Note: This story has been updated to reflect the child was 5½-years-old at the time of the dispute. The court case started when he was 7 and he is now approaching 9-years-old.
A former District 205 school board member hailed a recent federal court ruling in her favor as a criticism of the district’s “non-collaborative, non-productive, and at times unethical” approach, after a judge ordered the district to pay nearly a quarter of a million dollars in attorney fees for a civil rights case involving her child.
The ruling, issued on Aug. 15 by U.S. District Court Judge Jonathan Hawley in the Central District of Illinois, awards former District 205 School Board member Pamella Bess-Tabb and her husband $248,241—$245,171 for 516 hours of legal efforts and $3,070 in additional costs—plus 7.5% prejudgment interest from May 17, 2025, to address delays.
Family victory and district response
In an email statement to WGIL, Bess-Tabb said, “We appreciate the court’s judgement and their ability to recognize the importance of the issues brought before them in this case. This judgement is an acknowledgement of the hard work we have had to put forth over these last two years and reaching this pivotal point in the proceedings means a lot to our family.”
District 205 Superintendent John Asplund voiced opposition with the ruling, telling WGIL, “We disagreed with the judge on the decision in the case and we disagree with the judge’s decision on the fees.”
He noted the disparity in costs, saying, “To be honest, I am surprised their fees were so much more than ours. They were four times higher than the district paid for legal fees.”
Asplund added that the board has 30 days to appeal the fee decision and is “strongly considering that option.”
Should the district choose to challenge the fee award granted to the parents, it would supplement its ongoing appeal of the federal court’s December 2024 ruling, currently under review by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit.
Oral arguments in the appeal are set for Sept. 11 in Chicago.
Bess-Tabb, who won her first board term in 2021 but lost re-election on April 1, 2025, attributes the legal fee award to the District’s refusal to negotiate, stating, “Judge Hawley would have never had to get involved or make this ruling if the district came to the table in good faith.”
Asked if she planned to seek further damages, Bess-Tabb said she remains focused on her child, adding, “We want to ensure that our child is fairly receiving the federally and state protected appropriate services.”
Legal battle over education placement
In December, a federal judge reversed a previous administrative ruling and ordered Galesburg District 205 to keep a student with disabilities in the Galesburg school system instead of a school in Peoria. The judgment, filed Dec. 6, 2024, in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of Illinois, ruled in favor of a lawsuit filed by the child’s parents.
WGIL reported on Oct. 11 that attorneys representing then Galesburg school board member Pamella Bess-Tabb and her husband filed a federal lawsuit against District 205 and the Illinois State Board of Education, claiming they failed to guarantee their child an appropriate education as required by the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act.
According to court documents, the parents initiated the lawsuit to enforce their child’s “right to attend school along with children who do not have disabilities, and with appropriate supports and services.”
The district appealed on Jan. 3, arguing legal missteps.
The district, in its appeal, documents numerous behavioral issues with the then 5½-year-old student, including physical aggression toward staff and students; verbal outbursts including curse words and threats; throwing objects; and destroying property.”
The child is now going on 9 years old, according to Bess-Tabb.
The school district said the child’s behaviors are too severe for public school, even with supports, citing legal precedents. A hearing officer initially ruled in favor of the district, but a district court later sided with the parents, ordering the student to continue his education at a Galesburg elementary school.
Advocacy and criticism
Bess-Tabb criticized the district’s approach as “non-collaborative, non-productive, and at times unethical,” calling the appeal “fiscally irresponsible” and “a mismanagement of publicly supported money.”
She said neurodivergent children are “highly intelligent and brilliant.”
“Educational systems do not question that a wheelchair ramp is needed for children with physical disabilities, they provide the ramp and ensure it stays in working order to remain compliant,” she said. “Children with non-visible disabilities need IEP’s and (a Section) 504 as a ramp to access the educational environment and they have a legal right to the least restrictive environment along non-disabled peers.
“ADHD is one of the most common diagnosed childhood behavioral diagnosis that exists. It is well studied and clinically manageable.”
In response to criticism about suing the district she served, Bess-Tabb emphasized that her role as a parent supersedes her former titles as a school board member and a licensed clinical social worker, explaining that legal action was a last resort after unsuccessful collaborative efforts with the district.
“I am first and foremost a parent and that takes priority over all other titles I will ever attain or hold,” she said.