I attended the Barrington 220 Board of Education meeting (Tuesday), arriving shortly after six o’clock. I expected what most engaged residents expect: the chance to be heard. Instead, I watched a familiar story unfold, one that extends far beyond the night’s agenda item and deep into the culture that now defines our district.
Residents spoke passionately about their neighborhoods, some living there for three decades or more, describing the consequences the proposed Hager Ave. parking expansion would bring to safety, congestion, character, and precedent. They offered facts, first-hand observations, alternative solutions, and historical context.
And yet, rather than engaging with the substance, district leadership defaulted to performance: head-nods, polished reassurances, carefully crafted anecdotes including the now-infamous story of a parent who bought a second home in 1999 to secure a parking spot for their child. It was more than tone-deaf; it was revealing.
As community members spoke from lived experience, Superintendent Winkelman responded with scripted confidence, as if the concerns in front of him were theoretical or uninformed. It was an extraordinary display of disconnect, one that didn’t seem to register, even as residents grew visibly upset at being spoken at instead of spoken with.
But here’s the truth:
The parking lot is not the real issue.
The levy is not the real issue.
The real issue is leadership culture.
And this culture is showing itself everywhere.
A Pattern of Selective Listening and Selective Accountability
This past year alone, I and many other residents have tried to raise concerns- not political, not personal, but about professionalism, ethics, safety, and financial responsibility.
✔ When a teacher made dismissive comments about parents in front of students
The administration reframed it as a “Back-to-School Night misunderstanding,” defended the teacher, and never addressed the core issue:
students heard an adult ridicule parent concerns.
No acknowledgment. No ownership.
✔ When a Board member launched a partisan legislative campaign while still serving on the Board
Policies 2:80-E and 2:105 were bent to their narrowest possible interpretation.
The district even used taxpayer-funded legal counsel to review campaign-related conflicts — despite policies prohibiting such use of public resources.
Again, no accountability. Only justification.
✔ When a police incident caused confusion and fear before school
Parents were left in the dark. Staff did not know whether classes were even proceeding.
My written request for communication improvements and safety prioritization received no response at all.
Across situations big and small, the message has been the same:
the district hears what’s convenient and ignores what isn’t.
Meanwhile, the Financial Picture Raises Even More Concerns
A comprehensive review of FOIA-obtained documents — leases, contracts, amendments, utility agreements, activity fund reports — shows systemic problems in stewardship:
✔ Millions in lease-financing at 5–8% interest
Even while the district held over $100 million in reserves.
Apple leases alone contain more than $340,000 in hidden interest.
Canon, HP, Toshiba, and bus leases add far more.
✔ Architectural & engineering spending exceeding contract caps by over $2 million
Build 220 fees now exceed 9% of construction value despite a contractual limit of 7.4%.
Much of the excess came from avoidable redesigns, duplicated work, and over-scoped civil engineering packages.
✔ Electricity & natural-gas procurement without competitive bidding
Dynegy and Symmetry contracts cost $500k–$900k more than market alternatives.
No evidence of competitive evaluation exists.
✔ Student Activity Fund red flags
Thirty months of reconciliations show:
- identical manual adjustments,
- unusually large journal entries (up to $72,800),
- volatile disbursements,
- zero variances for 30 straight months — mathematically improbable without plug entries.
These are not isolated incidents.
This is a systemic pattern of weak controls and limited oversight.
Yet the district continues asking the community for more money.
When residents raise safety issues — silence.
When residents raise ethics issues — deflection.
When residents raise spending issues — no corrective action or acknowledgment.
When residents raise neighborhood concerns — they are told stories from 1999.
But when the district wants more taxes?
Suddenly conversation becomes urgent.
This dynamic speaks for itself.
A Community Willing to Invest — But Only in Leadership That Invests in Us
Barrington residents value education.
We value our schools.
We value our teachers.
But investment requires trust — and trust must be earned through humility, responsiveness, transparency, and accountability.
Right now, the district is asking for more money while:
- avoiding difficult conversations,
- dismissing legitimate community concerns,
- overlooking internal issues,
- and falling short of its own values.
Barrington 220 speaks often about transparency, collaboration, and respect.
It’s time for those principles to move from slogans into practice.
The Community Showed Up. Now It’s the District’s Turn.
The public comment at the recent meeting showed a community that is informed, engaged, and deeply invested in the future of its schools.
That level of passion deserves more than nods, reassurances, and pre-scripted narrative management.
It deserves reciprocal honesty.
It deserves accountability.
It deserves leadership that listens.
Before asking for another tax levy, Barrington 220 must commit to:
- full financial transparency,
- competitive and responsible procurement,
- ethical consistency,
- genuine respect for parent and student voices,
- and authentic partnership.
A levy may or may not be necessary.
But trust is not optional — and right now, trust is what needs rebuilding most.
Sam Mehic
South Barrington
Related: “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 »
