You are currently browsing the tag archive for the ‘board’ tag.
As regular readers know, and new visitors can see, I’ve been very critical of the way members of the Board have conducted themselves over the past several years. But I’d like to draw a distinction between criticism of behavior or action and the presentation of feedback, input or commentary on issues.
I feel that the Board needs to seek out, and actually consider, input, advice and opinions from a wider base of the community and experts on the matters. And, they should be open to accepting such input even from those who are critical of actions they have taken in the past.
This seems to be something that at least some members of the Board have thus far been unwilling to do, and has been most recently evident in the discussion of amending the parking ordinance for buses and large personal vehicles.
A recent decision by President Ritter Ed to no longer allow public comment during Board discussion of ordinances and other actions creates a situation where the Board could take action on a matter without the public being able to weigh in with specific information – whether opinions or from experts.
It seems to be a means to stifle public input into issues of concern to the community. Unfortunately, a prevalent philosophy of some Board members is to ignore — and often, in turn, criticize — those members of the community.
Board members should expect criticism from members of the community if they take actions that are seen as problematic; especially if such Board members are initiators or champions of a particular issue. Likewise, residents should be encouraged to voice such criticisms without fear of being cut off from the dialog.
Now, some have considered my criticisms to be be “personal”. But, as I said in a comment recently on this blog, they are not “personal” at all. But, they are distinct from being input or feedback. Instead, the nature of those comments are specifically aimed at actions engaged in which are illegal, unethical and/or complicit with such behavior. Such actions by elected officials deserve no mercy or “constructive criticism” because engaging in them undermines the rights of members of the community or society.
As I said at the start, these two types of criticisms are of different and distinct natures, and both serve a purpose — both ultimately seek to serve the community in different ways. Allowing input into, and hearing criticism of, issues and legislation from experts and members of the community helps elected officials serve better. Denouncing illegal, unethical and corrupt behavior engaged in by elected officials helps the community be better informed, so they may choose officials that respect them (and remove officials that don’t).
To weigh in on this matter of the ordinance prohibiting vehicles in excess of 8,000lbs from being owned and parked at residences in the Village (which have been debated in the comments of the “Ritter/challenge” entry), I have to say that I find that there are matters that the existing ordinance addresses that are important to the maintenance and safety of the community and its residents. That said, I also find that there are cases where the existing ordinance unknowingly, unintentionally or unwittingly prohibits passenger vehicles from being owned and stored at residences in the Village. Additionally, ordinances should take into account the sizable population of working class citizens who are residents of the Village.
I think it is good that the Board has asked for a revised ordinance to address these matters, and also provide exclusions that would allow certain buses to be parked at residences, which also are of benefit to the community.
So, those two things are good.
What I find disheartening, however, is that some members of the Board — Trustee Sigwalt, in particular — are using this ordinance in a discriminatory manner; specifically to harass a business owner in the Village, and perhaps others, as a matter of politics. I believe that it establishes a dangerous precedent — with evidence that it was long established, and is now commonplace — that damages the image and credibility of the Board, the Community Development Division (specifically code enforcement officers), and also the reputation of the Village itself.
Steps may be taken by those involved to ensure that such commentary and prejudices do not “leak” to the public in the future, however, that is no assurance of protection against such.
Again, this is another case where there must be a show of good faith on the part of the government, that it will listen to the people when they bring objections; and that they will be properly addressed. The passage of exceptions granted for non-commercial vehicles, and certain school buses is a start to demonstration of that commitment.
Yesterday’s Daily Herald reported that West Dundee was looking to ensure there was room in their budget to support the “Ride In Kane” program.
The township earlier this year asked village boards in Carpentersville, East Dundee, West Dundee and Sleepy Hollow to contribute a total of $58,000 to help the township match a $90,000 federal transportation grant. A $32,000 subsidy through the Regional Transportation Authority helped offset part of the match.
So far, East Dundee and Sleepy Hollow have agreed to contribute to the program. Meanwhile, a slim majority of the Carpentersville village board denied a request for $13,412…
Based on the report that West Dundee had already included their share in the 2009-10 budget, which they will look at in their March 21st budget meeting, Carpentersville will likely be the only Dundee Township member not contributing to the plan, letting at least $13,412 of federal funds that could have served Carpentersville be reallocated to some other community.
I believe the following discussion about this matter may be helpful to residents in understanding this issue, and being knowledgeable about the ideas represented by some running for Village Board in the April election; namely Ed Ritter, Kay Teeter, Pat Schultz and Brad McFeggan, who are aligned with Trustee Judy Sigwalt. (Ritter, Teeter, Sigwalt and Humpfer voted against funding “Ride In Kane”, thus rejecting federal tax dollars that would benefit Carpentersville residents.)
