The North Shore Shore School District 112 has assembled a team of community members to explore options and a direction with issues facing its holdings. (Photo by Gregory Harutunian/for Chronicle Media)

The North Shore School District 112 is seeking a consensus on the future direction for its facilities and personnel, as a civil lawsuit that seeks to enjoin the implementation of its “BDR3” plan that would result in the closure of four facilities, teacher layoffs, and student reassignment remains active. District officials are confident that the team effort will engage the community, and present viable options to their dilemma.

In a side development, four of the team members are running for Dist. 112 School Board seats in the upcoming April 4 primary election, while another is pursuing a spot on the Highland Park City Council.

The ad hoc group itself was tabbed, “The 2.0 Re-Configuration Community Team.” However, four of its members, Art Kessler, Alexander Brunk, Dan Jenks, and Julie Campbell, are listed as candidates for Dist. 112 board of education seats. Another member, Davis Schneider, is one of three candidates vying for a seat on the Highland Park City Council.

“No … it’s not stacking the deck,” said Glenn. “The team bought into the community process, and has been pretty careful, not to buy into a specific direction. They’re just running for office.”

The team came together, following the district’s defeat in placing a $198 million building bond referendum question on the March 2016 ballot. The question, approved by the school district board, was to be used as a funding authorization in borrow money to construct a new middle school to house fifth- to eighth-grade students, while using additional funds for upgrades at six other school facilities in its physical holdings.

“After the March 2016 referendum failed, the team was conceived to encompass community members, both pro and con, through a selection committee comprised from the board of education, and former superintendent Michael Bregy,” said Nicholas Glenn, the district’s director of communications. “Basically, the team is working to come up with options.

“The community outreach goal is to fully understand what the community wants, and what it will support. Eventually, we want focus groups, information sent directly to district homes, and public forums in the spring,” he said. “We want to solicit members of our community what direction the district should take.”

The direction is predicated on the district’s stance of financial burdens, which resulted in a Nov. 18 civil suit by a Highland Park parent on behalf of her 12-year-old special-needs daughter, requesting that an injunction be granted to halt the “budget deficit reduction” plan, and that the district adheres to its mandate of maintaining its operations, as directed by the Illinois Board of Education. It contends that financial insolvency procedurally involves the state of Illinois as an oversight agency. The state has taken no such posture.

The district had stipulated the BDR3 plan as its back-up course of action that would involve the mass teacher layoffs, and the closures of the four schools. The suit highlighted the school board’s February 2016 vote of 4-3 in approving the closures of Ravinia, Elm Place, and Lincoln schools, along with the Green Bay Early Childhood Center, contingent upon voter approval.

The “3” in the “BDR3” anagram indicated the third round of budget reduction initiatives in the last several years. The lawsuit named the district, the district’s school board, and former district superintendent and board secretary Bregy, as defendants.

The Nov. 18 filing in Lake County’s 19th Judicial Circuit Court also alleged that the district had misrepresented its financial condition, as a precursor to the reduction. More than 100 pages of documentation of the board’s operating revenues and expenses for several previous years were attached to the complaint, asserting the records were counter to the district’s financial claims.

Records at the Lake County Circuit Clerk’s Office show that a Feb. 16 conference was been slated on the chancery injunction, and other particulars, should no filings be submitted prior to that date.

“To my knowledge, there is no hearing date set for the litigation,” said Glenn.