“What now” is a good question. The answer to it remains to be seen once the new Board takes over May 5, 2009.
This blog will continue to provide news and information to the community. How and what this blog reports will be up to the members of the Village Board.
The faction that accused Sarto of being the lone cause of problems the last 4 years now has complete control. They should be able to do anything and everything that they promised in their campaigns — both this past election, and the one in 2007. There will be no one to blame but themselves. (But, there were some things that they promised in their campaigns, and some things that they’ve done already, that could be problematic for those of us in the community.)
I will continue keeping an eye on things. That’s been my point all along. It wasn’t simply about the election. It was about alerting the public to things that were happening with Village government. That will not change merely because an election has passed.
Ed Ritter has said that he is “an independent thinker” who chose to run with a team of “independent thinkers”.
Time will tell whether that holds true for Ritter, Teeter, Schultz and McFeggan. It is a status that will have to be earned. If past performance is indicative of future action, none of these will ever be considered an “independent thinker”. During the past several years, Ritter, Teeter and Schultz have been in lockstep behind Sigwalt and Humpfer — defending everything from Humpfer’s domestic battery conviction to violation(s) of the Open Meetings Act to use of Village property that they were required to pay to use and misleading Village staff about what they were doing during those meetings. Not to mention missteps of their own.
Things may get very interesting. Or, it will be very dull … where they will keep discussions of policy decisions out of the public eye, and will have all their decisions already made in advance of the meetings.
As I said, time will tell. But, this blog will seek to keep the public informed.
It is a job that cannot be done without the help of the community. Therefore, I encourage you … if you see something that doesn’t seem quite right, if you hear something that you think needs to be followed up on … contact Carpentersville Action Network and help get the community involved.
Carpentersville Action Network 
11 comments
Apr 15, 2009 at 3:59 pm
At a Glance
I read something in the comments on the Herald that kind of made me concerned. I think Mr. Ritter said that he didn’t want to burn bridges so he had waited to make comments to the idiotic comments that some were making. He sure didn’t burn bridges. He let the idiocy stand without comment.
If that is what we are destined to see, we are in deep trouble from our “independent thinker” and his team. Most of the people commenting were talking about resurrecting the Illegal Immigration ordinance now that Sarto is going to gone. We can only hope that there is enough common sense and guts to keep that from happening!!! Yes, Mr. Ritter, we will need you to stand up and let us know what you are going to do. It might mean that you will have to take a position – to burn bridges… or to fall in line behind the unconstitutional law that you will be soon taking an oath to keep from happening….!!! We’ll see what happens.
The people that voted against Sarto are counting on you to support the illegal approach to their bigotry. Sarto gave up his Presidency fighting for the constitution and decency. What will your approach be?
And, understand, there are very few that support illegal immigration. We do support following the laws and protections for everyone – including the legal residents of the community – all of them.
Apr 17, 2009 at 1:53 pm
Bill Sarto
The Ritter slate didn’t promise anything. I’m sure they will live up to that. I bet they can do NOTHING better than anyone. Sigwalt is well practiced at doing nothing. She been doing that for 10 years now. That was the same problem that Carpentersville had previously. The boards got along for the most part, but nothing was done in the Village. Nancy Moore was the only one out of step with the Boettger board and she was the one they said was causing the trouble.
You see, it’s very simple really. They just don’t like anyone questioning them on what they are doing or not doing. Nancy Moore actually asked about the “no opinion audits.” Because of that, the board voted to investigate her at taxpayer’s expense.
No, don’t expect to hear much from Carpentersville in the future. They will go back to sleep now.
Apr 17, 2009 at 2:54 pm
Chrysippus
At a Glance, that was precisely the fears I raised; that Ritter will more likely be a party to the continued corruption (or at least “friendly” or “silent” on it) than he will be to put a stop to it.
Illegal immigration was part of their plan to rid the town of those they determined to be “undesirable”. In the process, they hurt the entire town … further damaging its image and making it all undesirable. This is evidenced by the large inventory of homes for sale, vacant or foreclosed compared to surrounding towns.
The new members of the Board need to work very hard on making Carpentersville a desirable place to live, work and shop. They have to realize that it doesn’t come from code enforcement.
