McHenry County Blog

The five-member Grafton Township Board had only Trustees Barbara Murphy, Betty Zirk and Gerry McMahon in attendance Thursday night.

With Township Supervisor Linda Moore in Texas for her daughter’s college graduation and Rob LaPorta also absent, the meeting was relatively short and peaceful.

Newly-elected Township Supervisor Jim Kearns sat in the back row looking at the Board packet. To his right is Dan Ziller, Sr.

No one raised his voice or went off on a rant. Trustee Gerry McMahon even sat facing the audience.

Unlike the outgoing McHenry County College Board, the old Township Board, chaired Thursday by Barbara Murphy, spent much of the meeting deferring to their successors, referring several times to newly-elected Independent Supervisor Jim Kearns, who was sitting in the back row.

The Road District’s budget, for example, was not passed, even though that was the wish of outgoing Road Commissioner Jack Freund.

“The new Board comes in on the 20th,” Trustee Betty Zirk, the only member of the Board to seek and win re-election.

When it came time for to consider the bills, Zirk had a list of those to exclude. They included

Betty Zirk

• $2,644.68 charged to a BMO Harris credit card (postage, telephone, equipment maintenance, travel expenses, etc.)
• $864.20 for J.A. Jetchmark, Ltd.
• $475 for McHenry County Council of Governments dues
• $295.60 for printing to Total Point of Video, Inc.
• $24,162.50 billed for legal fees by Moore attorney John Nelson
• $39,007.89 billed for legal services from March, 2012, through March, 2013, by Moore attorney Ottosen Britz Kelly Cooper Gilbert & DiNilf

The Trustees’ law firm, Ancel Glink, however, was paid $5,747.48.

“In order to meet the payroll next week, I don’t think we can pay any bills,” Zirk said.

Zirk also mentioned that Township Road Commissioner was owed $7,161.20 to cover health insurance for his wife.

“He could get it cheaper by getting it through his wife’s than through the Township,” she explained.

The motion approving the bills noted that they would be paid when money was available.

Grafton Township Assessor Bill Ottley, Road Commissioner-Elect Tom Pozanaski, a Grafton Township Highway Department employee, Road Commissioner Jack Freund and Township Clerk Harriet Ford.

As outgoing Township Assessor Bill Ottley was leaving after the bills were approved, he was thanked for his service for the last four years. The sparse audience applauded.

Ottley reminded them that he would be around through December, when his term expires.

“And you, too, Jack,” one of the Trustees added.

Zirk then talked about how audit expenses should be allocated. She suggested Public Assistance pay 5% and the Road District 35%.

Freund objected to the number she suggested, saying, “I’ll pay 25% like I’ve always been paying.”

Trustee Gerry McMahon suggest a compromised of 28%. Freund did not agree.

After some discussion, Zirk suggested asking the auditor how much time he spent on the Road District budget and the matter was deferred.

As the meeting was drawing to a close, Murphy said,

“There’s a part of me that is worry for the way things ended up. I regret that.”

Part of the audience at Thursday’s meeting.

A letter from the forensic auditor was read in which he detailed Moore’s refusal to sign the engagement letter and a payment until ordered by Judge

He also said he was unable to obtain original copies of the warrant lists.

Township Clerk Harriot Ford pointed out the documents were on the web site.

“I look forward to things moving on a real positive way,” she said shortly before the meeting adjourned.

Also in the audience was newly-elected Township Assessor Al Zielinski.

I didn’t attend last Thursday night’s Grafton Township Board meeting.

Frankly, it’s not calm enough for me.

The following two-minute portion was forwarded to me.

From it, you can see what goes on at some point in virtually every meeting.

Sitting from left to right are Supervisor Linda Moore and Trustees Barbara Murphy, Robert LaPorta, Betty Zirk and the vociferous Gerry McMahon.

At the last meeting of the Grafton Township Supervisor Linda Moore asked her adversaries on the Township Board to approve the man whose arguments unseated their choice for Township Attorney, Keri Lyn Krafthefer, in Judge Michael Caldwell’s court.

Attorney John Nelson can been seen sitting in the middle of the front row in this photo of the last Grafton Township meeting.

To no one’s surprise the services of Attorney Nelson were summarily rejected on a 4-1 vote.

“Conflict” was the word used to explain the rejection. Moore was asked to bring three recommendations from among whom the Township Trustees would chose.