A person using the alias, woningkammer, (who is likely a Village board member or has close ties to a certain bloc of the Board) made complaints about the cost of such services.
I had this to say:
So Ritter, Teeter, Sigwalt and Humpfer voted AGAINST nearly $27,000 ($13,412 + 13,412 in matching funds = $26,824) to help fund a program that serves seniors, disabled and needy residents … ?!
woningkammer (and the group he/she supports) SAYS they SERVE, but then condemns programs intended to SERVE. “Seniors? the disabled? the needy? Find your own way!” (They chose to build about 150 yards of sidewalk instead.)
“Seniors, low-income and disabled residents benefit from this program,” [West Dundee] Village Manager Joe Cavallaro said before the meeting. “In these tough economic times, these are the types of programs that we need to maintain.”
Absolutely! With tight budgets everywhere, who in their right mind would vote to NOT accept money for services in their community?
[Amazing that] even with a current campaign slogan, they show they DON’T CARE. No wonder residents don’t believe these people.
woningkammer responded, claiming that I was for “wasteful spending” by supporting such programs, and that “Ride In Kane” was a redundant program which could be handled by NETSPAP and taxis.
I followed up with the following information and comments:
It is sad that you consider services provided to seniors, disabled and low-income residents to be “waste”. Further, it is obvious that you don’t understand how multi-agency funding helps make important social programs affordable. And you think I am the one in need of education…?!
NETSPAP serves one particular segment of the community [those who qualify that need a ride to a doctor appointment]. “Ride in Kane”, and other transportation services under the same umbrella, extend services to persons for reasons that would not be covered by NETSPAP [such as transportation to work or local grocery and retail stores for those who are disabled, senior or low-income citizens that also may not be accessible by means such as regular PACE bus routes].
Funding of this sort is a waterfall, with portions coming from several levels of government. The funding that was voted against by such short-sighted nincompoops was also a rejection of MATCHING FEDERAL FUNDS — federal tax dollars being returned to the local community. It gets returned through those ” multiple … budget line items”.
“One elected to office” SERVES EFFECTIVELY by also doing what is necessary to get, keep and use tax dollars in their community. To let them go elsewhere is WASTEFUL; waste that will ultimately increase our tax liability, not to mention put strains on other agencies, both public and private. (Yes, you are saying it should be eliminated by calling it “wasteful”. Do you expect us to believe you want to keep a service you think “wasteful”?)
Make your stand against waste somewhere else, instead of against senior, disabled and low-income citizens.
Yesterday’s post was one which I also posted on the Daily Herald web site. It prompted a few comments from the usual suspects (with the relevant portions quoted here):
RCG: If Sarto gets re-elected it would Guaranty[sic] of more of the same which include loud disruptive board meetings, disrespectful comments to the residents.
woningkammer: Time after time, as board President, his Napoleon complex has been put on display when he interrupts some people during public comments – against his own rules!. Time after time he rules to allow disorderly conduct during public comments as long as the person at the podium is complimentary to the actions of the President.
Who headed the audit and finance committee that resulted in the first clean audits? Who first documented how Carpentersville could fund a road improvement program? It was NOT Sarto, who did however start a rumor to demolish private property!
Voters will determine if the current Board President is replaced by […] someone who has displayed a consistent voice of reason while SERVING the residents.
[To which I respond:]
Richard, you neglect to mention that Sigwalt and Humpfer, with Ritter and Teeter backing them, met improperly with a group of residents to conspire on how to disrupt Village Board meetings – they met privately to PLAN to DISRUPT MEETINGS for the reason I mention above.
woningkammer obviously does not know the role or rules related to the office of Village President (just like Trustee Ritter who calls the President “just another member on the Board”, proving he doesn’t know the Municipal Code — which (Pay attention Trustee Ritter, especially since you are running for this office…) gives the President specific duties and powers not given to Trustees, particularly that of “chief executive officer” of the Village, see Section 2.8.020). The Code allows — in fact, requires — the President to stop a resident during public comment who is not addressing a matter of Village business [see Section 2.14.150, C & E]. Sigwalt, Humpfer, Ritter and Teeter are on record more than once voting to overrule the ruling of the President to allow their friends to disrupt meetings by talking ad nauseum about a topic that they were unwilling to discuss. Proof that they slowed progress and disrupted Village business.
(In light of these actions that allowed their group to berate the President, there were occasions that the President allowed residents to be critical of those Trustees. I don’t agree that it is right. However, given the Trustees’ acceptance of violations of Rules of Decorum, I do not think it appropriate to allow them to invoke it when they find themselves under such scrutiny.)
