Copyright 2024 All Rights Reserved.

May 22, 2024

College of DuPage – “Breuder Board” vs. “Reform Board” – Part II

By Kirk Allen & John Kraft

On January 3, 2016

DuPage Co. (ECWd)-

As we covered in this article, there are a lot of things the public must understand when evaluating the future makeup of the College of DuPage Board of trustees.

We will focus on the law firms that Trustee McGuire is so desperate to reinstate, and we are confident most people will see what a disaster that would be if the Birt, McGuire, Wozniak trio gains control of the College of DuPage board of Trustees.

Ever since the election, McGuire has filed multiple ARDC complaints against the current law firms hired by the ‘Reform Board”.  She has gone to great lengths to publicly claim those firms are “under investigation” in her attempt to discredit them.  We challenge her to publicly share the outcome of all of her complaints and those she had others file.  It is our understanding she has lost on every claim but only she can disclose the outcomes of her complaints so the challenge has been given, put up or shut up!

In a matter of a few minutes  we were able to put together a list of reasons COD should NEVER bring back the Breuder era Attorneys, which is what the ‘Breuder Board’ wants to do.

With all that has been found wrong  and in violation of numerous statutes, it reminds me of the Beatles Song, Dr. Robert. If you needed a fix (legal opinion) former COD attorney and Former Foundation board member Ken Florey would give you exactly what you needed, regardless if it was right or not.

The old law firm couldn’t even get the Open Meetings Act right.  Many will recall the recent ruling by the Attorney General Public Access Counselor, 4 years late, proved the meeting where Breuder got one of his many contract extensions was in violation of OMA.

The other law firm, with Attorney Respicio Vasquez,  tried to remove people from board meeting seats without any lawful authority, even threatening to use COD police against a meeting attendee.

Or that Attorney Ken Florey lied to the AG claiming if people asked for a larger room for the meetings they would certainly do so.  Not only did they refuse to do it, we sued them for not doing it.  The current legal counsel for COD, Tim Elliot, won that case and now we finally have the meetings in a room where everyone can witness the antics of the ‘Breuder Board’.

All while McGuire screams conflict of interest for the current legal counsel hired at COD, we find no record what so ever of her saying a single word regarding the conflict of interest created by Ken Florey being a Foundation Board member and COD Attorney – and even an Assistant Attorney General (was that why the opinion took 4 years?).  One can only wonder why those conflicts were never on her radar?

The ‘Breuder Board” attorneys never said a word about the illegal spending for booze, hunt clubs, Christmas gifts, and fine dining at the Waterleaf. No, instead they participated and were recipients of tax payer funded goodies.

The old law firm lied to the AG claiming all meeting seats were first come first serve when in fact they were not, as Breuder at least half of them reserved. An attorney willing to “misrepresent” the truth to the AG is not what this school needs.

They knew, or should have known, that Breuder or the SMT ordered employees (and paid them) to attend meetings and sit in the reserved seats and others as a means of limiting the citizens right to attend the meeting in person.

They sat back in silence as an elected trustee was “censured”, of which there is no statutory or constitutional authority for such action. But the ‘Breuder Board’ and their attorneys plowed ahead with it anyway. The resulting electoral and other dysfunctional actions following the censure were publicly predicted during the board meeting.

And as if this short list is not enough, they participated in the negotiations regarding Breuder’s “RETIREMENT” in April of 2014 BEFORE it was ever taken to the board!  (Exposed yesterday in Part 1)

Stay tuned for Part III where we will expose documented proof the past law firms were part of the very problems getting exposed at COD. They were actual participants and the paper trial proves it!


Please consider a donation.
[wp_eStore_donate id=1]


Share on facebook
Share on twitter
Share on print


  • George Sapyta
    Posted at 18:38h, 03 January

    You are being sued by a few people for lying but leave that out of your story

    • jmkraft
      Posted at 21:40h, 03 January

      George Sapyta: We are not now, and have never been, sued by anyone for anything. Of course that could change if someone thought we reported inacuracies, but for now, it hasn’t.

  • CC
    Posted at 20:44h, 03 January

    I am sure that shining a light on the nastiness and corruption at COD has infuriated those being exposed. The light does not suit them. It is an election year after all. Lawyers are paid for their work. They are not judges or juries. They don’t decide right or wrong. For example, a pedophile could hire a lawyer to defend him/herself from criminal charges.