Grayslake schools will honor controversial contract
Grayslake Elementary District 46 officials Wednesday night agreed to continue with a controversial $75,000 engineering consulting contract with former board member Michael Linder.
Concern among some board members recently arose after it was discovered Linder signed a two-year deal and not what was believed to be a one-year contract approved in a public vote in February 2011. Board members voted 4-3 in favor of allowing Linder to continue with the two-year deal as the facilities engineering consultant until March 23, 2013.
Meanwhile, Lake County Chief Deputy State’s Attorney Daniel Jasica confirmed before Wednesday’s meeting that authorities are investigating whether District 46 board members held an illegal closed-door session to discuss Linder in 2010. He resigned his board seat in November 2010.
Jasica declined to say who filed the complaint with prosecutors about 10 days ago. He said the state’s attorney’s office is awaiting “certain information” from District 46 that will assist prosecutors in the probe.
“It (the investigation) is related to Mr. Linder, yes, and the contract that was ultimately entered into,” Jasica said.
After Wednesday’s meeting, District 46 board President Ray Millington said that tapes and transcripts of the meeting at issue will be provided to prosecutors.
“I think we’ll be OK,” he said.
As for Linder’s contract, Millington said he supported continuing it for another year, in part because it’s not worth risking a lawsuit to do otherwise.
“Based on the advice that (the school attorney) had given us originally, that is a legal contract,” Millington said.
However, school board member Michael Carbone contended Linder should be put on a month-to-month contract. Another board member, Shannon Smigielski, questioned if there even is enough for Linder to justify a part-time, $75,0000 job until late March 2013 and questioned why payments to him are to a Convex Co. and not in his name.
In February 2011, the school board voted 4-2 to hire Linder for what appeared to be a one-year deal. While meeting minutes and the board’s motion didn’t indicate the contract’s length, officials mentioned “one year” as the term of the deal during the discussion.
When Linder signed the contract a month later, however, it was for two years.
Smigielski discovered the apparent discrepancy in January. At a Feb. 29 board meeting, District 46 attorney Kevin Gordon said Linder’s contract was “irregularly entered into” and is “arguably voidable.”
Board member Kip Evans pushed for voiding Linder’s contract and striking a new deal.
“I don’t believe we have a legitimate contract because it’s a mess,” Evans said.
Linder, elected to the District 46 board in 2007, cited changes in his schedule when he resigned in November 2010. His consulting was to include overseeing continuing projects districtwide and a 20-year facilities plan, along with reviewing and monitoring a budget. Retired from a career of managing large corporate operations, Linder wrote a letter to the school board in March 2011 stating he’d return about a third of the $75,000 he was scheduled to earn. As part of the same letter, he submitted a bill for work he performed in December 2010, two months before his official hiring.
Elected officials originally were scheduled to approve Linder’s consulting contract on Jan. 5, 2011. However, the item was suddenly pulled from the school board’s agenda, with Superintendent Ellen Correll saying she had planned to wrap up interviews for the position that day.
Linder’s contract may be cut short upon mutual agreement.