allowances were actually used, which were not, or how final project costs compare to what voters approved.

These findings do not allege wrongdoing. They do, however, raise legitimate questions about financial discipline, cost control, and transparency — especially when the district is asking the community to support additional levies.

Before requesting more taxpayer dollars, Barrington 220 should provide the public with:

  1. A complete Build 220 change-order ledger for each Project Work Order;
  2. A clear breakdown of construction dollars versus management and overhead costs;
  3. A reconciliation of architectural and engineering fees against the 7.4% contractual limit; and
  4. Plain-language summaries that allow residents to understand where their money actually went.

Barrington residents have consistently shown they are willing to invest in their schools. That willingness depends on trust, and trust depends on transparency. Clear financial reporting is not an obstacle to progress — it is the foundation of it.

Sincerely,

Sam Mehic
South Barrington

Related: “The Real Issue in Barrington 220 Isn’t Parking or Levies — It’s Leadership Culture”

Read Full Post »

District 220 board reverses decision to buy properties for parking

Posted in 220, Barrington High School, Board of Education, Daily Herald, Deception, District 220 referendum, Land Use, Letters to the Editor, Politics, Property Taxes, Real Estate, School Districts, What the Ficke (Bradford)? on December 24, 2025| Leave a Comment »

Courtesy Google Maps (Click on image to enlarge)

By Steve Zalusky | Daily Herald

The Barrington Area Unit District 220 school board voted 4-3 Tuesday to reverse its August decision to purchase four properties for parking expansion at Barrington High School.

School board members had unanimously approved buying lots at 502, 506 and 510 W. Main St. and 112 N. Hager Ave. to meet parking needs resulting from a 2024 referendum for school improvements, including a new auditorium.

However, residents from the Walnut Grove neighborhood located next to the high school organized opposition after learning of the purchase.

The residents expressed concern about preserving the scale and character of a neighborhood containing homes dating back to the Great Depression. They said they were also worried about the impact of demolishing three homes, including the elimination of affordable housing.

In addition, they were concerned about property values and being vulnerable to future expansion by the district, suggesting the district reconfigure portions of its buildable land.

Board President Sandra Ficke-Bradford and members Leah Collister-Lazzari and Barry Altshuler opposed reconsidering.

Altshuler worried about precedent, saying, “If we sign a contract and then we don’t go through with it as an organization, that’s not a good thing.”

He added that the properties would have improved safety and security for students and warned that the high school would lose parking during auditorium construction.

Read the full story here.

Related: “School district’s parking plan defies logic,” “Zoning change defies village policy,” “Paving paradise?: Historic Barrington neighborhood opposes District 220’s plan to buy land for parking”

Read Full Post »

D220 lacks transparency and accountability with respect to Chan Ding violations

Posted in 220, Barrington Education Association, Board of Education, Deception, District 220 referendum, Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI), Education, Elections, Illinois Federation of Teachers, Illinois State Board of Elections, League of Women Voters, Look For The Union Label, OP/Ed, Politics, Property Taxes, School Districts, South Barrington, Taxes, Transparency, Unions, What the Ficke (Bradford)? on December 19, 2025| 3 Comments »

The D220 Board of Education has determined that a properly issued Freedom of Information Act request surrounding the grievance procedure and finding that Erin Chan Ding flagrantly violated Board policies is unduly burdensome. They cite the cost to the taxpayer for attorney review as a reason. Yet, in the same response, they admit that the punishment assessed against Chan Ding for the repeated violations, remedial training, was paid by the District (that’s us, the taxpayer) and the training was provided by the Board’s law firm.

What do we conclude from this? That the Board is just fine with lining the Board attorneys’ pockets with the taxpayers’ money to defend Chan Ding in her violations of Board policies, but it is unwilling to pay attorneys to provide the taxpayers with documents that are rightfully within the public purview.

The purpose of the Freedom of Information Act is to ensure transparency and accountability by giving the public the right to access school district records, fostering open government, allowing citizens to see how public funds are spent, and monitoring operations. FOIA makes school districts transparent bodies, empowering the public to scrutinize their operations while balancing this with crucial privacy protections for students. There is no privacy protection for the self interests of partisan school board members flagrantly violating Board policies!

Do Better Sandra and D220!

