[{"_1":2,"_100":-5,"_101":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,76,88],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},"mediaId",6076831,"mediaKeyId","2967363-151095314673800d2865b42518ea4511","parentId",2967363,"title","Committee of the Whole adjourns to closed session on personnel under Illinois statute","audioSeconds",45,"startMs",6729000,"endMs",6774000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2967363-151095314673800d2865b42518ea4511&start=6729&end=6774","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2967363-151095314673800d2865b42518ea4511/thumbnail_6729000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6076831/Illinois/Committee-of-the-Whole-adjourns-to-closed-session-on-personnel-under-Illinois-statute","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6076831-0fb32431f226cbaf4c1727a968bec324/orig.mp4?Expires=1771077574&Signature=nLNihT3apRRCmgeBlOv3B4Ex~FGwjOogqMm0JvR3JGm7wO-2tJAQQf-a6auz1Yw~e7peUIt~XYrdqC0mMR8eI0bm0xOa9OEYcLmAq61ncQv1qI4AwK8e2lolCGIdcfwdJwG20BeJhqx4cLpesAB2BBtyWpGVQCF~xhE6CqfeN5zW~1Qpmugg~YgWsswiOw5hMlTQLQ-Z5gBK9FocYHJ1d59yupXuvHrd8XG8-vKM1exTd-etVQUwdrKD579Bqq4H7iHkYoAAvTiWpgjbrQx0NKiKabJjAo3vV4-K0AEXL3lxuj2G3EmAMUzIB6pLVJAKjp4~e51TSt8hU8y-UhY7Fg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Cary CCSD 26","date","2025-04-10T18:44:49Z","article","The Cary CCSD 26 Committee of the Whole voted to adjourn into closed session on March 10 under the Illinois Open Meetings Act exception for personnel matters.

The committee chair requested a motion to adjourn to closed session “for the appointment, compensation, discipline, performance, or dismissal of specific employees of the public body, 5 ILCS 120/2(c)(1).” A motion and second were made (names not specified on the record) and the board took a roll call vote. Recorded roll call votes were: Mindy Hartman — yes; Stacy Sull — absent; Dee Darling — yes; Jason Janzick — absent; Catherine Potter — yes; Julie Jetty — yes; Anson Tucci (recorded as Anne/Anson at different points in the transcript) — yes. The chair announced the motion approved and open session ended at 7:54 p.m.

This closed session relates only to personnel matters; no substantive decisions from closed session were disclosed in the public portion of the meeting.

","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Committee of the Whole: March 10, 2025","oneSentenceSummary","At 7:48 p.m. the committee voted by roll call to move into closed session under the Illinois Open Meetings Act to discuss appointment, compensation, discipline, performance or dismissal of specific employees.","taxTitle","Cary CCSD 26, School Boards, Illinois","taxId",74246,"location","Illinois","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":77,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":78,"_41":79,"_43":80,"_45":81,"_47":82,"_49":83,"_51":84,"_53":85,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":86,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":87,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6076835,"Board reviews D26 policy manual sections 1–2; tables district‑specific transparency policy and orders follow‑ups",5532,1193000,6725000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2967363-151095314673800d2865b42518ea4511&start=1193&end=6725","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2967363-151095314673800d2865b42518ea4511/thumbnail_1193000.jpg","/articles/6076835/Illinois/Board-reviews-D26-policy-manual-sections-12-tables-districtspecific-transparency-policy-and-orders-followups","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6076835-cd5c8a1ffcbf7b4b0d6a1154009f440e/orig.mp4?Expires=1771077574&Signature=TjuGKxdFOP7W2gOQSy2HoxqvwjIo20Q--Qa-XgbivUnKnuCpBda30QgNAvRcEBO0USqDc7uoB8w-OiL~MjkRJtN6sRK8~zBugadFWyRfWoATbiAUIkvRj7tHBDhqRm5HLgNTBckHdrFGOUdvfFp0AMACHtT~qy0BQurP7tywHB4H2ofw0gvs51JEVquCCoxyBNpegTEBE1S5kVahgE1Xkvlkot~beJsQeU6hSDrdeHvgL0NTSn~d0~SEWy4e7n7ZlxVVaH5iJZVuZOfZMrTa3dlMBD5XX4bLEUbnn4w9UZrrTLN9clbuANXBg89KU18GKN4NKFVT09GzJyezX9ah0Q__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Cary Community Consolidated School District 26 board members spent most of the March 10 committee meeting reviewing proposed edits to sections 1 and 2 of the district policy manual and directed staff on several follow‑up items.

