Fundraising and Spending in 6th and 14th Congresional District Races

From Former Quigley Supporter:

6th and 14th Congressional District Financials Summary — 2nd Quarter 2019

July 15 was the deadline for federal campaign committees to file their 2nd quarter disclosure reports with the Federal Elections Commission (FEC). 

Back on June 23rd’s update here on McHenry County Blog, I predicted where the major 14th congressional Republican candidates would be with cash-on-hand, which is a key metric to determine how a campaign is doing.  Here is what was published last month:

FQSFECPrediction062319.jpg

Here are the numbers, as obtained through FEC filings throughout the day on July 15:

Summary614Q219.jpg

As reported by Cal earlier in the day on Monday, Congressman Sean Casten far outraised Evelyn Sanguinetti, and has over 12 times more cash on hand than his Republican challenger. 

Incumbent congressmen having a significant financial advantage at this stage is common. 

It’s the power of incumbency.

Before discussing the 14th congressional district challengers, candidate Sue Rezin is not included on this grid since she did not announce her candidacy until July 9. 

She will be filing a 3rd quarter report in October, which will report her first fundraising activity. 

Since Allen Skillicorn at this point has not formally entered the race through filing FEC paperwork, he is not included either. 

Candidate Anthony Catella is not counted, since he has yet to file FEC paperwork since his mid March announcement to the print media.

My prediction was nearly accurate for Ted Gradel, missing the $300,000 cash on hand threshold by a little over $10,000. 

The prediction for Oberweis was off significantly, from the $500,000 cash on hand prediction.

ANALYSIS:  While money is not everything in any campaign, to be successful in a high-profile race like Congress, you must have significant cash to purchase TV advertising and materials to support a campaign. 

In the 14th, Republicans Jim Oberweis and Ted Gradel lead in fundraising. 

Oberweis has loaned his campaign $200,000, honoring his commitment to match dollar-for-dollar contributions up to $1 million. 

Since Ted Gradel has only loaned himself $30,000 since he launched his campaign on April 23, the Gradel campaign has actually raised more money from donors in the slightly more than 2 months since its launch. 

Factoring out candidate loans, Gradel has raised nearly $275,000 compared with the $216,402 Oberweis has raised. 

Very impressive for a first time candidate.

Since James Marter did not formally launch his 14th congressional bid until May 30, his campaign raising what it did is a good start for only a month. 

He will clearly need to do better in order to compete with Oberweis and Gradel. 

Please note, Marter ran for Congress in 2018 in the 16th district, which is why he had cash on hand at the end of 2018, and the end of March.  

Finally, Danny Malouf, since his campaign’s launch in mid February, lags far behind. 

He did not file an FEC report in April. 

His filing today covers the period from his campaign’s launch through June 30.

Sue Rezin is a proven fundraiser since first running for office in 2010. 

If she can show the same effective fundraising under federal rules as she has in her Illinois General Assembly campaigns, she should be able to be competitive with all of the primary opponents, and we should see evidence in the 3rd quarter filings.

It should take the FEC 2-3 days to process the detailed data which will enable anyone to query each candidates’ details to determine who the donors are, as well as where the candidates are spending their money. 

Additional detailed analytics will be forthcoming when this additional data is available.

Operating Engineers Local 150 Files Freedom of Information Suit against Woodstock

On May 31, 2019, Local 150 of the International Union of Operating Engineeers sought judicial relief for what is considers an inadequate reply to a Feeedom of Information request.

Charging “numerous violations” of the FOI Act, the union seeks “declaratory relief, injunctive relief, and attorneys’ fees and costs. “

The union represents Woodsotck’s Public Works Department employees.

Here is whart was requested on May 3, 2019:

  • any and all legal bills for the City of Woodstock for the past 12 months;
  • all emails, memos, notes, or other documents related to the job description/wage study performed by McGrath in 2019; and
  • all emails, memos, notes, or other documents related to the study performed by Clark Baird Smith, City of Woodstock officials, or any other entity which compared the wage rates of Local 150 Members to other similarly situated employees at other municipalities

The City replied that the 12-month request for all legal bills was too broad, so Local 150 narrowed its request to “all legal bills for Clark Baird Smith, and/or all legal bills related to the Public Works Department.”

The City responsed was “copies of legal bills from Clark Baird Smith and Zukowski, Rogers, Flood & McArdle for the period of February 2018 through December 2018, and it redacted the entire description of services rendered from every legal bill it provided,” claiming this was “responsive.”

Example of the legal services information withheld.
Example of Zukowski, Rodgers, Flood & McArdle legal bill information withheld.