At that same meeting unpaid for advice was given by an Ancel Glink attorney that led the Trustees to knock all of the citizen-initiated resolutions off the agenda of Annual Town Meeting.

The provision of that advice led to negative comments from Judge Caldwell (“They’re not going to sneak around behind the Court’s order …”) and a motion to expand the prohibition of legal advice from Ancel Glink beyond Krafthefer.

After the meeting, Nelson brought up the subject in Judge Caldwell’s court and the jurist said,

“The issue is, is there an articulable reason for not approving you.”

A motion filed last Friday may lead to an answer to that question.

Moore contends that Nelson’s approval was “unreasonably withheld.”

“Further, Supervisor Moore believes outside of conflict the Trustees can offer no articulable reason to deny consent and confirmation of Attorney Nelson as Grafton Town Attorney.”

You can read the motion below. Click to enlarge any page.

John Nelson

Thursday night, the Grafton Township Trustees rejected Supervisor Linda Moore’s selection of Rockford’s John Nelson as Township Attorney.

Little surprise there, since Nelson’s representation of Moore led to the dismissal of both the Trustees’ favored law firm Ancel Glink, but also Township Administrator Pam Fender, whom the Trustees put in office to perform as much of the Township Supervisor’s duties as possible.

I didn’t look at the agenda and got to the Huntley Park District meeting room too late to get a board packet, so I didn’t know what to expect. In fact, after listening to the tedium of expenditure discussion, I asked someone why I had come.

“Don’t worry. They’ll start shouting at each other.”

Before the shouting started at the Grafton Township Board Meeting.

And Gerry McMahon certainly lived up to that prediction.

More than once.

The person who was most disturbed for the negative impression made by McMahon’s outbursts is the Trustee who successfully moved to censure him in October of 2009, Barb Murphy.

At one point she said forcefully,

“I’m just telling you to shut the hell up for a few minutes so we can finish this damn meeting!”

The board reversed itself on selecting the 300-seat auditorium at the Huntley Park District headquarters in favor of returning to the Huntley High School gym.

Over 700 registered voters signed in at last year’s Annual Town Meeting.

The 2010 Grafton Annual Town Meeting had more that twice as many people as would fit in the Huntley Park District Auditorium.

The vote was 2-2 with Murphy and Moore voting for the move to the high school and Betty Zirk and McMahon voting to stay in the 300-seat venue.

Rob LaPorta abstained.

Moore ruled that abstentions would be counted on the positive side of the motion and moved onto the next item of business. And, my understanding is that under Robert’s Rules of Order, once the next item is taken up (video cameras for the Annual Meeting), it is too late to appeal the decision of the chair.

When I got home I looked up what Robert’s says about how abstention votes should be tallied and found the following on “The Official Robert’s Rules of Order Web Site“:

“In the usual situation, where either a majority vote or a two-thirds vote is required, abstentions have absolutely no effect on the outcome of the vote since what is required is either a majority or two thirds of the votes cast.”

But, as McMahon loudly proclaimed,

“We don’t follow Robert’s Rules!”

LaPorta, who abstained, said,

“I didn’t know about that. Guys from Lake in the Hills, what do you do?”

The reply from a village trustee:

“We follow Robert’s Rules.”

In another dispute, Moore asked permission to have the Electors vote upon trading the township van for a car which would ir easier for seniors to get into.

This was apparently the first time Moore has brought up the subject.

Moore pointed out that both bus drivers and seniors favored the switch.

Of the van. referring to the seniors, she said, “They hate it.”

“Send it to the (Transportation) Committee,” McMahon, a senior himself, said.

“It’ll take another year,” Moore replied.

“We don’t care,” McMahon retorted.

“We can’t be driving the bus all the time. It doesn’t look right to have one or two passengers in a bus.”

Moore pointed out that the bus used more gasoline than would a car and predicted that the price per gallon would exceed $5 this summer.

“I want to remove it from the agenda,” the other senior citizen on the panel said. “This is the first time it’s come up.”

And a majority of the Township Board took action that removes the possibility of trading the van for a car.

The final item I found of interest was that Ancel Glink is still providing legal advice.

A memo from Jeffrey R. Jurgens dated March 3, 2010, was used as the basis for rejecting all of the citizen-initiated resolutions.

Ancel Glink’s services as Grafton Township Attorney were ended by Judge Michael Caldwell.

