McHenry County Blog

Left over from the Balance of Powers suit filed by Grafton Township Supervisor Linda Moore was whether the billwould be paid from the company hired by the Township Trustees to figure out what had happened to the township computer ruled to be under the control of Moore.

Today Judge Michael Caldwell ruled that it would be.

All the air was sucked out of the 7 PM Annual Town Meeting of Grafton Township as Linda Moore’s opponents won the vote in the Special Town Meeting that started an hour before.

The Annual Town Meeting started about twenty after seven and was adjourned without any real business being done at 7:55.

At issue in the earlier meeting was whether the Township Board should be mandated to repay the $700,000 loan from the Township Road District (a separate governmental entity) to build a new Township Hall in a lump sum or whether the three-year payback contained in an intergovernmental agreement reached between Road Commissioner Jack Freund and the four Trustees was good enough.

Jim Kearns, the same man who was elected Moderator of the last year’s meeting, which Moore’s forces dominated, won that vote against Huntley School Board member Mike Skala for the six o’clock meeting.

When the time for repayment debate came, however, supporters of the Trustees managed to frame the issue.

They seized the initiative.

A drum beat of comments were made referencing the lack audits for the last two years and, because of that, not knowing if the township had $700,000 with which to repay the loan.

[No one mentioned that just-resigned audit firm Wayne Brown & Company refused to perform the audit until Moore's separation of powers litigation was concluded. Moore won that case in which Judge Michael Caldwell ruled that the Trustees overstepped their authority.]

Both the Trustees and Moore have selection of an auditor on their dueling agendas for the next regular township meeting on Thursday, April 14th, at 7:30 at the Huntley Park District building.

(After the meetings were over, Moore insisted that the Grafton Food Pantry account had been removed from the Quick Books data base after she defeated John Rossi for Township Supervisor. She said that Wayne Brown keeps the books for the Food Pantry.)

Trustee Barb Murphy lead the attack on the lump sum motion, defending the Trustee’s actions and blaming Moore for the not repaying of the first installment of $200,000.

“The Trustees are not refusing to repay the loan. The Supervisor is,” she said.

Tammy Luecht, one of Moore’s allies, outlined how the bank will not accept partial payment of the $700,000 loan, how the township will be paying $2,600 a month in rent to the Road District, plus running up interest on the loan for the three years.

She also pointed out that there was $611,000 sitting in the bank that could not be spent for anything but loan repayment.

“We’re going to be very, very short of funds,” Township Trustee Betty Zirk, going on her 12th year on the Board said.

One CPA told the audience,

“One payment just appears to me, based on Ms. Moore’s own numbers, to be an incredibly bad idea.”

A woman questioned a telephone transfer of the $611,000 made by Moore.

Moore explained that she put in a money market fund so it would earn interest.

“If indeed we haven’t had an audit, any of us who run a business wouldn’t run our business that way. I don’t think we ought to ramrod paying something off (without it),” a Sun City man stated.

A second Sun City businessman immediately added, “Why haven’t we had an audit?”

A woman on the pay-back-immediately side argued, “It’s not ours to do anything with. It’s not our money. Give this money back.”

A blond woman replied, “Last year we didn’t vote for a lump sum (repayment). We don’t have a 2009 audit. A 2010 audit is due soon.”

” My son does audits and they find things wrong. I don’t know why we can’t wait until after the audit is submitted,” another woman added.

The elephant in the room was brought up by Tom Legowski (?):

“A lot of the money we don’t have is because of the litigation. I think it would be a wonderful idea if they start representing the people, rather than their own interests.”

“We’re trying to save the township from bankruptcy,” Trustee Murphy said in her second trip to the microphone.

“I’m tired of the bickering,” a life-long resident said. She said the $700,000 loan was “illegal. It is wrong.” [A story about Judge Caldwell's decision overturning the former Township Board's decision to borrow the $700,000 can be found here.]

