As promised, Lindbergh Middle School Principal Julie McArdle filed suit against District 150 (
click here to read it) after being fired Monday — and it covers a lot more than just misappropriation of funds. The suit is filed against District 150, Superintendent Ken Hinton, Human Resources Director Tom Broderick, and Academic Officer Mary Davis.
Six incidents are alleged:
- “Misappropriation of School Funds for Teacher’s Aide to Pay an Unpaid Student Teacher and Refusal to Spend Funds Authorized for Teacher’s Aid”
The story here is that teacher’s aides get paid, but student teachers do not. In this case, there was a woman who had worked as a teacher’s aide at Lindbergh who was also taking classes at Eureka College to become a teacher. When it came time to do her student teaching, she wanted to do so at Lindbergh. Mary Davis allegedly instructed McArdle to continue paying her as if she were still a teacher’s aide, even though she was actually student teaching. There were two problems with this: (1) it was an unauthorized expenditure of funds on District 150’s part, and (2) it violated the student teacher’s contract with Eureka College. - Falsification of Student Addresses to Deny Poorer Students Their Right to Opt Into Lindbergh Middle School Under the No Child Left Behind Act
- Weekly Attendance at Lindbergh School by Private Counselor for Fees Paid by the Parents of the Students Contrary to District 150’s Obligation to Provide a Free Education
Mary Davis was allowing a private counselor to provide services for a fee. Parents of students were expected to pay the counselor directly. - Report to Superintendent and Peoria Police of Theft of District 150 Funds and Authority
The claim is that Mary Davis got a credit card in the name of Lindbergh Middle School without the knowledge of or approval from the district. Purchases and cash advances were made, and a $4,000+ payment was made on the card from the student activity fund for “miscellaneous items.” The itemized activity fund report for those “miscellaneous items” is missing. - McArdle’s Report of Mary Davis’ Misconduct and Theft of District Funds to Superintendent Hinton and Board Vice President Deb [Wolfmeyer]
It was reported via e-mail and had specific names and amounts listed. Nevertheless, when Hinton reported the apparent theft to the police, he said the person responsible was “unknown” and that it was for less than $300. - Policy Making Agents of District 150
This section says that Davis, Hinton, Broderick, and the D150 Board interfered with McArdle’s employment, resulting in her wrongful termination.
Three children who did not live within Lindbergh School’s boundaries were allowed to attend without getting the proper boundary waivers. Instead, McArdle was instructed by Davis to list a false address for these students. “The result of the falsification of the three out of boundary students addresses in the District 150 records denied three poorer children the right to opt out of their school to attend the non-failing Lindbergh Middle School – which had the wealthiest residence and was the best Middle school in District 150 under the No Child Left Behind Act.”
The suit alleges violation of McArdle’s rights to free speech, violation of the Illinois Whistleblower Act, and breach of contract. She’s asking for $550,000 in damages, plus attorney’s fees, and reinstatement to her job.
UPDATE: Here are the exhibits that go with the complaint that was filed:
Exhibits to Complaint court document
Exhibit 1
Exhibit 2
Exhibit 3
Exhibit 4
DO NOT SETTLE THIS CASE!!!!! I don’t care if they offer you a bazillion dollars… I will match any offer they make… (I can’t actually pay it, but neither can the District, they are broke too.)
I especially love number 16
“Davis stated she did not, but you want these kids in your school so you do not have to
take No Child Left Behind choice students.”
So… don’t want any students who NEED educational help… Davis just wants the “good” kids.
Gosh, I wish I were like her…
CJ – You are missing an important point that is not listed in the complaint. According to McCardles attorney Richard Steagall, Debbie Wolfmeyer, acting president of the Board of Education, Superintendant Ken Hinton, and their legal council, David Walvoord were in FULL POSESSION of these allegations and supporting documents BEFORE the Board of Education voted on McCardles dismissal.
