Lakewood Village President Paul Serwatka has sent emails to two Village Trustees saying that they are removed from their positions.
Jason McMahon
Patrick Rexroat
Jason McMahon was appointed by outgoing Village President Erin Smith to replace Ken Santowski.
Patrick Rexroat was appoint by Serwatka to take his place after he ascended to the Village Presidency.
The letters follow:
Email from Lakewood Village President Paul Serwatka informing Trustee Jason McMahon that he is no longer on the Village Board.
Email from Lakewood Village President Paul Serwatka informing Trustee Patrick Rexroat that he is no longer on the Village Board.
No state statute is cited giving the Village President authority to dismiss the two Trustee.
The next meeting of the Lakewood Village Board will be held at the Red Tail Golf Club at 7 PM Tuesday, June 12th.
Clean out the rotten trash, Paul!
We’re with you 1000%!
Rexroat is one of the ‘Lakewood Dons’ who swan about town lording over us taxpaying peons.
Wouldn’t miss it!
Way to drain the swamp!
For clarification 65 ILCS 5/3.1-35-10 (the section we believe Serwatka is referencing)refers to “appointed officers”. “Appointed Officers” are defined under 65 ILCS 5/3.1-30-5 and does not include elected officials. 35-10 also states upon restoration “the officer shall give a new bond”. 65 ILCS 3.1-10-30 states Trustees are not required to be bonded which is further proof 35-10 refers to the list of officers in 30-5.
65 ILCS 3.1-45-10 states, “The president and board of trustees may prescribe the duties of the officers appointed under Section 3.1-30-5”. Again showing 35-10 does not apply to trustees.
35-10 also states, “except as otherwise provided by statute, the president may remove”. Guess what?! There is another statute. 65 ILCS 3.1-10-50 (e) provides for the appointment of trustees to vacant positions. This provision states trustees are appointed until the next election.
Even the IL Constitution (Section 7) prevents the Governor from removing people he has appointed to vacant elected offices. Clearly Serwatka believes the law does not apply to him.
This is a willful and corrupt oppression of my rights and Pat Rexroat’s rights as Trustees. Good thing 65 ILCS 3.1-55-15 deals with that as well.
I sincerly doubt there is an attorney around that would support this joke.
I agree Jason. When someone is appointed to fill a term that becomes a vested right.
I am sure Sir Wat Ka, did not consult with legal counsel before doing this.
How about my prospective GQ Magazine cover model showing some libertarian, tax-fighter, compassionate conservative management style? Where is a political science and sociology professor when we need one? I suppose ruthless dictator Jack D. Franks (Jack Franks is a Democrat) needs to take some notes to keep his reputation going…stay tuned…tic, tock, tic, tock, tic, tock, meeeeeoooooowwwwwwwww…
King Rex needs to be defenestrated!
Serwatka to the rescue,once again!
McMahon, a Miller apologist, is no stellar trustee, I can vouch for that.
Ask him to take a lie detector!
Since when does America support a dictator?
No way this holds up and it will be time to have Paul complete his move and leave Lakewood.
Any word if he paid his taxes?
Serwatka strikes again for the taxpayer.
Serwatka for Governor. Think of all the time-serving,useless mooks he’d dislodge.
McMahon, alias the ‘pincher’ was never elected in the first place.
He slimed his way in under the crooked ‘auspices’ of the klepto el Presidente Santowski.
Ask Santkowski-spawn McMahon about the crooked Lakewood PD and why the ‘Chief’ was removed!
McMahon is, indeed, bad news .. a holdover from a misbegotten era of corruption. But “King” Rex is even worse and needs to abdicate, and pronto!
What this looks like is board manipulation.
Paul is rumored for Alabama.
He launches 2 opposing view points so that leaves the count 3-2 vote for his replacement.
Jason
Those two trustees were appointed so they meet the definition.
Way to go paul
Spent some time pulling around the IL Municipal Code
Send pretty clear as stated that the the article applied to ALL officers appointed by the president unless otherwise provided.
I looked around quite a bit. I can’t find anything that provides otherwise.
(65 ILCS 5/Art. 3.1 Div. 5 heading)
DIVISION 5. APPLICATION OF ARTICLE
(65 ILCS 5/3.1-5-5) (from Ch. 24, par. 3.1-5-5)
Sec. 3.1-5-5. Application of Article. This Article 3.1 applies to ALL officers elected or appointed under this Article and Articles 4 and 5, unless provided otherwise. If there is a conflict between any provision in this Article 3.1 and any provision in Article 4 or Article 5, the provision in Article 4 or 5, as the case may be, shall control.
(Source: P.A. 87-1119.)
ILCS 5/3.1-35-10) (from Ch. 24, par. 3.1-35-10)
Sec. 3.1-35-10. Mayor or president; removal of appointed officer. Except where otherwise provided by statute, the mayor or president may remove ANY officer appointed by the mayor or president under this Code, on any written charge, whenever the mayor or president is of the opinion that the interests of the municipality demand removal. The mayor or president shall report the reasons for the removal to the corporate authorities at a meeting to be held not less than 5 nor more than 10 days after the removal. If the mayor or president fails or refuses to report to the corporate authorities the reasons for the removal, or if the corporate authorities by a two-thirds vote of all members authorized by law to be elected disapprove of the removal, the officer thereupon shall be restored to the office from which the officer was removed. The vote shall be by yeas and nays, which shall be entered upon the journal of the corporate authorities. Upon restoration, the officer shall give a new bond and take a new oath of office. No officer shall be removed a second time for the same offense.
It looks like he needs to present the reasons for the removal to the Village Board at the next meeting and they can override it by 2/3rds vote.
The meeting has to take place within 5 to 10 days.
Not sure when the next Village Board meeting is scheduled.
What a mess
Taxes due 6.4.18 for 9811 Palmer do not appear to have been paid on Paul’s rental house.
See McHenry county tax collector website.
Also he returned to the house yesterday with a moving trailer which is currently parked in the driveway.
This won’t end well for a couple of reasons. First, democracy, (I am pretty sure that Paul wasn’t elected to the king position), Second all of the reasons for removal sound like: you are not doing what I am saying (which equals lame). Lastly, easy career day lawsuit for some lucky attorney.
Watching is correct on several levels. Paul is in a state-of-mind that allows him to believe that he was elected king. That is not surprising when one reads his newsletters which show his narcissism. He can’t write two sentences without using a first person pronoun. (much like our loser President) Leaders who have this type of personality seldom last. Paul is much like cal, his loser friend joey unAmerican walsh, and gasser.
This little stunt by paul will result in a legal battle much like gasser’s stupid show of firing two Township workers for his photo opt. Sad when losers try to run an organization.
The trustees still have the right to reject.
This will be a good test of what they are made of.
tommy, your back with your wisdom of doom and criticism, of those, who want to see a Clean Up, of the misuse of Taxpayer’s Dollars. Whose Piggy Bank do you take from?
WTH is this guy thinking?
He has no power to do this, and never will have the power to do this.
If the village attorney approve it, that person needs sued for malpractice.
Rumor has it that He is going for appointment for the state rep position assuming that Skillicorn is selected to move up to the soon to be vacated State Senate seat.
This will be essentially up to the McHenry County GOP Chairman as McHenry County has more weighted votes in the state rep district than Kane County.
The opposite will be true of the Senate appointment with the Kane County GOP Chairman having more weighted votes.
The person selected for both, however, will have to run for the position in this year’s General Election as the resignation is taking effect before the deadline in early August.
There will be no primary.
It will be important that the candidate not have a lot of baggage to overcome given what is shaping up to be a strong Democratic election year.
How much do you want to bet that the Administrator and Attorney are out within the next 6 months?
It appears neither have any influence to counsel Serwatka from making such poor decisions.
Lakewood is a tiny residential community.
The most important items on the trustee’s agenda are purchasing a lawnmower, or allowing a fence variation.
The powerplay of removing what boils down community volunteers is mindless.
The money that will be spent on legal fees for this matter is a complete waste of taxpayers money.
Way to go Serwatka.
King ‘Rex’ is the dictator who must be booted.
There is a BIG difference between “APPOINTED OFFICERS” and “CORPORATE AUTHORITIES”!
Look up the code and read it for yourselves! But START with the DEFINITIONS of the code so there is no question!
65 ILCS 5/1-1-2 DEFINITIONS: “APPOINTED OFFICERS” are the appointed (municipal) officers are the treasure, police chief, attorney, purchasing agents, clerk, public works director, etc. But “CORPORATE AUTHORITIES” are the trustees.
(from Ch. 24, par. 3.1-35-10)
Sec. 3.1-35-10. Mayor or president; removal of APPOINTED OFFICER.
Except where otherwise provided by statute, the mayor or president may remove an OFFICER APPOINTED by the mayor or president under this Code, on any written charge, whenever the mayor or president is of the opinion that the interests of the municipality demand removal.
The mayor or president shall report the reasons for the removal TO THE CORPORATE AUTHORITIES (TRUSTEES) at a meeting to be held not less than 5 nor more than 10 days after the removal.
If the mayor or president fails or refuses to report TO THE CORPORATE AUTHORITIES the reasons for the removal, or if the CORPORATE AUTHORITIES by a two-thirds vote of all members authorized by law to be elected disapprove of the removal, the OFFICER thereupon shall be restored to the office from which the officer was removed.
The vote shall be by yeas and nays, which shall be entered upon the journal of the CORPORATE AUTHORITIES.
Upon restoration, the officer shall give a new bond and take a new oath of office. No officer shall be removed a second time for the same offense.
So…the president does have the ability to remove any APPOINTED (MUNICIPAL) OFFICER from their position…he does NOT have the ability to remove CORPORATE AUTHORITIES (trustees) from the board…whether elected OR appointed!
This is a massive and illegal over-reach by Serwatka, trying to eliminate trustees who aren’t his puppets!
Swertka does not have the authority to do this.
And the fact that he thinks he does, did not confirm the facts, should bring into question every single other act or word that comes out of his mouth.
What a nutjob.