“I don’t know how you can drain all the money. Right now, I wouldn’t trust any figures,” a Lakewood man replied.

A CPA from Lake in the Hills noted the over $65,000 a month “burn rate of cash.”

He said, “Mrs. Moore is absolutely correct (re having enough operating money), but suggested going with “what the Trustees have done. He then mentioned the quarter of million in legal fees.

“I’m absolutely not trilled with either side.”

A Huntley man observed, “We now have $611,000. If we don’t (fall) short before June (when real estate tax money comes in), we’ll have to borrow less than $700,000.

“If we hadn’t spent $485,000 in legal fees since this started, we’d have plenty of money.

An amendment was offered something during the debate to require the repayment “sixty days after completion of the audits for both years.”

A voice vote on the amendment failed.

The vote on the lump sum repayment failed 140-85 [I got a larger number of positive votes last night after asking for verification of the tally.]

As the tally was announced, part of the crowd cheered loudly.

The next motion talked about personally penalizing township board members who didn’t follow the directions of the Annual Town Meeting.

Road District Attorney Coen took the floor and said,

“What you’re voting on electors don’t have the authority to do.”

The motion disappeared under the weight of that opinion.

And, at about 7:20, the six o’clock meeting was adjourned.

At that point, a lot of people started leaving the room.

How many?

Remember how the vote for the early lump sum motion was 140-128.

Mike Skala won the moderator post for the Annual Town Meeting 42-38.

Over half the people filed out during the intermission.

Reports from the Township Supervisor and Road Commissioner were read.

Someone wanted to ask Moore about the audit situation, but she had stepped out of the room.

During the public comment period, Lake in the Hills’ Bruce Augustine tried to make a motion to add an agenda item to discuss the audit, but was ruled out of order by Skala.

A female ally of the Trustees said, “The Trustees have not initiated any single law suit. They did not want to spend a half million dollars on law suits. The Trustees had to pya for their defense. Please stop bringing lawsuits against (the Township). ”

She added that she’d like to have the Forensicon audit to be completed and paid for.

A man retorted, “For the last six years what the Board has done has been illegal. It was proved in court and the appellate court.

“They’re still fighting. The $611,000 could only be paid for the loan. It should not be in the General Fund.”

A young woman pointed out that the lump sum payment had been voted down at the previous meeting and added, “I’d like to find a way to force Linda Moore to get the audit done.”

Tom Halat, who was one of the people whose suit resulted in the John Rossi Township Board having acted out of accordance with state law when it borrowed the $700,000 made this reply:

“The former administration perpetrated illegal acts. Ancel Glink twice said it was an illegal act (at the Annual Meeting last year). In December, Judge Caldwell said illegal, illegal, illegal. They spent $300,000 of our tax dollars defending their illegal activities.”

It was Trustee Murphy to the microphone again.

“Hiring Pam Fender was not an illegal act. It’s just the Supervisor had to do it…(what) Mr. Rossi (and the former Township board did) wasn’t illegal. It was two items done improperly.”

Luecht took the floor saying she had read the minutes of the Township meetings and “”There was never an action taken by the Board to separate the Food Pantry from the township.”

She said she was still waiting for the Food Pantry records to be included in the audit.

Trustee Betty Zirk took the floor saying she was going on her 12th year and

“The Food Party never had a line item on the (Township) budget.  It was housed by the Township, run by volunteers, some of our employees helping out.  the Food Pantry never was part of the Township.”

A man from the other side of the room noted, “It’s been a whole year and nothing has been paid back. How can we trust people when they continually  (against the voters’ wishes).

“They are a bunch of liars.  What makes you think they’re going to pay it back in three years.

“Betty, you’ve been there twelve years too long.”

That earned him an admonition from Moderator Skala.

“The Trustee have attempted to pay back the money.  It has been blocked by the Supervisor,” Augustine retorted.

“I’ve worked for public bodies. My understanding is there is supposed to be an audit every year.  I don’t now how you can operate.  I don’t understand it.”