Clean audits? Why were the finances allowed to get so in a mess that it took 4 years(!) to put an end to “no opinion” audits? That is unheard of ANYWHERE. The reality is the Board at the time didn’t take it serious enough — and some still don’t!
I’m surprised [woningkammer] brings up the demolition of the burned out William St property since it took residents questioning it and Sarto looking into it to get it gone. Anyone who is really SERVING the RESIDENTS would have supported their calls — as Sarto did — for getting it torn down.
And there were many on the Board who thought the residents could wait longer for their streets and sidewalks to be restored/rebuilt. After years of neglect, Sarto knew it needed to get done.
Trustee Ritter likes to think of himself as a “voice of reason”, but that “voice of reason” came pretty willingly over to the Sigwalt camp, regularly supporting those who would violate the rules of the Board and laws of the Village and State. Most of the time Ritter and Teeter just sat there without saying anything, until it was time to vote, and then they voted on the wrong side.
How is it that someone would argue about “disorderly conduct” while ignoring domestic battery, Open Meetings Act violations and misuse of Village property (even mentioned in this paper)? Someone who wanted to be taken seriously would condemn unethical and unlawful behavior instead of saying it deserves respect and courtesy.
Trustee Linda Ramirez-Sliwinski is back on the ballot for the April 7 Consolidated Election after she proved at least 9 of the signatures that had been previously rejected were, in fact, registered voters. Further, the Electoral Board reinstated 4 additional signatures that they had wrongly rejected on the basis that they had been printed.
Read more at the Courier-News or at the Daily Herald.
As was reported in the Courier-News, fellow Trustee and political adversary, Judy Sigwalt, did not want to allow the signatures, despite the fact that they were valid.
This was not unexpected, since Judy Sigwalt was likely a party behind the objections to the petitions of Ramirez-Sliwinski, as well as Ken Andresen, Deb Lowen, Joe Haimann, Jim Krenz and Bill Sarto.
But, what was somewhat unexpected was Sigwalt’s admission that what the law required did not concern her:
Sigwalt called the objection process flawed and said she could not vote to accept signatures when she knew they were not registered voters.
“Whether the law states I can do it or not, I cannot allow an unregistered voter’s signature,” Sigwalt said.
The problem with Sigwalt’s logic is that no one was asking her to allow an “unregistered voter’s signature”. But, I appreciate Trustee Sigwalt providing such testimony to back up my statement that she — like the “Carpentersville Cares” team that has allied themselves with her, and which she endorsed — has no regard for the requirements of law, and has shown it time and again by violating ordinances and statutes.
[T]he village board had previously adopted rules that allowed an affidavit to be accepted as proof of a signature during electoral board hearings.
Looking at the “Letters” page of the Daily Herald today, readers will find Judy Sigwalt supporting her minions. I wrote last week about how Ritter was linked to Sigwalt, and was the stooge of Sigwalt and Co. Today’s letter to the editor confirms this.
Sigwalt needs people in Village government who will look the other way at her corrupt activities — and that of her minions.
I will be supporting Ed Ritter for village president … [and] … incumbent Trustee Kay Teeter, Carpentersville Improvement Committee Chair Pat Schultz, as well as Brad McFadden.
For residents who want to rid Carpentersville Village government of the kind of corruption and problems that have been around for “the past 10 years” that Sigwalt has been in office, she at least has be kind enough to give you a list of who to vote against.
She says: Personal attacks by elected officials aimed at their fellows has been a shameful display from our boardroom far too often.
And yet, she regularly attacks Board members and residents (myself included) who object to her involvement in the corruption and coverups for improper and illegal behavior.
Send a message to Judy Sigwalt on April 7 … vote against Ritter, Teeter, Schultz and McFadden.
Last night the Village of Carpentersville Board voted 4-2 to approve a $50,000 grant to the Boys and Girls Club.
Trustees Sigwalt and Teeter voted “No” because it didn’t happen to be a line item in this year’s budget.
Hmmm … neither was the work for Kimball Farms that they voted for earlier this year …
Maybe there was some hope that the group could attempt to win the funds at that Indian casino Sigwalt proposed last meeting.
It took three meetings, and a Carpentersville business owner’s cash, but finally …
Five members of the Board did the right thing Tuesday night.
One persisted in the opinion that the Village of Carpentersville should be in the business of putting more guns on the streets.
The majority of Police departments across the country, the International Association of Chiefs of Police, many officers here in our area and numerous residents in and around the Village do not want police guns to be re-sold. That didn’t appear to matter to Judy Sigwalt, who was the only one to still vote for selling the guns — politics apparently overriding all else. Perhaps she’s still not over her anger at the “Trouble with Carpentersville” series, which clearly seemed to contribute to some of the indignation at the last two meetings.
