Several accusations were made against District 150’s director of technology and library media services Mary Ward and many other employees in her department. Interim superintendent Norm Durflinger took them seriously and conducted an investigation. Today, he announced the results of that investigation:
Interim Superintendent Norm Durflinger said 35 people in all were interviewed about 14 separate accusations ranging from employees giving away district-owned computer equipment or selling it on the Internet to viewing pornography or smoking marijuana while at work.
“We investigated all the accusations and could find no basis for any of them,” Durflinger said Tuesday, noting attorneys trained in such questioning performed the internal inquiry, which acted on claims that were made by people in the community as well as employees….
“There is a view by some in the community there is no credibility when it comes so some people in Peoria School District 150,” he said. “In this case, we had to prove whether there was any truth to the accusations or not. . . . There was not.”
So all the employees have been exonerated. Durflinger is personally apologizing to each person who was suspected of wrongdoing. I don’t blame Durflinger for feeling bad about the situation, but I still think he did the right thing. He’s exactly right — District 150 has a serious credibility problem. Exculpating these employees I believe gives Peorians more confidence in the District and will help quell unfounded rumors (although it certainly won’t eliminate them).
Even though the employees were absolved of any guilt, the district is going to enact some new internal controls, including tracking equipment worth less than $500. That’s a positive outcome as well.
Since when do “hired” attorneys do internal investigations? I am so confused on so many levels with this “investigation”. With accusations of theft and misappropriation of technology and equipment going on, why didn’t the Peoria Police Department handle this? Having D150 do their own investigation is akin to handing John Wayne Gacy a shovel and sending him into his own basement ALONE to see if anyone was buried down there. Come on, I seriously doubt any conclussion that the administration at District 150 attempts to ram down the throats of the tax paying public. Hopefully, Chief Settingsgard will read this and have a little chuckle, then get down to business. SOON.
Can’t wait for all those who joined the lynch mob and engaged in the rumormongering to come forth and apologize.
Hmmm….”internal” investigation comes up with nothing.
Shocking.
District 150 employees exonerated? Since they investigated themselves, I should hope so……
Question: If employees really believed illegal activities were taking place, why didn’t they just go straight to the PPD?
Answer: Fear of retaliation.
What happened to all the confidence you all had in Durflinger? Remember about three weeks ago he was the answer to all that ailed the District and he was gonna clean house like no other? Now…
Okay… this is a little weird… Durflinger, an outsider, has no interest in protecting 150 employees. He wins both professionally and personally by exposing Peoria’s short comings. So, when he investigates and doesn’t find anything… why is that suspicious? What does he have to gain? Do you think someone from Peoria High Class of 44 put the arm on him? Do you think Ken Hinton called out from the grave (metaphorically speaking)”Let my people go!”????
Emerge:The fact that he even “looked into the matter” is more than Ken Hinton did during his entire tenure in the district. Over and over again, situations were brought to Hinton’s attention and he always chose to bury his head in the sand, refusing to believe anyone or maybe simply too lazy to take on the task of finding the truth. Although I do not agree with the outcome, quite frankly anyone that investigates themselves and comes up with “wrongdoing” is an idiot, don’t you think, it is at the very least a STEP in the right direction. I just hope the police read the Peoria Journal Star and the blogs.
Yes, he should be commended for, at least, looking into it, BUT why was it only done “in-house?” Wouldn’t appear to the public as a more credible investigation if it was handled by someone NOT associated with D150? The district has a lot of credibility to regain (it may never regain all of it) and this could have been a HUGE first step.
It sounds to me that someone outside the District investigated this matter. Internal investigations regarding such matters are often handled by legal counsel, not the police.
Durf Fan, my question is about the people who found Durflinger credible before this investigation, but who now seem to suggest that he is in collusion with the old Administration (Hinton).