“…the job description/wage study performed by McGrath in 2019″ was denied.”

“…the study performed by Clark Baird Smith, City of Woodstock officials, or any other entity which compared the wage rates of Local 150 members to other similarly situated employees at other municipalities” was also denied.

Local 150 then lists alleged violations of the Freedom of Information Act:

  • refusal to provide legal bills in 2019 through the date of the FOIA request, May 3rd
  • “redacting the entire description of services rendered on each legal bill” and not giving the reason
  • refusal to provide the wage study by McGrath
  • refusal to provide the wage comp.arison study by Clark Baird Smith/City of Woodstock

Besides the information, the union requests

  • an injunction prohibing the City from violating the FOI Act again
  • costs and legal fees

Local 150 is represented by attorney Robert A. Paszta.

Demonstration Planned by ROAR for AJ at Courthouse June 16th, Day of AJ’s Parents’ Court Appearances

A group called ROAR for AJ can be found on Facebook.

It sponsored a small demonstration in front of the Department of Children and Family Services office the first week of June and plan another one on June 18th.

That gathering will be in front of the McHenry County Courthouse from 7:3–11:30, a period when AJ’s parents will be in court.

“Being a Young Conservative Female…”

Grandneice Keaton Campbell reflects on “Overcoming the Strawman.”

“When you’re a nineteen-year-old girl, there is a lot of incentive to be a Liberal. All of your favorite celebrities agree with you, you get to wear those cute feminist t-shirts that every brand seems to be making, and it feels like everyone else your age agrees with your ideology. There is simply something trendy about being a young Liberal.”

17-Year Honda Warranty

Back at Brilliant Honda in Crystal Lake this past week for a recall on the replacement for the recalled air bag, I was told that the driver’s seat belt was defective.

But, not to worry, it would not cost anything to have it replaced because this part of my 2002 Honda Civic was still under warranty.

Needless to say, I was surprised.

Townships Don’t Belong in Bus Business, Bob Anderson Says

From McHenry Township Trustee Bob Anderson:

Bob Anderson

Townships, like McHenry Township, have no business being in the bus business.

Township bus programs are not one of the three state mandated duties of township government.

These programs are just another way to get citizens addicted to government services at high public tax cost.

Township insiders know this buys votes and support to keep the extra layer of township government on the tax rolls, protecting their jobs and many benefits. 

The McHenry Township Senior Bus Program has a taxpayer cost of $300,000.

That’s not cheap.

It takes takes nineteen percent of the Township Budget to support the program.

Of the about 50,000 township residents, only 0.3 percent use the service!

There are five buses in the township fleet, at a cost of over $70,000 each, which are replaced every three years with low milage. 

Rides do not cost $7.59 per trip.

When all costs are factored in, the cost is about $25 one way, $50 round trip.

Note: in 2013 one way cost was $19.42.

That’s a 28% increase in just five years. 

Some of the operating costs are for administration, wages and benefits, insurance, fuel, cell phones, repairs, contractual services and repairs. 

Most bus trips are not used for doctor appointments.

Last year taxpayers paid for 1,617 trips to the McHenry Township Senior Center,

  • 136 to McHenry Township
  • 953 trips to 33 different restaurants
  • 607 trips to four different schools
  • 499 trips to three different libraries
  • 143 trips to nine different banks and
  • 727 trips to eight different churche.

There were even trips to

  • the McHenry Country Club and
  • Steffens Jewelers.

McHenry Township allows those as young as 55 to qualify as a “senior” to get a “free” ride.

McHenry Township’s hard working families live paycheck to paycheck. They are looking for tax relief from anywhere possible.

The McHenry Township Board eliminated the McHenry Township Bus Program for tax relief, a good thing.

Kenneally Announces Deferred Prosecution Program

From the McHenry County State’s Attorney:

MCHENRY COUNTY STATE’S ATTORNEY LAUNCHING DEFERRED PROSECUTION PROGRAM

Beginning August 1, 2019, Patrick D. Kenneally, the McHenry County State’s Attorney, is launching the Deferred Prosecution Program, formerly the First Offender Program.

The Deferred Prosecution Program will continue and expand upon the State’s Attorney’s commitment to divert less serious offenders from the
criminal justice system to a less costly process administered by a volunteer panel of citizens.

Specifically, an offender admitted into the Deferred Prosecution Program writes out a statement admitting to the offense, appears before a panel of citizens who are informed of the details of the offense and meet with the offender.

The victim will also have an opportunity to address the offender and panel members.

