Grafton Township Audit, $400,000 Town Hall Loan Repayment Authorized

Drawing of the Grafton Township Hall planned by the previous adminstration, but derailed by Judge Michael Caldwell when he ruled that there was inadequate notice given the public. Caldwell's decision was upheld by the 2nd Appellate Court. Voters defeated a referendum last fall to construct a new building. Electors voted to allow repayment of the loan over time, rather than in a lump sum.

The Grafton Township Board met Tuesday night and the Township Board approved the appointment of an auditor and the repayment of $400,000 of the money borrowed from the Road District to finance a new township hall.

Evans, Marshal and Pease out of Rolling Meadows will conduct the audit.

No lawyers were present at the meeting.


Comments

Grafton Township Audit, $400,000 Town Hall Loan Repayment Authorized — 19 Comments

  1. So is the auditor the best choice, or the lesser of the evils that Linda personally picked? Did the board have input on selecting the auditor, or did Linda threaten them with lawsuits and contempt charges like she did at the last meeting?

    The governmental process and the series of checks and balances that is the basis for American government since our founding fathers has become a farce in this township. I have lost all faith in the government “closest to the people” and in our judicial system. This isn’t goverment of the people, by the people and for the people, this is government for those who have enough money to sue anyone who disagrees with them, sorry, those who have the TAXPAYERS to sue anyone who disagrees with them!

  2. dd

    If there was anything in this township that WAS positive, I’m sure the comments would be different.

  3. Here’s something positive. At the last townhall meeting, voters listened to what was said and determined for themselves that it didn’t make sense to pay off the loan in full until an audit was performed to determine the financial health of the township.

    Unfortunately, I don’t see much positive happening in this township, so my comments regarding it tend towards the negative. When we get some fresh blood into the elected positions, especially the township supervisor, maybe my outlook on the township will change.

  4. “Evans, Marshal and Pease” is known in the area for handling much larger clients than Grafton. It’s not like they are a rent-an-auditor for lemonade stands. Of course, that would never be enough for the person or crew that posts everything negative to pursue their own agenda.

    There’s more but it’s just feeding the crew’s need to engage.

  5. Caddy cassandra/jacksprat what issue are you addressing other than just beating someone down?

  6. What issue am I addressing? Pick one.

    1. The audit is 1.5 years overdue.
    2. At the last townhall meeting, the voters specifically said that they didn’t want the loan paid off until an audit was completed, and the financial health of the township was determined. At the last meeting, Linda attempted to pay off the balance of the loan.
    3. The fact that the financial records for our township were on an unsecured computer in someone private residence for close to a year, combined with the fact that the audit has been continually delayed, makes me EXTREMELY uncomfortable. Given the bookkeeping that I have seen in meetings to date, I question the validity of the books.
    4. Having the audit performed by a firm chosen solely on the discretion of the individual responsible for point 3 above does not make me feel any more comfortable. This situation calls for a forensic audit.
    5. An outside firm has a report documenting that township records were deleted from a township computer. The individual responsible for deleting these records now refuses to pay the bill to release this report. During the entire time this firm was working on the computers, this individual knew exactly what happened to the records, and was in possession of the only existing copy, yet did not stop the work from proceeding, resulting in an $18000 fee, which will probably end up in another lawsuit against the township.
    6. During meetings, if someone disagrees with the supervisor, she has a habit of threatening lawsuits and contempt charges.

    I’m sure I could come up with a dozen other issues, but I hope you get my point. Just for the balance, here are a couple others:

    a. We have a township board member who is unable to control his anger or his voice level, and behaves inappropriately during meetings.
    b. The board overstepped their authority and hired a township administrator, who actually had some good ideas and helped out some people before she was fired.

    For point a, my solution is to not vote for him next election. I didn’t vote for him last election, and since there is no way to get rid of a township official (believe me, I’ve investigated this), I just have to live with him (and others) until the next election.

    For point b, its over and done with.

    Since as I pointed out above, there is no way to get rid of a township official, and I don’t have enough cash on hand to file a lawsuit, so the only way I can deal with points 1 through 6 above is to make sure everyone I can reach is aware of these issues, so they will help vote out the root cause of these problems next election.

  7. Jack,
    My point is, do you have anything good to say as you hide behind an anynomous name?
    Are you aware that an auditor has been approved by the board or did you not read the story?
    Did you know that bills can only be paid with board approval?
    Why do you persist in negativity? Its time to be part of the solution and get your facts in order.

  8. Yes, dd (gee, isn’t that an anynomous name?), I am aware that an auditor has been approved by the board. I am also aware that the board has been threatened with contempt charges if they didn’t approve the auditor of the supervisor’s choice (just like the township attorney), so basically their hands were tied.

    Yes, I know that bills can only be paid with the board approval, but I also know that the supervisor refuses to pay bills that the board has approved, and that the supervisor tried to make two payments of $200,000 on the loan, because she interpreted the board approving the exact same wording of a line item for both the March and April meetings as approval to pay it twice.

    My facts are in order, since I have not seen you produce any evidence to the contrary. I am being part of the solution. I actively participated in the townhall meeting, I read the background information available, and I ask questions. I am better informed on the issues than most people I know

    I will persist in what you call negativity, until something is changed. This is my right as a taxpayer and voter. I see a problem with the current government in Grafton Township, and I have helped others to see this problem as well. This is my right as a taxpayer and voter. If you have a problem with it, simply stop reading my comments.

    As for my “hiding” behind an anonymous name, maybe you are familiar with some others who have done so in the past. Do the names Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and Jay John ring a bell? They published The Federalist Papers under the anonymous name Publius. Without these anonymous authors, the US Constitution may not have been ratified.

  9. re “the board has been threatened with contempt charges if they didn’t approve the auditor of the supervisor’s choice,” I’ve sat through the most recent court hearings and I did not hear Judge Caldwell threaten such contempt charges.

    If you did, please tell us which hearing.

  10. Jack,
    Again you did not read the story that the board did indeed approve repayment of $400,000 and also approved making this payment to Harris Bank which should result in a great savings of interest payments. Thankfully the supervisor negotiated this with the bank.

    Perhaps your negative attitude is the result of a reading comprehension challenge.

    Again, its time to be part of the solution. Can you make a positive comment?

  11. Personal insults, DD? Accusing me of hiding behind an anonymous posting name? You are beginning to sound very similar to another poster on this issue.

    If you were familiar with the issues, you would know that Linda’s attempt to pay back a second installment of $200,000 came during the April meeting, a month before she negotiated the payment plan with Harris Bank (which, btw, seemed awfully easy to do after trying to convince the public this couldn’t be done for the town all meeting)

    You obviously choose to be blinded by her half-truths, and are unwilling to check the facts for yourself. You aren’t worth my time

  12. It seems your negative comments stem from a personal vendetta with the supervisor. You need to get past this problem and try to see the bright side of things.

  13. Why is it that when anything surrounding Linda Moore is said and it’s negative, her supporters constitute that as a personal attack? People are not disagreeing with her because they do not like her personally, they are disagreeing with the way she, as a PUBLIC figure, is doing her PUBLICALLY PAID FOR job. It is no different than all those who argue against the President and attack him. She is in a public position and needs to take criticism just as much as praise, which many people feel she has not done a job worthy of praise.

    As to saying that people need to see the bright side of things or being less negative, I have personally tried to see both sides of this argument as someone who has no stake in what Linda Moore does since I do not pay her salary as a non-Grafton resident but it is very difficult to see the bright side of a civil servant not being civil or providing for those residents who voted for her and pay her check. Any time that I have attempted to ask the supervisor questions, she blantantly ignores me. That makes it very difficult to be positive and happy, unless there are some drugs I can get for that.

    Lastly, DD; it is very difficult to take you seriously in your call for positivity when you personally attack someone else who is obviously very active in the political process. Saying that Jack’s negativity is “perhaps…the result of a reading comprehension challenge” is very degrading in my opinion. That is a personal attack. Saying that an elected official sucks at their job is not. Big difference is that Jack has never said that Linda Moore has a learning disability like what you eluded to earlier. Those in glass houses DD, should not throw stones.

  14. Thanks for that very thoughtful response DD. Just for clarification, I was using sarcasm in the statement “unless there are some drugs I can get for that”.

    Btw, your style of posting seems vaguely familiar to me…

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.