Page 24 – 25 “Attorney Client Privilege” and “Safety”


Information leaking out of the private closed sessions is one of the more disturbing issues this school board faces. It is a breech of the public trust, and the end of the confidence we put in our elected public officials. The McCampbell family has even addressed this issue accusing someone of leaking information. There is a few examples of this, and two are listed in the email below.

I have my opinions as to who is sharing information, but I have no evidence to back that up. I can only make the assumption that it was in fact a friend to the McCampbells. The divide between the very few people who think they are in the right, and the much larger number who think the McCampbells couldn’t be more wrong is so vast that the chances of someone who disagrees with them telling anyone anything let alone a friend of the McCampbells is in fact so great that it is almost simply not possible. As I said I have no proof of this, and it is just a personal feeling I have deep down inside my gut.

David Stachura is an admitted close friend to Roy F McCampbell at a minimum, and most likely close to both. We know from past meetings that he doesn’t think before he speaks, and drawing such a conclusion considering their friendship just makes sense. I could be wrong, and in this case I hope it is just a coincidence. The information discussed behind the closed doors of closed session is some of the most private, and needs to remain that way.

Page 24


Dear Board,
Sorry to be sending such a long missive on Halloween of all days! Attorney-Client Privilege Issue

I suspect that a Board member is informing about information that has been discussed during closed sessions. I have reached this conclusion based on two statements that made to me. The first occurred on Tuesday, October 21st, when commented to me during our telephone conversation that he bet I “had never seen anything like this in 22 years of practice.” This was almost a verbatim comment that I made to the Board during the closed session meeting I attended on Wednesday, October 15th. This was not a comment that I made to at any time. The second occurred on Tuesday, October 28th, when indicated during our in-person meeting something to the effect of “why are you bringing up those 22 complaints? Those are all in the past.” – there is the 22 complaints Roy F McCampbell spoke of in one of my earlier posts. 

The binder contains well in excess of 22 complaints. I never mentioned 22 complaints and, in fact, have not yet made an exact count. I think that was confusing my 22-year practice comment in reference to the number of complaints. Again, I never mentioned to that I have practiced law for 22 years nor did I mention the number of complaints he has filed. My instinct is strong that a board member is sharing information with redacted. This must stop immediately. My ability to advise the Board is seriously compromised if the advice I am giving on sensitive matters is being shared with the public, in fact, to the very individual who is making complaints against the District that I am advising on. – The School Board Lawyer has verified that the binder exists, and it contains well in excess of 22 complaints yet Mr McCampbell not long before this went on about how no such binder exists. Who is lying in now Roy F McCampbell?

The attorney-client privilege is held by the Board – not individual members – but by the full Board of Education. In order to share information with the public that is discussed during closed session meetings, a majority of a quorum would have to affirmatively decide to do so. I want to also note that whether I designate an email, letter, memo, etc., as “attorney client privileged” or not is irrelevant. Whether designated or not, communications from me to the full Board are protected by the privilege in all instances. As you can see above, from now on, I will specifically designate my communications with you as attorney client privileged so that there is no confusion. I recommend that the Board consider holding a session with IASB to review the confidentiality rules governing Board members.

No Trespass and Communication Directive

Continued on page 24

The allegations that redacted is making against Kim are baseless and not grounded in fact. Reviewing his communications over the past month alone, it is clear that hostility toward Kim is increasing. Simply put, this is classic bullying behavior that the Board must take a firm stance against. It is my recommendation that the attached letter be sent to redacted. – baseless and not grounded in fact, and hostility towards Kim is increasing. This is classic bullying behavior, and the board must take a firm stance. Those are some very troubling and powerful things to say, and are simply the truth. This has been going on for years, and increasing steadily.

I recommend that a special board meeting be convened next week for the board to deliberate the issue. Given the gravity of the situation, I do not think that we can wait until the next regularly scheduled Board meeting of November 19th. I am free every night next week except Thursday November 6th. In order to comply with the 24-hour notice requirement, will Wednesday November 5th work? Let me know.

Our discussion of this issue can properly be held in closed session based on 5 ILCS 120/2(c)(8): “Security procedures and the use of personnel and equipment to respond to an actual, a threatened, or a reasonably potential danger to the safety of employees, students, staff, the public, or public property.” The Board must vote in open session to direct this letter to The form of the motion will be: “I move to direct the Board’s counsel to issue a no trespass and communication letter to .” Assuming the motion passes, I will issue the letter the next day and the letter will become a public record that is subject to release under FOIA (obviously with redactions to his address and any other personal information). This adds a layer of complexity to the issue that I wanted you all to be aware of before we meet. – this meetings urgency was for the safety of the districts employees, students and staff. Let us not forget that this is the statement that Patricia Godziszewski that wasn’t important enough to call a special meeting. Patricia Godziszewski doesn’t worry about the safety of the boards only employee, or the children it is charged with protecting. She cares for the well being of Roy F McCampbell.

Kim is working directly with Sara Boucek, Legal Counsel for the IASA, regarding steps that she can take to help ensure her safety. Kim can inform the Board during the special meeting what those steps are and we can discuss coordination of efforts.

As an unbiased newcomer to the scene, I am uniquely able to separate out the litany of complaints and issues with redacted since 2007 from the current events. I tried my best to establish a relationship with redacted and was cordial and respectful to him, without exception. My recommendations are based on the current events alone – nothing more. conduct evidences an instability of thought and action that is extremely troubling. His thought process is delusional and paranoid. I am recommending that the Board take action also as a show of support for your staff. Although Kim is the one most directly impacted, this is an issue that affects all of your other staff members, too. Kim is the leader of the District and as such, it is important that the Board take a stand on her behalf in order to send the message to others that they will be supported in similar situations. – “conduct evidences an instability of thought and action that is extremely troubling” “His thought process is delusional and paranoid” if you don’t want to believe the dozens of other people that have said that very thing. You should believe a person who puts their professional career at risk by choosing to advise and defend this School Board in these issues.

As always, let me know if you have questions or concerns. Also, let me know whether Wednesday, November 5th works for the special board meeting date.


This is of great concern to me and many others. You hear stories all the time of people breaking from reality and hurting lots of people. Is this a possibility with Roy McCampbell or his wife? I certainly hope not, but one thing that makes me feel a little easier is that I believe in my heart that one thing that the staff of this district hold above all other things no matter the dificulty is the safety of your children.


Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s