McHenry County Blog

Subscribe

Archive for the ‘Ancel Glinck’

What Happened about the Grafton Township Case in Judge Michael Caldwell’s Courtroom

December 17, 2010 By: Cal Skinner Category: Ancel Glinck, Forensicon, Grafton Township, John M. Nelson, Linda Moore, Michael Caldwell, Thomas DiCianni

I wrote a piece on what I heard sitting in the courtroom while the elected Grafton Township combatants’ attorneys tilted in the first post-decision hearing.

Out in the hall, Supervisor Linda Moore’s attorney John Nelson outlined what had been decided.

The first question concerned that part of the ruling dismissing Ancel Glink as Township Attorney and Keri-Lyn Krafthefer, a party to the suit, specifically.

Ancel Glink litigator Thomas DiCianni told the judge that his firm would not serve as Township Attorney, but asked that his firm’s prohibition of service as Township Attorney be limited to Moore’s term in office.

“The judge thought that was fair,” Nelson said.

A time line will be developed for Moore to fulfill her part of the judge’s order. That will be reviewed at the next hearing, which is on January 21st.

There was discussion of the payment of bills. Moore has been order to promptly present bills, which the Board can decided to pay or not to pay.

Nelson brought up the concept of checks and balances, pointing out that the Supervisor does not have to pay the bills if there is legitimate reason they should not be paid.

Asked what that meant, Nelson replied, “If improperly incurred.”

The bills for Forensicon and Elgin Key and Lock were discussed.

Judge Michael Caldwell told the lawyers there wasn’t sufficient evidence presented to see how these bills were incurred. Because of that he wasn’t ready to make a decision.

Nelson asked about the process of appointing a township attorney. The judge is reported to have indicated that the board’s advice and consent could not be unreasonably withheld.

“Let’s say Linda submits six lawyers and the board rejects them all,” Nelson suggested.

That might be considered unreasonable, I gathered.

“In my opinion, the township needs a lawyer,” Nelson said. He suggested such an attorney would have to “be firm with all parties.”

Judge Michael Caldwell

The final item discussed was the possibility of mediation.

Judge Caldwell brought up that topic.

In addition, the judge “gave indication to both parties to pay attention to his entire opinion,” Nelson said.

My notes also have, “Entire body of the opinion should be seriously considered.”

“I took him seriously,” Nelson concluded.

By the time I got finished talking to Nelson and Moore, DiCianni was out of sight.  I am sure that the First Electric Newspaper will have quotes form him.

Grafton Township Separation of Powers Trial Resumes

June 01, 2010 By: Cal Skinner Category: Ancel Glinck, Barbara Murphy, Betty Zirk, Chapman and Cutler, Grafton Township, Harriet Ford, Jim Kelly, John Rossi, Linda Moore, Michael Caldwell, Patrick Coen, Robert LaPorta, Separation of Powers

Supervisor Linda Moore

Trustee Rob LaPorta

10 AM is the time court begins.

It’s the trial between Grafton Township Supervisor Linda Moore and the Grafton Township Trustees consisting of Robert LaPorta, Betty Zirk, Barbara Murphy and Gerry McMahon.

Trustee Betty Zirk

At the last hearing, Township Administrator Pam Fender, appointed by the township board to supplant Moore in as many functions as legally possible, testified that Moore had not cooperated with her.

In addition, Township Trustee Rob LaPorta, the floor leader of the trustees, testified as to the difficulty of getting along with Moore.

One point LaPorta made was that attorneys had been approved by the township board under Moore’s predecessor John Rossi.

Trustee Gerry McMahon

I have filed a Freedom of Information request asking for newly appointed Township Clerk Harriet Ford to produce any pages of minutes from 2005-2009 that would verify that sworn testimony, but have not received a satisfactory reply.

I even narrowed my request by listing the legal firms that had received payments under Rossi with their first and last payments.  I figure board approval would have come before the first payment and termination would precede the last payment.

