The summer-long conflict between the Red Bud School District and Regional Office of Education seems to have reached a true conclusion after a construction disagreement was once again brought to and settled in Randolph County Circuit Court recently.

As previously reported, the disagreement which went to court earlier this summer centered around construction and renovations performed at Red Bud Elementary School between 2022 and 2023.

Regional Superintendent of Schools Kelton Davis originally issued a building permit for the construction of a gymnasium as well as a few other additions and improvements to the existing RBES building.

In accordance with the building permit, construction was concluded through the district’s architect firm Cordogan Clark in St. Louis, and a certificate of occupancy was filed in November 2023.

In his capacity as the code official for school construction projects, Davis identified what he found to be several issues with the construction. He described apparent issues including handicap access to the new stage requiring travel through several other rooms and the emergency exit for the gym lacking a paved path to a common pathway such as an existing community sidewalk.

Another item Davis has spoken about is an apparent “dead-end corridor” – a corridor lacking a direct exit from the building – which he has said exceeds a length limitation in the building code.

On the district’s side, Red Bud Superintendent of Schools Jonathan Tallman has emphasized the Red Bud School Board’s trust in Cordogan Clark, pointing to the architects’ qualifications and confirmation that the building and its latest renovations are up to code.

The aforementioned certificate of occupancy has been the focus of the ongoing disagreement between the ROE and Red Bud School District as Davis previously refused to sign the district’s application due to the code violations he perceived.

A court hearing June 28 resulted in an order from Judge Jeremy Walker for Davis to execute the application for occupancy given the district complied with all procedures for the occupancy permit to be issued.

A July 10 article from the Republic-Times made mention of Davis’ intent to re-address the perceived violations even as he was ordered to sign this application for occupancy.

As his office inspects school buildings throughout Monroe and Randolph counties each year, Davis suggested he would identify the code violations at such an inspection and close the building should the school not adequately address the supposed violations.

In that same article, Barney Mundorf, an attorney representing the Red Bud School District in the case, said Davis would not be able to return to the apparent violations again as the occupancy application he signed indicates that “no certificate of occupancy was issued until the discrepancies were remedied.”

Mundorf’s stance would appear to be accurate, as an additional order filed in Randolph County Circuit Court on Aug. 6 required Davis to “execute a ‘clean’ version of the Application for Occupancy as well as a ‘clean’ Certificate of Occupancy, to comply with the June 28, 2024, Order of Mandamus.”

Per a transcript from the Aug. 6 court hearing, Davis issued a letter to the school district on July 17 threatening to shut down the school based on the same code violations he had identified  during June court proceedings.

Mundorf, addressing Judge Walker, said the Randolph County State’s Attorney had previously presented the opinion of the architect Davis had brought in as an additional perspective, with that architect having only recommended the addition of a sidewalk outside of the gym’s emergency exit. That architect had not identified any code violations.

Mundorf went on to say that, while not explicit in the original order of mandamus, Davis was expected to sign the final certificate of occupancy after he had signed the application for occupancy as he was ordered.

Robert Jackstadt, an attorney representing Davis and the ROE at the recent hearing, said Davis was acting within his capacity in issuing the closure threat as he is required by law as regional superintendent to conduct school inspections, ordering that code violations be corrected and temporarily closing school facilities which contain an imminent threat to the safety of its occupants.

Mundorf noted that no inspection had taken place, saying Davis “hasn’t been in that building since June 28,” with no additional renovations having been done in that time either.

“So, you’ve got procedures for how facilities are inspected under the code, under the Illinois Administrative Code if it’s construction, and then there’s separate powers for him to inspect the facility,” Mundorf said. “But you can’t sign off on an application for occupancy certifying that it’s in full compliance with the code and then turn around and invoke (Title 23, Section) 180.400 and say, well, it’s not in compliance with the code.”

Though Jackstadt suggested Mundorf and the district were requesting that Davis never be able to act in his capacity as an inspector, Walker ultimately sided with the school district.

“We were in court, and a mere less than two weeks later they’re getting the notification that what they thought they had just resolved in court wasn’t resolved at all?” Walker said. “Which kind of is in contradiction of what the court order was. I mean, if Mr. Davis has an architect that says that there is a code violation, he had the opportunity to call them as a witness that day. They weren’t. It was represented to me that there was no such violation, period.”

Walker then ordered Davis to execute the new “clean” version of the application for occupancy as well as a “clean” certificate of occupancy.

The judge further recommended Davis not continue to press the issue. Though he would be able to bring the matter to the Illinois State Board of Education, Walker suggested the board would not have a favorable response given the signed documents, further saying to Davis, “The ship has sailed.”

Following the ruling last week, Tallman once again expressed hopes that the matter is behind the school district so focus can be placed on the 2024-25 school year.

“We just want to move on,” Tallman said. “We’re proud of that building. We’re proud of the firm that designed it. We’re proud of the contractors that built it, and we firmly believe that it is completely compliant, accessible and safe for our students.”

Though he was unavailable prior to publication, Davis did get in touch with the Republic-Times to say that the school district had appealed to the Illinois State Board of Education, adding that the matter should have been brought before the board to begin with.

While Davis said the board could come to a ruling within the next week, he added that he is unsure whether or not the apparent violations themselves have been brought before the board.

On the matter of code violations, Davis also said he had been surprised at the Aug. 6 hearing to learn that the court had not been provided details about the violations nor the perspective of the third party architect Davis had brought in whom he has said corroborates his stance on the violations.