Davis gets to keep her salary unless she’s convicted…and maybe even then

Since Mary Davis was fired from District 150, I’ve been wondering if the taxpayers would be getting their money back from all those months she was on paid administrative leave. Today I got the answer from the district’s spokesperson Stacey Shangraw: Only if she’s convicted:

Mary [Davis] will be required to pay back the salary she received while she was on administrative leave if she is convicted of a crime. The pay back requirement does not come into play when a person is indicted or charged. Her trial for the criminal charges has been set to begin August 16.

So we will not know if she is required to pay back the salary she received while on leave until the criminal proceedings are finished. It is outlined in the Illinois State Statute, the state officials and employees ethics act, under 5 ILCS 430/5-60 that she will be required to pay the salary back, however it is not part of the criminal code.

If convicted, we will ask the State’s Attorney to include a request to include payments as part of her sentencing, but the Judge is not required to include that in the sentence or order. If the Judge does not include this payment requirement in the criminal sentencing order then the district would have to seek payment by first demanding it pursuant to the statute.

Here’s what 5 ILCS 430/5-60(b) says:

As a matter of law and without the necessity of the adoption of an ordinance or resolution under Section 70?5, if any officer or government employee of a governmental entity is placed on administrative leave, either voluntarily or involuntarily, pending the outcome of a criminal investigation or prosecution and that officer or government employee is removed from office or employment due to his or her resultant criminal conviction, then the officer or government employee is indebted to the governmental entity for all compensation and the value of all benefits received during the administrative leave and must forthwith pay the full amount to the governmental entity.

Sounds complicated. It also sounds like District 150 won’t be getting that money back. Read the wording of that statute again, especially the part that says, “and that officer or government employee is removed from office or employment due to his or her resultant criminal conviction, then the officer or government employee is indebted….” They fired her before she was convicted of anything, not because of a criminal conviction. So, I’ll bet the statute is moot and the district doesn’t get that money back, unless they can get it included as part of her sentencing.

Any lawyers out there, feel free to correct me if I’m reading the statute incorrectly. I’d really like to be wrong about this.

171 thoughts on “Davis gets to keep her salary unless she’s convicted…and maybe even then”

  1. still asking:

    Is PHS gonna be ready for the students (passing OSHA inspection) by September? Or will the students being attending classes in the building formerly known as Woodruff Hiigh School?

  2. Lynn-

    Looks like you have a serious credibility issue. Either back up your accusations or stop throwing them out there. It appears Laura P. had done her homework on this one. How do you explain the discrepancy Lynn?

  3. Laura Petelle…..

    I congratulate you on attempting to find some answers but some discriminatory errors were made in the hiring process.

    Can you tell me why SEVERAL white applicants, each with 15 plus years of law enforcement experience weren’t even contacted for an interview BUT a minority with two previous firings from previous employers and poor work evaluations from D150 was interviewed? Why was another minority candidate with the least experience, a known history of spending more time with his mistress at work than working and a semi-forced resignation from a city police department interviewed?

    Now before the bigot crowd leaps forward for an attack….I’M NOT SAYING THAT THOSE TWO SHOULDN’T HAVE BEEN INTERVIEWED but why would you interview those two with some previous issues and NOT interview some white applicants with NO previous issues? Ones with good clean work records, plenty of experience, education and training.

    You can preach that this process was on the up and up but I know that it wasn’t so don’t try and sell me a line that it was.

    A local attorney seems to think the process wasn’t too equal opportunity so I guess that is how it will be worked out.

  4. Laura Petelle….One other thing…What did you actually expect the superintendent to tell you?

    One of two things had occurred here….Either YOU are lying or you were lied to about the hiring process!!!!!!!!!

  5. Lynn–
    One thing you should know is that Laura has ALWAYS been visible, transparent, and approachable to all of us. She explains most of her votes. She is very diligent in getting answers, not just accepting a line.

    Be careful before you start accusing her of not doing her job.

  6. I also think it is low to even suggest it is possible that Laura lied about this. She does not have to post on this blog but does so to keep the public informed.

  7. Unfounded accusations are a dime a dozen around here. People need to think before they post.

  8. After awhile, folks get tired of the ‘she said-she said’ syndrome.

    Lynn says she has proof of this supposed wrongful interview/hiring issue, then maybe she needs to bring that proof to the BOE. That includes naming the folks she is getting from someone else, and that’s if they are telling the truth.

    Laura Pettelle, being an actual BOE member, gets info 2nd hand too,
    so if she gets false info from a Dist. 150 staff person, there are
    consequences to that.

  9. My personal opinion is that Ms Petelle has been lied to about the hiring process. PLEASE NOTE THAT I DID SAY MY OPINION.