Thereafter, the panel of citizens places requirements on the offender that must be completed within a certain period of time.

These requirements may include making full restitution to the victim, completing community service hours, obtaining a high school diploma, seeking counseling or substance abuse treatment, obtaining and maintaining employment, and not committing further offenses.

Upon successful completion of these requirements, the offender’s case is dismissed.

If the offender fails to complete the program successfully, the case is returned to the courts for prosecution.

Previously, a similar diversionary program was only available to first-time offenders.

The diversion of first-time offenders proved incredibly successful, boasting a recidivism rate of less than 20%.

Patrick Kenneally
Patrick Kenneally

The Deferred Prosecution Program seeks to build upon this success by allowing admission, on a case-by-case basis, of minor offenders who may have been arrested before.

Of the Program, Kenneally stated:

“While holding everyone that has violated the law accountable is paramount, inflexible approaches to prosecuting less serious offenses is unnecessarily expensive and risks imposing criminal convictions that can have collateral consequences for the rest of an offender’s life.

“The Deferred Prosecution Program is a win-win.

“It establishes consequences and effectively promotes rehabilitation for those who have broken the law, does a better job reducing recidivism, and helps alleviate the financial and personnel strain on the system.”

New Asylum Rules Proposed

From the Trump Administration:

DHS and DOJ Issue Third-Country Asylum Rule

WASHINGTON – Tomorrow, a joint Interim Final Rule (IFR) issued by the Departments of Justice and Homeland Security will publish in the Federal Register.

This IFR uses the authority delegated by Congress in section 208(b)(2)(C) of the Immigration and Nationality Act to enhance the integrity of the asylum process by placing further restrictions or limitations on eligibility for aliens who seek asylum in the United States. Specifically, the Departments of Justice and Homeland Security are revising 8 C.F.R. § 208.13(c) and 8 C.F.R. § 1208.13(c) to add a new bar to eligibility for asylum for an alien who enters or attempts to enter the United States across the southern border, but who did not apply for protection from persecution or torture where it was available in at least one third country outside the alien’s country of citizenship, nationality, or last lawful habitual residence through which he or she transited en route to the United States.

Department of Homeland Security Acting Secretary Kevin K. McAleenan issued the following statement:

“While the recent supplemental funding was absolutely vital to helping confront the crisis, the truth is that it will not be enough without targeted changes to the legal framework of our immigration system. Until Congress can act, this interim rule will help reduce a major ‘pull’ factor driving irregular migration to the United States and enable DHS and DOJ to more quickly and efficiently process cases originating from the southern border, leading to fewer individuals transiting through Mexico on a dangerous journey. Ultimately, today’s action will reduce the overwhelming burdens on our domestic system caused by asylum-seekers failing to seek urgent protection in the first available country, economic migrants lacking a legitimate fear of persecution, and the transnational criminal organizations, traffickers, and smugglers exploiting our system for profits.”

The bar is subject to three limited exceptions, including:

(1) an alien who demonstrates that he or she applied for protection from persecution or torture in at least one of the countries through which the alien transited en route to the United States, and the alien received a final judgment denying the alien protection in such country;

(2) an alien who demonstrates that he or she satisfies the definition of “victim of a severe form of trafficking in persons” provided in 8 C.F.R. § 214.11; or,

(3) an alien who has transited en route to the United States through only a country or countries that were not parties to the 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees, the 1967 Protocol, or the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment.

Asylum is a discretionary benefit offered by the United States Government to those fleeing persecution on account of race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion.

Attorney General William P. Barr issued the following statement:

“This Rule is a lawful exercise of authority provided by Congress to restrict eligibility for asylum. The United States is a generous country but is being completely overwhelmed by the burdens associated with apprehending and processing hundreds of thousands of aliens along the southern border. This Rule will decrease forum shopping by economic migrants and those who seek to exploit our asylum system to obtain entry to the United States—while ensuring that no one is removed from the United States who is more likely than not to be tortured or persecuted on account of a protected ground.”

The United States has experienced a dramatic increase in the number of aliens encountered along or near the southern land border with Mexico. This increase corresponds with a sharp increase in the number, and percentage, of aliens claiming fear of persecution or torture when apprehended or encountered by DHS. The number of cases referred to DOJ for proceedings before an immigration judge has also risen exponentially, more than tripling between 2013 and 2018. These numbers are projected to continue to increase throughout the remainder of Fiscal Year 2019 and beyond.