Apr 17, 2009 at 3:05 pm
At a Glance
Yeah, and as a property owner, I certainly do not like the loss of value to my home, as a result of vacant homes all over the Village. I predicted the housing bubble burst because of the glut of homes that would go on the market at one time as ARM’s and Interest-only mortgages were repricing. The quantity of houses on the market then and now keeps the economy unstable and more likely to decrease revenues for community services…but that is usually the tactic used by the Republicans to cut social programs, so it fits their agenda to a tee…!!!
More vacant houses, less value, less value, less revenues for Village services… less services, less demand for housing in our village …less demand, less value….and the cycle just keeps going.
Apr 18, 2009 at 7:48 am
A WISE OLD MAN
Bill Sarto, you should remember that the election is over, you lost big, and your reply sounds like sour grapes. If you want to be fair in assessing what happened on election day and why you lost, apart from looking in the mirror, you should express your disappointment for the voters staying home on election day. Less than 15% of Carpentersville registered voters bothered to turn out, especially 5 months after the historic election of Barack Obama as the President of the United States, and the local victory of Carpentersville John Noverini being elected circuit judge?
Shortly after the November election, I remember you posting on your blog that everyone should get behind President-elect Obama, even if we did not vote for him. The same should be said right now for President-elect Ed Ritter, and the newly elected/re-elected trustees. The record for Ritter’s administration of Carpentersville has yet to be written, and while Ritter has a record as a trustee, he could turn out to be a great village president, or he could turn out to be another Mark Boettger. Ritter’s performance as village president will build his legacy, and I believe Ritter knows that a majority of voters in this year’s election preferred someone else, despite his winning.
But Carpentersville does need healing, and your publicly accepting the judgement of the voters who turned-out in this year’s election, in genuine humility and grace, will go a long way towards beginning the healing process in Carpentersville.
Apr 18, 2009 at 11:03 am
Bill Sarto
A Wise Old Man-
Not at all. It’s not sour grapes. It’s a fact. The Ritter team that was elected on April 7th offered nothing. They made no promises. So, they have nothing to live up to.
Ritter hismself said that he was running to get me out of office. So, he has accomplished his goal. Now what?
The truth is that Ed Ritter as a trustee never showed any leadership skills whatsoever. He was a very good follower. But no one would ever mistake him for a leader. I heard a businessman in Carpentersville say that Ritter couldn’t lead a line of ants to a piece of candy. His words not mine. No, the businessman was not Tom or Jack Roeser. He stayed neutral in the campaign.
I’m counting on staff to keep the programs going. Now that they have begun. The 28 year old Brad McFeggan, who couldn’t answer some questions during the League of Women Voter’s forum, because he didn’t know enough about the issues to comment, should be an interesting experiment in Village government. Pat Schultz who was one who violated the Open Meetings Act, while on the Audit & Finance Commission will also be an interesting addition to the board. Pat Schultz, also is the “Chairman” of the Carpentersville Improvement Committee, who allowed the Ritter team, that she was a part of, to use the CIC “slogan” Carpentersville Cares on the Ritter team’s campaign matterials. While being questioned during the petition challenges, Pat Schultz couldn’t recall Brad McFeggan even being in the same car with Ritter and her on their trip to and from Harvard, IL. Pat Schultz also is the one who put Ritter’s address on her Statement of Candidacy. These are the winning candidates.
This is NOT sour grapes these are real questions as to what the future holds for Carpentersville’s residents.
Apr 20, 2009 at 10:03 am
At a Glance
WiseOldMan, seems like Sarto is right…Looks like we are seeing “what’s next” with the disclosure by Chrysippus over the weekend that Sigwalt is running things as Sarto had been trying to tell us. She is offering decissions to the Board on issues that are yet to come before the Board….backroom deal making for her special interest friends…without contacting either Sarto or Ritter for their input…Now that’s democracy at it’s worst and that’s Ritter’s challange….
Ritter said he wants to be more inclusive but maybe it’s the inclusion of Ritter, like Sarto before him, that is needed…by Sigwalt. How will he handle this one…That’s the test of a Leader!!!!! Will he show he is or isn’t really the one leading the Village??? Can he take control from Sigwalt and her special interests or will we see the rubber stamping, without challange, of all the isuses Sigwalt champions?
Apr 22, 2009 at 11:08 pm
Jhalf
Remember, according to the brochure, Pat Schultz also got a high school diploma and took some college courses… now she’s influencing my property values and taxes… yikes.
Apr 23, 2009 at 5:32 am
A WISE OLD MAN
Yes, it will be interesting to see how Ed Ritter will govern, which begins on May 5th, and not before. May 5th will be here soon, and you will start to see your answer.