Better Barrington
Sign the Petition to Remove Chan Ding

Related: “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,” “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 »

Illinois TOPS NATION for public sector union political spending

Posted in 220, 300, Barrington Area Library, Barrington Education Association, Board of Education, BOHICA, Cook, County, Deception, Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI), Elections, Fools and their money, Illinois Federation of Teachers, League of Women Voters, Look For The Union Label, Overhead, Pension Funding, Politics, Preckwinkle's Rules of Order, Pritzker’s Rules of Order, Property Taxes, Road construction, School Districts, Springfield, Taxes, The Center Square, What the Ficke (Bradford)? on December 17, 2025| Leave a Comment »

Scott Stantis / For the Chicago Tribune

By Glenn Minnis | The Center Square contributor

Commonwealth Foundation Labor and Policy Senior Director David Osborne says Chicago’s growing reputation as the place where public sector unions flex plenty of political muscle is more than well deserved.

Osborne points to a new Commonwealth Foundation report highlighting how public sector unions across Illinois spent nearly $30 million on state races over the 2023-24 election cycle, or far more than what union officials in any other state dedicated to such causes.

At $5.5 million, Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson tops the State Government Union Pac Money List of those most benefiting from government employment unions support. In addition to Johnson, at least six other state lawmakers land on the list’s Top 20, lead by House Speaker Emanuel “Chris” Welch, D-Hillside, at No. 2 and Illinois Senate President Don Harmon, D-Oak Park, at No. 4.

“In the state of Illinois, political spending is bigger than in any other state,” Osborne told The Center Square. “Unions seem very focused on who gets elected to be the mayor of Chicago and governor of the state. What you’ve got really is a downward spiral in Illinois where the kinds of unions that have gotten so powerful have really done it at the expense of taxpayers and then they’re pouring more money into getting the right kind of people elected for them.”

With researchers adding that almost 96% of all donations for Illinois-level candidates went to Democrats, Osborne said it’s past time someone address the imbalance.

“Public sector unions, they’re not often talked about as the cause of problems,” he said. “We often look to high taxes, bigger government, economic policies, but really what’s driving states and cities to enact policies that are harmful to individuals, that raise taxes, that grow the size of government beyond its purpose are public sector unions.

Read more here.

Read Full Post »

District 220 Board of Education meets tonight

Posted in 220, Agendas, BACOG, Barrington Education Association, Board of Education, Clown Car, Cost of Living, Deception, District 220 referendum, Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI), Education, Elections, Ethics, FOIA, Illinois Federation of Teachers, League of Women Voters, Open Meetings Act, Politics, Pritzker’s Rules of Order, Property Taxes, School Districts, South Barrington, Taxes, Unions, What the Ficke (Bradford)? on December 16, 2025| Leave a Comment »

The District 220 Board of Education meets this evening at 6:00 PM at the District Administration Center, 515 W. Main Street. Items on their agenda include:

  • Consideration to open the PUBLIC HEARING concerning the intent of the Board of Education to sell not to exceed $5,400,000 Working Cash Fund Bonds for the purpose of increasing the District’s Working Cash Fund.
  • Public Comment – Working Cash Fund Bonds
  • FOIA Requests (13) Report
  • Finance Reports
  • Personnel Report
  • Action on Suspension Appeal for Student A
  • Consideration to Approve Tax Levy
  • Consideration to Approve Summer School Fees

A copy of the agenda can be viewed here. The meeting will be live-streamed on the district YouTube channel.

Related: “The D220 Board of Ed gets another ‘F’ in accountability & transparency,” “School district’s parking plan defies logic,” “Zoning change defies village policy,” “District 220 Public Hearing December 16th re: ‘proposal to sell bonds of the District in an amount not to exceed $5,400,000’,” “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 »

The D220 Board of Ed gets another “F” in accountability & transparency  

Posted in 220, Agendas, Barrington Education Association, Board of Education, BOHICA, Clown Car, Deception, Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI), Education, Elections, FOIA, Illinois Federation of Teachers, Illinois State Board of Elections, League of Women Voters, OP/Ed, Politics, Property Taxes, School Districts, South Barrington, Taxes, Topics Of Interest, Transparency, Unions, What the Ficke (Bradford)? on December 15, 2025| 3 Comments »