Jim Kearns took the microphone.

“I understand that the $700,000 will be held in the Road fund for three years because the bank will not take back anything but a lump sum.

“I’d like to see everyone start getting along and stop this bull.

“You need to start growing up, you guys.  That goes for everyone.

“Start doing it today!”

Another man advanced the opinion that it was “time to have a recall and start over again and get people in office to be stewards of our tax money.”

[Recall is not an option in Illinois.]

“‘Liars’ is a pretty strong statement.  I’d hate to think an elected official is a liar.”

 

At this point someone moved to adjourn and the motion passed.

= = = = =
Want to know how the missing part of the $700,000 was spent. Here’s the only place you’ll find out.

Today I received the following email from Forensicon President Lee Neubecker concerning the images I posted of his contract in this article . He says the first one was from a draft agreement and the second, with Betty Zirk’s and Rob LaPorta’s signatures, was from the final version.

His letter follows and below are the three pages of the contract.

Dear Mr. Skinner,

I think it is important that you know that your blog misrepresents certain facts with regard to our agreement with Grafton Twp.  On your website, (http://mchenrycountyblog.com/2011/03/08/judge-caldwells-feb-24th-grafton-township-suit-concluding-comments-–-part-2-–-forensicon-and-elgin-lock-key-bills-not-approved/) you display page 1 of a draft agreement that was never signed and page 2 of the actual agreement.  I request that you publish the letter of agreement in its entirety so that facts relating to our retention are not misrepresented.  I assume you were not provided the actual signed agreement and received partial data.  Attached is a copy of the letter which includes the original signed agreement.

Regards,

Lee Neubecker
President

Click to enlarge any of the images below:

In the latest hearing on the continuing Grafton Township separation of powers case, Judge Michael Caldwell continues to tell the township what bills should be paid and which should not.

 

Township Supervisor Linda Moore has been withholding bills she thought should not be paid.

Yesterday, he decided that bills incurred before his decision about the legitimacy of the new township hall favored so strongly by the township trustees should be paid.

Supervisor Linda Moore had been withholding payment pending such a court decision.

Judge Caldwell now turns to the bill from Forensicon, with whom Trustees Betty Zirk and Robert LaPorta signed a contract:

THE COURT: To this day I have a serious question on the legitimacy of the Forensicon bill which only grows every time it’s presented in front of me.

It’s approved for $10,000, now it’s 19. I don’t know why.

I don’t even know how Forensicon was hired.

I don’t see — I have never seen in any of the things that have been presented to me any itemization, any proof, any verification as to how this contract was entered into, who did it, when it happened and how it happened.

Grafton Township Trustees Betty Zirk and Rob LaPorta.

My suspicion is, and this is very dangerous to the people who may have done it, is that a couple of trustees went off on their own and hired somebody else and then brought it into the board as a fait accompli and said, “Here’s our computer expert, pay it.”

If that’s what happened, this may not be a legitimate bill of Grafton Township, somebody may have contracted to pay for this out of their own pocket.

Elgin Key & Lock is not payable from township funds.

That was number one.

It was a bill that was incurred by a trustee on their own to do something which was plainly illegal and which I found to be illegal.

Forensicon is not approved for payment and it’s open to — if you want it paid, pay it out of township money, you’re going to have to prove it.

You’re going to have to bring me a special proceeding on that because I will not approve it.

The Elgin Lock & Key bill was $381.

More tomorrow.

= = = = =

Link to the final Forensicon contract with Grafton township.

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.”

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.

Yesterday, McHenry County Blog summarized Judge Michael Caldwell’s conclusions in the lawsuit filed by Grafton Township Supervisor Linda Moore against her fellow Grafton Township Board members, Trustees Gerry McMahon, Rob LaPorta, Barbara Murphy and Betty Zirk.

Today, we’ll look at his logic.

