Copyright 2024 All Rights Reserved.

July 20, 2024

Watchdogs Position Validated by the Feds and the State!

By Kirk Allen & John Kraft

On January 16, 2013

As I reported here, Chris Patrick was sitting in a position with a potential conflict of interest even though he insisted that was not the case since he was somehow taught to read and comprehend differently than the rest of the world.  I covered the reading comprehension here.

So here we are a month later from when I first wrote about this issue and my findings of fact have been validated by the Office of Chief Council for the Illinois Department of Transportation and the US Department of Transportation.

Mr. Patrick’s position that simply disclosing the conflict of interest is not valid as he has insisted and that fact was confirmed by both agencies referenced.

“The District has received responses from both the Federal HWA and IDOTS Office of Chief Council.  BOTH offices CONCURRED that Mr. Patrick’s participation on the County Board is a potential conflict of interest in accordance with both Federal and State Regulations/laws.”

I reported that the options to eliminate conflicts of interest are limited and I outlined the only 3 options our research pointed to.

  1. Resign from Public Office
  2. Liquidate all interest in Zimmerly Ready Mix
  3. Never provide ready mix to ANY government job in Edgar County that involves work with County Highway personnel or assets

As the documents from the state reflect, its clear Mr. Patrick insisted that the state provide the direction to resolve this issue instead of the States Attorney.  That is a very odd request considering its the States Attorney’s obligation to provide legal opinions to the County Board members, not the state.  I guess Mr. Patrick missed that in his reading of the statute, or maybe he just comprehends it differently.
    Sec. 3-9005. Powers and duties of State's attorney.

(7) To give his opinion, without fee or reward, to any county officer in his county, upon any question or law relating to any criminal or other matter, in which the people or the county may be concerned.

Even more confusing is Mr. Patrick’s request to the state for some form he claimed was referenced in the second to last sentence of the Federal conflict of interest law.  No such form is referenced in that Federal Regulation.  Must be another reading comprehension issue.

 From the US Department of Transportation:

 “A waiver or public records disclosure does not exist to address the conflict described above”

So what advice did the US DOT have for the situation?

In part – “A solution that meets the FEDERAL regulations would be for the executive to recuse himself from such actions for Edgar County and for the county to establish authority for another individual”.

Its all in the wording Mr. Patrick!  They have advised you on a solution that pertains to the FEDERAL regulations.  The US DOT makes NO reference that such a solution clears you of the State Law relating to Prohibited Interests in Contracts.

The second portion of their solution pertained to pavement selection decisions and suggests a letter stating his firm would not compete for works in the project.

What was one of the three solutions I outlined?

“Never provide ready mix to ANY government job in Edgar County that involves work with County Highway personnel or assets.”

Sounds like the Feds agree with that position so now we need to stay focused on the State Statute and Illinois Court opinions on matters pertaining to Conflicts of Interest.  I will even provide an Attorney General Opinion that has a very interesting statement that also supports everything I have reported on in this matter!

 You don’t have to vote to establish the conflict!

Having an Interest IS sufficient to establish the conflict!

“Savaiano committed the offense of “Interest in Contracts” (PEOPLE v. SAVAIANO)

Interest in contracts IS an offense stated by the Appellate Court of Illinois – Second District (2nd Division) (PEOPLE v. SAVAIANO)

In People v. Savaiano (1976), 66 Ill.2d 7, 15, this court construed section 3 as barring an official not onlyfrom having a private interest in situations in which a binding contract exists but also from allowing himself to be placed in a situation where he may be called upon to act or vote in the making of a contract in which he has an interest. The evil exists because the official is able to influence the process of forming a contract.”

Conflicts of interest do not appear to be eliminated by recusing from voting under state law/case law precedent!  

Such a position is not only upheld by court cases but also by the attorney general!

As quoted from the AG Opinion:  “Therefore, it is Irrelevant  whether an interested person takes part in the letting of the contract or votes thereon.  If the officer’s “DUTIES” are such that he “COULD” or “MIGHT” (emphasis added) be called upon to take any action in the matter of making a contract, that fact disqualifies him from having any interest in the contract”! 

(Attorney General Opinion- page 4 & 5 for that quote)

Having an INTEREST is sufficient to establish the conflict, of which if Chris Patrick is still the owner of Zimmerly Ready mix it would appear his interest in that would be sufficient to establish the conflict when crossed with case law and AG Opinions.

I guess the States Attorney is not going to look at what appears to be a clear conflict of interest in the payments that have already gone to Zimmerly Ready Mix for Airport Projects, of which Mr. Patrick was the appointed official in charge! That information was reported here.  Doing my homework, as directed by Chris Patrick, I found some very disturbing things.