The committee agreed to reinsert the district’s formal legal designation into policy 1‑10 so the manual notes the district’s full name. “My recommendation would be that we put it back in…Cary Community Consolidated School District 26, McHenry and Lake Counties, Illinois,” Catherine Potter, policy chair, said; board members agreed the manual should include a clear reference and a shortened reference for day‑to‑day use.

Policy 1‑30, titled school district philosophy, will be replaced with the district’s current mission and vision. Potter read proposed mission and vision language and the committee expressed support: “My goal was to eliminate redundancy and be clear,” Mindy Hartman said.

Members discussed policy 1‑40 (district accountability and transparency), a D26‑specific policy originally adopted in 2012. Several members said the policy is concise and useful, but others noted overlapping material already appears elsewhere in the manual and in the district’s current website resources. The committee agreed to table 1‑40 for final consideration at the end of the policy review cycle so staff can cross‑reference other policy changes and get attorney input. Dee Darling, the board president, suggested tabling the district‑specific policies to ensure consistent cross‑referencing across the manual.

The committee also revised policy 02/22 to reference the district strategic plan more clearly. Members agreed to change the title to include “strategic plan development” and to add a link and adoption date so readers can find the current plan easily. “If I'm in there searching the policy and I type in strategic plan, then this will come up,” a board member said during the discussion.

Community input timing and committee practice were debated. Several members proposed moving Committee‑of‑the‑Whole public comments to after discussion so the audience hears presentations and board discussion first; others noted the practical downside that community members sometimes attend only to comment on a single item and would then wait through a long meeting. The committee agreed to keep a sign‑in option at the start of the meeting that lets speakers designate whether they wish to speak at the beginning or after discussion, and to clarify in policy that questions and comments are distinct: comments may be made immediately, while questions that require staff research will receive a follow‑up response.

Members reviewed several D26‑specific committee items including the parent‑teacher advisory committee and behavioral interventions committee. Staff cited statutory guidance and ISBE material saying those committees are required; the committee directed staff to confirm whether the committees should be listed as board committees or superintendent committees and to bring a legal recommendation back. “Boards must establish and maintain a behavioral interventions committee and to develop these procedures with ISBE's guidelines,” staff noted when referencing the statute and ISBE guidance.

Legislative policy (2‑152) drew divergent views: some members worried that detailed legislative‑advocacy language could invite partisan activity; others said the board should have a concise mechanism to monitor legislation that affects district funding and operations. The board asked staff to send that policy to the district attorney for review and to return recommended language that preserves nonpartisanship while enabling oversight of funding and mandates.

Other procedural items discussed included exhibits for selecting a board attorney, FOIA/public records exhibits and a procurement provision requiring selected architects, engineers and surveyors to meet with the superintendent and board to discuss responsibilities and scope. For the architectural procurement policy (2‑170) board members supported restoring language that the selected firm’s representative “shall meet with the superintendent and the Board of Education to discuss responsibilities and scope of services.” Some members cautioned against routine attendance by paid consultants at every monthly meeting; the committee clarified the intent is a kickoff/major‑decision briefing, not attendance at every routine meeting.

Next steps: the committee will place most press model policy updates on the consent agenda (excluding 1‑40, which was tabled). Staff will prepare redlined language and submit district‑specific items to the attorney for review before final board action.

","Committee considered multiple policy manual edits, including restoring the legal district name, replacing a policy with the current mission and vision, renaming and linking the long‑term strategy policy to the strategic plan, and tabling a district‑specific accountability and transparency policy for final cross‑reference and attorney review.",{"_33":89,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":90,"_41":91,"_43":92,"_45":93,"_47":94,"_49":95,"_51":96,"_53":97,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":98,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":99,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6076840,"District staff recommends five‑year custodial contract to Citywide Building Maintenance; board questions retention, scope",148,319000,467000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2967363-151095314673800d2865b42518ea4511&start=319&end=467","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2967363-151095314673800d2865b42518ea4511/thumbnail_319000.jpg","/articles/6076840/Illinois/District-staff-recommends-fiveyear-custodial-contract-to-Citywide-Building-Maintenance-board-questions-retention-scope","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6076840-d6ec3ec2a75fb369c749bd8ab7d910a0/orig.mp4?Expires=1771077574&Signature=GtH7EwrZd4B1sDia5qUExYXkqDkJmfM-dKhEIoW0ZYtcmXEikfx1qi2A8JLCmLl~Ftj4Ut4wRQzXoNHJpzQ-6z8GKvFuk5OaG6MJmeZ7BdW65F2-geBH1ZPeqmL1nHDBpPbEqXfH4Z8jUh-dHUkFuM~Yp3zhC2W6xnxUH5rg2zABOkPJaD1in9YcMH7VadZC8CCipEL0LdPAhQmNjBh8Sy8rQl6knrdAmDX6iaK4v8n7jjN~ZtN2774XrxvNiTH6BHaX2t9mu1X1BOUNidHNweA4vYA8oV-6FEwxF7AGCq0etpqBGtw7Ttaucrz0ff~vp54Tf~bMCCc34LE-jldRww__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Cary Community Consolidated School District 26 administrators told the committee of the whole on March 10 that they recommend awarding a five‑year custodial contract to Citywide Building Maintenance after a public bidding process.