From what I understand through “heresay”, they were advised that the whistle blowing was a separate issue from her job performance. Is that not ludicrous? Does anyone in D150 Admin have even the slightest understanding of normal human behavior? There seems to be a complete disconnect between anyone associated with D150 and common sense. Has the water on Wisconsin Avenue been tested?
Come on Jim… where is your big talk about the District? We all saw the paper this morning:
150 never issued a credit card
An “independent” review showed no misconduct
The Discover card was a personal card… NOT paid out of student activity funds
The Counselor running her own business out of the school was totally appropriate
The Three out of boundary children so that Lindbergh didn’t have to get those NCLB poor stupid kids is a good thing, right? Gotta keep the one school that is surpassing AYP in good order!
What else… oh yeah… after your thorough investigation of this issue (I suppose you apply the same concern for truth and detail in your investment business) you decided to ruin a woman’s career… BEEEE A U TIFUL!!!!
Like cutting a guy from the Basketball team because you don’t like his parents or his older brother… right?
If in fact the credit card was a personal discover card and the monies were not paid out of the student activity fund, as alleged, this attorney should be reprimanded by the court. I have no horse running in tis race.
…and if the horse in the third race is really donkey than the rice noodles are over cooked.
Wacko: I know that there are many lines to read between in this case and that truth is still elusive. I appreciate all the speculation on both sides because this isn’t a case that affects one or two people. This situation reveals a saga that could be taking place at any or all District 150 schools because there are many small funds–that add up to a significant amount of money–that are possibly not subject to very much oversight. Case in point would be all the profit from soda and vending machines. I believe Elaine Hopkins, while at the PJS, tried, to little avail, to uncover that “mystery.” The treatment and evaluation of employees in 150 is also an issue that can be debated.
At this point–although I personally believe that Julie McArdle has been railroaded out of 150–whether or not she was fired as a whistleblower is up to the court system now, so we no longer have to speculate about that. However, even if she loses the case, District 150 does not come out the winner because clearly there are several practices revealed here that show the district isn’t keeping track of some of the little molehills that can become mountains.
As for this case–big IF–if I’m reading it correctly, the primary financial question boils down to what was purchased with the $4,000 check from the Lindbergh Activity Fund. There seems to be a good possibility that the Discover card was Davis’ personal card. If so, she was free to charge anything on it. However, it appears that she paid for $4,000 of those charges with Lindbergh money. If District 150 really wants to know the truth, it shouldn’t be difficult to find out if the $4000’s worth of purchases benefitted Lindbergh. Then there are other questions to answer. What is the revenue source of the activity fund? What is the purpose of this fund? Were Davis’ purchases in keeping with the purpose of the fund? District 150 and quite probably the Lindbergh PTO should want answers to these questions.
Just one question from me: Is it at all possible for District 150 to not be the headline for one single day?
It just gets old.
Are the exhibits to the complaint available too?
There’s another issue with #1. above. The district’s past practice is when an employee is required to student teach to fulfill degree completion requirements, the employee must request, in writing, a one-semester unpaid leave of absence. The whole discussion is silent on this point. Could one infer that she was advised not to request the leave? If so, by whom? Or did she request, and was granted, the unpaid leave by the Board of Education? If so, then Davis could very likely have more problems with this.
There is a very simple way to determine ownership of this credit card. Have someone contact Discover and obtain the tax payer identification number associated with it. By law there has to either Davis’s social security number or District 150’s FEIN (Federal Employer Identification Number).
she is asking for 100K in punitives from each of the three individual defendants, or a total of $550K. Very modest if you ask me. I think a jury might give her more if it got the chance. Of course Judges can (and often do) reduce the jury’s award. Wouldn’t want to be too hard on these fine “public servants” [OK, thought it was time for a morning laugh].
Vinron: I’m working on getting copies of the exhibits. I’ll post them as soon as I get them. They haven’t been file-stamped by the court yet… whatever that means.
CJ – all that means is that the Clerk’s office has stamped them as received and the date.