Trustee Barb Murphy

Here is what included:

  • Ancel Glink – the first payment I found was 6-20-5 for $1,110.  The last significant one was $5,878 on 8-14-5.  Another $87.50 was paid on 3-24-6
  • Chapman and Cutler – $15,000 on 8-11-8. This is the only bill.
  • Matuszewich, Kelly & McKeever – The first bill ($2,850) was paid on 7-11-6.  I am informed that Linda Moore terminated the first when she took office, but bills were being paid well into the first year.
  • Militello, Zanck & Coen – I see a 5-9-5 payment for $50 and a 7-15-5 payment for $100.

I told Ford after last Thursday’s meeting that a statement from her that no such minutes can be found would be adequate.

In any event, the trial will resume in Judge Michael Caldwell’s court.

I’ll be sitting on the hard seats, so you won’t have to.

Grafton Township Ancel Glink $40,000 in Legal Bills for April Higher than March’s $36,400

May 25, 2010 By: Cal Skinner Category: Ancel Glinck, Dan Ziller Jr., Gerry McMahon, Grafton Township, Keri-Lyn Krafthefer, Legal Fees, Linda Moore, Separation of Powers

In March, Ancel Glink billed Grafton Township $36,432.

Think that’s high?

In April, the bill was for $39,994.88.

Here's an April photo of the Grafton Township Board and Ancel Glink Partner Keri-Lyn Krafthefer. Savor the photo because under the newly-imposed rules photos can only be taken from the back of the room. It will be difficult to see Trustee Gerry McMahon's face because he tends to sit with his back to the audience, as he is here.

There was $5,226.25 to advise on “Corporate” matters.

Another $28,373.75 to prepare for the separate of powers suit filed by Supervisor Linda Moore. Most court days have been in May.

$138.75 was billed because of the winding down of the Dan Ziller, Jr., et al, case against the unlawful approval of a new township hall on Haligus Road in Lake in the Hills.

Voters kept coming and coming and coming until ovdr 700 had signed in. Those who could not obtain one of the 700 ballots stood along the side of the room "just in case of a close vote." There were no close votes. Two Ancel Glink attorneys attended.

And, there’s another $4,208.50 for the April 13th Annual Town Meeting.

If you would like to review May’s bills, you can do so by clicking on the articles below:

Ancel Glink Bills Grafton Township $36,432 for MarchAncel Glink’s March Bill for Grafton Township – Part 2

Ancel Glink’s March Bill to Grafton Township – Part 3

Ancel Glink’s March Bill to Grafton Township – Part 4

Ancel Glink’s March Bill to Grafton Township – Part 5

Ancel Glink’s March Bill to Grafton Township – Part 6

Ancel Glink’s March Bill to Grafton Township – Part 7

Ancel Glink’s March Bill to Grafton Township – Part 8

Ancel Glink’s March Bill to Grafton Township – Part 9

Ancel Glink’s March Bill to Grafton Township – Part 10

Ancel Glink’s March Bill to Grafton Township – Part 11

Grafton Township Critic Says Let Other Governments Absorb Its Functions

March 24, 2010 By: Cal Skinner Category: Abolish, Algonquin Township Assessor, Algonquin Township Road Commissioner, Ancel Glinck, Bingo, Bus, Forrest Hare, Grafton Township, Grafton Township Food Pantry, Grafton Township Road Commissioner, Gus Philpott, Jack Freund, John Rossi, Legal Fees, PACE, Senior, Senior Citizen, Taxi, Township Assessor, Township Government

McHenry County Blog has some thoughtful thinkers.

One has posted the comment below under the last article.

Grafton Township Board, from left to right, Trustees Gerry McMahon, Betty Zirk, Rob LaPorta, Barb Murphy and Superviosr Linda Moore.

Certainly people are talking about abolishing Grafton Township.   Two trustees have told me that might even favor the idea. I found one at last night’s meeting who had inquired how to do it by petition and referendum.

Grafton Township Road Commissioner confers with his attorney Pat Coen about how to unwind the deal that had the Road District buy the township hall in order to find money to build a new township hall on Haligus Road. Now, at least Trustee Gerry McMahon wants to keep the money, have township voters who attend the April 13th Annual Meeting legally authorize the purchase of the Haligus Road property from the Village of Lake in the Hills, then sell that land, using both sources of money to buy and remodel a vacant building to house township offices other than the Road District's. Township electors on April 13th will have the last word. The effort would nullify any results from the court-order referendum this fall about proceeding with the new $3.5 million *over $5 million with interest) township hall

I asked Road Commissioner Jack Freund how abolishing the township would affect his operation.

