EDGAR CO. (ECWd) –
It is encouraging to see so many of the recent issues of public concern finally showing up in the local paper, as we have been hammering some of these issues for over a year. However; there needs to be some clarification on the printed information in relation to the facts and the statutes these public officials are bound to, so that the public can better assess what is really going on. Some of those facts I know the Beacon are aware of as they were at the same meeting I was, however, several other issues they may not be aware of without further digging into the statutes.
Paris Beacon -Published Thursday January 10th, 2012.
“No meeting for Airport Board”
- The law is the Open Meetings Act, not the Illinois Pubic Meetings Act.
- Selection of replacements to the Airport Board is handled by the County Board, NOT the Airport Board.
- If they are now only an Advisory Board then all they can do is advise the County Board. Advisory Boards don’t take action. (more exposure on this in another article!)
- The County Board KNEW there was no Chairman for the Airport Board and that fact was presented in two previous county board study sessions, of which they chose to wait to appoint anyone till things calm down! So to take the position the root cause was a resignation of the past Chairman is both misleading and in direct conflict with positions taken in the study sessions! They CHOSE not to fill the vacancy and the Beacon was there for that discussion!
Paris Beacon – Published Thursday January 10th, 2012.
“ECSSAS loan does belong to County”
- How can an ECSSAA Loan belong to anyone other than ECSSAA?
- During the past study session with the County Board, I explicitly outlined that the only name on that loan is Edgar County, and the very document presented by Jeff Voigt proved that. The Beacon was at that meeting.
- There was no uncertainty about the loan! The loan was illegally taken out the last time by Jim Keller with no authorization from the board, or even knowledge of the County Board or the County Treasure. The bank officer under Federal Guidelines is required to have a resolution from the public body that would have authorized Mr. Keller to take out the loan and that never happened. Have Federal laws been broken as well? YES! This was all exposed at the last study session. The Beacon was at that meeting.
- Any speculation the county was a co-signer was simply wrong, as all they had to do was look at the loan paper in Mr. Voigt’s hands. The ONLY obligated party on that document was the County of Edgar and I advised them of that during that meeting, as well as over a year ago so I’m not sure why that fact wasn’t reported on! The Beacon was at that meeting.
- The loan was not to rehab the building! It was to purchase the property for Dee Burgin to run his business and the resolution of that purchase only authorized a loan in 2003 for $255K not $300K. The County Board illegally took out a loan in this whole scheme and dumped $45K of it into their General Fund.
- Full Details can be found here.
Paris Beacon – Published Friday January 11, 2003
“Community members want answers”
- Mark Isaf instructed the speaker to schedule an appointment so they could discuss the matter in a more appropriate setting? Is this now confirmation We The People have a right to schedule an appointment to discuss matters? That is a HUGE step forward if that is in fact the case, however, I am betting that won’t happen. I have tried for over 9 months to schedule a meeting with Mr. Isaf regarding an opinion document he wrote for the past board and the multiple inaccurate claims in that document, and he has refused to meet with me. (I will cover that in detail shortly)
It will prove very interesting on this “appointment to discuss matters” as anytime a majority of the quorum is present it constitutes a public meeting. If it is a public meeting, then how on earth can anything be discussed with a 5 minute time limit for the public to speak, let alone with instructions from the state’s attorney that it is not a question and answer session.
Is the implication that we can now have the issue placed on the agenda so an open discussion can be had? I have tried that in the past and was told I have no right to have anything placed on the agenda.
We will attempt to get an appointment with the entire county board to discuss matters and will report on how that process works, assuming it does.