The main thing, however, is that the guns will now be destroyed. Thank you to Mr. Roeser for stepping up to the plate.
It would be nice if we wouldn’t have to go through all this in the future. It would be nice if the Village adopted a policy that all weapons — either turned in, confiscated or one’s no longer used by police officers — would automatically be disposed of.
It seems that Sigwalt and Co. might also have been humming “You Ain’t Seen Nothin’ Yet” as they read last week’s “Trouble with Carpentersville” series. Maybe that would offer some explanation for the events that took place at this week’s Village Board meeting.
They seemed determined to do things that were really strange …
First, when President Sarto gaveled two citizens for comments that were not relevant to Village business, 5 Board members overturned the ruling of the President … ignoring even the advice of the Village attorney.
Then, Trustee Sigwalt appeared to once again be overstepping her position, directing staff to do her bidding. This time it was to have Village staff gather information about a possible land-based casino along the Randall Rd corridor, just north of Huntley Rd.
It’s somewhat ironic that one of those asked to end his comments was talking about censure (even though the Board previously considered the matter and it was determined it was not applicable). If anyone deserves to be censured, it is Trustee Sigwalt, for she is clearly in violation of the Municipal Code and statutes. According to the rules, only the Village President has the individual authority to direct staff. Trustees must do so with the consent of the Board, typically through an agenda item for “discussion and direction.”
But, the pièce de résistance was when they put revenue before public safety. As Tom Roeser commented yesterday, “Now their bad judgment is starting to affect safety.”
I guess these Trustees have now given us our answer to the invitation to amend their ways and begin to work for the people of Carpentersville. That answer is a resounding “no”.
This is a forum for you to speak up about these things folks. If you can’t make it to the meetings, or don’t want to get up to speak during public comments, then you could voice your opinion here. The Board is reading this — especially the comments — as are many of your fellow residents in the community. Use of a unique alias is fine, if you don’t feel comfortable putting your name out there. (As I’ve said before, I will not allow people to be attacked, especially not for using an alias.) If you’ve paid attention to what’s been going on, then you know that this blog has made an impact. Be a part of it. Join the discussion.
We may not have heard the last word on the sale of those guns — which included about 20 .357 Magnum handguns, among others. Seems that a Chicago media station was contacted by Rev. Jesse Jackson, of Operation PUSH, and Fr. Michael Pfleger, of St Sabina Church in Chicago, regarding Carpentersville’s decision to sell these weapons after overriding President Sarto’s veto. Sarto cited concern for public safety as his reason for vetoing the sale that was previously approved 4-3, before Trustee Hinz changed his position on the re-vote.
Those who are familiar with Jackson and Pfleger should realize that this is not necessarily a good thing for our Village. If we thought that “3,000 people” showing up at Village Hall for the immigration debate was a nightmare … just wait …
The chorus of “You Ain’t Seen Nothin’ Yet” from Bachman-Turner Overdrive is playing in my head.
A recent article reporting on response of the Catholic Church to urban violence in Chicago gives a bit of history of Fr. Pfleger and why this hits so close to home for him:
Father Michael Pfleger, pastor of Chicago’s St. Sabina Parish, knows the feeling of helplessness that can strike family members. In 1998, his 17-year-old foster son was shot. He died in Father Pfleger’s arms.
However, Carpentersville could be potentially spared from this if they take Otto Engineering President, Tom Roeser, up on his offer to pay $3,000 for the Village to do the prudent thing and destroy the weapons. It would seem to be the best case scenario … the Village gets their $3,000, public safety is not put in harm’s way because the weapons are destroyed and we avoid more negative publicity.
And, finally, the following letter was received by the Village:
Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2007 18:59:02 -0600
Subject: My regretsMr. Sarto,
I understand that you stand opposed to police weapons being sold to enerate revenue for Carpentersville. I am a Schaumburg resident, but I do care what is happening in the communities around mine. I cannot believe that Carpentersville is so strapped for cash that it must net $3000 the Daily Herald reports will be collected upon the sale of these guns. Honestly, if I had discretionary money to buy them all, to personally see they get destroyed – I would. I can assure you if this were happening in Schaumburg, I would be doing
more to assemble people to do the right thing. Unfortunately, my funds, time and responsibilities here are somewhat limited. Here’s a simple idea… Organize a fundraiser and have people donate money to a cause that results in the guns being destroyed. You just might raise more than $3000.On my behalf, I ask that you forward my message to the board of trustee members who support this. I wonder if each of them have considered what his or her reaction will be when they learn one of these weapons is used in a violent crime. The only way to ensure this will not happen is by seeing the weapons are destroyed. I am stunned to believe a suburban community would even consider selling weapons to raise funds. For $3000 no less! Why not start taking stuff to the local pawn shop? What type of image does this uphold for the people of the community?