Only a small minority of these individuals, however, are ultimately granted asylum. The large number of meritless asylum claims places an extraordinary strain on the nation’s immigration system, undermines many of the humanitarian purposes of asylum, has exacerbated the humanitarian crisis of human smuggling, and adversely impacts the United States’ ongoing diplomatic negotiations with foreign countries. This rule mitigates the strain on the country’s immigration system by more efficiently identifying aliens who are misusing the asylum system to enter and remain in the United States rather than legitimately seeking urgent protection from persecution or torture.

The IFR is immediately effective upon publication and can be found here.

Updating 6th and 14th Congressional District Activity

From Former Quigley Supprter:

And here I was looking forward to enjoy a nice quiet Sunday, in quiet personal reflection on the meaning of Bastille Day, as one whose family comes from France, via Mexico and Native American, Spanish and Basque. 

And like everyone else right now, I woke up to news of this:

From being a real champion and truth teller on Friday defending Speaker Nancy Pelosi in the face of outrageous claims she was a racist by the progressive “squad” in the House, before leaving for Milwaukee to the event(s) attended by 14th congressional candidate James Marter. 

And now President Trump sunk to what he tweeted this morning.  Reaction was swift:

And where is the reaction of the Republicans seeking the 6th and 14th district seats next year as of 8:35 PM Sunday evening? 

  • Evelyn Sanguinetti, a woman of color herself? 
  • Anthony Catella? 
  • Ted Gradel? 
  • Danny Malouf? 
  • James Marter? 
  • Jim Oberweis? 
  • Sue Rezin? 
  • Prospective candidate Allen Skillicorn? 

Throughout today, only James Marter and Allen Skillicorn have taken to social media, with Skillicorn talking about taxes here in Illinois and in Indiana. 

If something was posted by the candidates outside of their congressional campaign social media accounts,

I could have missed it. 

Marter takes shots again at Sue Rezin and Jim Oberweis over the new gas tax, and posts about Texas vs. United States challenge to Obamacare. 

And he also posted this:

Right now, the real garbage on the immediate table is the one President Trump tweeted this morning about four members of Congress who happened to be women of color being told to go back where they came from. 

I have little in common with Congresswomen Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Ilhan Omar, Rashida Tlaib and Ayanna Pressley, and all of their politics and what they want to make our country into scares me. 

Yet they are also Americans too, 3 native-born, one naturalized, with the rights as any other citizen of the United States. 

I genuinely felt President Trump telling me to go back to where I came from, even through my family has been within the Untied States going back to the 1820s.

What President Trump tweeted on Sunday morning was wrong, period. 

May God get through to President Trump that he fully realizes what he did this morning, and the President needs prayers, too. 

God can get through to anyone, including the President.

H/T to the DownWithTyranny blog for having the President’s tweet complete for cutting & pasting.

Mona Charen Perspective on President Trump

This past Tuesday morning, like a precursor to the feud between House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and the progressive “Squad” and the ugly tweets from President Trump, an article from conservative columnist Mona Charen was published in POLITICO magazine. 

To be clear, I have respected Mona Charen and her opinions for nearly 3 decades. 

Like anyone else, I do not agree with her 100% of the time. 

Charen makes some very solid points, and warnings not only to the 2 dozen Democratic presidential candidates, but also to congressional district incumbents representing the 6th and 14th. 

In particular, this:

Charen points out, accurately, that the victories in last year’s midterms, including Sean Casten and Lauren Underwood, were not because of progressive positions, but on commitments to be “independent”. 

Underwood being clear she wants to keep the ACA, and not go to single-payer Medicare-for-All that progressives want. 

In Underwood’s case, her 2018 victory was as much about a Republican incumbent running a terrible campaign than her position on health care, which was the main issue in the 2018 midterms. 

But as Charen accurately points out, the 2010 midterms made people believe President Obama would be a one-termer, and look what happened. 

Additionally, the 1994 midterm, both nationally and even in Illinois (the last time Republicans controlled both houses of the General Assembly), saw President Clinton re-elected to a 2nd term 2 years later.

Charen is warning all that the progressive politics represented by the progressives in Congress, and progressives running for President, can easily send President Trump to a 2nd term. 

Lporen Underwood

Closer to home, Congresswoman Underwood continues to be the most liberal freshman member of Congress, as documented by Voteview. 

But lately, going back to June 27, Underwood has been moving to the center, in opposing the progressive Squad. 

It started with the approval of the Senate-amended emergency aid for the southern border, that passed 305-102, with Underwood and Casten voting in the majority along with nearly all Republicans, and the Squad leading the opposition to final passage. 

