Pecatonica Township critic taken away in the dark of night for attending meeting

Thanks for putting out information on what is really going on in Pecatonica. Have been friends with people there for almost a lifetime and have gotten an earful . Alot of people don’t respond cause this Johnson gal and her family and pals like to do what she is doing here trying to browbeat anyone who disagrees with them or speaks out . Did you know this Johnson gal is a member of the Pecatonica Village board and she should know better. and according to my buds she doesn’t even go to the Township meetings because they are on the same night so how would she know except her, the Mayor and Musso, are buds. Someone passed one of those FOIA around town they did on Village and questionable spending by Mayor and then Village changed its credit card use. She was the one trying to fine people like an elderly woman in town and others for having flowers and plants too tall and for snowshoveling. People in Pec are sick of how our town is looking because of them. Wouldn’t believe anything those people say, There is something wrong when people ask questions and they are treated badly and cant get answers. Maybe you should ask if she was there. The other gal is the mother of one of the trustees Boomer and that Don is a bud of Musso, just so you know. As my buds tell it 2 members of the Township try to fight it but the other 3 are in thick.
https://www.wifr.com/content/news/Debate-grows-over-planting-ordinance-507007481.html

As stated before, she was already banned for 3 months when she walked in to this meeting and was legally removed due to the resolution the board passed and the officers escorted her out. She knew she would be as she was in violation. Her husband, the tax assessor knew she was going to do this, so the tax assessor knew that she was once again going to disrupt a township meeting. As far as the other people you stated in your comment have nothing to do with this.

Cindy, along with yourself there are nothing but a bunch of buffoons who do nothing but be a keyboard warrior. I almost feel sorry for you that your life is so miserable. Great watchdog group again, not.

Will, do glad you want to do nothing. So you just prove that nobody on here is actually worried about the facts and the other gentleman is not to swift on thinking that those responding are from the township that all of you are talking about. So there is more than one person ignorant on how an ip address works.

I don’t know if you’re blocking my answers to your questions or what, but I’ve answered all your questions and don’t see them post here. Let’s try again . As far as what laws/(rules) governing board meetings try:

Robert’s Rules of Order Chapter 15 Discipline

“Removing an Offender from the Assembly Hall

Anyone attending a meeting can be removed from the assembly hall. The chair has the power to remove a nonmember at any time during a meeting, and this person has no right to appeal the chair’s decision. (However, a member can make an appeal on behalf of the nonmember.) An assembly vote is required to remove a member from the hall.

If a person is asked to leave the assembly and refuses, the chair should take the steps necessary to see that order is enforced. The chair must carefully appraise the situation and act wisely. The chair can either appoint a committee to escort the person to the door or ask the sergeant-at-arms to remove the person. (The sergeant-at-arms is the person who acts as a doorkeeper, maintains order at the direction of the presiding officer, and is responsible for the comfort of the assembly.) Those escorting someone to the door must be careful how much force they use, because they can be liable for damages or be sued. If those appointed to escort the person to the door can’t persuade the person to leave, they should call the police. However, the police may not want to get involved unless the organization is willing to press charges.”
(Copied from Robert’s Rules of order)

Just an FYI Jim Anderson, a member of the board, did enter an appeal on behalf of this person at the time and was out voted.

A simple search of legal sites shows that Robert’s Rules of Order are legally binding if “formally adopted by the entity”. This board has used Robert’s Rules of Order for a long time.

As far as IP address issue we are not even in the same neighborhood and definitely not the same wi-fi but if they too have mediacom you might be reading IP address of Mediacom server.

Where there is smoke, there is fire.

Awe…look at you go. Freedom of speech needs to be looked at, not freedom to choose what they want and obviously plenty others have posted they disagree with this person and her habitual antics. But yes, somebody who has nothing to do with this come in and comment to fuel drama.

I wasn’t much interested in this story until I saw forty comments! Wow! Must be some hot-button issue. Little did I know it was just one sputtering miss-spelling person that has some grudge. Why do you bother replying to that? Public meetings are for the public. Who do these township people think they are representing? How dare they presume to be the arbiters of who gets to say what and when! No first amendment here. That amendment doesn’t say anything about morons not being allowed. (Which is probably why the dogs let this person take over their comments section.)

Your own comment negates the ip address issue. If your a watchdog investigate, get the true facts, or sit here and try to twist what really is happening. FYI, screen shots don’t lie.

I am not lashing out. I stated true facts, again obviously you’re not any kind of reputable watchdog organization or news source.

I never stated other boards did this. So you obviously cannot even keep it straight of whom you’re communicating with .

Why don’t you go and investigate the facts yourself, obviously you’re too obtuse in getting the facts. Rogene Hamilton and her crew have added you to their bucket of let’s get some more people to believe our lies and try to destroy a person. If you’re a watchdog group you really suck at it.

Funny as the states attorneys office is not a legal oversight commission. I don’t believe you…. now let’s get back to the THOUSANDS of dollars this person has cost the township residents and using her husband’s office as the local tax assessor for her own personal vendetta.

Well that’s just great if we all use the same ip address as we all live in the township and know the true facts and not the inept coverage that is full of false and misleading inaccuracies.

She is requesting foia request even with being the one video recording each meeting…ever hear of the attorney general’s office? Legal oversight….

Absolutely correct Lynn!!!

jmkraft, first of all to accuse all of us from using the same ip address is ignorance. And the full story is out there. Guess you’re too busy making hypothetical, whataboutisms and ignoring the true facts.

Reporters should have followed that deal right out of the room. Ask questions, take pictures.

Leave a witty comment….seriously, so this is a trash site and not about facts.

This post is completely inaccurate and obviously printed without actually checking the laws governing board meetings. The person involved has been removed before for being disruptive and refusing to follow the laws. She has openly taunted the police to arrest her in the past. She has been legally banned from meetings for 3 months and knew she would be arrested if she attended. Other boards have legally banned people for being disruptive and refusing to follow rules of order from the board chair. If you’re going to present things as being news or even being true maybe you should do a little research first or label yourself as ‘spreading opinions with very little basis in fact’.

Nothing exciting to see here.

She was “banned”, by royal proclamation by the board (2 no and 2 yes votes) for criticism, from the next 3 meetings and sat out the 1st of the 3. The township supervisor, Musso, is the one that needs to go to the re-education camp. Wonder if he is still fighting to kick the Assessor out of his office so the supervisor won’t be disturbed by the Assessor doing actual work in the next room. Kicking him out will cost the taxpayers a lot in rent.

This makes me wonder “what does the Pecatonia Township have to hide?” My take on “public meetings” is that they are duh…. “public”. We don’t know if the person was disruptive, swearing, etc without any minutes or video. The normal procedure, if that were the case, is to ask the person to leave. It’ll be interesting to hear more.