Once again, Mr Sarto, I commend you for taking the right position here. I feel horribly sorry for your board of trustees who obviously value money far higher than principles. Proverbial souls are being sold here for the low, low cost of $3000.
Regretfully,
David {last name withheld}
Schaumburg
I guess we should have seen this coming, right?
Trustee Hinz putting price before principle…
The Daily Herald published an article today, “Settle differences behind closed doors, expert tells village board”, reporting on one of the items that came up in Saturday’s Strategic Planning meeting.
Gerald Gabris, a professor in the public administration division at Northern Illinois University, suggested trustees meet in executive session to address problems among the seven-member board.
I believe this to be an excellent idea. This is something that I and others have been saying to the Board for quite awhile. In fact, it is the predominant factor in this blog being started.
But not all trustees are convinced the special meeting will solve the board’s problems.
“I think some things will be said that people will not want to hear,” Trustee Paul Humpfer said. “There are differences in opinions on the board and I don’t think they are going to change. I am pretty tentative.”
If one watches the Board meetings (whether in person, or on Comcast) or they read the meeting minutes, there are many times where this isn’t simply “differences of opinion”, but often they are catfights. (Cases in point would be the meeting minutes for September 18 and October 2.)
Frankly, something is going to have to be done because the Village’s image is being further damaged by this at nearly every meeting, and the ability to efficiently work on Village business is being hindered. Those unwilling to do whatever it takes to resolve differences and begin to work effectively together do not deserve to sit on the Village Board. If it fails, it fails. At least it can be said it was tried.
Although there is probably a need for some airing dirty laundry and calling people out for past issues, that should not be the focus or the intent of such a meeting. Rather, it should be used more as a means of agreeing as to what is proper conduct, how to effectively run the meetings, Board members’ interpretations of the Corporate Proceedings as specified in the Municipal Code and State Statutes, and learning how to communicate respectfully with one another.
Have I left anything out that would make such a meeting more productive, and solutions-directed, instead of being simply a rant session?
The Board has previously discussed lifting the overnight street parking ban that is in effect on Village streets. At the October 2nd meeting, a majority of the Board expressed that they had received calls from residents requesting that ban be lifted. Only one trustee said she received no calls or emails with such requests.
At the last meeting, it seemed likely that a majority of the Board would vote to keep the ban in place, despite the objections of some residents.
This is not an item that really affects me, but I wanted to put this information out there so that people were aware of it.
Yes, residents do have the option of contacting the Police Department if there is a necessity to park their car in the street overnight. In such a case, a ticket would not be issued.
And, worthy of note is the winter street parking ban that also exists.
Since this item was raised, however, several Board members have expressed that they have not heard anything from residents about lifting the parking ban.
If you are one of those residents who have contacted members of the Board about lifting the ban, it is recommended that you call or email them to express your feelings on the issue. Otherwise, it does appear that the parking ban will remain in effect.
This past Tuesday, an ordinance was discussed that would ban “scavengers” from picking up “white” items (such as appliances) put out at the curb for waste management, making it punishable by a fine. One of the issues raised was that residents are required to put 10 $2.40 stickers on these large items, as well as the fact that the current Village contract amount with ARC expects there to be a certain level of these “white” recyclables that would be picked up.
But, has the Village considered cases where residents put out these items without stickers the evening before pickup with the explicit hope that a “scavenger” would take such an item, thus saving them the $24 (or putting stickers on in the morning, if the item is still there)? Would this really be a “theft of recyclables” as defined in the Municipal Code, if stickers were not present? Or, would the homeowner be fined in accordance with 8.08.100 ? Will they take away residents options in this regard?
In terms of there being a lesser number of these items found at the curb by disposal service workers, could it be due to the fact that many delivery services now include hauling away the old appliance in their delivery options?
What would be the added cost for the Village’s waste disposal and recycling services if a specified level of these items is not received by ARC?
President Sarto sent the following message about the Village’s upcoming Strategic Planning meeting:
Once again this year as we did in 2006, the Village Board and the staff will hold a Special Meeting at Randall Oaks Golf Club. The purpose of this meeting is a Strategic Planning Session.
Last year I opened this session with some remarks that were meant to set the tone for this worthwhile planning session. Again this year I will be making some opening remarks. A year ago my comments were very upbeat and positive about our future. I stated: “This meeting reflects extraordinary changes that have taken place in the Village over a relatively short period. It reflects elections in Carpentersville. We are at a crossroads. We have before us today an opportunity that only comes around once in a while. We are in a position to make sure that our programs are moving in the right direction and addressing the issues that we as a Village need to face. We are on the right course.”