Most public school districts in our country have a $100,000 maximum payout for lawsuits. This maximum amount is for the death of a student or teacher. It is hidious and needs to be ammended because of the decline of morals and corruption in school administration policies. No wonder the administration have so much power and control to even break the law if they decide. Disgusting.
MsCommonSense – the district had to pay settlements in excess of $100K each to Mary Davis, Davidson, Knapp, and the unions among others. Granted, some of these were ULP’s rather than lawsuits. This will probably end up being handled by the District’s insurance provider – many employer insurance policies include coverage for employee theft and dishonesty.
Now that Davis has been named in a lawsuit with accusations of
mishandling funds, why hasn’t she been suspended (with or without pay)
instead of being left in a position where she can presumably still
access funds? Why isn’t the fund mishandling being taken seriously? Why is the D150 legal team not advising them of the risks involved of keeping Davis in the workplace. Or are they and the advice is being ignored?
Red Flag, for whatever reason, the district must believe the allegations against Mary Davis are false, even though on the outside it appears to us, the general public that they are true. They must believe they have documented proof that these allegations will not play in Peoria. Otherwise, I have no answer for that question.
Red Flag and MAWB: it is the district’s past practice that anytime accusations of wrongdoing are levelled against an employee, that employee is placed on paid administrative leave pending the outcome of the investigation. The way Hinton is handling one of his inner circle during this time is baffling. If you were the Superintendent, wouldn’t you want to handle this without giving the appearance of favortism?
What did Davis sue for the District for?
She sued because, after receiving a complaint about her coaching while at RHS, the district removed her from her coaching duties. She sued, won, and received a generous settlement.
PrairieCelt: Do you have proof on these payments? As far as Unions go in the school district, they are useless! If you know any employment lawyers who have sued the school districts, ask them about the maximum compension limits.
Personally, I would like the laws and rules in thse school districts to change to make ammendments. Especially, when school district administration has too much power and over the years has been corrupt. Leaders are not always trustworthy or honest.
The lawsuits are a matter of public record as are the suits filed with the Illinois Education Labor Relations Board.
All of these cases received extensive coverage in the Peoria Journal Star. If you ask Terry Knapp, he’ll probably tell you the amount of his settlement.
PrairieCelt, I totally agree that Mary Davis should be on leave. I was only thinking of explanations as to why she is not, which frankly, baffles me. They may not want to put her on leave because she has sued them before. I also agree she is part of the “inner circle” now and Hinton is protecting her.
It is also my understanding that another principal, or asst. principal, whose name escapes me now, was accused of mishandling money and was not put on leave. Has this started a whole new precedent?
And the clog continues to grind….
MsCommonSense: I’m a little confused about your statement above, “Most public school districts in our country have a $100,000 maximum payout for lawsuits. This maximum amount is for the death of a student or teacher. ” That sounds like the statutory limit for Worker’s Compensation injury/wrongful death award not a damages award for a civil suit or unfair labor practice claim.
MsCommonsense: Recently I was looking for other information. I just typed in Harry Whitaker and Google took me right to the whole transcript of Terry Knapp’s suit. Terry’s generoisty to so many since then (and probably before) proves that he came out quite well. As I recall, he surprised a Woodruff custodian with a new car right after he won his settlement. I don’t recall the actual figure of his settlement even though I’ve heard it often enough. If I’m not mistaken, Terry was also president of the union, when Mary Davis won her case. When Terry was president of the union, the union certainly was not useless. Sometimes administrators become arrogant with power and make mistakes that make them vulnerable to lawsuits because they see no reason to be careful.
Two Academic Excellence:
-LINDBERGH MIDDLE SCHOOL – ACADEMIC EXCELLENCE
-WASHINGTON GIFTED SCHOOL – ACADEMIC EXCELLENCE
The District website is up… look who is excellent! The ONLY two schools… and the only general admission school to achieve this excellent rating is… The terrible principal’s school… Lindbergh.
Ha ha ha ha ha… So, either Principals are irrelevant or McArdle isn’t so bad.