After asking Jimmy Wells, the airport Manager about Zimmerly projects at the airport he informed me “the only Zimmerly Ready Mix that the airport ever got was DONATED”.  I assured him that was not correct and that we have identified the invoices and payments to Zimmerly.  When I shared that he claimed to have “NO CLUE” what Zimmerly Ready Mix might have provided at the airport.

If he has no clue who approved the project?  No approval appears in the County Board minutes so any claim that it was the County Board wont hold water! The only other party left that could have approved such a project was the Airport board, of which Chris Patrick has been in charge of for I believe 25 years based on his pre-election interview by the farm bureau.

All those facts aside, lets assume business as usual is going to take place and Chris Patrick is going to be allowed to do business with the county and townships provided he doesn’t discuss or vote on those matters.

An action forbidden to other county board members by the way!

Does that work for the people?

Does the advice of the OCC to Chris Patrick lead to a bigger concern for Mr. Patrick? 

I think many will agree it does after reading this!

I don’t see how a public official can intentionally refuse to perform his mandatory duties as required by law.  Is it fair to the voters in Mr. Patricks district to only be represented on certain duties and have no representation on others?  I think not!

As an elected official who was duly elected to perform certain duties, which many include the voting on matters, requires him to perform those duties and an oath of office confirmed he agreed to perform those duties!

What is even more troubling is as the Chairman of the County Board he is required to cast a vote in any matter that is a tie vote from the board.  How is he going to refuse to do his job if or when the vote is tied?

Did he inform the voters prior to the election that he could only represent them on certain matters in the county but not others because he has to make money providing his materials to the very public body he was seeking to become a member of.

As an elected official, specifically a county board member, he is called on to vote under certain powers and duties in that capacity, of which he is required to perform, and took his oath that he would uphold those very obligations.

Apply the Attorney Generals words!

If the officer’s “DUTIES” are such that he “COULD” or “MIGHT” (emphasis added) be called upon to take any action in the matter of making a contract, that fact disqualifies him from having any interest in the contract”.

Does Mr. Patrick’s DUTIES put him in a position that he COULD be called upon to take any action in the matter of a contract?  YES!  And so established with all the documentation!

Is intentionally failing, or in this case, refusing,  to perform any mandatory duty as required by law a concern?   I believe the statutes on this entire matter are clear and its not just a matter of a potential conflict of interest!

(720 ILCS 5/33-3) (from Ch. 38, par. 33-3)
Sec. 33-3. Official Misconduct.)

A public officer or employee or special government agent commits misconduct when, in his official capacity or capacity as a special government agent, he commits any of the following acts:
(a) Intentionally or recklessly fails to perform any mandatory duty as required by law.

"A public officer or employee or special government agent convicted of violating any provision of this Section forfeits his office or employment or position as a special government agent. In addition, he commits a Class 3 felony."

With all this information will the public outcry for doing the right thing be heard? 

Will the States Attorney advise Mr. Patrick that State Law still applies and he needs to either resign or never sell materials to the County and or Townships?

Will the public tolerate Chris Patrick being allowed to provide his materials by simply not performing his duties of voting on matters before the board even though he was elected to perform those duties?

I pray not, however lets not forget the actions of the former Sheriff, Tim Crippes and his use of his position in public office while at the same time using his private business as another source of revenue by fixing the very police vehicles he is in charge of.

idot & us dot CONFLICT ARTICLE


Share on facebook
Share on twitter
Share on print


  • Bradley Cooley
    Posted at 02:05h, 17 January Reply

    Bradley Cooley liked this on Facebook.

  • Robert O. Bogue
    Posted at 12:22h, 17 January Reply

    You quoted Jimmy Wells as saying he has “no clew”. Is it
    then fair to say, that he’s clewless on this matter as
    well as on their issues? I think so. It seems clear to me
    from the history we’re now living…
    that a single validated complaint against either Jimmy or Chris doesn’t warrant any
    action and most certainly no action in a timely fashion
    from our county board. And that would be a single complaint.
    How many issues have been raised on both of these bad boys?
    Has it been 5, 10, 15 or more? In the last board meeting I personally raised more
    than 20 separate issues that included incompetence,
    dereliction of duty, flagrant abuse of
    authority, abuse of county resources, conflict of interest
    and failure to pay $12,000.00 in hanger rent (theft by
    most standards). Why hasn’t the county asked for this
    hanger rent? Why hasn’t the county accepted hanger rent
    money that’s been offered, when it’s needing the money
    for our jail and other things? Does anybody happen to
    know how many validated complaints it will take to get
    rid of these carpet baggers? Has anyone actually counted
    the number of outrageous and illegal activities? What
    is it that keeps our County Board from moving on this?
    Are they in disbelief or denial? Are they waiting for
    the umteenth opinion (as an excuse) before taking any
    action? Come on guys. It only took Jimmy two days to
    issue an eviction notice for no reason after the
    breastfeeding issue was brought to your attention in
    this past November’s board meeting. So, we’re now past
    the 3 month mark. Rob

