McHenry County Blog

Jim Bishop, speaking as an individual, not an attorney, was first up for the proponents.

Two issues were considered for the second time at Tuesday night’s:

• slot machines at bars and restaurants in unincorporated McHenry County
• electronic billboards outside of municipalities

Also called video poker machines, the electronic devices will be allowed after a 15-9 vote.

The argument that the unincorporated bars were playing on an uneven playing field seemed to carry the day over arguments that gambling can lead to addiction that can destroy lives.

In 2009 the McHenry County Board voted 13-10-1 to prohibit the devices.

At that time rules had not been promulgated and no municipality had voted to allow them.

As Ken Koehler, maker of Tuesday’s motion put it, “It probably made sense to send a message to the rest of the County.  Now twenty [cities and villages] have [approved video gaming."

Fred Hoffman, who owns the Snuggery just south of McHenry on the Fox River, told the competitive disadvantage his establishment has because no electronic gaming devices are available.

Names of the fifteen who voted in favor follow:

• Michele Aavang
• Nick Chirokos
• Sue Drafkorn
• Joe Gottemoller
• Jim Heisler
• Tina Hill
• John Jung
• Ken Koehler
• Bob Martens
• Mary McCann
• Mary McClellan
• Anna May Miller
• Robert Nowak
• Sandy Salgado
• Mike Skala

Joe Edwards spoke against legalization, calling video gaming the “crack cocaine of gambling.”

Those voting “No” were

• Yvonne Barnes


Bethany Lutheran Church Pastor Carrie Smith, not speaking for her church, told of how gambling had devastated her brother’s life.

• Diane Evertsen
• John Hammerand
• Donna Kurtz
• Nick Provenzano
• Carolyn Schofield
• Ersel Schuster
• Mike Walkup
• Paula Yensen

The second issue was prompted by villages not wanting electronic billboard near their municipalities.

A moratorium enacted at their request was about to expire and, according to one village’s representative, “the word on the street” was that lobbying to let the moratorium run out was heavy.

Algonquin Village President John Schmitt explained his Board’s opposition to electronic billboards.

Appearing were those wishing to keep the ban on electronic billboards in unincorporated areas.

Algonquin Village President John Schmitt. He pointed out that the issue was so important to him that he was missing only is fifth meeting in twenty years of having served on his Board.

Catherine Peterson, Lakewood’s Village Manager, also weighed in asking for a continuance of the billboards’ prohibition through the summer months until the new zoning ordinance could be approved.

Also present was Lake in the Hills’ Community Development Director Dan Olson.

Despite the apprehension of village officials, the County Board approved the requested extension by voice vote. I heard no dissension.

Part 2 of the Chicago Tribune said about Lakewood’s alternative revenue bond purchase of what is not called RedTail Golf Club:

Lakewood is featured as one of the villages

“where bets backfired on taxpayers…where taxpayers should have been protected form tax increases” but weren’t…where “taxpayers instead awoke to hikes they never approved, ones that even exceeded what the law normally allows.”

Lakewood did not make the front page of the story, but the financing of the golf course it bought is referenced on page 10.

The Red Tail Golf Course, financed by alternative revenue bonds not approved by the taxpayers, did not come with a permanent clubhouse. .

“That’s how taxpayers is upscale Lakewood in McHenry County ended up paying for a golf course they were told wouldn’t cost a them a dime.”

Although I was not quoted in the story, I have replayed the interchange between the three residents and the then-village board several times to the current village board members.

There were three of us there.

Former Village Trustee Roger Reid said that he didn’t think it was the role of government to be in the golf club business.

Attorney Jim Bishop asked if board members knew that golf courses all over McHenry County were having financial problems.

I asked, “Is this ever going to cost me a dime?”

I was assured that it would not.

The breaching of that assurance undoubtedly explains my defense of the Property Tax Cap, which prohibited the issuance of bonds without a referendum.  (I lost the fight to keep that prohibition for park districts and you can see the most recent “need” determined by the Crystal Lake Park District at West Beach.)

