Recording for Second McHenry County Board Meeting in a Row Missing

I’m told that the McHenry County Board meeting today was over at about 6:55 PM.

I clicked on the “media”button for the video/audio recording at 8:11.

What I found you can see below:


Recording for Second McHenry County Board Meeting in a Row Missing — 6 Comments

  1. Franks suffered another embarrassment when the Board voted 16 to 6 to reduce the size of the county board to 18 members but also keep 6 three member districts.

    Franks had wanted to keep the number of districts an unknown until some later date when he could assemble a hand picked “citizen committee” to make recommendations.

    Paula Yensen was visibly upset after the meeting.

  2. Correction: 14 to amend to keep the 6 three member districts.

    19 for reducing the size of the board to 18 members with that amendment.

    Note that Franks mentioned several times that citizens could submit a referendum petition with about 7000 signatures to set the structure of the board so long as it remained 18 members.

    Sounds like that could be the next shoe to drop.

  3. Franks actually wanted to reduce the Board to 12 members.

    Franks wanted to postpone the allocation of board members.

    He could have redistricted the county to have 12 districts with 1 board member each.

    It’s much easier to bully 1 instead of 3 to get his way.

    Can you say gerrymandering?

    Thank goodness County Board members are beginning to wise up to his antics.

  4. As far as this resolution goes, We don’t need less representation.

    DO NOT take our citizen’s representation away!!!

    The Chairman is a hypocrite!!!

    If he was truly interested in shrinking Govt. and/or saving the county money he would not have grown his own elected office by hiring two patronage hires +insurance +pension on the taxpayers and pushing for a third!!

    He also wouldn’t suggest that the county taxpayers pay for his campaign swag.

    Shut down the Inspector General position!

    It’s not only Redundant, it’s insulting to the qualified Elected officials who’s job it is to audit, provide legal opinion and make arrests if appopriate.

  5. Under the present precinct configurations, single member districts with 18 members would average 12 precincts per district.

    There are several areas in the county where you could put together 12 districts that vote majority Democratic.

    Woodstock is one of them. Also possibly LITH, McHenry, Wonder Lake. The Marengo area could have it’s own district.

    Look at the map from the Trump election and you can see right where they are.

    State statute which Franks claimed to have written allows for a citizen referendum.

    Franks implied in his comments that it would be a binding referendum but the only provision I could find clearly states that it is advisory.

    “b) Advisory referenda. The voters of a county may advise the county board, through an advisory referendum, on questions concerning (i) the number of members of the county board to be elected, (ii) whether the board members should be elected from single-member districts, multi-member districts, or at-large, (iii) whether voters will have cumulative voting rights in the election of county board members, or (iv) any combination of the preceding 3 questions.” (55 ILCS 5/2-3002)

    His next step will probably be to get his paid student minions to circulate a petition with the necessary signatures and use the results of that to push the Board that will be elected in 2020 (which is the only one that can actually do this).

    In a county with a Chairman elected at large, the Chairman draws the map, subject to Board approval.

    ” 3) In a county where the Chairman of the County Board is elected by the voters of the county as provided in Section 2-3007, the Chairman of the County Board may develop and present to the Board by the third Wednesday in May in the year after a federal decennial census year an apportionment plan in accordance with the provisions of subsection (1) of this Section. If the Chairman presents a plan to the Board by the third Wednesday in May, the Board shall conduct at least one public hearing to receive comments and to discuss the apportionment plan, the hearing shall be held at least 6 days but not more than 21 days after the Chairman’s plan was presented to the Board, and the public shall be given notice of the hearing at least 6 days in advance. If the Chairman presents a plan by the third Wednesday in May, the Board is prohibited from enacting an apportionment plan until after a hearing on the plan presented by the Chairman.” (55 ILCS 5/2-3003)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *