Lakewood Decides to Keep 24-Hour Police Coverage

What happened at the last Lakewood Village from Lakewood Trustee Paul Serwatka:In follow up to yesterday’s village board meeting,

Report on Village Board Meeting

I wanted to give a quick report on the deliberations over Agenda Item #7”. 

Crystal Lake Police car

Crystal Lake Police car

This was the motion to approve an agreement between our village and Crystal Lake Police Dept. to have no Lakewood police officers on patrol between the hours of 2 a.m. and 6 a.m. and instead have any calls for police go to Crystal Lake Police Dept.

I have to say upfront that I truly believe this was a perfect demonstration of residents staying informed, engaged and making a difference.

Scores of residents replied to the email that I distributed, some replied after seeing it posted on McHenry County Blog and others took the initiative to read the agenda online, as it is now posted on the village website.

A dozen or so residents were present at the meeting and several made public comments sharing their express disapproval of this agreement. Several residents also shared common sentiments that they were “disappointed”, “insulted”, and “in disapproval of’ — “several questionable decisions” that this current board has made.

I honestly believe the common sentiment of disapproval expressly shared by these residents influenced at least two of the trustees to vote NO on this agreement, when they would otherwise have voted in favor of it.

The Discussion:

Discussion opened on this agenda item with remarks from President Erin Smith and Trustee Gene Furey, both of whom were absent from the meeting, but requested that trustee, Carl Davis read their brief remarks.

Their remarks reflected that both President Smith and Trustee Furey were IN FAVOR of approving this agreement.

Newly-elected Jeff Iden, one of the three who voted "No" on the SportsPlex extension.

Jeff Iden

The discussion was rather lengthy and got a bit heated at times.

Trustee Jeff Iden then made a motion to approve this agreement.

This motion was seconded by Trustee Bev Thomas.

All trustees present (Serwatka, Santowski, Davis, Thomas and Iden) then voted “NO”.

Technically speaking, I believe it was a parliamentary error for a trustee to make, and second, a motion in the affirmative and then vote against it. If challenged, I believe the NO votes cast by trustees Thomas and Iden would be negated. That being said, I do not foresee this being challenged.

The end result was a victory for Lakewood residents – Lakewood residents will continue to have a police patrol 24-7!

As always, your thoughts, questions and concerns are always welcome.


Comments

Lakewood Decides to Keep 24-Hour Police Coverage — 9 Comments

  1. Congratulations on getting something right.

    Seems that is something we seldom get to see of late.

  2. Really, Erin Smith wants to be the Queen of England, but she has no clue!

  3. …and as my friend Matt who launches billion dollar satellites would say:

    This is how you do it.

    People need to let go of the personal stuff and realize that Paul is actually showing all of us how its done.

    This is how you stop silly spending.

    He is controlling what he can control and letting go of the things he cannot.

    He is informing the people he was elected to represent and clearly, they are responding.

    Walk Lakewood yourself and find out.

    Sure we will have the one or two penny stinkers who complain but when you do it right… it works.

    Lets pray we all work like this.

  4. actually Paul, you can vote no to something that you have made a motion on or seconded according to Robert’s Rules and parliamentary proceedings.

    While not common to do so, it is allowed.

    All making a motion and seconding a item is to allow it to move to a vote.

    Often times you can move the motion when you see discussion has moved in the direction you want it to, so that it can be voted on before any dissenting opinions arise that might change the vote.

  5. Under Robert’s Rules of Order, the person who makes a motion may vote against it, but he/she cannot speak against it. \

    The person who seconds the motion may speak against it and vote against it.

    IDK if Lakewood uses RRO.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.