Copyright 2024 All Rights Reserved.

July 12, 2024

Algonquin Township Clerk – Legal bill disputes her verbal claim on record destruction

By Kirk Allen & John Kraft

On June 7, 2018

McHenry Co. (ECWd) –

May 2018 Road & Bridge Budget Hearing – “I didn’t destroy any records, nor do I have any intent to destroy records.”

So if there is no intent to destroy records can anyone explain why there are legal bills for researching the destruction of records two months before she makes this claim?  If you have no intent to destroy any records why discuss destruction approval with your attorney, which cost the taxpayers more money?

3/20/2018 – ……..” conference re destruction approval by local records officer”

Not convinced her words are disputed by the legal bills?

4/13/2018 – “correspondence with client re state process for records destruction and effect on pending suit”

So if there is no intent to destroy records as she claimed, why only one month before her claim in the budget hearing do we find more billing regarding records destruction and the effect it would have on the pending suit?

Clearly, she wants to destroy records.  If not, why rack up legal bills discussing how to destroy records and how doing it properly may affect the pending suit?

Are matters worse than taxpayers have been lead to believe?

01/04/2018 – “meeting with client re evidence of records disposal by Supervisor and R. Provenzano;

This billing indicates the Clerk has evidence that the Supervisor and R. Provenzano have destroyed records.

Two weeks later, Provenzano is terminated and banned from the premises.  Was Provenzano’s termination tied to this claimed evidence of record disposal?  The Northwest Herald reported that the trustees commended the Supervisor for terminating Provenzano.  I wonder how many of those knew there was billing from the Clerks lawyer for meeting with her regarding “evidence” of records disposal by not just Provenzano, but also the Township Superivosr Lutzow?

Records destruction is a criminal offense.  A felony under the local records act.

(50 ILCS 205/4)Sec. 4. (a) Except as otherwise provided in subsection (b) of this Section, all public records made or received by, or under the authority of, or coming into the custody, control or possession of any officer or agency shall not be mutilated, destroyed, transferred, removed or otherwise damaged or disposed of, in whole or in part, except as provided by law. Any person who knowingly, without lawful authority and with the intent to defraud any party, public officer, or entity, alters, destroys, defaces, removes, or conceals any public record commits a Class 4 felony. 

How ironic that people continue to attack the one person who is trying to protect the records when in fact the paper trail points to record destruction going on and money being spent to destroy them properly.

In light of all the violations of law that have been identified in this Township, it does make you wonder if the attempt to protect people by destroying records is much larger than many believed? It would appear the Gasser suit to protect records might need to be amended to name some other parties.

Listen to the melt-down:

Our work is funded entirely thru donations and we
ask that you consider donating at the below link.


Share on facebook
Share on twitter
Share on print


  • Jannie
    Posted at 15:35h, 07 June Reply

    This is all making my head swim!!

  • Cindy
    Posted at 02:16h, 08 June Reply

    We are living through Spygate, Irangate, and now Millergate.

Post A Comment