I think Durf is telling the truth and the outcome is what it is. They took Mary Ward’s computer, wouldn’t you think that would have shown something, if there was something? Also, its 100% improvment from unethical Hinton. You’d report something to him and the next thing you knew you were gone.
Emerge, maybe not in collusion. Just very naive. They investigated a “technology” department. Would you think they know how to cover their tracks? I would like to know the qualifications of the “specially trained investigators”.
Do you know how easy it is to switch out a hard drive? I just want to know why iPods were passed out to RR employees, then mysteriously collected after word got out. Also, I am curious to know how often have these situations taken place in the past with no one mentioning it.
Observer: the specially trained investigator is the law firm hired by District 150……..you know, the people writing their check.
I certainly do not fault Durflinger–in fact, I give him credit for not only investigating but for making the investigation public. I suppose there is room for some questioning as to who did the investigating. A diligent district will pursue all allegations in order to maintain credibility.
Some good should come out of this situation. Durflinger has already stated that some things need to change. One of the major changes, I believe, should be the return of the Purchasing Department. Also, on WMBD radio Durflinger just stated that some phases of the investigation continue–but that Ward was cleared.
Below is part of the interview from WMBD radio this morning. I wonder if Mary Ward was sent home immediately because they knew how badly they screwed up the Mary Davis case by letting her stay for 5 months after the allegation came out about her. Also, if Mary Ward has been exonerated, then why do they have to change the inventory procedures? NOTE: 17 changes to the inventory procedure. OUTSIDE attorneys were not used. This law firm has been used by District 150 for more than 20 years. They have collected quite a bit of money in the past from District 150 and my guess is that they want to collect “future money” as well. Read between the lines folks.
Dist. 150 administrator back at work
Interim Superintendent Norm Durflinger says outside attorneys questioned 35 people and Ward was cleared of any wrongdoing. Durflinger the action against Ward was done as a precaution. “Mary is a director which is a higher level administrator,” Durflinger tells 1470 WMBD.
“We wanted to make sure having an outside interviewer would allow for no question of a cover-up or anything like that.”
Durflinger says he apologized to Ward in person. Durflinger says the outside attorneys conducting the probe recommended 17 changes in areas ranging from inventory control to reminders of the Illinois Ethics Act. Durflinger says 35 people were interviewed during the investigation.
Interesting. After reading about the interview on WMBD this morning it would appear reasonable to conclude that the Peoria Journal Star article was biased. NOooooooooo????!!!!!!
Wouldn’t Durflinger have looked EVEN BETTER of had busted some higher ups in 150? As it is, he comes off okay, but if he is covering up something, he risks looking CRIMINAL. So, if there was something, he had nothing to lose and everything gain by exposing it, and if there isn’t, he has everything to lose and nothing to gain by covering it up.
The simple way to analyze these political things is to just ask “Who benefits?” Cui Bono?
It smacks of either cover up or inept investigation. Just the same as when Scott Stewart the plumber was not fired because he had the goods on Dave Ryan. Fact. If 150 really wanted to clear the air why didn’t they involve the police and Kevin Lyons’ office?
Why? Because the police might find something, deebie47. Maybe we could start an academy of lies and cover ups. Probably a good market for those graduates these days.
Weren’t the police with Durflinger when the “raided” the dept? What does their report say? Was one filed? District can hardly “afford” another Lyons investigation. MD case going on nine months. When will Kevin give birth to some answers?
It took the police 4 months to investigate the Mary Davis situation. It’s been another 6+ months sitting in Lyons’ office. Still no charges.
A little birdie told me that (name your D150 employee) was doing (name your crime). I don’t have any evidence or proof (nor did they with Mary Ward), but, hey, let’s turn this over to the police and Lyons.
I have no timetoday to blog about this myself, but I’ll say this is stunning news.I never saw the outpouring of accusations right after this wasannounced. Of course, most of it WAS anonymous.
As I recall, the police were only called in the MD situation because Julie’s atty insisted that Hinton report the documented allegations.