    Won’t I just be the biggest fool when my prediction about who will be hired doesn’t come true! Yeah like that is going to happen (BIG SMILE). No one seems to dispute my answer to the equation, only my process at arriving at the answer.

  10. Lynn Smith appears to have another agenda altogether. Everything she complains about is based around race.

    She obviously detests the Superintendent, but why, she barely knows Lathan.

    If Lynn Smith works for the District she needs to resign, she obviously hates her job and her boss.

  11. Laura, I did ask for my above comment to be deleted. I forgot to look at the quotation marks–shame on me; an English teacher should notice quotation marks. Anyway I was upset–just seeing my name attached to Lynn’s accusations about this hiring process. Thanks, Laura, for speaking for yourself. I honestly had meant to report on this blog what you had e-mailed me earlier–but I am glad you spoke for yourself here. When Laura, as a school board member, is willing to attach her name to what she heard first hand from Dr. Lathan, we certainly can appreciate her candor.

  12. @ Charlie….I would love to know the answer to that same question. I have been asking for months to just simply put a plan in place in the event PHS is not ready to accomodate the children on 8/31. Unless I have missed something, there is no plan (B) in place. It is absolutely frightening.

  13. “@ Charlie….I would love to know the answer to that same question.”

    I have asked several people and in EVERY CASE I only get a ‘knowing smile’ and no answer… SO I’ll ask it again.

    IS Peoria Central High School going to be ready September 1st, and if not, are their plans to send the students to the building formerly known as Woodruff High School?

    Have they scheduled an inspection by OSHA yet? Are they exposing or removing any asbestos from the PHS building?

  14. Blake Long from WMBD has the 6/14 board meeting now uploaded in its entirety here:

    http://centralillinoisproud.com/district-150

    For future reference, you can go to the site, click on the “News” tab and scroll down to the D150 menu.

    In this tape, catch the interesting public comments, particularly from Bobby Darling, and also notable line of questioning from Board member Martha Ross to the Technology Department about invoicing. Way to look out for the taxpayer Martha! I love when she gets feisty!

    The joint meeting between the City Council and Board of Ed meeting last week has also been uploaded in its entirety.

    Please consider dropping an e-mail to Blake Long and the technology staff at WMBD-TV and thank them for their cooperation in bringing un-edited video recordings of the board meetings to the tax-paying public.

  15. “@ Charlie….I would love to know the answer to that same question.”

    I have asked several people and in EVERY CASE I only get a ‘knowing smile’ and no answer… SO I’ll ask it again.

    IS Peoria Central High School going to be ready September 1st, and if not, are their plans to send the students to the building formerly known as Woodruff High School?

    Have they scheduled an inspection by OSHA yet? Are they exposing or removing any asbestos from the PHS building?

  16. Lynn,

    Be careful about what you say about people’s past. I am not sure what the laws are in protection of speech in blogs but….
    I don’t know of who you are referring in these security issues but it seems as if you either have breeched their privacy by looking into their records, acted unprofessionally in your job role by revealing in what you were privy or making up completely false accusations. It would be a shame if one of these people lost out on a job because the super reads these blogs and actually believes this stuff.
    I do, however, respect that you put your real name on here. You must be retired or “safe” as they say.

  17. Former 150, what makes you think “Lynn Smith” is her/his real name? Of course, many who read this blog have been checking to see if anyone knows of a person of that name working in the district. Personally, I don’t believe anyone would say the things that “Lynn Smith” says if he/she were using his/her own name.

  18. To Former150…..I am well versed on what is and isn’t privacy issues. I’ve not mentioned anybodies name and anything that I have written about is public knowledge. To the contrary I am probably the only one that hasn’t shared someones private records. As you can Sharon has the hounds trying to track me down….So much for free speech and privacy!!

    If you go back and read the recent posts, I didn’t revisit this topic for as far as I am concerned it is over and done with. This topic was only revisited because Sharon decided to call me a liar and a bigot. It is not what I have said that is bothering Sharon, it is because she doesn’t know nor will she ever know who I am that is bothering her.

    Former150….You need not worry because anything mentioned about some of the applicants on this blog will only help them not hurt them. What amazes me is that everyone, who cares, sees all of the stupid mistakes that District 150 makes yet if someone “speaks against their stupid acts” that person is the one that is attacked. A perfect example is the McArdle incident…..Who got the ax the crook or the whistleblower?

    To Sharon and all of the loyal District 150 supporters please hear this……I am finished discussing this topic. What I’ve said about this hiring process is the TRUTH and no matter how hard the “tories” try they will not convince us that we didn’t see and hear what we saw and heard.