I went on to say: “The Village now has an outstanding staff. Our job on the Board is to now keep our good people. So, today, we are here to help build and develop a strategic plan that will identify issues that may involve short-term, medium-term and long-term consequences. We are ready at this time to move ahead in this strategic direction.”
I continued: ” Our predicament in the Village is to think as a dreamer. We need to think outside the box. This is a good thing. We need to look and think about the bigger picture. In my opinion, we can do better than we are doing now.”
I concluded my opening remarks with this: “What is important is that the Board members and staff now seem to be on the same page and ready to go. We need to conceptualize a future and then decide how we want to get there.”
That was last year. So, much has happened in that short time. Here are some of the thoughts that came from that session just one year ago. These were the comments from the Village Board members given in one on one interviews with the facilitator: Under the heading “Core Values of Carpentersville”
1. Down to earth community that reflects a
2. “diverse” demography that helps make the
3. Village a highly family oriented place to live.
4. The village has a “small town feel” even though
5. it is located in a highly populated suburban location convenient to
6. shopping and other cultural amenities.
7. The Village offers a wide variety of housing stock ranging from very affordable single family homes to those on the high end.
8. Carpentersville is a maturing community that is known for its high quality drinking water, hard working residents, and high quality schools.
9. In summary, Carpentersville reflects the future now. It displays the characteristics of a family oriented, ethnically diverse, high service community where municipal government sustains a high quality of life with a small town feel.
Listed below were the top 5 “Strategic Issues” that we identified a year ago:
1. Improve the Village infrastructure (i.e. roads) Build a Public Works Facility, Identify funding sources for additional Village staff, especially for Public Works, Educate citizens about the need for a potential property tax increase to fund needed infrastructure improvements.
2. Have the Village engage in more intensive business/retail recruitment. Focus on economic development. Increase Village Revenues, i.e., grants, sales tax, and link to economic development.
-Hire an Economic Development Director.
-Hire an Economic development advisory firm.
-Create an Economic Development Council to advise the Board and Village.3. Engage in active redevelopment of those areas of the Village that need it.
4. Improve the Village’s Image:
a. externally in a broad sense, and
b. internally between Board and staff.5. Have the Village grow wisely.
I’ll let those reading this make up their own minds in grading the Village on achieving those goals that we set out to accomplish one year ago.
Bill Sarto – President
Village of Carpentersville
No longer does Carpentersville simply have a place in the national spotlight. The Village has now gone international, with the latest piece appearing in The Guardian’s Observer magazine (The Guardian is a United Kingdom new source):
The fight against the Hispanic revolution is gathering momentum in small towns across America. None is more on the frontline than the seemingly sleepy Illinois village of Carpentersville, one of a string of towns hereabouts that were founded by Irish and Polish immigrants, thrived on trade and factories, and have now hit harder times.
This excerpt is part of a longer analysis that appears toward the end of the lengthy article, which speaks of a more far-reaching issue:
For decades, Hispanics have existed mainly in the shadows of the American dream. Now they’re taking to the streets in their millions, in the biggest march for equality since the Civil Rights movement. And with $1 trillion to spend, millions ready to vote and their own candidate for President, Hispanics hold the key to the new American century.
The portrait that is painted of Carpentersville is, once again, not pretty to look at. And, with pending litigation against the Village for alleged discrimination — while the Village and paramedics may be found to have immunity — we could be faced with the reality of seeing the town labeled, as Hazleton was in a Zogby International Report, as “full of racism”.
A Zogby International report issued Wednesday paints a harrowing picture of Hazleton as a city where racism is rampant and people live in constant fear of racial profiling and losing their homes and/or jobs if taken for being in the country illegally.
Just as in Carpentersville, the news in Hazleton, PA is not all bad. There are some good strides being made there as well. Unfortunately it is overshadowed. Unfortunately, “but” has to be inserted in order to tell the fuller picture.
Even if there is some admitted “political opinion” injected into the report on Hazleton, and the articles on Carpentersville, opinion shapes ideas, thoughts and plans. Seeing that Carpentersville has struggled with image problems for the better part of a decade, its those types of opinions that we could do without. Which makes it more important for the Village Board to put down their swords, make a public commitment to the residents and business owners to work to move past the division and spite of the past (that goes beyond the current group of Board members) and raise their level of communication.
Doing so would give this blog something to praise, rather than things which deserve criticism.