After summarizing the testimony, Judge Caldwell wrote:

“There was voluminous evidence of

• canceled gasoline credit cards belonging to a department of the township,
• the failure to halt direct deposit of employees’ paychecks,
• Moore’s attempts to put the meetings of the township board on the the internet via the assessor’s website and the Illinois Township Officials Association,
• misdirected mail,
• the changes in the bus schedule (labeled as a “…complete failure…” by a single resident),
• the complete history of the Grafton Township Food Pantry,
• the history of the terms of Supervisors [Mildred] Ruth and [John] Rossi and
• an evidentiary comparison of the workings of Nunda Township with Grafton Township.

“None of this has any relevance to these proceedings”

“It may be interesting, even entertaining for some, but on the whole it is immaterial and irrelevant….It is nothing more than evidence of

• simple mistakes,
• poor judgment and
• a past that is over and not about to return any time soon.

“As such, none of this has any relevance to nor does it contribute to any decision that I must make regarding the state of affairs in Grafton Township.”

In his analysis section, the Judge pointed concluded,

“That there is an all-out, political and personal war between the Township Supervisor and the Board of Trustees of Grafton Township is readily apparent from the evidence.

“Not only do these parties intensely dislike one another, but both sides of this controversy seem dedicated to all out conflict, all of the time, regardless of its effect on township government or its programs.

“At the heart of these proceedings is the toxic relationship between the township board and the supervisor….

“Any ruling I make can affect some aspects of the relationship but not all of them.

“I cannot judicially regulate impolite, abusive, or course discourse between parties. It may be rude and hurtful, but the harm is not irrevocable and no one has the ‘right’ to compel others to be polite.

“Someone far wiser than I once said, when commenting on the First Amendment,

‘It takes a thick skin to be an American citizen.’

“Additionally, politics has always been a rough and tumble pursuit. Apparently in Grafton Township, it has been elevated to the level of a blood sport.

“That being said, there is nothing this court can do to compel these parties to be “…nice…” to one another, as was requested in one of the prayers of relief.

“The only think I can offer is the advice of the late President Harry Truman who said,

‘If you can’t stand the heat, get out of the kitchen.’”

Ancel Glink partner Keri-Lyn Krafthefer looks up a point of township law after she had been dismissed by Supervisor Linda Moore.

Judge Caldwell then indicated he would rule on the “supervisor/ board relationship.”

In other words, on the separation of powers.

And, how those powers were balanced was reported in yesterday’s article.

The Judge confirmed Supervisor Moore’s authority to fire Township Administrator Pam Fender and Township Attorney Ancel Glink, usually represented by Keri-Lyn Krafthefer at township meetings.

Judge Caldwell’s reversal of the political strategy presumably concocted by Krafthefer to allow the Township Trustees to take control of what they could not win at the ballot box is nothing short of stunning.

He confirmed Moore’s authority to run the day-to-day business of the township the same way that a strong mayor or a village president does.

Caldwell did say the Township Trustees could set the agenda at the beginning of every meeting, had approval authority over large contracts and should have the ability to access township financial records.

Among unanswered questions are the following:

• whether forensic computer firm Forensicon’s bill would have to be paid with taxpayer dollars or by the two trustees–Betty Zirk and Rob LaPorta–who signed the contract
• whether taxpayers have any call on the money that was paid to Township Administrator Pam Fender and Ancel Glink after Moore dismissed them from township service
• whether paying off the Town Hall loan to the Township
  Road District mandated at the Annual Meeting requires Board approval
• whether the severance clause in the contract approved by the Trustees for Pam Fender is enforceable
• whether the Supervisor can select the outside auditor (since advice and consent is required for the attorney’s selection

Judge Caldwell did rule that both Moore attorney John Nelson and the Trustees’ Ancel Glink litigator Thoma DiCianni and others in his firm would be paid by the taxpayers for services rendered in this lawsuit.

When I last looked at the bills, the Trustees were outspending the Supervisor 4 to 1.

Part 1 is here.

