Copyright 2024 All Rights Reserved.

May 25, 2024

AG Confirms Edgar County Board Violated the Open Meetings Act

By John Kraft & Kirk Allen

On October 8, 2013


The Illinois Attorney General’s Office finally confirms that the Edgar County Board violated Section 2.02(a) of the Open Meetings Act on November 7, 2012, when they held a public meeting without posting its agenda at least 48 hours in advance of the meeting.

This was at the direction of Mark Isaf, the Edgar County State’s Attorney, and Jim Keller, former County Board Chairman, who incorrectly advised them that they could simply put the closed session at the beginning of the meeting and drag it out for at least a half an hour, then go back into open session to continue with the meeting.

If you recall, this was the meeting where the former county board ram-rodded reappointments of the ETSB (911) board thru at the last minute – and we are still stuck with those same goof-balls that handed the coordinator a 4 year contract and $500.00 per month just to drive to work and back home every day.

What is more telling about this situation is the proof of the miserable failure of Lisa Madigan and the Illinois Attorney General’s office in timely resolution into violations of the Open Meetings Act and violations of the Freedom Of Information Act. To take 10 months from final arguement, to issuing an opinion, on something that both parties agreed upon, is rediculous – but hey, this is one of the faster moving complaints. 
[gview file=””]


Share on facebook
Share on twitter
Share on print


  • watchdogwatcher
    Posted at 14:06h, 08 October Reply

    That was a bunch of nothing.

    • frank
      Posted at 18:51h, 08 October Reply

      taxpayers money used again for john and kirks big ego

      • jmkraft
        Posted at 21:38h, 08 October Reply

        I’ll fix it for you:
        “Taxpayer’s money used again because elected officials and their legal representative cannot follow the law, and if fact admit to actively acting as a group for the purpose of knowingly taking measures to violate the law.”

        BTW, this was all done at the last meeting of the old board, not with the board we have now.

        • jim bob
          Posted at 19:10h, 09 October Reply

          ok mr kraft who is responsible for physicaling putting up meeting notice and do you go and wait to see it is posted 48hrs or does one of your informants tell you
          if its the clerks office then why arent they held responible for not doing it right please give me your best bs I know you will any way

          • jmkraft
            Posted at 21:04h, 09 October

            It’s no secret the responsible party for posting the agenda is the clerk of the board. Which is an action of the board and the reason the AG determines the board violated the act instead of an individual.
            It’s no different than any other situations in which a person (employed) with a public body breaks the law, it is the public body that is responsible – and pays any settlements – even 20 years later. The public body also pays any judgements based on employee conduct – like a deputy found guilty of violating a person’s civil rights…the public body (through its insurance) paid that judgement.

          • skipper
            Posted at 02:37h, 10 October

            ok who was the acting clerk of the board at that time

          • jmkraft
            Posted at 07:51h, 10 October

            There is no acting clerk, it is always the County Clerk, that is one of his jobs by statute.

          • ginger
            Posted at 09:51h, 10 October

            so just another of the many small errors are clerk has made
            was that a day you kept him busy so he couldnt get it posted correctly

          • jmkraft
            Posted at 10:45h, 10 October

            If you would keep the same username it would easier to follow.

          • mary ann
            Posted at 11:09h, 10 October

            who cares about user name just answer questions

  • Blake Stiff
    Posted at 15:32h, 08 October Reply

    Blake Stiff liked this on Facebook.

  • Michael Mastin
    Posted at 19:58h, 08 October Reply

    What does it matter that you and John were present? What about the other citizens that were not informed or properly notified? Why on Earth was it so important to rush these decisions and violate the law? I am sorry but if things are being rushed thru without proper notice, it sure sounds like that someone did not want anyone to have the opportunity to object. What is wrong with this country these days? Violation of ANY LAW needs to addressed and prosecuted. A citizen is not given a pass for speeding, for theft, for drinking and driving, etc. By God follow the laws or get the hell out! These people are supposed to be the pillars of the community and not play games with the rules be cause they have the power to abuse! What will it take for people to get fed up with corruption at county, city, state and federal levels. Get out there and raise your voices and let these scum bags know that you are sick and tired of this BS! Privilege of position should not me freedom from prosecution!

  • Old dude that left
    Posted at 18:56h, 09 October Reply

    It was 30 minutes shy of 48 hours. Come on guys they are doing much worse things out there than being 30 minutes shy of the 48 hour rule. This while technically illegal was not worth the fight. Fight the big fights and people will take you seriously. Fight these and people just look at you funny. Do you really think these 30 minutes amounted to a hill of beans? The law says it is illegal to travel in excess of the 55 mile per hour speed limit. If there was a officer writing tickets for 56 MPH in a 55 MPH zone you all would be crucifying them. That is what this hole thing amounted to.

    • jmkraft
      Posted at 19:21h, 09 October Reply

      OK, here is the big picture on this particular incident.
      It was an illegal meeting and had the AG responded within the appropriate amount of time, could have and should have nullified the appointments to the ETSB (911) Board. These appointments were made at the final meeting prior to a new county board taking over – which enabled the previous board to re-appoint these members, even thought their current (at the time) appointments were not expiring. Another attempt, and successful in this situation, of the previous board to protect what they had been doing for years.
      So in light of the failure of the AG in timely responses, we have started an attempt to figure out how to mandate timely responses and opinions of the AG.
      I still have some going back 2 years waiting on their response – the AG received their final arguements from me and the 911 board well over a year ago and they have been telling me for months that “it will be finalized this week”. It gets tiring at times, but we will figure it out.

      • teddy
        Posted at 20:15h, 09 October Reply

        who posts the notice

  • Patsy Runyan
    Posted at 18:32h, 10 October Reply

    Patsy Runyan liked this on Facebook.

Post A Comment