    So Sharon, you and the loyalists…Type or print whatever insults you feel like typing in response to this message for I simply don’t care what you have to say. When District 150 fulfills the prediction that we have made you will then have to say to yourself….They weren’t lying after all.

    GOOD NIGHT, Mrs. Calabash–wherever you are! :)*

  19. Lynn, you have single handedly changed my reputation. My critics have been complaining for months that I say only bad things about District 150. Now you see me as its staunch supporter. Also, Lynn, I haven’t been trying to find out who you are–others have commented to me about your identity (not because I requested the info). I don’t need to know your identity. However, I do believe you are posing as a person with a “real” name of Lynn Smith–I don’t believe that is your name. It’s clever; others, who want to be anonymous don’t try to fool us into believing they are providing a real identity.

  20. With regard to District 150 – does anyone know why the minutes for May 24 have not yet been posted. The minutes are usually posted the day after the minutes are approved–almost a week and they aren’t posted yet.

  21. Charlie, nobody here can predict the future. Will Central be ready–only time will tell.

    Yes, asbestos is being removed where required.

  22. Nobody can predict the future… except when it comes to taxpayer investments in museums and private hotels.. right?

    Why is it that people like you seem to apply whatever standard to argument sounds the best in any particular discussion and then can not realize that what is good for the goose is good for the gander…
    Central has to be renovated, but a NEW hotel has to be built and we can close three others… while paying an upstanding strip joint owner millions to accomplish this coup. 0h, by the way, WHO IS buying Al’s property from him?

    This is a good investment because we have to move forward and forget about the past, while this is a good investment because we need to embrace our history and protect our traditions…

  23. Nobody can predict the future on any project or investment. I haven’t heard anybody from the city say there is no risk in hotels or museums–or that they can predict the future. There is always risk in the future.

    The developer–Gary Mathews–is buying the Big Al’s property.

    As for my “standard of argument”, well, here it is:

    –Base my argument on facts, not on wild eyed unsubstantiated accusations, rumors, guesses and emotional proclamations

    –Recognize that there are good points on both sides of the argument and drawbacks on both sides. Rarely is any complicated issue black or white. Nuance is important.

    –Argue the merits of the subject–do not make personal attacks on others taking part in the debate. Respect those that are part of the discussion. Name calling actually shows that your argument isn’t a good one and you are resorting to cheap shots rather than logic and facts. Name calling is really an admission that you have lost the debate.

    –When you stop shouting and really listen—I mean listen with an open mind—you can really learn quite a bit.

  24. “The developer–Gary Mathews–is buying the Big Al’s property.”

    Is there a transfer of wealth from the taxpayers to Big Al through Matthews? Is that what the 9 million was for?

    Did we just buy big Al’s block and give it to Matthews?

  25. I certainly have no problem with Shipp retiring. There is no way the district could have pulled off firing her after that many years of service. The problem, of course, is that previous administrations allowed her to get away with the behaviors that finally resulted in this action–and ignored all the complaints.

  26. Had Shipp been held as accountable as she “enslaved” her staff to be then she would have been fired years ago…..infact she would NEVER have been promoted to an administrative position….talk to some of her former colleagues…

  27. Charlie — The $34-37 million grant that the city gave to Matthews will be used, in part, to acquire the property he needs from Al Zuccarini. $9 million is Matthews’ “developer’s fee,” so that goes in his pocket.

  28. bert, I know that and agree–just saying that the right steps weren’t taken early on, so the board had little choice at this point. Certainly, District 150 can’t afford another lawsuit.

  29. Charlie asked why that statement was made BECAUSE he was questioned about following the thread. If the thread is about D150, then a statement about Mathews is ill-placed.

    An apology to Charlie is in order.

  30. Oh… I get it, now CJ. Thanks. $9 million is the “signing bonus” Matthews gets along with the $35 million to subcontract the project…

    Sweet deal… Everyone wins in this project… Cat, The Pere, Zuccarini, Matthews, temp construction jobs… everyone, that is, except the hotels already operating downtown, and the rest of the citizens and taxpayers.

    Thanks for the clarification.

  31. You can call it retirement but when the only alternative is termination….I can see why she picked “door #1”.

  32. The court gave Mary Davis an additional 7-8 eight weeks; throw in a couple of weeks for holidays and that is a very small amount of time in the criminal justice system. No worries, she can run but not hide. Eventually, she will have to “pay the piper”. Let’s see if she can walk away from 16 felony counts!

  33. The civil lawsuit(whistleblower) by McArdle is alive and well. The suit is against the boe, hinton, davis, and broderick.

  34. Big Bird: if you are so sure about that, then HOW COME the lawsuit hasn’t been dismissed?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.