Recently, I found something very interesting concering the village of Carpentersville and its village board mirrored the village of Hanover Park, and the similarities between outgoing Carpentersville President Bill Sarto and Hanover Park Village President Rodney Craig. Craig, like Sarto, upset the village’s old guard establishment winning election 2 years ago to the unexpried village presidents term by a close margin, just like Sarto’s victory over Paul Humpfer in 2005.
President Craig faced a hostile village board, and the trustees did many things to undermine his leadership over the past 2 years. Maybe not to the level of outrage of Carpentersville with the faux immigration issue and the “secret meetings”, but in equally frustrating methods.
For the 2009 village elections, the Hanover Park old guard rallied around a current trustee’s challenge to Rod Craig’s re-election as village president, and formed a slate for village government (sound familiar?). Craig did the same, to break the old guard’s village board majority.
That’s where the similarities end. Craig won the election this month, by a 3 to 1 margin over Trustee Lori Kaiser. The village clerk running mate, a bright, young Hispanic named Eira Corral, won by a similar margin, and all of Craig’s trustee running mates won, too (Corral’s victory itself was unique, given she was one of the only Hispanic candidates, incumbent or challenger alike, who won their election this month in the northwest suburbs).
Bill Sarto and his supporters should look at how the elections played out in Hanover Park this year, and contrast it to how the elections played out this year in Carpentersville, with far different results. On paper, President Sarto and President Craig look to have faced very similar challenges with their respective village boards after their respective, upset victories for village president. It is fair to point out one challege Craig did not face in Hanover Park was a 3rd village president candidate in the election.
It looks to me Craig and his supporters (who included Senator Michael Noland, who also supported Sarto) did a lot more about their situation then Sarto and his supporters. Check out the Craig slate’s website at http://www.hanoverparkprogress.com to see how organized Craig’s slate was to overcome the Hanover Park old guard’s slate.
Would the Craig-type of organization, or the lack of a 3rd candidate in the village presidents election have kept Bill Sarto in office? Who knows. I would venture a guess to say Sarto would have done better than 16% of the vote with better organization, communication and financial support.
Apr 23, 2009 at 6:45 pm
Chrysippus
Marc, thanks for the information. Carpentersville and Hanover Park, quite a tale of two cities. I think organization was definitely a problem for many of the good candidates that were running this election cycle. For instance, Keith Andresen and Deb Lowen didn’t really get their “Save Carpentersville” site off the ground until a few days before the election. Tough to get your message out via that medium in 3-5 days.
There is one thing, though, with which I somewhat disagree and that is when Ed Ritter begins to govern. He is in office at the present time, so he has had the opportunity to do things already. True, he’s not Village President, but Ritter is on record as saying that the VP is just another member of the Board, so whether VP or Trustee he should have been able to move forward on items.
Still, I do agree that we will see what this new Board really has as their agenda after they are all seated on May 5th.
I know there are some who are already complaining that Sarto’s Committee appointments need to be reviewed. But, that seems pretty unlikely, given that 5 of the 7 members on the incoming Board had been responsible for the approval of those appointments. Questioning those appointments would be a sort of questioning of their own judgement.
Further, doing anything like that should raise huge red flags about the new crew. Given their track record, wanting to stack the deck even further in their favor should be viewed as an attempt to hide any future questionable actions from the public.
Apr 24, 2009 at 5:14 am
A WISE OLD MAN
Glad you found the information about Hanover Park interesting. Correct about Andresen and Lowen. Let’s face it, Ritter is going to find the village president is a little more than just another member of the board, beginning with his statutory duty as Liquor Commissioner.
Yes, I saw the complaining on the Stoneham/Grass site about Sarto’s appointments. Don’t see what they can do about those appointments already in place, short of asking for all of their resignations, or dissolving those respective committees/commissions. Ritter has mentioned he wants to re-look at all of the committees/commissions.
Not much more they can do with PZC, but all of the others might be revamped. Dissolving Audit/Finance and Parks and other advisory and covering those committees’ work through a Committee of the Whole of the village board is a possibility. Wonder if the future elective office aspirations of some of the appointees might be at the center of that statement over at Playhouse, given several appointees ran for local office this year, with Schultz winning village trustee, Sherry Dobson winning library trustee, and Paul Lanspa ran for township trustee?