His basic answer was that it wouldn’t. That’s because the Road District is a separate municipal corporation.

And the Assessor’s Office?

Well, someone has to do the work. It might end up under county jurisdiction. After all, the County Supervisor of Assessments is charged with assessing all property.

What would happen to Assessor Bill Ottley and his employees?

Since Ottley has the most uniform assessments in McHenry County (the last time I looked), he would undoubtedly head up the operation.

Where would the office be?

Probably right where it is or in some other area space rented by the county. Ottley could probably even find a great deal in this economy.

Another possibility occurs to me.  The bill I sponsored back in the 1970′s to create the office of Multi-Township Assessor could be modified to allow for the election of such an official from a neighboring township, plus Grafton Township.  An analysis by then-Algonquin Township Assessor Forrest Hare convinced me that bad (defined as having a large margin of error) assessments were much, much more likely to occur in townships with less than 5,000 people than those larger.  The reason, I believe, is that larger townships could afford a full-time assessor.  I guess the still existing township board would handle the bill paying and oversight functions.

Then, there’s the other services that Grafton Township provides.

For starters, people should know that virtually all such services were permitted by law at the request of township officials trying to justify their existence.

Townships have only three mandated functions:

  • Maintaining some local roads
  • Assessing property
  • Administering General and Emergency Assistance

All the rest are add-ons.

However, let’s say bus service for seniors and the handicapped is considered by the community to be necessary.

I would note that senior bus service is provided by the Road Commissioner in Algonquin Township. The same could happen in Grafton Township, if Freund were amenable to the idea.

Gus Philpott, in his Woodstock Advocate, suggests there may be a much cheaper way to provide transportation services to seniors and the disabled. Subsidize taxis and handicapped equipped vans. Or subsidize PACE, I would add.

Since most of the service is provided Huntley residents, the village itself could even assume the responsibility.

Bingo can be run by any entity. The same with helping with handicapped vehicle hangers and handing out batteries for hearing aids.

The food pantry is already off on its own. The subsidies of the past are over, if not accounted for.

The General and Emergency Assistance is minimum. I believe one of the last year’s of former Grafton Township Supervisor John Rossi’s administration is was about $12,000. I guess the area would operate the same way the one-third of Illinois counties do now. There are no townships in Southern Illinois.

Compare that to the $16,000 in legal bills for Ancel, Glink last month.

When would the township go out of business if such a referendum were put on the ballot and passed?

I can’t tell you. I think I remember some provision that says elected officials serve out their terms.

Too much from me. Here’s the reader comment:

“Dear” Grafton Township Elected Officials and “Hired” (more like appointed) Employee(s),

The money you are so droolingly intent on spending for Your WANTS not NEEDS is OTHER PEOPLE’S money.  It’s not your private little world and check book.  It doesn’t matter if you are taxing $5 or $200 dollars, you are still taxing.

Stop trying to grow what some people consider a no longer needed layer of govt. BIGGER.  In Grafton, it would make sense to allow other govt. entities to absorb most or all of what Grafton does.

There are plenty of places for bingo, food pantires, meeting rooms, yada yada yada and they are spread across Grafton Township – not just in Huntley.  Certain types of transportation services can be worked out with local Taxi companies eliminating the need to own vehicles/buses, pay for gas, labor, insurance, upkeep, schedulers, etc.

If you absolutely MUST MUST MUST have Grafton Township’s name on such things instead of cooperating with others, then RENT them.  The events would still be called Grafton Township Bingo but it doesn’t require a multi million dollar building and loan interest.  I repeat, it’s far cheaper than a multi-million building and loan interest.

Trying to recreate the wheel and sliced bread in this case sure seems to be  ego driven.  The way it’s being handled reminds me of Washington DC/Chicago tactics.

NOTE:  Huntley isn’t a small place anymore.  Have the elected and “hired” people not noticed? Perhaps when it was small, there was a dream in someone’s mind to make the Township more important, provide missing services, and so on.  That was then.  ”We” aren’t living in “then” anymore.  Grafton Twp. elected officials and “hired” employees, are YOU still living in the “then” in the “dream”?  If so, as one movie character once succinctly said “Snap out of it!”

