Copyright 2024 All Rights Reserved.

December 26, 2024

Shelby County Conflict Recognized? – Board Member Fails To Vote As Law Requires –

By Kirk Allen & John Kraft

On December 12, 2024

Shelby Co., Ill. (ECWd) –

Shelby County Board member Austin Prichard had numerous items on the agenda for purchase approval for the Shelby County Dive Team which Prichard is also the Commander (Department Head) of.

In a previous article, we covered the alleged conflict of interest involved with Prichard holding both offices.

In true form to Shelby County, Prichard failed to vote as the law requires.

55 ILCS 5/2-1005 – Likewise, the yeas and nays shall be taken upon the question of the passage of any other ordinance, resolution, or motion at the request of any county board member and shall be recorded in the minutes. The changes to this Section made by this amendatory Act of the 99th General Assembly are declarative of existing law and do not change the substantive operation of this Section.
(Source: P.A. 99-774, eff. 8-12-16.)

Rather than vote yea or nay as the law requires, Prichard voted present, which appears to indicate he recognizes the conflict involved with being a county board member as well as the head of a department within the county.  We note that the County Board legal counsel, Ruth Woolery, sat silent when this violation took place.  His failure to vote accordingly points to people in his district not having proper representation on the matter before the board.

More to come on this subject.

 

 

SHARE THIS

Share on facebook
Share on twitter
Share on print

RELATED

34 Comments
  • Dr. Watson
    Posted at 17:07h, 19 December Reply

    Edgar County Watchdogs c/o Mr. John Kraft & Mr. Kirk Allen:

    I have much respect for your manner in your company’s investigative reporting on the operating characteristics of the Shelby County Dive team commander. A tip of the iceberg became apparent in your responsiveness to his email inquiries which you eventually surfaced without a shred of unkind regards.

    Now years later, in light of the many other issues surface; both resolved and otherwise, is the matter of the fee schedule. To be honest, I struggled to understand how/why the county allowed that issue to languish several years at all, but then again for a significant period of time before finally appearing as an item for a committee and then board agenda. It seems to be languishing still. I gather the county has no intention of publishing the document authorizing the fee schedule on the county website.

    For that and another reason, I would like to request a follow-up news piece on the activity purported in the meetings minutes whereby the matter seems to be finally being address. “Seems” is the keyword as I have no reason to believe it was accomplished. II should think a communications paper trail between members Mayhall, Pritchard and SA Woolery would document the purported activity. I should also think the matter resolved, at least to the satisfaction of member Pritchard. With that, I’ve never felt less assured, however.

    Anyway, in exchange for the follow-up news piece, I would be happy to provide the Edgar County Watchdogs a commitment of my own time and energy. I possess goodwill and a strategic mindset. For purpose of your work, I offer a laypersons knowledge of law and a better than average understanding of its application in Illinois. I do not have access to legal libraries such as West Law, however. I can offer skills in data collection, analysis, and reporting.

    Thank you for your consideration. Please advise.

  • Dr. Watson
    Posted at 13:10h, 19 December Reply

    JOHN KRAFT & KIRK ALLEN:

    The assertions made by the character commenting here as LIBERTY epitomize the sovereign attitude certain locals espouse during county board meetings. Their apparent rejection of factual information, together with the absence of, logic and reason regarding the meaning of votes, compensation, and lame redirects, indicate a willingness to engage with others under false pretenses. Their virtual psychological abuses may be less harmful than other in-person forms.

    The opinion sought by SA Woolery will eventually be delivered, affirming not an appearance of a conflict, but one that were clearly established previously under the constitution and laws of the state. I gather Shelby’s sovereigns will still pay [it] no heed. Meanwhile, I suppose one of the less lazy lot of characters can move a representative to sponsor and file another house bill. However, unlike the recent counties code changes (Rescue Squad, Custom Farming, and Special Assistant), a house bill to resolve the conflict board member Pritchard willfully drew the public body into will most certainly fail. Indeed, such an effort would represent Shelby’s sovereigns’ will to waste resources, including others time and energy…again as the character LIBERTY does here.

    My office sign for LIBERTY and its Shelby likenesses now reads:

    Closed for Good
    Best of Luck.

    • Character formerly known as Liberty
      Posted at 15:23h, 19 December Reply

      Your reply made me giggle. Sorry but facts are facts on the Shelby courthouse website. If you don’t want questions asked of an article, make sure facts can’t be found and brought into the narrative that seems to run rampant to the one sided view. I have a different view. So be it.