Additionally, Underwood is working with Republican Congressman John Katko on H.R. 3526.

On Friday, Underwood tweeted about the House passage of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), and included this graphic:

On Friday’s passage of the House version of the NDAA, there were many amendments to the bill, including 2 from Squad leader Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (AOC) which the House voted down, though Underwood and Casten took different positions on the two AOC amendments..

  •  Prohibit the President from deploying troops on the southern border if the purpose of this deployment is to enforce immigration law, defeated 241-179, Underwood voted in majority, Casten in the minority
  •  Prohibit the President from using the authorized funds to detain undocumented immigrants in Department of Defense facilities, defeated 245-173, Casten in majority, Underwood in the minority

As discussed on Friday, the final House NDAA passed the House and the Squad voted against it. 

A conference committee will need to merge the House and Senate passed bills into the final NDAA legislation for FY2020. 

Remembering Mona Charen spoke out openly at the 2018 Conservative Political Action Committee (CPAC) meeting against President Trump and had to be escorted out to insure her safety, C-SPAN did an interview with Charen discussing the reasons why she spoke out against the President back then, and given the opinion piece that was published last week, reviewing what she said in early 2018 would prove interesting. 

The C-SPAN interview, with calls, is a little over 40 minutes long.

Please read the entire article from POLITICO.  Charen’s overall message concerning is two-fold:

  • Presidential candidates need to stop trying to out-Trump Trump
  • Don’t go to the far-left that you guarantee a 2nd Trump term.

Sanguinetti Rolls Out More Endorsements

From 6th Dsitrict GOP congressional candidate Evelyn Sanguinetti:

Evelyn Sanguinetti For Congress Announces Over 40 New Endorsements

The Evelyn Sanguinetti for Congress campaign today announced more than 40 new endorsements from elected officials, activists and Republican leaders for Evelyn’s election to Congress for Illinois’ 6th district. 

“I am so thankful and humbled by the amount of support I have received in the short amount of time since announcing my campaign for United States Congress,” said Evelyn Sanguinetti, candidate for Illinois’ 6th Congressional District.

“Through my conversations with 6th District constituents and the overwhelming support I have received, it is clear the 6th is ready for change and I promise to work my hardest to ensure this district is properly represented in Washington.” 

  • Adam Kinzinger, United States Congressman (IL-16)
  • Mark Kirk, Former United States Senator (IL)
  • Judy Biggert, Former United State Congresswoman (IL-13)
  • Corinne Wood, Former Lieutenant Governor of Illinois
  • Dan Cronin, DuPage County Chairman
  • Steve Balich, Will County Board, Founder of the Conservative Committeeman Project
  • Fred Bucholz, DuPage County Recorder
  • Greg Hart, DuPage County Board Member
  • Kitty Weiner, Elk Grove Rotary, Political Strategist 
  • Robert Corbino, of Downers Grove
  • Jack Novak, Downers Grove GOP Township Committeeman
  • Michael Konewko, Winfield Township GOP Committeeman
  • James Doerge, of Cook County 
  • Liz Eilers, Director At WLUJ
  • Jim Ruhl, Naperville Township GOP Chairman 
  • Stephanie Rhinesmith, Milton Township GOP Committeeman
  • Sam Maggio, Vietnam Army Veteran, Wheaton IL
  • Mark Senak, Milton Township GOP Committeeman
  • Yvonne Sencial Bolton, Former Republican National Hispanic Chairwoman
  • Ron Menna, Milton Township GOP Committeeman
  • Meaghan Jorgenson, Milton Township GOP Committeeman 
  • Tom Elsner, Milton Township GOP Committeeman
  • Bob Cherry, Milton Township GOP Committeeman 
  • Tim Whelan, Milton Township GOP Committeeman
  • Mike Formento, Milton Township GOP Committeeman 
  • Flo D’Angelo, Milton Township GOP Committeeman 
  • Christina Martin, Downers Grove GOP Township Committeeman
  • Don Rickard, Downers Grove Township GOP Committeeman
  • James Wool, Downers Grove Township GOP Committeeman
  • Bob Krzyzewski, Milton Township GOP Committeeman 
  • Jim Norris, Downers Grove Township GOP Committeeman
  • Carl Miller, Downers Grove Township GOP Committeeman
  • David Norck, Milton Township GOP Committeeman 
  • Paul Bischoff, Milton Township GOP Committeeman 
  • Thommen Poozhikunnel, Milton GOP Township Committeeman 
  • Mark Thomas, Milton Township GOP Committeeman 
  • Greg Moffett, Milton Township GOP Committeeman
  • Arthur Grant, Milton Township GOP Committeeman 
  • Chick Briner, Downers Grove Township GOP Committeeman
  • Christopher Davis, Downers Grove GOP Township Committeeman
  • Alex Ion, Milton Township GOP Committeeman 
  • Joe Duffy, Milton Township GOP Committeeman
  • Noel Manley, Downers Grove Township GOP Committeeman
  • Tim Waz, Downers Grove Township GOP Committeeman
  • Deborah Kraus, Downers Grove Township GOP Committeeman
  • Jonathan Nelson, Downers Grove GOP Township Committeeman
  • Jaye Wang, Downers Grove Township GOP Committeeman
  • Cynthia Schneider, Naperville Area Republican Women’s Organization

