District 115 Student CSAM Charge: Why Parents Still Need the Truth

Two days ago, we wrote to the community regarding the arrest of a 19-year-old adult, a Lake Forest High School graduate, and a current participant in the Transition Center program and the District’s decision not to disclose the nature of the charge in its March 5 email to families.

That concern has only intensified.

What the District Left Out

As we noted in our prior email, public records reflect a Class X felony charge involving child sexual abuse material. This is among the most serious felony classifications under Illinois law.

Yet when District 115 informed parents about the arrest, the District chose not to disclose the nature of the charge.

That omission matters.

If there is any possibility that this adult had inappropriate contact or communication with a child or teenager in our community, parents need enough information to speak with their own children and find out.

Parents cannot do that if they are kept in the dark.

This post about the District 115 student CSAM charge explains why that omission matters so much.

Why The District 115 Student CSAM Charge Matters to LFHS Families

And it is important to understand who we are talking about.

This was not an unknown outsider with no connection to local students.

This was a Lake Forest High School graduate who had recently been part of the regular LFHS student community and remained connected to District 115 through the Transition Center program.

Parents deserve enough truth to determine whether their own children may have known him, interacted with him, or had any reason to be concerned.

The Questions We Asked Matt Montgomery and Melissa Oakley

That is why Parents Care Executive Director Frank McCormick sent a series of direct questions to Superintendent Matt Montgomery and Communications Director Melissa Oakley, including:

• When did the District first learn of the arrest and charge?

• Did this adult remain in any District program after the District became aware of the matter?

• Why did the District choose not to disclose the nature of the charge to families?

• Did law enforcement influence the timing or content of the District’s communication?

• What steps, if any, were taken to determine whether local students may have had inappropriate contact or communication with this adult?

  
  

These are not complicated questions. They are not document-heavy requests. They are the most basic questions any parent would expect a school district to answer after sending a message to thousands of families about a serious matter involving an adult connected to a District program.

How the District Responded

Melissa Oakley did not answer them.

Instead, she forwarded them into the FOIA process.

Matt Montgomery then responded by saying that emails from Parents Care are generally treated as FOIA requests.

That is unacceptable.

Parents Care did not submit a FOIA request. We asked direct questions about the District’s timeline, communication decisions, and safety response.

Routing those questions into a process designed for records requests is not transparency.

It is bureaucratic evasion.

And the community should understand the context. The District has recently used “voluminous” designations to restrict or deny FOIA requests. Under the District’s own posture toward Parents Care, this latest attempt to force basic questions into FOIA looks less like good-faith communication and more like another maneuver to avoid answering parents directly.

Parents should not have to fight through bureaucratic tricks to get basic answers about a matter that could affect their children.

Board President John Noble

To his credit, Board President John Noble at least acknowledged our outreach and said he would look into the questions and respond as best he could.

We appreciate that acknowledgment.

But acknowledgment is not the same as answers, and parents still do not have them.

Why This Involves the School

Some may ask why this involves the school at all if the reported conduct occurred outside school.

The answer is straightforward:

This was not just any adult in town.

This was a Lake Forest High School graduate and current participant in a District 115 program.

The District itself chose to notify families about the arrest. Once it made that decision, it assumed a responsibility to communicate candidly and answer reasonable follow-up questions from parents.

If there is any possibility that a child in this community may have been harmed or had inappropriate contact with this adult, the only way that can come to light quickly is if parents are given enough information to have the right conversations at home.

That is why full transparency matters.

Parents do not need rumor. Parents do not need spin.

Parents need enough truth to ask simple questions at home:

Did this adult ever contact you?Did anyone tell you he was talking to students?Did anything happen that we need to know about?

This is not hypothetical.

As an illustration of what we are talking about, Parents Care recently spoke with a Lake Forest parent who reported that within the past year, this 19-year-old adult had been at the parent’s home, spending time with the parent’s middle school-aged child and that child’s friends. According to the parent, the children described him casually as someone who “goes to LFHS” and “hangs out with everyone.” The parent thanked us for raising this issue because, without fuller disclosure from the District, the parent would not have known to have that conversation at home.

Without that information, families are left unable to ask the right questions at home — and that is not a theoretical concern.

What We Are Still Investigating

We also want the community to know that we are looking into additional questions that have been raised about West Campus, including concerns from some parents regarding the proximity of other programs operating at that location.

We are also investigating reports regarding other entities that may use or lease space there, including SEDOL programming.

We are taking those concerns seriously, but we will allow ourselves time to verify the facts before drawing conclusions.

We are also submitting records requests to determine whether, given the shared West Campus location, any Little Scouts families were notified, and if not, who made that decision and on what basis.

This Is Not Happening in a Vacuum

Under Superintendent Matt Montgomery, this community has seen a repeated pattern: serious safety or transparency concerns arise, parents ask direct questions, and district leadership responds with partial disclosure, forced FOIA, or silence.

A brief timeline

• November 2023 — Paul Brock / Deer Path: Montgomery told the community that Deer Path teacher Paul Brock had engaged, at a prior district, in a personal and sexually grooming relationship with a middle school student and had lied about it in the hiring process. That was a serious student-safety issue from the start. [READ MORE]

  
  

• December 2023 — Direct questions, no direct answers: After Parents Care sent Montgomery and Oakley a series of precise written questions about the Brock matter, the District did not answer them directly. Montgomery instead refused to provide answers and considered the email chain closed when we repeatedly asked for answers.

  
  

• June 2024 — LFHS worker and a minor: Parents Care reported that an adult LFHS food service worker was terminated for soliciting a relationship with a minor, and that Lake Forest Public Schools made no public announcement about the incident. [READ MORE]

  
  

• June 2024 — Another LFHS employee matter: Parents Care also reported alleged misconduct by another LFHS employee that it says was not reported to parents or the community, with meaningful details emerging only through outside investigation and FOIA. [READ MORE]

  
  

• Late 2024 — Sex offender incident / false reassurance: Parents Care later reported that after a registered sex offender incident near Deer Path, district leadership sent the community claims that were contradicted by other evidence, and that Montgomery then refused to correct the record. [READ MORE]

  
  

• 2025 — FOIA violation: Parents Care also reported that the Illinois Attorney General’s Public Access Counselor found Montgomery’s administration had violated FOIA after improperly withholding records. [READ MORE]

  
  

This is why trust has eroded.

This is why parents increasingly feel they must investigate on their own.

And this is why this issue matters beyond one incident.

If it turns out that a child in this community was victimized by this adult, then the District’s failure to disclose key facts and answer direct questions will not be viewed as a communications mistake. It will be viewed as a profound failure of leadership.

Our Position Is Simple

• Parents deserve the truth.

• Student safety must come before administrative reputation.

• Families should not have to learn critical information from reporters or public-record searches instead of from their own school district.

• District leaders who choose vagueness over honesty should expect public scrutiny.

  
  

We will continue pressing for answers and updating the community as more verified information becomes available.