As readers are aware, a Petition was recently started for the removal of School Board Member Erin Chan Ding in the wake of her many violations of D220 policies which resulted in a legal investigation of Chan Ding’s activities and the resultant finding by the D220 Board of Education that Chan Ding made flagrant violations of D220 policies. (See “BOARD OF ED VOTES, MEMBER CHAN DING MADE FLAGRANT POLICY VIOLATIONS“)

The Petition to remove Chan Ding is now over 630 strong. Read up on the Petition here: For the Resignation of Erin Chan Ding ~ D220 Resources are Not for Political Campaigns

We’ve been advised by a friend of the Observer that a FOIA request was sent by him to the D220 FOIA Officer for communications related to the investigation of Chan Ding and her violations of D220 policies. That FOIA request was recently responded to, and, you’ll be amazed (LOL) to learn that the D220 Board, through its FOIA Officer and Superintendent Winkelman, has refused to respond to the request, claiming that it is “unduly burdensome.”

The response states:

(O)ver 7000 pages of emails were identified that may be responsive… It would take an unreasonable period of time for a staff member to review all of the records… the School District would need to utilize the services of its outside legal counsel to review the records at a significant cost to taxpayers… Review of the records would disrupt the duly undertaken work of the School District… In this case, the request is unduly burdensome and the burden on the School District outweighs the public interest in the information.

Isn’t that rich? We, the taxpayers, have been funding the legal review of Member Chan Ding’s conflict of interest in running as a Democrat in the primary for the State Representative of the 52nd District while serving as a 220 Board Member, her D220 policy violations in seeking the nomination, the resultant investigation requiring the retention of separate legal counsel, and her punishment, ongoing training related to her violations.

Yet, this District refuses to provide us taxpayers with the communications related to the very investigation we paid for? Citing it as burdensome?!

Given that D220 is claiming that there are over SEVEN THOUSAND pages of emails related to Chan Ding’s FLAGRANT VIOLATIONS of Board policies, how can anyone conceivably argue that the whole Chan Ding debacle is not a distraction to the Board, the District and its business?

The Chan Ding distraction prevents the District from complying with it’s obligations to the taxpayers and respond to a simple FOIA request because it’s too burdensome? If that’s the case, why isn’t the Board petitioning the Regional Superintendent of Schools for Chan Ding’s removal if she has become such a disruption in the duly undertaken work of the District?

The lack of transparency and accountability by the District and the Board of Education is revolting. We think the petition to remove Chan Ding doesn’t go far enough. We’d like to see the removal of any School Board Member and Administrator who refuses to provide the taxpayers what they are rightfully entitled to.

Related: “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 »

School district’s parking plan defies logic

Posted in 220, Barrington High School, Board of Education, Daily Herald, Deception, District 220 referendum, Land Use, Letters to the Editor, Politics, Property Taxes, Real Estate, School Districts, Transparency, What the Ficke (Bradford)? on December 10, 2025| 5 Comments »

Courtesy Google Maps (Click on image to enlarge)

Daily Herald Letter to the Editor

Barrington residents and students have asked District 220 for years to address the parking shortage at Barrington High School. The community has been clear: we need more parking, but we need a solution that makes sense.

Unfortunately, the school board’s current proposal defies logic.

The board has refused to consider a viable option that would create 216 parking spots at a cost of roughly $18,518 per stall. Instead, they are choosing to spend nearly $50,000 per stall to build just 40 spots by demolishing homes on North Hager Avenue and Main Street.

Why would the District choose to pay 2.5 times more for significantly less parking?

This proposal is not just fiscally irresponsible; it is destructive. It needlessly tears down attainable homes, uproots residents and erodes the historic character of Walnut Grove. School officials confirmed at the Dec. 2 board Meeting that cash reserves are available for the larger parking solution. There is no financial excuse for choosing the destructive path over the efficient one.

Barrington values thoughtful planning and stewardship. Tearing down historic homes for a small, overpriced parking lot undermines those values.

District 220 still has time to change course. We urge the board to listen to the more than 400 residents who have signed our petition. Choose the plan that expands parking meaningfully and uses taxpayer dollars responsibly — don’t destroy a neighborhood for 40 parking spots.

Margaret Van Duch
Barrington

Related: “Zoning change defies village policy,” “Paving paradise?: Historic Barrington neighborhood opposes District 220’s plan to buy land for parking”

Read Full Post »

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »