Parent tells Huntley 158 board her son faced threats and distress in classroom; board hears but takes no action at meeting

Koula Salamu told the Huntley Community School District 158 Board of Education during public comment that her son suffered repeated emotional distress because of a teacher’s conduct, including alleged threats (“I’m going to kill you,” “I’m going to throw you out the window”), favoritism, and instances in which students were left outside unsupervised.

Salamu said she first reported the incidents weeks earlier and that district communications initially characterized those reports as hyperbole. She said additional families later came forward and that the teacher was placed on administrative leave. “This is about accountability,” Salamu said, urging improved training in emotional regulation, de‑escalation and sensitivity for staff and better responsiveness from administrators.

Board members and administrators acknowledged the comment before moving on to other agenda items. At the meeting the board offered no vote or formal public update about the personnel matter; the record contains no motion or board action tied to the allegation. The superintendent’s office said only “thank you for your comment” during the public‑comment period.

Why it matters: Salamu’s remarks raised safety and special‑education concerns; she said her son has an Individualized Education Program (IEP) that entitles him to a safe, supportive learning environment, and she urged the board to ensure policies and training protect students. The meeting record shows the district presented, later in the agenda, a separate administrative memo about IEP communication and confidentiality but made no immediate administrative statement or vote responding to her allegations.

What the district has said elsewhere: During the meeting Assistant Superintendent for Special Services Dr. Gill described district IEP procedures and a “need‑to‑know” approach to sharing IEP information, saying case managers coordinate implementation and staff receive training on IEP compliance and confidentiality. That presentation explained how IEP accommodations are communicated to relevant staff but did not reference the specific public comment or identify any personnel outcomes tied to it.

Next steps: The transcript does not show any board motion or vote at this meeting in direct response to Salamu’s allegations. If the board or administration takes further public action—investigation findings, personnel action, or additional policy changes—those would be reflected in later meeting notices or administrative communications.