Pete Gonigan asks about the use of Ancel Glink for legal advice.

Afterward, First Electric Newspaper Publisher Pete Gonigam asked about Ancel Glink’s continuing legal advice.

“The judge said we could still go to Ancel Glink at no charge,” LaPorta said.

The final part of Judge Michael Caldwell’s comments at the February 24, 2011, hearing had to do with contracts.  The judge is still disturbed at the Trustees “trying to marginalize” Supervisor Linda Moore.

He warns the Trustees (and maybe their attorney Thomas DiCianni),

Judge Michael Caldwell

“…I want to caution everybody in the courtroom who’s involved in this case: The orders of this court have the force of law and they are supposed to be observed.

“Now, I know people who think they are more clever than I am and they probably are, but what happens to cute and clever people from time to time is they get too cute and they get too clever and they may suddenly find themselves in direct violation of a court order.

“When that happens, my discretion is always exercised with a jail term. I have never fined anybody for direct criminal contempt.”

Here’s the concluding part of the transcript:

THE COURT: Now, I shouldn’t have to say this, and I guess the reason I’m sort of chagrined by this whole thing is when I said the trustees had the power to contract, what I meant was that the trustees have the power to make a motion to approve the entry into a contract; and then when I went on in my decision to talk about Linda Moore’s obligation to sign the contracts, it is also her right as the trustee — as the supervisor to sign those contracts which have been approved by the board. It is a ministerial function of the supervisor.

It is demeaning and insulting for the board to sit there, approve a contract for a vendor and then sign it and not give her a copy.

It is her right to sign it, not yours.

She is the chief executive officer of the city.

That’s what they do.

That’s what they’re supposed to do.

MR. DiCIANNI: What if she refuses to sign it which is what –

THE COURT: That’s not the issue.

MR. DiCIANNI: — was evidenced.

THE COURT: That’s not the issue here. The issue here wasn’t that she refused to sign it.

The issue here was that it was approved by the trustees, they all signed it, she asked for a copy and she wasn’t given it.

They do it and then run around somebody; and, again, this is another instance of the trustees going off and trying to marginalize or avoid the responsibility for the duties of the trustee.

It’s not punishable at this moment in time, but I want to caution everybody in the courtroom who’s involved in this case: The orders of this court have the force of law and they are supposed to be observed.

Now, I know people who think they are more clever than I am and they probably are, but what happens to cute and clever people from time to time is they get too cute and they get too clever and they may suddenly find themselves in direct violation of a court order.

When that happens, my discretion is always exercised with a jail term. I have never fined anybody for direct criminal contempt.

I have jailed people for direct criminal contempt.

Grafton Township Trustees Gerry McMahon, Betty Zirk, Rob LaPorta and Barb Murphy.

Only twice in 13 years and I regretted the necessity to do both, but, folks, believe me, I’m not going to tolerate a lot of this nonsense in the future because I think that, by and large, there should be a way for this township to be governed in a much less contentious manner.

Do you want time to write this up?

MR. DiCIANNI: Yes.

THE COURT: Two weeks.

MR. DiCIANNI: Thank you.

THE COURT: Give me an order continuing it.

= = = = =

This is not the first time that Judge Caldwell has mentioned contempt in connection with the continuing Grafton Township dispute.  See also

• 5-18-10 Politicians Who Can’t Say, “No”… or “Yes”
• 3-30-10 Judge Puts Grafton Township Supervisor Linda Moore Back in Her Office, Threatens Trustees, Administration with Contempt

I have bumped this up because of a comment that Grafton Township Trustee Rob LaPorta made. It is now included in the article.

Those attending last Monday's Grafton Township meeting.

An email that took less time to post than attending Monday night’s Grafton Township re-do of the tax levy it passed last week.   Tonight’s meeting lasted about 25 minutes, about twice as long as the first one.

Dear Friends,

Thank you for attending the Grafton Township Special Board Meeting tonight.

1. When I calculated the levy before the first Special Meeting on the 20th, I multiplied 4.999%, per the wishes of the trustees, by last year’s levy, rather than by the extension.
2. Apparently, Assessor Ottley realized the error shortly after the special meeting on the 20th and called in Trustees Murphy and Zirk, who then relayed his concerns to me. Unfortunately, neither Assessor Ottley or the Trustees noticed the error during the 20 days posting time frame prior to the special meeting on the 20th.
3. Fortunately, tonight, at another special meeting (27th), we were able to correct the error.
4. I stand firm in my conviction, that the economy is so poor at this time, that Grafton Township residents should not pay any increase at all to their government. That is why I voted against increasing the levy at both special meetings called by the Trustees on the 20th and 27th of December. Unfortunately, I was the only board member who voted against increasing residents’ taxes and the motion passed.