Or, maybe the Principal at Washington ought to be looking over their shoulder…
Just talked to Terry Knapp (enjoying a vacation in Florida)–so now I’ll correct my errors. He wasn’t union president yet when Davis won her suit and he didn’t give a car to a custodian (an “urban” legend that I’ve believed for a long time). The original impetus for his lawsuit was that District 150 refused to settle his grievance for a $34.00 bill he turned in for mileage that he had incurred as a coach. It turned into a million dollar loss for District 150. Terry’s lawyers received a considerable chunk, but Terry received $256,000 plus interest.
Sharon, thank you for the back up!
The big issue in this case now is whether it will be investigated properly, so as to find out and prosecute all the crimes, if any, so they will not be covered up. The lllinois state police should be doing the investigation, as Peoria police have too many ties to Dist. 150. Will this happen? Don’t hold your breath.
And Sharon is right — I looked into the vending machine money, found there was no central contract as there is at other school districts, contracts which net them millions.
If Dist 150 needs money, it could do that. But I learned that the vending machine contracts function as a slush fund for the various school principals. So far as I know they are not even audited.
A sane school board and administration would require a central vending contract for all schools, ban nepotism in hiring, stop closing solid, well situated schools and building new ones, and bid for legal and audit services. (The same old firms have held these contracts for years, and know where the bodies are buried! And they don’t dare offend the school officials or stand up to any abuses they encounter. )
It’s easier to pass another tax increase then do the real work required to improve Dist. 150.
Elaine is right. The vending machine money could be an important source of income for the district. Right now the income may help fund athletic programs, etc., but I believe the lack of transparency about how the money is used could well be a “misuse.” Certainly, there appears to be no accountability.
Thanks for posting the exhibits!
Somebody has some explaining to do about the credit card bills (ex. 3), I think. Ex. 4 has an email about a kid (who was named) flunking summer school — with his grades. That should have been redacted.
Very interesting, as Mary Davis would say. D150 is very messed up.
Yes, I was very surprised the grades weren’t redacted, too. I would think that would be confidential information under some sort of student records law or something. At least they redacted the credit card account number.
I did notice that the address on the credit card bill was Lindbergh Middle School and their Sheridan Road address. If this is supposed to be a personal credit card, I think it’s very strange that the billing address is Lindbergh’s.
It is also bothersome that all the activity fund line items were fairly specific except for the whopping $4,000K plus listed as “miscellaneous”. Hey, I might try that with our household budget and see if the hubby notices!
Thanks for all the information, C.J. Exhibit 3 is interesting–certainly shows the account wasn’t closed as of October. This looks like a personal charge card. I wonder how many principals use their school addresses for personal mail, bills, etc. What I found most striking about these charges is the number of late fees and high finance charges. Certainly, this kind of money wouldn’t be wasted in a school account, would it? Many of the charges do look like school-related items–certainly too many for a personal charge card. However, the $4,000 seems to be an extremely “accumulative payment,” so it’s very hard to tell what items were actually covered and over what period of time since the account seems to always carry a high balance. If this is a personal account, I hope the district recognizes that this a very poor way to manage “school business.”
Mary should have taken lessons from Manual’s former band director. He ran his band accounts (Band Parents Organization, etc.) like a business. He kept meticulous records so this sort of thing would never happen to him. He certainly wouldn’t have used a personal account to make band purchases. Well, I should leave the analysis to the experts, but this is an interesting puzzle.
PrairieCelt:
Since all these cases won in civil or criminal court with District 150, please share the website to prove these compensations were rewarded.
Please don’t bullsh*t me about school UNIONS. I’m well aware of how absolutely useless they are! Oh….I also know about the “code of silence”in school politics. Shhhhh………..
It would seem that Ms. McArdle’s actions violate the Illinois Student Records Act. The exhibits she provided to her attorney and which are now part of the complaint contain confidential student information. The names of the students’ should have been redacted from the exhibits.