Franks’ Allies Reply Upon Citizen Participation Act to Defend Attacks on Brettman & Schuster

Early in his legislative career State Rep. Jack Franks passed the Citizen Participation Act to protect those opposing zoing changes by corporations.

My attorney used the act in defense of McHenry County Blog when I was sued by the Northwest Herald.

Now Franks’ allies have trotted it out to defend the actions made by the Illinois Integrity Fund against unsuccessful District 6 Republican County Board candidates Orville Brettman and Ersel Schuster.

Both Orville Brettman’s and Ersel Schuster’s faces appear on this attack mailing from the anonymous Illinois Integrity Fund.

Here is the way two defendents in the suit summarized the argument:

The claim is that the Brettman-Schuster suit is a “Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Paerticipation” or “SLAPP” suit, according to the dimissal motion filed by attorney Tara O’Mhoney.

In reply Brettman-Schuster attorney Jim Bishop offers the following:

The Illinois Integrity Fund (IIF) “is some illusory entity without legal status…[and] the speech sought to be protected by Defendants is defamatory and false and, therefore, not protected under the First Amendment.”

Bishop continues:

The brief argues it is the IIF defendants who must prove that the claims are “meritless and retaliatory.”

It also argues that none of the IIF citied documents are “official documents.”

The Brettman-Schuster quote the Citizen Participation Act’s protected entities:

  • citizens and
  • organization of the State of Illlinois

pointing out that the Illinois Integrity Fund is neither.

No “third party” can “determine anything about IIF.”

No incorportion with the Illinois Secretary of State.

No registration with the Illinois State Board of Elections.

In short,

Bishop then argues transcripts submitted by the defendants are in “no wy “authenticated or certified” and should be considered “hearsay.”

Indeed, the Cook Couty Appellate Court ruled that “grand jury proceedings cannot be used to preserve or obtain testimony for use in civil suits.”

The filing then moves onto the claim by Jack Franks that a comment on McHenry County Blog traced by Lakewood Police to Schuster’s internet address was considered a “death threat” only by Franks.

The claim popped up nine months after law enforcement officials had determind no crime had been committed.

Claims of “conspiracy” among Joe Tirio, Orville Brettman, Ersel Schuster, Chuck Wheeler and Michael Rein have been made by defendats with no evidence and are irrelevant, the plaintiff’s argue.

The 2012 Illinois Supreme Court decision in Sanholm v. Kuecker is cited as definng the content of of the Pulic Participation Act.

Bishop argues,

Pointed out is that the lawsuit is not brought for “the sole purpose of chilling the defendants right to petition, speech or participation in government.”

Dismissal of the motion to dismiss is therefor sought.

A hearing on the case will be held at 1:30.

Will or Won’t Algonquin Township Road Commissioner Have to Pay Fine Personally?

From Illinois Leaks, republished with permission:

Algonquin Road District – Local 150 attorneys conflicted in Gasser ruling

BY KIRK ALLEN ON JULY 13, 2019 • ( LEAVE A COMMENT )

McHenry Co. (ECWd) – During the June 20, 2019 hearing in Lake County regarding legal fees for Local 150 against the Algonquin Township Road District, the two attorneys for Local 150 took opposing positions on who should be responsible for the requested legal fees pertaining to Highway Commissioner Andrew Gasser and the past contempt order issued against him.

While opposing positions are common in the normal course of a court preceding, normally the conflict is with opposing counsel, not co-counsel.

Local 150 attorney Robert Paszta asserted :

  • “Our position is it should be awarded against the Road District and the Highway Commissioner in his professional capacity.  We characterized the petition in that regard. He was the party that was held in contempt in his capacity as Road Commissioner and these arguments were never raised.” (See page 14 of the transcript)

Note the attorney confirms the petition for the fees named the Road District and Highway Commissioner in his professional capacity, not as an individual.

