Hinsdale D86 Critic Warned About Recording
HINSDALE, IL – A Hinsdale High School District 86 employee asked a school board critic not to take video of the board before a meeting is called to order or after it is adjourned.
Now the question is, does the district’s rule apply to people taking video before or after a football game or a graduation ceremony?
At the Sept. 18 board meeting, the employee, Deb Kedrowski, told the resident, Yvonne Mayer, “We’re not called to order yet.”
Find out what's happening in Hinsdale-Clarendon Hillswith free, real-time updates from Patch.
“It’s a public meeting,” Mayer said.
“When we’re called to order,” said Kedrowski, the district’s administrative chief of staff. “I don’t think people expected to be recorded before the public meeting.”
Find out what's happening in Hinsdale-Clarendon Hillswith free, real-time updates from Patch.
Mayer then asked whether anyone objected to the recording. No one did. (Only a handful of people outside the board were in attendance.)
Near the end of the meeting, Mayer asked whether she would have permission to speak before the adjournment. She was denied.
After the meeting ended, she began to speak about the issue of hiring a new school lawyer. She continued taking footage.
Kedrowski broke in, saying, “I just don’t want you recording, unless they consent,” apparently referring to the state’s eavesdropping law.
Mayer asked for everyone’s consent. Only one person, board President Catherine Greenspon, objected. Mayer turned off her camera, but continued speaking, with officials staying to listen.
After the meeting, Mayer emailed Superintendent Michael Lach about Kedrowski’s request that she not record.
Lach backed Kedrowski. He said anyone was welcome to take video or audio during a meeting, but it becomes a private conversation after the session ends. He said he believed people in Illinois have the right to decline to be recorded.
In response to a Patch inquiry, Kedrowski said she conferred with the district’s lawyer.
“(O)nce a Board meeting ends, there is no public event,” Kedrowski said. “Outside of Board meetings, including at a football game or other public event, Board members are not gathered in their official capacity, and they have the same rights as other private citizens to decline to have a conversation with someone who wants to record that conversation.”
In an email to Lach, Mayer pointed to other examples in which residents took footage before meetings. Kedrowski could be seen walking by, without issuing warnings, she said.
“It is unclear what Ms. Kedrowski’s true motivation was in trying to stop me from recording and videotaping my post-meeting comment to the board, but her disdain for me was on clear display,” Mayer said. “While she may have the right to not like me, she has no right to try to use governmental power to exercise that dislike.”
In the latest case, Mayer said, the board had no reasonable expectation of privacy. Under the district’s interpretation, anyone taking footage at any school event would need to get the permission of everyone who might be recorded, whether intentionally or inadvertently, she said.
“We all know that is not the case in D86, as recordings are made all the time and posted all over social media sites. Why? Because there is no reasonable expectation of privacy,” Mayer said.
Get more local news delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for free Patch newsletters and alerts.
Click Here: china factory direct sale