  • Liberty
    Posted at 18:37h, 15 December Reply

    Once again “Prosser” isn’t apples to apples. Both positions in the Prosser readings likely were paid. Pritchard is an unpaid volunteer. If there was a vote to give monies to the fire districts would Ross not be in the same position?

    • John Kraft & Kirk Allen
      Posted at 19:10h, 15 December Reply

      The Dive Team is part of Shelby County government. Pritchard is a department head with authority to spend public funds and “hire and fire” dive team members. Additionally, the county board votes on the hiring, firing, and discipline of the dive team commander, and that commander develops the dive team budget. Pay, or compensation, is possible in the county and dive team resolutions/policies. Ross is not a fire district trustee as far as we know, and fire district are not part of the county government.

      • Liberty
        Posted at 19:21h, 15 December Reply

        Funny you mention fire trustees, the county appoints those correct. When the district trustees are appointed for his fire department he represents and is an officer for, will he abstain from that vote?

        • John Kraft & Kirk Allen
          Posted at 19:50h, 15 December Reply

          You mentioned the fire districts, I only responded to what you mentioned. Depends on which Fire District. Some are appointed and some are elected.

          • Liberty
            Posted at 19:57h, 15 December

            So I’m guessing you all will investigate and reply. Since his trustees are likely appointed by the county board, he’d have potential to vote in his future” boss’s” correct.

        • Kirk Allen & John Kraft
          Posted at 21:28h, 15 December Reply

          The AG has addressed the conflicts for Fire Districts and since Ross is NOT the Chief or a trustee there is no conflict.

          • Liberty
            Posted at 22:26h, 15 December

            Where might that ruling be found

      • Liberty
        Posted at 10:20h, 16 December Reply

        There was an agenda item to give monies from the ARPA funds to the Fire Districts. It it would of came up to discussion and vote, where would his stance be? It would be a conflict as his district would receive those monies.

        • John Kraft & Kirk Allen
          Posted at 13:48h, 16 December Reply

          No conflict that we can find.

    • Dr. Watson
      Posted at 11:17h, 16 December Reply

      Since when are Shelby County Dive team volunteers not paid? According to Pritchard’s documentation, the answer is never…they’ve always been paid….part of their total compensation, which also includes insurance and paid trainings. Despite your assertion otherwise, a Granny Smith to Honey Crisp comparison is easily made with respect to the Prosser Rule. But if you’re repulsed to differing colors, textures or taste between the two, substitute an Abrosia or Gala for the tart Granny.

      Pivoting to member Ross in order to allege a similar conflict must be psychologically relieving to your bias.

      Liberty without justice becomes a despot’s friend.

      • Liberty
        Posted at 13:04h, 17 December Reply

        You are quite certain dive team members are paid for training? Where pray tell did you find that information, as the treasure’s reports shows no such information. As I have looked, I suppose a simple FOIA would set that assertion straight. I was asking questions to Ross as he is emergency services like Pritchard and has rank within his fire department and is more similar to the situation being discussed.

        • John Kraft & Kirk Allen
          Posted at 13:26h, 17 December Reply

          No similarity at all.

        • Dr. Watson
          Posted at 12:46h, 18 December Reply

          Yes. By paid training, I mean they do not have to pay for the cost of the training. Otherwise, the trainings and/or required PADI certifications are expensive to obtain. PADI certifications are good for life and are required for recreational scuba diving, for example.

          Since the book-keeping has only recently become the purview of the treasurer, and since the audit is only in draft form, it stands to reason there might be questions about pay and what not else. You’re free to consider Pritchard’s SOP and team member requirements to contemplate the historical pay and compensation of members. If you’d like to gain a better understanding of the value of the required certifications, please do explore the PADI website. Detailed information about training/PADI certification requirements can be found in Pritchard’s SOP, which is linked in this article:

          https://edgarcountywatchdogs.com/2023/06/shelby-county-dive-team-want-our-assistance-to-find-your-loved-one-pay-1000-00/?highlight=Dive%20Team

          • Liberty
            Posted at 10:23h, 19 December

            So, you expect volunteers to pay for their own trainings? Not sure what you are getting at here. Paying for required training isn’t a paycheck in these folks pockets by what you are implying. I expect it to be quite costly to maintain a diver. It isn’t like this is a marketable skill they can use to get a job. Since volunteers have left all sources of emergency services in droves, Shelby county and whomever else that has folks willing to step up and volunteer to give their time should be treated fairly and expect their expenses to be somewhat covered if there is budget money to obligate, otherwise you’ll expect a even less amount of folks willing to commit their time. The SOG/SOP says nothing about a payment to the volunteers, and unless you are willing to go back and prove there were checks written to the volunteers you are blowing in the breeze here. Implying that folks have been paid without proof is a slippery slope.