Local 150 attorney Bryan Diemer asserted:

  • “I think Mr. Gasser made decisions eyes wide open, and he should bear the cost of those decisions, not the taxpayers of Algonquin Township.  And so I would ask that the order be entered against Mr. Gasser individually.” (See page 15 of the transcript)

Now before a select group of anti-Gasser people get their britches all bunched up, the information provided in this article is not about Gasser and his actions as a Highway Commissioner. 

It is about the rule of law and how it is applied and how that application can directly affect your local government on several fronts.

The Judge ordered attorney fees against Gasser individually and made an interesting comment regarding reimbursement.

  • “He was held in contempt, so I’m going to be awarding the judgment against Andrew gasser, and on his behalf, you can pursue, I suppose, reimbursement if you think it’s justified under the law from the Township or the Road District as appropriate. 

The law in question is known as the Local Governmental and Governmental Employees Tort Immunity Act.  A point of interest in that act is Part 3, Indemnification of Public Employees.

  • (745 ILCS 10/2-302) (from Ch. 85, par. 2-302)
    Sec. 2-302. If any claim or action is instituted against an employee of a local public entity based on an injury allegedly arising out of an act or omission occurring within the scope of his employment as such employee, the entity may elect to do any one or more of the following:
  • (a) appear and defend against the claim or action;
  • (b) indemnify the employee or former employee for his court costs or reasonable attorney’s fees, or both, incurred in the defense of such claim or action;
  • (c) pay, or indemnify the employee or former employee for a judgment based on such claim or action; or
  • (d) pay, or indemnify the employee or former employee for, a compromise or settlement of such a claim or action.

Applying the law, the Algonquin Road District “may” indemnify the employee or former employee for his court costs or reasonable attorney’s fees and “may” elect to pay for a judgment. 

The Judge appears to take the position that this could be pursued if they think it is justified.

Since it is the public entity that makes such a decision, it would appear it is up to the Algonquin Township Road District Highway Commissioner to make such a determination. 

I think we all know, anyone sitting in that position is going to have the public body pay the bill rather than themselves individually. 

Regardless of what people think should be done and regardless of what Gasser decides in this matter, the judge’s ruling raises serious concerns.

Andrew Gasser was not named in court action in his personal capacity.  Local 150 attorney Paszta confirmed that fact as does the court filings.

That being the case, how can a judgment be placed against a person that is not even a named party in action before the court?

The point with this is the chilling effect such an order has on people who may want to enter public office. 

If elected officials indemnity protections are going to be ignored by the courts, it will surely have a negative impact on peoples willingness to serve in any capacity in their local government.

More importantly in our opinion, if courts can issue orders against a person not named individually in a petition then they have taken their power at the bench to a whole new level.

Think about it long and hard.

If you are an elected official and an action is brought before you in the court naming you in your official capacity, any finding in such a case against the elected official is just that, against the elected official, not you as an individual. 

While many want Gasser to pay for his actions individually, such a requirement sets a precedent that should concern anyone even thinking about running for local office or even being an employee of a public body.

The language in the law cannot be any clearer:

 (745 ILCS 10/1-101.1)(a) The purpose of this Act is to protect local public entities and public employees from liability arising from the operation of government. It grants only immunities and defenses.

If such protections can be stripped away by an elected judge we will find ourselves with fewer and fewer people willing to step up and participate in their government because now it appears a judge can order you to personally pay even though you’re not named individually.  How many are willing to put their personal finances up for grabs by an elected judge?

If you want politics to rule, allow this type of action to stand. 

The law is in place to ensure operation of government. 

Take it away and you will surely see government operations diminished due to fear of being personally liable for actions taken as a public employee.

We understand the order has been appealed and when we get a copy of the appeal we will publish it. 

We suspect it will be based on at least two different issues. 

One being Andrew Gasser was not sued in his personal capacity so the court would be limited to issuing an order only against those named in the capacity found on the petition and the other on the issue of awarding attorney fees.

Local 150 argued for attorney fees because they performed the work at a cost on behalf of its members.

Hanlon argued they are not entitled to such attorney fees based on clear language found in the UPTOWN PEOPLE’S LAW CENTER vs IDOC case. 

When an entity uses in house counsel there are different rules applied to attorney fee matters and it appears the argument made by Hanlon is that Local 150 used in house counsel who are basically employees rather than contracted attorneys. 

We will predict that if attorney fees are granted, it will be an obligation of the Road District, not Andrew Gasser individually.