Is someone looking to have their name engraved on a room, a program, ………….a political ballot?

Grafton Township Trustees Blow Off Second Meeting – Ancel, Glinck Partner Writes Boycott OK

November 16, 2009 By: Cal Skinner Category: Ancel Glinck, Betty Zirk, Grafton Township, Grafton Township Food Pantry, John Rossi, Keri-Lyn Krafterfer, Linda Moore, Robert LaPorta

For the second time in four days, Grafton Township Trustees boycotted a meeting called by newly-elected Supervisor Linda Moore.

Grafton Township Meeting 101-16-9 WaitingMoore was criticized by township attorney Keri-Lyn J. Krafterfer in a November 6th letter for not having included items on her agenda requested by Trustee Robert LaPorta.

They included

  • Motion to approve Board rules that were originally submitted by Trustee LaPorta and approved by Trustees in a Grafton Special Meeting that Supervisor Moore did not attend (because of being physically indisposed, I was told).
  • Discussion and motion to approve Senior Transportation Fees and Fee Change procedure.
  • Inclusion of Huntley Chamber Bill and Attorney Kelly’s open bills on warrant and motion to approve full payment of.
  • Motion to define, complete and approve FOIA stating Clerk Fergo as the person to assemble, report on, and delegate FOIA request completions.
  • Motion to approve Grafton Township maintenance of Haligus Road property.
  • Motion to approve ‘new location’ of Grafton Township Food Pantry inclusion on Grafton Township website and Posting in Grafton Township Offices.
  • Motion for authorization to have assessor’s office research available office space within Grafton Township for consideration of a lease and/or purchase agreement.
  • Distribution, review, discussion and motion to approve or reject township audit.

These items Moore included in her Monday meeting agenda, but complained at that boycotted meeting that Township Clerk Dina Frigo had removed them from the door of the township hall.

In a letter to Township Attorney Krafthefer, dated November 16th, said the removal “was witnessed by a reliable source.”

Frigo, who Thursday indicated she did not know where the missing trustees were, apparently knew they were not showing up Monday night and joined their boycott.

But Frigo did post a notice for a 7:30 PM Wednesday township meeting called by Trustees Betty Zirk and Rob LaPorta.

Many of the items listed above in LaPorta’s request to Moore were included, as well as others, including

  • new locks for Frigo’s office
  • paying bills that would have been approved at last Thursday’s meeting
  • establishing a procedure for receiving and distributing the trustees and clerk’s mail
  • establishing a township investment policy

The changes seems to have had the advice of an attorney.

Moore posted her own agenda for a meeting at the same location—the Huntley Park District at 12,015 Mill Street in Huntley—but starting a half an hour earlier at 7 PM.

At the 12-minute meeting tonight, Sun City resident Ralph Wehnes had some comments:

“Is this really a major problem with you and John Rossi?…It looks like something is going on that’s going to cost somebody a lot of money.”

“It already has,” Moore replied.

Commenting on Rossi, whom Moore defeated by 30 votes in the Republican primary election, she said, “I haven’t spoken with Mr. Rossi since I kidded with him about other people being able to do the job.”

Asked about the problems, Moore suggested,

“Three of the board were on the previous board. I think it’s a case of sour grapes.”

Moore also wasn’t happy at the new attorney’s having suggested in writing,

“Further, there is nothing to prevent the Township Trustees from boycotting the regular meeting with your proposed agenda and posting their own notice of a special meeting with an agenda including their items.”

The attorney wrote that it would be “happy” to prepare the agenda.

Dueling Township Meeting Agendas for Wednesday Night at the Park DistrictIn a November 16th letter, Moore asked if “the clerk need(s) to follow the same rules you laid out in your recent opinion letter and include the supervisor’s agenda items on her agenda.”

Moore’s agenda items were not included in the Zirk-LaPorta agenda.

Moore also asked,

“If three or more trustees have a daisy chain telephone conversation and decide to boycott township meetings, twice in a row, does this constitute a violation of the open meetings act?”

Both sides of the dispute are sending the McHenry County State’s Attorney copies of their missives.