Bills Grafton Township Supervisor Linda Moore had refrained from paying at the advice of her attorney John Nelson is the topic of the next section.

Who hasn’t been paid?

Here are the ones listed in the brief:

• $19,880.31 – Forensicon (incurred by Ancel Glink and Trustees Betty Zirk and Rob LaPorta)
• $4,318.75 – “billed by an architectural firm for work purportedly done in March or April of 2009. When documentation was requested of what the work was for Supervisor Moore received no response.”
• $2,695.31 – Mismailing, Inc. (Incurred by Township Administrator Pam Fender to send out 7,097 post cards to residents inviting them to attend the annual meeting)
• $1,886.0 – Matuszewich, Kelly and McKeever LLP billed June 14, 2010 for work done from Sept. 2009 through March 2010. “This firm was terminated by Supervisor Moore in May of 2009, but apparently engaged by Ancel, Glink for work done on the litigation they had previously been involved in.”
• $1,330 – (Incurred by Township Administrator Pam Fender on June 1, 2010 for resolutions, posters and 669 unused pink voting pads for the annual meeting.)
• $510 – Point of Video, Inc. (Incurred by Township Administrator Pam Fender for recording the April 8, 2010 regular and April 13, 2010, annual meeting.)
• $380.74 – Elgin Key and Lock (Engaged by Trustee Betty Zirk)
• $312.06 – Stamps, treats, sound system, etc.
• $280 – Q and A Reporting (Incurred by Township Administrator Pam Fender for a transcript of a 3½ hours board meeting. “Ms. Fender retains the transcripts, if any.”)
• $150 – Leading IT Solutions (Engaged by “alleged” Township Administrator Pam Fender)

“The supervisor believes these bills are not proper and should not be paid for with Grafton Township tax dollars. The supervisor will do so if the Court orders.”

More tomorrow.

The firm Ancel Glink engaged to look at what Grafton Township Supervisor Linda Moore did to her computers has submitted a bill for $19,880.31.

That a big chunk of change.

Let’s look at the court-related expenses, found on the June 1st invoice below.

Court Appearance

• 05/27/10 0.80 Client Communications with Ancel Glink re: court and emails to counsel and township officials. $350.00/hr $280.00
• 05/03/10 1.50 Consulting re: letter received $350.00/hr $525.00
• 06/01/10 0.50 Consulting re: Helped prep YS for court $350.00/hr $175.00
• 06/01/10 1.80 Travel to Woodstock $125.00/hr $225.00
• 06/01/10 2.50 Travel from Woodstock $125.00/hr $312.50
• 06/01/10 2.60 Court appearance $450.00/hr $1,170.00

SUBTOTAL:  $1,707.50

Take a look at the bills below, if you have the interest.  Any image can be enlarged by clicking on it.

First, there is the bill for March 29th.  Note it was sold to a Matthew Smith:

March 30th’s bill comes next and Matthew Smith’s name again appears:

Skip to April 9th, shortly before the April 13th Annual Town Meeting.  Matthew Smith’s name is still on the invoice.

June 1st is the next activity.  Now Grafton Township Trustees Rob LaPorta’s and Betty Zirk’s names appear on the “Sold to” line.

Then, there is a summary page, issued June 9th.  Again Zirk and LaPorta are named.

“Who can obligate the township?“

is one of the key questions in the Grafton Township separation of powers lawsuit that Supervisor Linda Moore filed against the four Township Trustees and Ancel Glink partner Keri-Lyn Krafthefer.

Supervisor Linda Moore has refused to pay a fair number of bills the services for which she did not initiate.

Services requested by Township Administrator Pam Fender with regard to the Annual Town Meeting have been submitted, approved by the township board, but not paid. Moore has said the non-payment is on the advice of her attorney, John Nelson, pending the outcome of the trial.

The most interesting one is bill from Forensicon.

Right before the end of the trial, Ancel Glink litigator Thomas DiCianni requested “interim relief.” He wanted Judge Michael Caldwell to order Moore to “pay the Forensicom bill.”