A sports management company made the projections that the golf course in Lakewood would pay for itself.   The Tribune article explains,

“Some residents remained skeptical, including [former Village Trustee] Roger Reid, who recalls going with a small group to the Village Board meeting to ask for assurance that taxes would not go up because of the deal.

“‘We were assured–up and down and sideways–that, “This is not going to go on you tax bill,”‘ Reid recalled.

“Then residents were hit with the catch in the law:  If projections are off, taxes can go up.

“Turns out, the town’s projections were so far off that the golf course couldn’t even pay a penny toward its loan payment for six years.  And, by the time the bond was paid off two years ago, records show, 53 percent of it was paid off through higher taxes, not the projected golf course profit.”

The Tribune article points out that no state agency verifies financial projections that will be made by firms like Power Wellness, the health club firm McHenry County College hired to justify putting taxpayers on the hook for paying back tens of millions of dollars in projected borrowed money.

Although the Illinois Attorney General has authority to “advocate for taxpayers misled by the deals…the issue has never been raised there.”

No mention is made in this Northwest Herald article of the financial fiasco that occurred in Lakewood because of the use of alternative revenue bonds.  And there is no way to finance the MCC health club without going to referendum without using alternative revenue bonds.

= = = = =

If you into irony, the day after the Tribune article about the abuses of alternative revenue bonds ran, the Northwest Herald ran diminishing the dangers involved in using alternative revenue bonds.

On January 6, 2013, right on the top of the Sunday Chicago Tribune, there was an expose that should send warning flares up about the alternative revenue bonds that the majority of the McHenry County College Board seem set to issue.

The January 6, 2013, article by Joe Mahr and Joseph Ryan about small suburbs like Lakewood having made a decision that backfired on property taxpayers.

Alternative revenue bonds are ones ostensibly to be repaid by identified sources of revenue, for example in MCC’s case, an increase in student fees of $8 per hour, increased tuition from more enrollment and health club fees among other sources…

But, just in case, don’t you know, to be paid by property taxes if the projected revenues from the other non-real estate sources don’t bring in enough money.

The Tribune doesn’t look at junior colleges in its article. As the headline implies, it looks at “Small suburbs [that have] exploit[ed} tax loophole."

The sub-headline on the front page reads,

"Even in places where residents might expect tighter oversight, Illinois borrowing rules let towns sidestep voters, make decisions that can backfire on taxpayers"

McHenry County College taxpayers managed

• not to step in the Briar Patch when the Board wanted to borrow, without asking voters at the ballot box, $25 million to finance a minor league baseball stadium,
• but are facing a similar entangling long-term obligation in current Board members' desired to borrow, without voter approval, $45 million to build a health club and new classrooms (even while only using the classrooms 45% of the time).

Lakewood’s Red Tail Golf Course, purchased with revenue bonds which could not be repaid without forcing real estate taxes up.

The story describes alternative revenue bonds as a

“device that lets towns borrow in a way that sidesteps voters and property tax caps.

• The catch for towns:  They must be able to foresee paying off the loans without raising property taxes.
• The catch for residents:  If towns’ projections are wrong, taxes are automatically hiked to make the loan payments.

= = = = =

More tomorrow.

Another letter to the editor. This time from Attorney Jim Bishop:

Jim Bishop

I don’t know who or what the “Alliance of Land, Agriculture and Water” is, but I find the “politically correct” responses, presented in the McHenry County Blog, of the candidates for the McHenry County Board very amusing.

The vast majority of the candidates answered “yes” or “agree” to the first question:

“Do you agree that new development should be located where infrastructure exists, to minimize the extension of new roads, utilities and services, and protect farmland and water recharge areas?”

To agree with or answer yes to the above question shows that the reader either does not understand the question or ignores history.