          • John Kraft & Kirk Allen
            Posted at 10:38h, 19 December

            Shelby County Board Resolution 2024-13, top of page 3, and signed on February 8, 2024, requires a payment to team members for callouts and for training. Diving certifications, training, and skills are marketable skills for jobs.

          • Liberty
            Posted at 10:50h, 19 December

            John and Kirk, resolution 2024-37….. “Catch up with the class” wouldn’t that supersede the previous

          • John Kraft & Kirk Allen
            Posted at 11:21h, 19 December

            Liberty, “Catch up with the class” – Resolution 2024-13 is the Resolution the State’s Attorney is using for the Dive Team as evidenced in the letter she sent to the Attorney General’s Opinions Bureau.

          • Liberty
            Posted at 12:30h, 19 December

            John/Kirk, I didn’t ask what was sent to the AG… I asked wouldn’t 24-13 supersede

  • PaulineR
    Posted at 21:49h, 13 December Reply

    Speaking of representation or lack thereof, let’s speak on the three-peat resignations of board members of late. Are we playing games with resigning multiple times only to return like the prodigal son, or are we going to do the job they were elected to do? Either resign and stay resigned or get in the seat and do the job your constituents elected you to do. This is absolutely asinine. Of course while you are busy pointing out things let’s point that out. Of course one can see the writing on the wall and the chess play that will take place soon. This just reeks of another act in the continuing sock puppet theatre presentation going on. I guess though if “they wanna quit let them quit” right?

    • John Kraft & Kirk Allen
      Posted at 10:16h, 14 December Reply

      They did resign. What’s the problem? Now new members can be appointed. Meanwhile, the residents in Prichard’s district are left without full representation in Dive Team matters. Their vote apparently doesn’t count – why are you not talking about that?

    • Justice Seeker
      Posted at 15:32h, 14 December Reply

      If you live in Shelby county, run for office and let’s see how long you want to be a part of the circus. It appears that the only folks who endure are those who harassed prior board members who did not share the same opinion then gained the support of a united group that seemingly cares about nothing but corruption and the county farm. But they sure paint a pretty picture. The only thing to be said to the train wreck in your pitiful little county is Best of Luck.

  • Jack Tarleton
    Posted at 15:31h, 13 December Reply

    f Prosser v. Village of Fox Lake, 91 Ill.2d 389 (1982) The watchdogs appear to be correct. A board member is not allowed to vote present, but must vote either “aye” or “nay.” If a majority of the entire board is required to sustain the vote, then the “present” vote must be counted as “aye.” I note that Liberty cites no authority for the contrary position. I have not read enough to know if Prosser is controlling authority, but it seems likely.

  • liberty
    Posted at 12:45h, 13 December Reply

    A “present” vote does not count towards or against the passage of a bill, but it contributes towards the quorum, which is the minimum number of Members required in attendance for the body to conduct business legally.

    • John Kraft & Kirk Allen
      Posted at 13:27h, 13 December Reply

      It counts towards the majority vote, just like not voting or abstaining. See “Prosser’s Rule”.

  • Liberty
    Posted at 12:35h, 13 December Reply

    A “present” vote does not count towards or against the passage of a bill, but it contributes towards the quorum, which is the minimum number of Members required in attendance for the body to conduct business legally.
    How many times can a 501C take down comments that don’t align with their beliefs?
    Argue me this point above. And let you show me as a fool.

    • John Kraft & Kirk Allen
      Posted at 13:28h, 13 December Reply

      It counts towards the majority vote, just like not voting or abstaining. See “Prosser’s Rule”.

  • Liberty
    Posted at 11:47h, 13 December Reply

    removing comments I see

    • John Kraft & Kirk Allen
      Posted at 13:29h, 13 December Reply

      What was removed?

    • Dr. Watson
      Posted at 18:12h, 14 December Reply

      The Public Safety Committee chair stuck a damn two by four in your eye, you fool. Now it’ll cost you a $1000 fee to have some other fool rush in and remove it.

      On the contrary, you could always profit from helping yourself first.

  • Liberty Franklin
    Posted at 10:18h, 13 December Reply

    When a bill or amendment is up for a vote, a Representative may vote “aye”, “no”, or “present”, which is a refusal to take sides. A “present” vote does not count towards or against the passage of a bill, but it contributes towards the quorum, which is the minimum number of Members required in attendance for the body to conduct business legally.
    Sounds like Mr. Pritchard did some homework.

    • John Kraft & Kirk Allen
      Posted at 13:30h, 13 December Reply

      Wrong.

Post A Comment

$