It’s now about $15,000.

And I’m not sure that includes the cost of court testimony at $350 per hour.

Judge Caldwell’s answer?

“I have the authority to do so, but I won’t.

“If Forensicon wants to take action on its own, it can.”

Ancil Glink seems to have arranged to hire the firm.  It is listed above as the “retaining client.”

Trustees Betty Zirk and Rob LaPorta signed the contract on behalf of Grafton Township.

 

Who will be on the hook for the $15,000 bill when the judge’s decision comes down?

I’m losing count. Was today the fourth day of testimony in the Grafton Township separation of powers suit?

Maybe it was that I arrived by the expected start time, but an argument over a Temporary Restraining Order wanted by the McHenry County Health Department on a two-year old issue postponed testimony until 1:30.

In any event at least I remembered to take a cushion to soften the hard bench in Judge Michael Caldwell’s court today.

But listening to the who hit whom when and where is wearing on me.

If the question is whether Grafton Township government is dysfunctional, that has long since been proven.

Again it was Township Supervisor Linda Moore’s political enemies on the witness stand.

First up was a Forensicom “Senior Forensic Examiner” testifying that his firm had not finished its work because it had not been paid by Grafton Township. While not privy to contractual details Yoniv Schiff explained how people he supervised in the six-man firm for whom he works, copied a computer “in Pam’s office” and told a server to Chicago to copy because it was taking too long in Huntley.

Schiff explained how a program called Eraser, one version of which is available over the internet, was used to erase data from the computer, but not the server. February 8th was the day version 5.8 of the program was installed on the computer. It was “run against specific files and over(wrote) the data on those files,” he said.

The folder erased and overwritten was called “QuickBooks.” It “was sent to the recycle bin for deletion.”

On February 9th, he continued, “a flash storage device was attached to the computer.”

March 2nd saw “two separate external hard drives…attached to the computer.”

Under cross examination by Moore’s attorney John Nelson, Schiff revealed that his firm had been retained by Ancel Glink.

Admitting his lack of computer expertise, Nelson revealed,

“I want you to understand that the next email I send will be my first.”

Schiff confirmed that whatever was erased can be recreated, although he testified that he had not don’t any actual examination of the computer, rather his study was on “the forensic images of the computer.”

“At this point there is no evidence that an eraser program has been installed in the server?” Nelson asked.

“That is correct,” was the reply.

When asked whether February 29th was the only date the flash storage device was used, Shirff did not recall.

Schiff couldn’t testify to what happened when the external hard drives were attached because his firm had not been paid.

“Did you discover any deletions from a year prior?” Nelson asked. “Did you examine for that?”

“No,” Schiff replied.

There has been talk that Moore’s predecessor removed data from a township computer before leaving office.

The Judge asked some clarifying questions including one concerning the server. Schiff explained that his firm had “not determined what, if any, metadata (“data about data”) has been removed from the computer.”

Next up was Dina Frigo, the former Township Clerk.

It was pretty obvious she and Moore didn’t get along.

“Not a very pleasant relationship,” was how she started her testimony.

She intimated that Moore had a key to her office and had put a copy machine and files inside without her knowledge or permission. Moore had previously denied that and on cross examination, pointed out that if Moore had a key she would not have had to file Freedom of Information requests about which Frigo complained.

Moore did say that the building’s landlord, the Township Road Commission had keys to all the rooms.

How many FOI requests?

“Too numerous to mention.”

“You’re telling me you received FOI requests for information that was in the township hall?” Judge Caldwell asked.

“Yes. She would FOI my mail, too.”

Frigo did quote Moore assistant Trudy Jurs as asking via email, “Will you please give me information on the xerox I placed in your room?”

Frigo reported that Moore had opened her mail, specifically citing one from the Local Archives Division of the Secretary of State’s Office.

There were accusations concerning Moore’s putting up and taking down meeting notices.