  • concerned
    Posted at 15:48h, 17 January Reply

    And every time you get on your rant, no matter how justified,
    which it is, you are hurting your son more than helping.
    People on that board DO NOT like you and your persistence
    will be to the detriment of your son, unfortunately! Stay silent
    and let your son fix the issue!

  • hahahaa
    Posted at 16:25h, 17 January Reply

    Little advise…please continue to associate with and aid rob bougue. It
    just verifies you guys are crazy and people really don’t care what crazy
    has to say. thnks again

    • jmkraft
      Posted at 06:50h, 20 January Reply

      So we should take advise from someone too scared to put his
      or her name on the line?

      That is funny.

  • hahahaa
    Posted at 16:28h, 17 January Reply

    Good hide behind -Disclaimer: We are not attorneys and don’t pretend
    to be. The information presented here relies primarily on information
    available through public records. We are not responsible for documentation
    from government entities and other public sources which may be incomplete
    and/or inaccurate.

    • jmkraft
      Posted at 06:48h, 20 January Reply

      So you think we should rely on our local governments to be
      truthfull with us and provide the complete documentation when
      they can’t even provide it to State and Federal investigators?

      They can’t even keep complete copies of real estate loans – or
      at least they says they don’t.

      They certainly can’t properly complete applications for
      tax exempt status on real estate without withholding
      crucial information from the IDOR.

  • Robert O. Bogue
    Posted at 21:48h, 17 January Reply

    Dear Concerned,
    Thanks for your great advice who ever you are. So you’re point is, I’m telling the
    truth and justified in what I’ve been saying, but because I haven’t said it in the
    way you would like to hear it, I’m not well liked? And, because it was said more
    often that you would like to hear it, then I’m obviously doing greater damage than
    those attacking my son and I should stay silent?
    Silence is what got us into this mess. But, let’s skip ahead and try a little harder
    to get the facts straight on who’s hurting who; or have we become so lost in our
    emotional attachments that we cannot think clearly? The relentless an unwarranted
    attacks on my son, daughter in law and granddaughter, my son’s business, his employees
    and friends are what? Compliments? Where have you been? Have you not studied the issues
    at hand, been to the county board meetings and tried to absorb what is happening here?

  • Judy Pufahl
    Posted at 02:48h, 18 January Reply

    Judy Pufahl liked this on Facebook.

  • Gail Heltsley Steidl
    Posted at 15:05h, 19 January Reply

    Gail Heltsley Steidl liked this on Facebook.

  • Kirk Allen
    Posted at 07:03h, 20 January Reply

    Not attorney’s but it is rather comforting to have so many
    acknowledge that our analysis was spot on!

    1 of 2 things will happen. Chris Patrick resigns from
    the County Board or is forbidden from selling ready
    mix to the county and any county or federal funded project.

    If he fails to resign and CONTINUES to sell to the
    county, he SHOULD be arrested for breaking the law,
    just as many other elected officials have been.

    Considering he has already sold materials to the county
    while in office, most have agreed he violated the law.

    I am confident that the State’s Attorney knows the
    law and will apply it accordingly.

  • stevemo43
    Posted at 16:38h, 27 January Reply

    First a disclaimer. I do not live Paris, nor in the State of Illinois. I have no financial interest in the Edgar County Airport, nor any of the Edgar County Boards or Commissions.

    I discovered this whole fiasco when I went looking for information regarding airports in Illinois.

    The problem of “conflict of interest” needs resolution by either resignation or by placing such business interests “in blind trust”. Apparently, the latter is not forthcoming.

    So, where does that leave you? Someone, with “the balls”, needs to file suit in State Court requesting the removal of the Airport Advisory Board and the Presiding Commissioner of Edgar County, IL.

    Only then will the slow, rumbling wheel of justice start to roll. Hopefully, those smart enough to hear the sound will get out and by doing it gracefully can retain their reputation and standing.

    In my home state, this procedure was instigated twice and was successful. I wish you luck and much courage.

    • jmkraft
      Posted at 17:38h, 27 January Reply

      The business is tied up in a divorce, so that’s unlikely.

      It just shows his “charactor flaws.”

Post A Comment