To illustrate, I would ask if you would rather live in or near the triangle between

1. Crystal Lake, Algonquin and Huntley, or the triangle between
2. Crystal Lake, Woodstock and McHenry or the triangle between
3. Huntley, Marengo and Hampshire?

Unquestionably area 1) above is located where infrastructure exists, etc, but has required, by far, the greatest expansion of roads, utilities and services, whereas, the areas in 2 and 3 which consist of mostly estate developments requiring no extension of sewer or water, far less extension of gas and electricity, lower density, fewer children per unit for our schools and on and on.

Incidentally, the groundwater of McHenry County is in great shape and if one digs in the right places at the County Planning and Development Department, all of the evidence of this fact is on file. High density development also impedes groundwater recharge by building rooftops, parking lots and pavement, all peculiar to high density development, not estate type development.

I don’t think the “Alliance” knows what they are talking about.

Sincerely,

Jim Bishop

I cut my political teeth while McHenry County Treasurer in 1959-70 by challenging real estate assessments before the McHenry County Board of Review (a fool’s errand in those days) and, then, appealing them to the newly-former Illinois Property Tax Appeals Board.

Jim Bishop

What I could find of the "Tax Avenger" sword.

I had read the decision railroad lawyers had gotten. It said that taxes for rights-of-way in each county should be based on assessments equaling the county average.

So the Involved Citizens Association and I conducted two studies to find out what the average (median) assessment level was in McHenry County.

We used two different methodologies

1. We compared assessments on homes with the amount that tax stamps on deeds indicated the homes’ values.
2. We sent questionnaires to home purchases for the same year asking what they paid for their homes.

Both studies yielded the same result.

As I remember the finding was that the median assessment level was 43.2%. Something close to that anyway.

At the time, the rules laid down by McHenry County Supervisor of Assessments were that all residences were to be assessed at 60% of market value.

Turns out that most township assessors went “wink, wink, nod, not” and assessed only the new homes purchased by people in subdivisions like Crystal Lake’s Coventry at 60%.

Obviously, a lot of older homes were assessed a lot less or the median (mid-point when lining all the percentage figures up from high to low) could not have been 43%.

The new home buyers who figured how they were being discriminated against were, of course, quite upset.

Fourteen appealed all the way to the State Board.

All won.

There's always next year.

As McHenry County Treasurer, I was handing out $500 refund checks to Coventry homeowners.

Great publicity for me, undoubtedly helping me get elected State Rep. in 1972.

This year and two years ago, Crystal Lake attorney Jim Bishop did the heavy lifting.

Due to the absurdity that the County Board of Review will not take into account distressed sales, he advised me to get an appraisal. I did from Crystal Lake’s Meador and Associates.

Recently, I received a letter from Bishop telling me my assessment had been decreased from $107,595 to $101,657.

A 5.5% cut in my assessment worth a bit over $500.

Not as big a percentage cut as the new homeowners got back in 1970–a cut of almost 30%–but worth the effort.

After we got the decision, Joanne Wojcik gave me a fiber board sword painted gold with a sparkling ribbon.  On it was written, “Tax Avenger.”  It recently got destroyed in a kids’ sword fight.

If you don’t read the comments under articles, you are often missing some good information.

Under yesterday’s story containing the application withdrawal letter for appointment to the elected office office of Regional Superintendent of Schools Dr. Jeffrey Schleff, there were three comments from former and current school board members about the office.

I’m going to share them with you.

Ned Neumann, former McHenry High School Board member wrote:

“The Regional Supt. of Schools is a needless, worthless form of government. I was an elected member of the McHenry High School Board of Education for eighteen years and I never understood why the superintendents at their monthly meeting couldn’t coordinate schedules for sports or whatever and why the State Board couldn’t verify certification of teachers.

“We can’t constantly complain about Illinois having 7,000 units of government, 2,200 more than the next highest state, while we still support township government and things like the Regional Supt. of Schools.

“We’ve been without a supt for almost a year.

“Can anybody notice the difference??”