Sincerely,

Linda Moore
Grafton Township Supervisor

= = = = = =

After this was posted, Trustee Rob LaPorta wrote the following comment:

Please note the tax increase that Mrs. Moore is referring to is 11 cents ($.11) per $100,000.00 home value.

So, if you own a home valued at $400,000.00, your tax will increase 44 cents ($.44).

The Trustees agreed with the Assessor’s recommendation towards this increase; of which the Assessor also explained to the Board that if Grafton Township did not confirm this very small increase to taxpayers, that the Grafton Township will be at risk of losing over $54,000.00 of tax revenues.

Each Trustee is highly confident of the taxing-conservative and fiscal-responsible decision that was completed.

The Audit of Grafton Township’s Financial Records will begin soon, and will include analysis of the accuracy of all Township Financial Records that were taken from Grafton Township offices to Mrs. Moore’s home.

Moore then replied,

Rob,
Can you explain how we will lose $54,000 in tax revenue in more detail?

Thank you for your help on this.

Linda Moore

Another person suggested Moore was not reading LaPorta’s comment correctly, after which Moore posted this:

Thank you for the correction.

Rob,

Please explain how we would be “at-risk” for losing $54,000 in tax revenue.

Thank you for your help.

This message was found in the bleachers of the 2010 Grafton Township Annual Meeting.

I can only please

one person a day.

TODAY IS NOT YOUR DAY.

Tomorrow doesn’t look good either.

That’s the message on the tee shirt.

David Moore taping an April township board meeting.

The press release below was issued by the Huntley Police Department. It relates to a confrontation between Township Supervisor Linda Moore’s husband David and Township Trustee Gerry McMahon.

David Moore is one of the mildest men I have ever met, while McMahon is the most combative public official I have ever observed.

Image and text taken from the April 21, 2010, article.

McMahon clearly does not like his township board participation videotaped. You can see that in this April 21, 2010, article or this one.

Battery Charges Filed in altercation

Thursday evening October 14, 2010 at 11:41 pm the Huntley Police Department responded to the Huntley Park District (12015 Mill St. Huntley) for a report of a battery that had just occurred.

The investigation into the incident revealed that a physical altercation occurred between David C. Moore and Gerald McMahon.

It is being alleged that David Moore approached Gerald McMahon outside the meeting room in the park district building and started videotaping McMahon’s conversation with other members of the Grafton Township Administration.

McMahon put his hand up and attempted to block the videotaping when Moore reacted and allegedly placed his hands on McMahon’s upper body and shoved him.

McMahon then slapped Moore as he was being pushed.

David Moore was taken into custody by Huntley officers and transported to the station.

Moore was charged with Battery.

Moore posted $150.00 bond and was released with a McHenry County court date of November 19, 2010 at 8:30am.

Defendant:
David C. Moore DOB 11/15/62
13904 Harmony Rd

So how many times did the “Family Feud” Grafton Township Board meet in the first year since Linda Moore replaced John Rossi as Supervisor?

Past boards have met once a month, plus the Annual Town Meeting of Electors.

The Supervisor and Clerk get paid a salary, but the Township Trustees get $100 a meeting.

You can do the math to figure out how much the Trustees could have earned had they attended every meeting.

A November meeting that Township Trustees boycotted. Sitting at the table are Road Commissioner Jack Freund and Supervisor Linda Moore.

5-21-9

5-26-9

6-17-9

6-25-9

7-6-9

7-9-9

8-13-9

9-3-9

9-10-9

9-22-9

10-8-9

10-29-9

11-12-9 Trustees boycotted meeting.

11-16-9 Trustees boycotted meeting.

11-18-9

11-18-9 Trustees boycotted meeting.

11-24-9 Trustees boycotted meeting.

Feb. 22, 2010, Grafton Township budget meeting.

11-24-9

12-10-9

12-17-9

1-14-10

2-11-10

2-22-10

3-2-10

3-11-10

3-23-10

And with all the meetings since October, don’t you think there might have been time to approve the October minutes that were unavailable when I filed a Freedom of Information request?