Trustee Sigwalt,
I am directing this letter to you for reasons which are not, by any means, partisan. Your responses to some recent emails from myself and others, in addition to actions taken during Village Board meetings, have given me cause for concern. A primary concern is your insinuation that there is an agenda behind your actions on the Board. The comments I have received from others have led me to believe that as well.
Specifically, when concerns were raised about the behavior of the Board, you replied, in part: “Anytime you would like to talk and learn the reasons behind some of the actions I would oblige.” I think we all would like to know those reasons, so please share them. I believe you, as a representative of the People of Carpentersville, owe us all an explanation.
The purpose of this blog is to call those elected to office in the Village to account in hopes of moving things forward, and stopping what I believe to be a pattern of lies and games. It is in this spirit that I have pointed out areas that I believe need significant improvement — always backing my statements with evidence.
I do believe you, as the senior trustee on the Board, have been a factor in the current state of Village politics, which has now seen 3 different Village Presidents. Yet it has not changed the contentious behavior — of which you most often seem to be a part — of the Board.
However, this is not merely about you. This is not even about me. It is also not about Bill Sarto or any others. And, it is not about anyone on a personal level.
This is about the Village and residents; and about our elected officials’ service and duty to us. This is about where we have chosen to live and work and raise our families and setting things in place to continually improve that.
Unfortunately, you have seemed to make this personal. I could provide a litany of examples to back such a statement, but I think I’ve already said enough along that line.
I’ve said in the past, patterns of behavior that I have observed for some time have made it necessary for me to take these issues to the people — and provide the information that I feel has been lacking, and even ignored — using a mechanism that is commonplace on the public internet: a pseudonym or “alias”.
In the past week, I have taken some time to work on presenting a better image of what is happening in the Village … and have asked that our Village Board get past their petty bickering. I have done this because I honestly feel that the Village has finally began to move forward in the past few years.
Yet, the Board seems to continually argue about things which are irrelevant to Village business.
If it takes further criticism of the Board to get you all to play nice, I will not hesitate to say what’s on my mind. The ultimate direction of my comments on my blog is up to you and others on the Board.
Let’s pull it together so that the good work that is being done in the community can be reflected in, and assisted by, our Village Board.
As the storm clouds hang over the Village Board in their attacks on one another, residents seem to be banding together more than ever to bring healing and unity to a town battered by political division and neglect for nearly a decade. In fact, take the Board’s discord out of the picture and one sees a picture of a town in recovery, for the most part.
For example, the Courier-News published a report last Friday of a group of about 10 local pastors of Carpentersville churches who have been meeting regularly to reach out to the community through their congregations to hear their concerns and attempt to find direction and solutions for the Village.
Village staff is doing a good job of coordinating efforts to repair and maintain the roadways and infrastructure, as well as bring additional retail and commercial development to the town. Although a few businesses that have left Carpentersville have been relatively high profile (Circuit City, Jewel, Big Lots, and Fridays), there are not as many empty store fronts as some would have folks believe. With the exception of the old Big Lots space, Meadowdale Mall is basically full. The old Jewel store is being significantly overhauled to open in November/December as “the Village Fresh Market”. White Castle is slated to open soon next to Aldi on the near-West side, across from food stops like Jamba Juice and Panda Express. And, there are some rumors flying around that some of the restaurant spaces around Spring Hill Mall might not be empty for long.
Even the schools in the area appear to be improving. Despite continued overcrowding issues (although the total number of students is below the bottom floor estimates provided by the District during the last referendum) that have plagued District 300 for years (on the West, as well as the East), according to recent reports test scores among third through eighth graders improved to exceed the state average. Carpentersville Middle School, after several years of failing to meet standards set by the federal No Child Left Behind act, has recently received a passing grade.
It will take time to get to a higher level of satisfaction … but progress is being made, in a time when the economy is otherwise stumbling, slowing growth and development.
Now, if we can just stage an intervention as a community to help some of our Trustees get some therapy so they can actually aid in the recovery…
Who would have thought appointments to a committee (an ad hoc committee, at that) would be so difficult for a Village Board? Ah, but this is Carpentersville after all, where even the routine will be made difficult.
At their July 17th meeting, the Board voted for the creation of an ad hoc committee to work out details of the Carpentersville Improvement Committee, consisting of 3 residents and 2 trustees.
Sarto introduced his choices for appointments to the CIC by stating that he had put this group together as a team whose skills well complimented each other and would put forward a diverse and well-balanced “face” to the residents of Carpentersville. It was well-stated introduction that reflected how and why teams are built and chosen.
Four trustees were determined to inject political spite into the discussion — a discussion that went on for over an hour. Their comments wreaked of no-confidence in the abilities of the five members to make up the committee, and showed a great disrespect to the residents and trustees that were to make up this committee.