Former Crystal Lake Grade and High School Board member Jim Bishop wrote:

“As a past member and President of the Board of Ed in Crystal Lake-Cary-Grove District 155 for 9 years and member of the Crystal Lake District 47 Board of Ed for 4 more years, I wholeheartedly agree that the Regional Superintendent position should be eliminated, the office closed and the expenditures be eliminated.

“While I’m at it, I believe the same is true of the US Department of Education and believe most local educators would agree.”

Current Cary Grade School Board member Chris Jenner adds,

“Another BoE veteran (me, Cary D-26) agrees with the above comments, particularly Mr. Bishop’s proposal to eliminate the US DoE (which was originally going to be called the Department of Public Education till some government genius realized what the acronym would be).”

A press release from Congressman Joe Walsh. If you wish to read the entire pleading, you can find it here.

Rep. Walsh on Latest Development in Court Case

“Yesterday’s pleading proves that I have been a loving, supportive, involved Dad from the beginning”

Joe Walsh listens to Randy Hultgren campaign manager Joe Calomino at the Nunda Township GOP meeting Monday. To the left is Jim Bishop. To the right is Alan Skillikorn. Joe Wheeler is seen in the foreground.

WASHINGTON – Yesterday as he has promised to do from the start, Congressman Walsh continued to fight, through the legal system, the untrue allegations by his ex-wife Laura Walsh.

Mr. Walsh filed his pleading along with substantial evidence that for the first time allowed him to submit the full and true story regarding the care of his children.

The key points in the plea are:

• Mr. Walsh was able to prove (backed up with checks cashed by Laura Walsh) that he did in fact make years of payments at a time in which Laura Walsh claimed she received no payments from Mr. Walsh.
• Mr. Walsh did in fact pay his share of the education costs for all of his Children to attend Catholic school; despite the claim that Laura Walsh claims she incurred all of the costs.
• By blatantly and knowingly submitting false information in her pleading Laura Walsh and her attorney’s not only broke Illinois state law, but it is clear that the only point in submitting these allegations was an attempt to tarnish the Congressman’s reputation.
• From 2007 on, the children lived with Mr. Walsh half the time.
• Over a five year period, Mr. Walsh and his wife agreed to both increases and decreases in child support changes, without modifying them in court.
• In fact for almost a full year while Laura Walsh was making $140,000 a year and living in another state, Mr. Walsh provided full time residential custodial care for his youngest son, despite making significantly less money than Laura Walsh.
• At no time did Mr. Walsh ever ask Laura Walsh for child support despite her high salary and the fact that he was the full time care giver of their only remaining dependent child.

“I don’t know why my ex-wife filed this complaint last December, three weeks after I was elected a U.S. Congressman.

“I don’t know why she and her lawyers knowingly filed a complaint with outright untrue allegations and claims.

“I don’t know why they have gone public and politicized this conflict.

“I do know that I won’t engage this case in the media, I won’t do that to my children and I won’t do that to the mother of my children.

“Throughout our marriage and after our divorce, my ex wife and I have both done our best to be loving supportive parents to all three of our children.

“As much as I have tried to sit down with her and work things out these past nine months, I still do not understand why she has decided to take this public route.

“Her actions though have left me no choice but to defend myself through the court system.

“While I have tried to avoid discussing this case with the press, it is clear that the media are now fixated on this case, and are willing to report on her allegations as though they are true.

“Now that I have submitted my pleading which is backed up by substantial evidence, I can only hope that the press will report on the facts with the same vigor they were willing to report on uncorroborated allegations.

“I have unfairly endured two months of media ridicule as a “\’deadbeat dad.’

“My children have had to endure this as well. Yesterday’s pleading proves this charge is unfounded and shows that I have been a loving, supportive, involved Dad from the beginning.

“I understand that politics is a rough business and I have been an outspoken member of Congress who has clearly become a target.

“But to lie about me, especially my worth as a Father just isn’t right and I won’t put up with it.”