Jon: to be clear, it has been just a couple of weeks shy of a year ago that the police report regarding MD was filed. Tick, Tock, Tick, Tock…
Yes – the police report was filed in late April – the police then investigated the allegations for four months, turning in their report to Lyons in early September, so Lyons has now had it for nearly 7 full months.
http://www.pjstar.com/news/x302142791/District-150-adviser-on-leave-after-misuse-of-funds-probe
Ummm …. did Durflinger use the term “exonerated”? No, he said the district “could find no basis for any of them.”
This is after a three WEEK (corrected) investigation into allegations of CRIMINAL behavior made by multiple parties. An investigation NOT done by anyone in law enforcement, but someone on the district payroll.
Meanwhile, the investigation into allegations made against a different administrator is approaching a full year.
Billy, not 3 months, 3 weeks!
Thanks. Correction made.
billy, who were the “multiple” parties? I heard it was one individual making allegations to one board member.
TO sum up:
“why didn’t they involve the police and Kevin Lyons’ office?”
1) “Because the police might find something”
2) “It took the police 4 months to investigate the Mary Davis situation. It’s been another 6+ months sitting in Lyons’ office. Still no charges.”
Conclusion… The police might something, sometime, somehow… but no matter if they do or not, nothing will happen. In fact, apparently, unless you are involved in some sexual deviance or dalliance with a student nothing will happen to anyone.
That doesn’t sum up my point very well, Charlie (and you know that). These were allegations with no known proof. You don’t run to the police every time someone makes an allegation – they’ve got better things to do. (and by all means, if any of those multiple people making the accusations has any proof, please go directly to the police yourselves) If anything, the district may have been overzealous in its investigation of this matter.
Jon, are you speculating or are you commenting from some knowledge of the situation? I think one problem may (exphasis on may) be the one dealing with purchases and/or items with a value under $500. A while back–before the Purchasing Department was abolished–all purchases had to go through the central purchasing department. Then this questionable under $500 rule went into effect. Therefore–my opinion only–some of the items in question may have fallem through the under $500 crack since the district keeps no record of such items. I’m not on sure ground here–thought someone else might have better information.
I agree with Technosavy. It is true that the hard drives could have been easily replaced in both desktops and laptops and a person would not find evidence. Wouldn’t you think that the technology department could do that? In response to Frustrated, we are talking about Dennis Triggs, you might as well say he is legal counsel, jury, and judge for District #150. One more thing: Obviously there is something wrong, when the superintendent says now we are going to change the way we do inventory. Just like in the Mary Davis case: “Everyone turn in your charge cards”. Think about it.
Honestman – Mr. Triggs has been a respected attorney in the community for a number of years. I do not believe he would perform anything but an unbiased assessment of his interview findings. Employers don’t want to keep dishonest and/or ineffective employees on their payroll. What would be the motivation for Durflinger to do so?
It could be that employees of the District did something that was unethical and/or illegal but Mr. Triggs determined through his investigation that the District did not have sufficient evidence to dismiss the employees involved, or it could be allegations are untrue. I do not think it is clear from the comments reported in the PJS.
And because the investigation found deficiencies in inventory controls at the District does not equate to employee dishonesty. It might mean employee incompetence, but typically an organization does not terminate someone on the spot in that case, especially if Ms. Ward has had otherwise satisfactory evaluations prior to this incident.
Frustrated’s possible scenarios make sense to me. Channel 25 at 10 stated that Ward was cleared but that doesn’t mean the investigation is over. 150 handled this well in that they didn’t leave an employee (Ward) hanging for any longer than necessary. It makes me wonder about the Davis case–wouldn’t (or couldn’t) district officials have done the same if there were no credible evidence against her?
Sharon – My GUESS is that there is not clear and compelling evidence that Mary Davis did anything wrong. I am not saying she did not do something wrong, just that the recordkeeping , etc. is likely confusing at best, and that there was no clear policy and procedure on the books as to the management of the petty cash fund, use of a personal credit card to purchase items for school use, etc.