Administration said seven contractors submitted sealed bids that were opened publicly on Feb. 27. “We ended up having 7 contractors submit sealed bids, and they were publicly opened on February 27 at 10AM,” Mr. Shepherd said. He told the committee the year‑one base bids ranged from $722,440 to more than $1 million, and five‑year totals ranged from about $3.7 million to $5.3 million.

The recommendation to select Citywide follows vetting of bids and references for the three lowest bidders. “After review of all the 7 bids and contacting references…administration has concluded the bid submitted by Citywide Building Maintenance appears to be complete and responsive,” Mr. Shepherd said. He added the district verified minimum wage assumptions in the bid and reviewed each bidder’s proposed profit and overhead.

Why it matters: administration told board members the contracting approach produces savings compared with maintaining custodial services fully in‑house once salary, benefits, Illinois Municipal Retirement Fund contributions, Social Security and workers’ compensation are counted. Administration estimated the district would add “probably an additional 2 to 2,500,000 dollars” per year to operations and maintenance costs were those employees kept wholly in‑house; Citywide’s five‑year price was described as “a little over 3,500,000” in total.

Board members pressed staff on details they said matter to families and employees. Catherine Potter, policy chair, asked whether the contractor’s price includes work at the planned transportation center; Shepherd said the contractors were aware a transportation center was forthcoming but, because land had not yet been delivered, bidders provided only estimates for that facility. Potter said, “I think just seeing the layout of the transportation center…would be important for us so there’s no surprises.” She requested a written estimate integrating the transportation center into the scope.

Board members also asked whether Citywide intends to retain existing custodial employees. Shepherd said the firm’s transition plan typically includes interviews of existing staff and that Citywide “will interview all the existing employees with our recommendations of, like, who is a a good fit,” but that the vendor retains final hiring decisions. Board members pressed for assurances about employees’ pay and benefits; staff said Citywide’s bid includes insurance and vacation and that administration checked minimum wage levels in the bid.

Members asked about responsiveness and past performance. Shepherd said the district checked references for Citywide — including Woodland School District and North Palos School District — and that those districts recommended Citywide. He said administration also checked for recent contractual disputes and performed additional research beyond the submitted documents.

Administration’s next steps: staff recommended the board receive the bid tabulation and place a contract approval item on the regular board meeting agenda next week, when a Citywide representative is expected to attend. No formal contract award was taken at the committee meeting; the item was framed as an administration recommendation for board action at the next regular meeting.

Board context and concerns: members repeatedly said they value custodial staff familiarity with buildings and requested explicit language or assurances about retention, benefits and transition planning when the contract returns to the board. Several members asked staff to confirm how many incumbent workers would be retained and to provide the district’s estimate of any incremental cost tied specifically to adding the transportation center to the scope.

Looking ahead: Citywide will appear at the board meeting next week for questions. Administration will attempt to post bid details to the board documents repository and said it will provide the board the contractor’s transition plan and the transportation‑center estimate before the award vote.

","District administration recommended the board approve a five‑year custodial contract with Citywide Building Maintenance after a competitive bid; board members pressed for clarity on employee retention, transportation‑center scope and verification of wage/benefit assumptions.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Committee of the Whole adjourns to closed session on personnel under Illinois statute

Board reviews D26 policy manual sections 1–2; tables district‑specific transparency policy and orders follow‑ups

District staff recommends five‑year custodial contract to Citywide Building Maintenance; board questions retention, scope