Mr. Walsh filed his pleading yesterday in the Circuit Court of Cook County, Illinois.

When my Crystal Lake Community High School Class of 1960 held its tenth reunion, I was on the committee. We put together a questionnaire and one question this then-late twenty-something guy came up with was

“What do you want on your tombstone?”

Now, with classmates of this 67-year old dying, it doesn’t seem so amusing, but you know how young people think they are immortal.

My line was

“The Taxman Cometh.”

I was McHenry County Treasurer at the time.

Today, the Taxman came(th).

Property tax bills arrived in the mailbox from McHenry County Treasurer Bill LeFew.

Thanks to a property tax appeal by attorney Jim Bishop (you’ll see his ad to the left every once in a while), our real estate bill decreased from $8,831.72 to $7,642.80, a 13 1/2% cut.

The bill offers a dollar comparison, but, unfortunately, there is no rate comparison.

Click to enlarge either part of the tax bill shown.

OK. so why bother you with how much we are going to save this year?

The reason is so you can protect yourself next year.

Those of use who got lower real estate assessments in 2009 than we had in 2008 (remember, the tax cycle is always one year behind) got a lower tax bill.

If you aren’t one of the people who did not appeal and get a lower real estate assessments, it means you will pay a higher percentage of the total tax bill than last year.

Those who got reductions will pay a smaller percentage.

So, to protect yourself next year, you need to appeal your real estate tax assessment. You can do it yourself—just find 3-5 properties that are worth what yours is, but are assessed lower, fill out the form, submit it and argue it before the McHenry County Board of Review—or you can hire an attorney like Jim Bishop at 815-455-0244.

We have been looking at the details in the Ancel Glink invoice to Grafton Township for the month of March, 2010. So far, we have finished what Ancel Glink calls the

• “Corporate” and
• “Linda Moore v. Grafton Township”

portions of the bill.

Now, we move into the only one-page section, which is entitled, “Daniel G. Ziller, Jr. et al. v. Gerry McMahon, et al.

Finishing up the Ziller v. Grafton Township case that the Trustees lose before Judge Michael Caldwell. Click to enlarge.

Former Grafton Township Attorney Jim Kelly, who served under Township Supervisor John Rossi.

Monday, March 15th, Keri-Lyn Krafthefer “prepare(s) for court appearance” and “confers with Jim Kelly regarding same” for an hour. Kelly was the township’s attorney before he was replaced with Joe Gottemoller, who resigned after dealing with the situation over last summer.

Former Grafton Township Attorney Joe Gottemoller. Gottemoller followed Jim Kelly.

(See What Grafton Township’s Just Resigned Attorney Sees as Looming Legal Issues and

Resigning Grafton Township Attorney Accuses Board of Being More Interested in “Being Right” than “Doing What’s Right” and

Take This Job and Shove It , all three articles about Gottemoller’s resignation and the township’s unresolved legal problems.)

March 16th Krafthefer billed the township for three hours for “prepar(ing) for and attend(ing) court appearance before Judge (Michael) Caldwell, review(ing) the proposed order and meet(ing) with attorney Kelly.”

March 17th the Township Attorney spends a quarter of an hour reviewing the proposed draft order with Kelly.

March 18th another quarter hour is billed “review(ing) and respond(ing) to correspondence regarding implication of court order.” No indication is given as to whom the letter or email is sent.

March 23rd drew another quarter of an hour bill for “review(ing) correspondence from Jim Kelly” and “review(ing) the court order entered in the Ziller case regarding injunction.”

New Township Hall proposed for Haligus Road in Lake in the Hills.

Total cost to Grafton Township taxpayers for the five hours on the invoice?

$925.

Crystal Lake attorney Jim Bishop won the case for those opposed to building a new $5 million (when interest is included) Grafton Township Hall.

First, he won before Judge Michael Caldwell in Circuit Court.

Then, when the Trustees tried to do an end run by providing full notice at a township board meeting, Bishop own again. The judge informed their attorney that he meant they could try again at an Annual Town Meeting, which, of course, they just did and failed miserably.

