JERSEYVILLE, IL. (ECWd) –
“Illinois Alluvial Regional Water Company” – LOL
Pretty catchy title – however, the fact remains, neither Carlinville nor Dorchester have statutory authority to do what they are doing and their attorney, Mr. David Foreman, gave bad “legal advice.”
OK, so we have a “Regional Water Concept” being ram-rodded forward at all cost, even at the cost of lying to the public, trying to end a meeting without public comment, and conducting another illegal meeting without properly posting an agenda and having the meeting in an inconvenient place.
The November 30, 2017 “Meeting”
- A notice was posted at Carlinville City Hall
- NO agenda was posted as required under the Open Meetings Act
- The meeting was held in a location not convenient to the public (45 or so miles from Carlinville)
- The meeting was held in a private building where attendees might be apprehensive about entering
- A majority of a quorum of the Carlinville City Council discussed the public business of Carlinville
Fosterburg Water District
What is the big secret about Fosterburg Water District?
Everyone knows they pulled out of this “company” – FWD even voted to withdraw from the regional water concept and retract their $50k “seed money” at their last public meeting.
The people at this regional meeting act completely ignorant of Fosterburg’s decision – which leads us to think that maybe there are some behind-the-scenes dealings going on with the FWD and this company.
There is no other reasonable excuse for not knowing that 1/3 of your Board and their $50,000 are no longer taking part of the concept.
The Attorney for IARWC and Gateway Water Company
David Foreman, the attorney, when the board was confronted, for the second meeting in a row about the statutory authority of Carlinville to join this nonprofit water company – the attorney for this alleged company (and also for Gateway Regional Water Company) spoke up to give his “expert” legal advice:
“the underlying authority for this organization is Article VII, Section 2 of the Illinois Constitution. and there is case-law pursuant to that section authorizing these types of agreements“
Of course, he didn’t answer the question, and what he did quote is complete hogwash, and I believe he knew it at the time he gave his “legal advice” – Glad it was “free” advice because it sure wasn’t worth paying for.
He quoted Article VII, Section 2 of the Illinois Constitution, which has absolutely nothing to do with this situation, but rather deals exclusively with County Territory, Boundaries and Seats:
SECTION 2. COUNTY TERRITORY, BOUNDARIES AND SEATS (a) The General Assembly shall provide by law for the formation, consolidation, merger, division, and dissolution of counties, and for the transfer of territory between counties. (b) County boundaries shall not be changed unless approved by referendum in each county affected. (c) County seats shall not be changed unless approved by three-fifths of those voting on the question in a county-wide referendum.
Try again Mr. Foreman…but we still believe if there were any resemblance to any statutory authority that Carlinville would have surely waived that in front of our faces already. Oh, and please read up on Dillon’s Rule.
Once again we call on the City of Carlinville to provide their statutory authority to participate in the formation and operation of this “company.”
Our work is funded entirely thru donations and we
ask that you consider donating at the below link.
anonPosted at 14:44h, 01 December
“Stop everything right there!”
“Stop everything right there!”
Robert O. BoguePosted at 08:39h, 03 December
What an enlightening video. An alleged attorney wrongfully quotes an irrelevant law in support of his position to the sheep governing and in attendance at this meeting. He then offers a discounted rate for his services.
The sheep, hoping to enhance support; then claim they’re non for profit, with one hoping to gain more creditability by mentioning his former hero status. (Gosh, I hope he didn’t misspeak on that point).
Remember, attorneys are paid to argue on your behalf…and outside a court of law they will say pretty much anything. Oh yes they do, and this attorney is interested in his profit; he’s not working for free. It’s not just the rate he charges, but the rate at which he completes his work, the total billable hours. Get it?
To the larger picture. The board members, the sheep if you will, need to verify for themselves what is being said. Read Illinois Law, that is, unless you are unwilling to accept the proper conclusion and unable to accept disappointment.
Don’t believe that every single attorney is knowledgeable. Understand, in every court case, there are two attorneys in opposition with only one winner. That’s only 50-50..but they both get paid rather well.
Damming the opposition while begging sympathy for an unsubstantiated opinion is patently disingenuous. Get the facts, read Illinois Law and don’t be afraid of an intelligent discussion. If you can’t read, learn how. Follow the law. Don’t rely on others to think for you.
This debate isn’t about water for all, it’s about a flawed, illegal process and perhaps the draw of large federal dollars floating around in the offing. That’s what the sheep said, federal dollars…meaning our tax money.
Ask the question, “Says who and under what authority”.
Matt TurleyPosted at 20:01h, 03 December
SocratesPosted at 15:24h, 14 December
That would be Article VII Section 10, the Intergovernmental Cooperation Article.
jmkraftPosted at 15:27h, 14 December
That is the article he was probably talking about, but even that article does not give them the statutory authority. The keyword being “Intergovernmental” and not “Intergovernmental and nonprofit private corporations”