We have been told Local 150 did file for sanctions against Hanlon at the Appellate Court and their motion was denied without needing any response from Hanlon. 

We have FOIA’d those documents and will publish when we receive them.

A copy of the transcript related to the recent court order against Gasser can be found at this link

Local 150 Seeks Garishment of $33,742.48 from Algonquin Township Road District Bank Account

The Algonquin Township Road District bank account at the American
Community Bank & Trust will be almost $34,000 lighter, if Lake County Judge Daniel Jasica signs the “Turn Over Order” request by attorney Mark Gummerson on behalf of Llocal 150 of the International Union of Operating Engineers.

The amount represents the fine the Judge levied after a Contempt of Court decision against Algonquin Township Highway Commissioner Andrew Gasser and the District in the matter of Gasser’s refusal to recognize the labor agreement signed by former Highway Commission Bob Miller.

Local 150 is representd in the mattee yby the Crystal Lake law firmof Zukowski, Rogers, Flood & McArdle.

Detail on Quashing of Algonquin Township Subpoena of Illinois Leaks

From Illinois Leaks, republished with permission:

McHenry County Circuit Court Quashed Subpoena, Ordered Algonquin Township to provide an Index of Records –

BY JMKRAFT ON JULY 12, 2019 • ( LEAVE A COMMENT )

Algonquin Township (ECWd) – Wednesday in McHenry County Circuit Court, our Motion to Reconsider a previous Order denying (and then Staying production) a Motion to Quash a subpoena from Algonquin township for our DropBox files, including names of anyone who ever had access to them was heard.

The Court reconsidered the previous Order (here) and Granted our Motion to Reconsider, which Quashed the Subpoena issued to us from Algonquin Township.

Order to quash Algonquin Township subpoena for Illinois Leaks records

In quashing the subpoena, the Court stated that we (Kraft, Allen, and ECWd) fall under the protection of the Reporter’s Privilege Act (“RPA”). 

His previous Order was based on thoughts that Reporter’s Privilege was similar to Attorney-Client Privilege, and after reviewing case-law on the subject provided in our Motion to Reconsider (People v. Silverstein, First District Appellate Court), found that higher courts have interpreted the RPA broader, giving more protection, than what he based his previous Order on.

When we get a copy of the transcript we will update accordingly as we believe people need to be able to read the judge’s words to appreciate the importance of our justice system and the manner in which peoples rights are protected.

Also considered was our Motion to Index, that motion was also granted and Algonquin Township was given until July 24, 2019, to produce the index, which is a list of records we requested and reasons they were not provided. There is a status hearing scheduled for on July 31, 2019.

According to Section 11(e) of the Illinois Freedom of Information Act, the index shall include the following:

(i) A description of the nature or contents of each document withheld, or each deletion from a released document, provided, however, that the public body shall not be required to disclose the information which it asserts is exempt; and

(ii) A statement of the exemption or exemptions claimed for each such deletion or withheld document.

We hope, at this point, that Algonquin Township is getting tired of wasting tax dollars on irrelevant subpoenas, but only time will tell.

Our work is funded entirely thru donations and we
ask that you consider donating at the below link. 

Man Found Dead on Lakewood Side of Crystal Lake Friday at Gate 13

From the Village of Lakewood:

Gate 13 boat pier durng May rowing race.

On July 11, 2019 at approximately 1231 PM, the Lakewood Police Department and Crystal Lake Fire Rescue Department responded to a report of a possible drowning victim in the lake in the 1300 block of South Shore Dr.

Responding units located an adult male subject face down in the water just off the shore line.

Crystal Lake Fire Rescue attempted lifesaving efforts and transported the subject to Northwestern Medicine Huntley Hospital, where the subject was
pronounced deceased.

The McHenry County Medical Examiner’s Office will be conducting a post mortem medical examination on July, 13th 2019. The name of the decedent is being withheld pending the McHenry County Medical Examiners findings and notification of next of kin.

McSweeney on WGN-AM Sunday Morning at 7

From the Chicago Tribune:

Chicago Tribune political reporter Rick Pearson’s guests on his Sunday politics radio show are:

  • State Rep. David McSweeney, R-Barrington Hills, who’s been vocal about recently passed tax hikes, including the doubling of the state’s gas tax to pay for the state’s crumbling roads and bridges;
  • Tribune investigative reporter Hal Dardick on property tax assessments; and
  • Regional Transportation Authority board Chair Kirk Dillard on capital funding. The “Sunday Spin” airs from 7 to 9 a.m. on WGN-AM 720.