MsCommonSense:
Here it is: http://bulk.resource.org/courts.gov/c/F2/757/757.F2d.827.84-1060.84-1032.html
This is Terry Knapp’s case. This case is remembered by many, if not all, in District 150 at the time–made big headlines. And, of course, many of us are friends of Terry’s, so we are very sure this happened.
Another observation about Exhibit 2.
I notice the entry says $4,000.02 to Sam’s Club. If I were an auditor, I believe I would think that this money had been paid to Sam’s Club (and even though the sum is large, the expenses could be school-related). However, the $4000 was paid to a charge card company, not to Sam’s Club.
Sharon,
while you say Manual’s former band director ran his band accounts like a business I say that’s great. OTOH another one of the District 150 embezzlers along with Linda Fuller and Anna Marks was John Davis, band director at Roosevelt. His conviction came after the court found him guilty of theft that came from co-mingling of personal and District money in various accounts, kiting checks and poor/misleading records. Once again a person’s career was ended for a paltry amount of money, which is sad, but when they made the decision to steal they threw their life away.
Sharon:
Thanks for sharing but that case was 30 years ago when the unions were powerful and you could sue for emotional distress. Unfortunately, most teachers, faculty and staff are sufferinf today with emotional distress. Unions are not fighting as they once did 30 years ago. In addition, 30 years ago people were employed at the same job for 50 years. In this 1981 law-suit, Terry Knapp was awarded what he would make if he worked in the district that long. Times have changed and unions are over-whelmed and have the lost the fight for workers.
If this happened to me, I would hire the best employment attorney available and fight for all I could get including my job back. I’ve spoken to employment lawyers and many have told me about the limit of compensation and they find it to be ridiculous but school administration are very well aware of their power and this is why they are not afraid to fire the “WhistleBlower.” Officals representing the school district don’t show up for trials and prolong the cases for 20-25 years until the victim completely loses wind and gives up, unfortunately.
I’ve been advised to redact the student information, and have done so.
MsCommonSense: I do agree with you about the present state of unions and the PFT, in particular. Terry maintained a strong union until his retirement in 2005–also, when I retired. In that era, we had the benefit of Terry’s support when we needed it. It will be interesting to see if you’re right with regard to this case. I’m hoping the new PFT leadership will be able to regain some of its strength. Hopefully, the union now can, at least, help to call attention to situations such as this one where employees are not treated fairly or consistently. Not everything has to wind up in court.
I say the buck stops with Hinton. He has allowed his central office staff to treat administrators, teachers and other staff poorly. The culture of a district starts at the top and the culture within dist. 150 is horrible. Morale is down and continues to fall. How can people do their job well when they are constantly brow beaten?
When people go to him and report misconduct/behavior of his central office staff he listens very quietly then goes after the person doing the reporting. Don’t let his soft spoken voice fool you. Many of us have witnessed the intimidation and control techniques he uses.
They can Pacific Institute people to death but it is not going to help.
I’m thrilled Broderick is being sued. He thinks he is good at blackballing people. Well it has caught up to him.
CJ, I just clicked on it and the names are not all blacked out
Mr. Davis plead guilty before his retrial, after his first trial by jury which came back a hung jury. Saying the court ‘found him guilty’ is a bit misleading, though the court accepted his guilty plea and entered a conviction.
I also read where McArdle reported things to Dr. O’Brian and she was to get back to her. Why did she not communicate with her after she said she would? Isn’t one of district 150’s Expectations of Excellence COMMUNICATION? Why did O’Brian just let it go?
Frustrated, who was responsible for redacting the names… McArdle or Steagle?
Does anyone remember what is was Tonya Jenkins was accused of at Roosevelt? I don’t remember her ever being put on leave either. I have no idea how that was investigated, but since she is at Manual now there must have been no wrongdoing found. Maybe this is the precedent the board is referring to when they do not take action to put Mary Davis on leave.
The Taunya Jenkins case centered around a trip to Virginia for the chorus or band in order to perform for Queen Elizabeth at the time of her visit to the U.S. The allegations had to do with the fees the parents had to pay for their kids to travel, etc., etc. I believe she was cleared of all allegations.