How old is Mary Davis? Old enough to take early retirement if the District leaves her on the payroll a bit longer? It would seem the matter would be decided sooner than later, as Supt. Lathan stated in her press conference that she would like to have her team in place by June.
Frustrated, I thought that Durflinger stated that Davis would not be holding her old position–so it has already been decided that she won’t be part of Lathan’s team. I am not at all familiar with how the legal system works. However, by now, if there is not enough evidence to warrant charges against Davis, I would think that there would be a definitive statement by Lyons stating there is not enough evidence. Are you saying that you believe the long delay means there is not enough evidence? Could there be other reasons–other investigations that have taken priority, etc. Do employees have to have a policy to know that personal expenses can’t be charged on a company charge card? Isn’t that just assumed?
I didn’t realize Durflinger made that statement. I think a finding by the State’s Attorney that Davis did something criminally wrong and that he is pressing charges is helpful but not necessary to terminate her. If the District had clear evidence that her conduct violated policy or procedure than they could take action independent of Lyons.
Employees are terminated for offenses such as falsifying expense books or misuse of company property or even theft (on a small scale) without involving outside authorities. But for this to happen, the organization must have checks and balances in place to catch such behavior. My guess is that the District did not, if such conduct even took place.
I do not know the District’s policy, but I do not think it is questionable practice for an employee to use a personal credit card to pay for a business expense and then submit the proper receipts to the company for reimbursement. I think this happens frequently.
Question to which I don’t have an answer: When a teacher becomes an administrator does he/she lose tenure. I assume they do lose union protection but do they lose tenure. In other words, can they be fired without cause even if they had tenure as a teacher? I believe you’re right about criminal charges not resulting in loss of a job with the district–if the criminal charges weren’t work related. However, in Davis’ case–IF found guilty, wouldn’t the crime be against District 150?
Frustrated, this statement was from the March 19 PJS: Mary Davis, the district’s former academic officer who has been on paid administrative leave since September, also could be teaching again.
Who knew: I hear the answer is five.
Billy–I lost track–what was the question for which the answer is five?
Anyone interested in District 150 issues is invited to Godfather’s at 6 p.m. on Sunday.
Are there issues? ; )
One issue that concerns me is that District 150 still sends $800,000 a year to Edison and $200,000+ to Johns Hopkins but can’t afford to offer summer school to high school students this summer. Also, I am concerned that taxpayers will, consequently, (and have been in the past) responsible for paying for young people to take courses a second and sometimes even a third time. Before the last decade, District 150 conducted an almost entirely self-funded summer school by requiring students to pay $150 a course instead of the reduced fee of $30 charged more recently. Now, I believe, the plan is to put a few students (probably seniors and maybe some juniors) in front of a computer for the summer to make up courses that they will need in order to fulfill graduation requirements by this summer or next year.
I am not an accountant, but doesn’t the Edison money come from a different pot? Maybe Jon can shed some light on this.
Also, did you see where Owens and most upper management took pay cuts this last year? I didn’t read where Hinton took one….
Edison has always been funded from the EDUCATION FUND. Furthermore Edison has always been a drain benefiting a select few at the expense of others. Counseling out under achievers has always been a way to weed out the dummies!
You are absolutely correct without malice. Right before ISAT, many students are counseled out of the Edison School so their “low” scores won’t make the school look bad. I have seen it since the very first year Edison was in D150. Unfortunately, Edison has a hard time enticing higher achievers, save Northmoor. Edison needs to go. We will dump money on Manual for the next 3-4 years and we will see no changes. No “program” is going to make kids want to come to school to learn, it’s the parents, teachers, and school itself that make kids want to be there. Gee, I’m not even a highly paid consultant and I know that much……
http://www.pjstar.com/news/x905416469/District-150-ready-to-use-new-public-comment-policy