Re-enforcing testimony was provided that Moore usually kept the door to what used to be the reception area closed and locked.

Frigo generalized about Moore’s treatment of her. A sample follows:

“She was getting hostile, persistent, argumentative. You could not talk to her at all. I’d excuse myself from the situation.”

Then there was the Milestone Mortgage call.

A representative from the firm called to verify Frigo’s employment and how long she had worked for Grafton Township.

Did Moore refuse to do so out of privacy concerns?

No way to know.

Under cross examination Frigo admitted she had not told Moore that a mortgage company might be inquiring.

All apparently ended well because McHenry County Clerk Kathie Schultz was able to fax the evidence needed to the firm.

It was again pointed out that Moore did not have contact information for the Grafton Township Food Pantry as she provided for other ones.

On December 17th, Frigo said she filed a police report because she thought Moore had used a date stamp that was unique to her office.

When asked why she resigned, it was because

“I could not work with Linda Moore anymore. It was very stressful for me and my family, the continual turning things around, twisting things…”

“When you resigned, didn’t you say you resigned because you had obtained full-time employment?” Nelson asked.

“That was one of the reasons,” Frigo replied.

Just before, the court learned Frigo was working for Huntley School District 158 as a lunchroom worker and recess person. The word “substitute” was used but I didn’t catch with regard to which assignment.

Disputes over the content of minutes Frigo wrote, which were not approved until after she resigned took up a good bit of time.

Nelson inquired about when the Food Pantry was moved out of the township office complex.

Despite being on its board, Frigo couldn’t remember.

Nelson sought specifics about what Moore had said she did that she didn’t do and what she said she didn’t do that she did and got a few.

Frigo revealed to the Judge that the Township Board stopped operating under Robert’s Rules of Order after revealing board meetings under Supervisor Rossi lasted ten minutes to an hour, while those after Moore took office lasted 3-4 hours.

She was asked the question about which I filed a Freedom of Information request:

Did she recall the board under Rossi ever voting on the hiring or firing of any attorneys?

“I can’t recall off hand.”

The next witness was Frigo’s successor Harriet Ford.

Township Trustees’ attorney Thomas G. DiCianni put into evidence seven sets of township minutes. Nelson observed they “do not bear your seal” when he questioned her.

“She can certify by seal or testimony,” DiCianni said.

Nelson asked Ford the same question I had filed a Freedom of Information request about, that is, whether any of the minutes report the “hiring or firing of any attorneys?” as Trustee Rob LaPorta had affirmed on the last court date.

“I’m unaware,” Ford replied.

At 4:40 the last witness of the day, Trustee Betty Zirk, took the stand.

She was asked if the Grafton Township Food Pantry had ever been an official part of Grafton Township.

The answer was, “No.”

She went through what appeared to be rehearsed answers to questions about her views of the duties of township trustees.

In answer to a question of whether she was “motivated by a political dispute over a township hall,” she answered in the negative.

She was asked how she voted at the 2010 Annual Town Meeting.

She said she voted with the majority.

“It’s just we’re having problems with some of the duties,” she said.

The locked door objection was reprised,

• as was the intercepting “some of our mail,” including one from the Herb and Jack Franks law firm,
• as was Moore’s not having presented a proposal of Brown Accounting to the board for the 2008-2009 audit,
• as was charging Rutland Township senior bus riders $3, instead of the $1 charged Grafton Township residents,
• as was not paying the Huntley Chamber of Commerce dues, as was the firing of part-time employees by Moore,
• as was the budget (“We found so many problems. I finally said it was time to have the auditor come in and revise it.”),
• as were meeting agendas,
• as was the delay in payment of Attorney Jim Kelly’s bill for representing the trustees in their appeal of Judge Caldwell’s “You can’t build the township hall without giving proper notice” decision.

Four of the Grafton Township Trustees coalition left the courthouse first today.

Court adjourned just before 5 PM. The ceiling lights blinked out as I was approaching the stairs.