Newly sworn in Grafton Township Trustee confers with Township Trustee Rob LaPorta just after being sworn in. Trustees Gerry McMahon and Betty Zirk are to the left and Trustee Barb Murphy is on the right.

Newly appointed Township Clerk Harriet Ford wrote,

“Apparently, the Township board has previously reviewed them and found them to be inaccurate. I need to review the tapes of the October meetings, which I understand were very long meetings, in order to prepare correct minutes. I will be happy to make the minutes available once they are approved by the Township Board.”

Ford then goes on to suggest Grafton Township Freedom of Information Office (and Supervisor) Linda Moore that she should advise me that

“to the extent that these documents are not yet available and they are are exempt from FOIA, because there are no documents to produce yet. To the extent that incorrect preliminary draft minutes exit, they are exempt from disclosure under Section 7(f) of FOIA. One the minutes are approved by the Township Board they will be made available for public inspection within 7 days, in accordance with Section 2.06(b) of the Open Meetings Act.”

Sunday Northwest Herald Executive Editor Chris Krug wrote of taking some heat from a reader who criticized him in a letter to his boss John Rung.

In response, Krug said he was going to list the benefits of township government.

What followed was nine empty lines.

Of the six comments when I wrote this at 2 yesterday afternoon, most were favorable to Krug’s viewpoint.

The final one, from “hblarson” read,

“Chris: The township is the most democratic of our American institutions. To do away with the township is to admit We the People are incapable of maintaining a democratic form of government. One way of looking at the issue is: If residents of a township are unhappy with their town government, they, as electors, are empowered to change it.”

Larson, alas, is remembering the past.

Back in 1969. township electors indeed had power.

They had the power of setting the budget.

Porten's Subdivision with area in the flood plain shown. Map taken from the new GIS web site.

That year, Porten’s Subdivision in Nunda Township next to the Fox River, which had private roads the Nunda Township Road Commissioner would not repair because, well, because they were private, went on the war path.

They packed the township meeting and lowered each line item in the road commissioner’s budget to $1.

What they didn’t know was the township road commissioner’s salary was in the Town Fund.

So, the road commissioner got paid, but didn’t have the money to do any work.

That same year, electors supporting reform-assessor Forrest Hare took control of the Algonquin Township meeting  at Eastview Grade School on Route 62.

The pesky homeowners, who were fed up with being assessed by the county supervisor of assessments at a higher level than elsewhere in McHenry County, inserted $500 in the budget to sue for equity.

$500 was a big number then.

The Algonquin Township attorney managed to spend the $500 without filing suit, so nothing substantive came of the action.

Except…

Except, township officials asked the Illinois General Assembly to change state law so uppity citizens would have no say on the budget.

Instead all the decisions henceforth would be made by the township auditors (the name changed later to “trustees”).

So commenter Larson, direct democracy died about 1970.

Grafton Township meeting as seen from the western part of the gym before the momentous meeting began.

Annual Town Meetings now have very little substance to them, despite the Grafton Township exception this year.

In fact, it would surprise me not one bit if the Township Officials of Illinois lobbyists were not at this very moment trying to change township law to remove the requirement that voters have to approve borrowing money to build township buildings.

That would overturn the law made by 2nd Appellate Justices in the Grafton Township case last year.

Ancel Glink Partner Robert Bush

Just this year, some Grafton Township citizens petitioned to have votes on whether to fire the township attorney, Ancel Glink.

Ancel Glink Partner Rob Bush ruled that township electors did not have that power, so the question could not be put on the Annual Town Meeting agenda.

So sad, attorneys are hired and fired only by township boards.

Firing the new Township Administrator was also ruled to be none of the township electors’ business.

And that revolutionary idea of requiring Robert’s Rules of Order at all township board meetings, well, in that matter, too, the electors were irrelevant.  (Now, Grafton township meetings often resemble a free for all, the board having set themselves from Robert’s Rules of Order.)

So, Mr. or Mrs. Larson, the next time you try to defend township government because it is some Athenian democratic ideal, please don’t.

Just as “American Pie” relates the “day the music died,” direct democracy died in township government decades ago.

Now, township boards run the show pretty much as city councils do.  And as county boards do.  And as school boards.

Nothing very special about the way townships are governed.