Copyright 2022 All Rights Reserved.

December 3, 2022

Clark Co. Park District Commissioners served with demand to comply with law –

By John Kraft & Kirk Allen

On February 20, 2015

CLARK CO., IL. (ECWd) –

We were notified today that the Clark County Park District Commissioners and the Executive Director were served with a letter demanding they comply with their non-discretionary duties to comply with the Park District Code.

This letter was sent to them by a resident and voter of the district.

The Section of the code, 70 ILCS 1205, the letter referenced was:

(70 ILCS 1205/4-6) (from Ch. 105, par. 4-6)
Sec. 4-6. No member of the board of any park district, nor any
person, whether in the employ of said board or otherwise, shall have power to create any debt, obligation, claim or liability, for or on account of said park district, or the monies or property of the same, except with the express authority of said board conferred at a meeting thereof and duly recorded in a record of its proceedings.
(Source: Laws 1951, p. 113.)

It is well known, and a common occurrence, that this Park District and some of its commissioners continuously violate this section by authorizing work to be performed without express approval of the board during a public meeting.

This letter is the first step in a Writ of Mandamus, which would ask the Court to order them to fully comply with the Park District Code. Any such writ, as I understand it from a little research, must give them official written notice of the demand that they comply – prior to filing any such writ if they continue to violate the law. In other words, they must first be given the opportunity to correct, or come in to compliance, prior to filing a writ.

The letter is below:

[gview file=”https://edgarcountywatchdogs.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/Writ-Demand-Of-Compliance-SENT.pdf”]

 

 

 

 

 

SHARE THIS

Share on facebook
Share on twitter
Share on print

RELATED

3 Comments
  • Dave L.
    Posted at 22:21h, 20 February

    Interesting to say the least……..

  • franklin
    Posted at 06:28h, 21 February

    Why was the letter back dated ?

    • jmkraft
      Posted at 07:56h, 21 February

      I believe that is the date it was mailed.

$