The Township Trustees did not give up, appealing Caldwell’s decision to the 2nd Appellate Court. Bishop won a third time.

Township Administrator Pam Fender holds up the real estate listing of the vacant factory building she found at the March 11, 2010, meeting.

Other relevant articles include

The Skunk, the Meerkats and the Elephant – Part 1

The Skunk, the Meerkats and the Elephant – Part 2

The Skunk, the Meerkats and the Elephant – Part 3

There is still a court-order referendum on whether to build a township hall to be held at the November elections.  I know of no one who thinks it has a chance of passing…especially after the over 700 verified registered voter turn out at the Annual Town Meeting.

All efforts by the current Township Trustees to resurrect the question of new offices, including purchasing an old, empty factory found by Township Administrator Pam Fender were trounced.

That, however, did not seem to discourage the Trustees.  The very next day, they filed court papers intended to bounce Linda Moore from office.

Grafton Township Democrats certainly have their eyes on the bickering Republican office holders. In this photo of part of the audience at an early Septembeer, 2009, meeting you can see future Democratic Party Chairman Mike Bissett, his wife, McHenry County Board member Paula Yensen, outgiong Township Attorney Jim Kelly and McHenry County Board member Jim Kennedy.

All of this infighting among officials elected as Republicans leads me to believe Democrats will control Grafton Township government after the 2013 elections.

The following has been received from the office of Jim Bishop, attorney for Dan Ziller, Jr., et al, in their successful case against the Grafton Township Board’s attempt to build a new township hall without voter approval:

The Illinois Appellate Court officially ended the legal battle of the stalled Grafton Township Town Hall project. No negotiations with respect to settlement are either appropriate or necessary.

The Appellate Court ended all speculation with its Decision of September 18, 2009, ruling in favor of the Grafton Township residents that filed suit against Grafton Township Officials, the Appellate Court ruled that there must be a the then Township Supervisor, John Rossi and the other Trustees.

The Appellate Court has ruled that the issue must be placed on the ballot for the vote of the residents of Grafton Township at the November 2010 General Election. The referendum will determine whether the project to construct a new township hall, estimated to cost in excess of $5 million, will proceed.

For more than seven months, the residents of Grafton Township have pleaded with, and finally sued, the Grafton Township Board of Trustees to delay the construction until a referendum could be placed on the ballot concerning this important matter.

Over a period of many months, the Grafton Board of Trustees refused to halt the project necessitating the litigation.

The Appellate Court sided with the residents on all issues in the Court’s 12 page published Opinion.

Grafton Township Supervisor Linda Moore, who has been steadfastly opposed to the Town Hall construction project, has been continuously thwarted by the actions of the majority of the Trustees, which led to the recent resignation of Township Attorney, Joseph Gottemoller.

The continued refusal of the majority of the Grafton Township Trustees may well lead to additional litigation against the Township in order that the residents may see certain financial and other documents relating to various expenditures over the past 4 years.

James Bishop, attorney for the Plaintiffs in the “town hall” litigation has recently filed a Freedom of Information request with the Township Clerk, Dina Frigo, and has indicated that should the Trustees continue to refuse to provide such financial documentation, another lawsuit will be forthcoming.

Among financial documentation sought by Bishop are annual

• Township audits for the years 2006-2009,
• monthly bank statements, check registers,
• contracts relating to the sale of the existing township property,
• contracts and other documentation.

By law, the township is required to respond to Bishop’s FOI request early next week.

= = = = =
Seen at the Grafton Township meeting when attorney Joe Gottemoller rendered his resignation are, from left to right, Township Clerk Dina Frigo, Township Trustees Rob LaPorta, Betty Zirk and Gerry McMahon. Trustee Barbara Murphy has her back to the camera. Township Supervisor Linda Moore was medically indisposed. If you wish, you can read Gottemoller’s parting advice to the board.