Trustee Ritter began by stating: “You point out that this is a team, but your team is a player short.” Sarto, however, had listed 5 appointees, as the Board had previously approved (in fact, it was Ritter who made the motion and Sigwalt who had seconded). Attorney Rhodes confirmed the minutes, motion and vote taken to the Trustees. Thus, in order for the team to be “a player short” would mean that a member of the team was not right for the job.
Why does this Board continue to attack its members? Why do they think so little of the abilities of Trustees Teeter and Ramirez Sliwinski, not to mention the residents who were also chosen to be appointed?
In fact, based on their statements, why do we need a committee at all? From the way the others made it sound, Trustee Sigwalt has all the experience — and the only experience — that is needed.
Still, why did they chose to throw Teeter under the bus? It should have been obvious to them that Ramirez Sliwinski, being the only Hispanic on the Board, would have been chosen so, at issue was really Sigwalt vs Teeter. Oh, they planned it out ahead of time to make it appear that they supported Teeter, but it was so thinly veiled as to be obvious they supported Sigwalt over Teeter.
I thought they were attacking Sarto (and I think they thought that too), but their antics and argumentation really were a slap in the face to Trustee Teeter. Why do they think she can’t do the job? The lack of respect for her capabilities and experience should really come as a shock to someone who has been there to support their often ill-advised agendas.
And, what about Sigwalt’s statement that she is the only one who is not a member of a committee? Well, earlier this year, though she was going to be made a member of the the Audit & Finance Commission, she declined the appointment. So, she does not sit on a committee by her own choosing.
This was not “Sigwalt’s baby” as it was put in the discussion. Trustee Sigwalt originally touted this as something akin to a “code patrol”. This was the direction of the initial discussions until resident Pat Schultz clarified for the Board that the committee to be formed would be primarily directed toward education. (Schultz was one of the residents appointed to the ad hoc committee last night). Further, as Trustee Humpfer noted, this was a recommendation of the Comprehensive Plan, not specifically of the Board.
In the end, after all the arguments for Sigwalt to be on the committee over Teeter, the Board unanimously approved Sarto’s appointments, leaving one to wonder what all the fuss was about. To be honest, it was an embarrassment to see the Trustees behave this way. It is long past time for them to put aside their spite and get to work.
Carpentersville Action Network 
Email over veto resorts to name-calling, distortion
Dec 3, 2007 in editorial | Tags: board, carpentersville, editorial, gun sale veto, public comments, sarto, trustees | 12 comments
Personally, I don’t find the idea of selling confiscated or turned-in guns to a Federal Firearms Licensed dealers (FFL) to be a significant issue. Those previously used by law enforcement might be an exception I’d take.
A few families in our community that lost loved ones to gun violence this year may have a different take, I would guess. For them, I’m sure that the fewer guns on the streets, the better.
At the last meeting of the Village Board, a vote was taken on selling guns presently possessed by the Police Department. It didn’t involve very much debate. The vote was 4-3 in favor is approving the sale of these guns to an FFL dealer. The sale was estimated to net $3,000 (a pittance in relation to an approximately $30 million annual budget).
While some cities will sell these weapons, most will typically destroy them. Though I can see the rationale for both, it might be worthwhile to sell a particularly rare, collector-type gun that would bring a more significant amount. Sometimes valuable guns are unknowingly turned in to police, either through a gun buyback program, or by those who no longer want them and do not know how to otherwise dispose of them.
In a report prepared for the Village Board on this agenda item at the last meeting, Police Chief Neumann states “Some municipalities mandate the destruction of all firearms that come into their possession once any law enforcement use for them is completed. This policy is based on the belief that the community is safer when weapons are not recirculated, and that a weapon sold by the department could possibly be used in a future crime.” (emphasis added)
Based on that information from the Police Chief, it would would seem the community might be best served by destroying these weapons.
In light of that, Village President Bill Sarto vetoed the approval of the sale.
It upset some of those in “the backroom” however … and the following email was sent to members of the Board and some others close to Carpentersville politics, from someone who has posted regularly to this blog in support of Sigwalt and Co (one of a seeming trio of cronies):
Talk about distortion! For cry-pete! These guys are desperate.
Folks may recall earlier email ramblings and rantings from another that were along the same lines, just on a different subject.
Anyway …
First, to specifically call Sarto an “A–hole”; That in itself is unbelievable that anyone would think it appropriate.
Next, are we still talking about illegal immigration? Sheesh … I thought everyone said they were done with that issue for now. Kinda shows you that it will be brought up again and again whenever it is convenient.
So, what about the real issue? Easy enough to correct all the errors here.
1. The “letter to the editor” was to the Daily Herald. It may have appeared in the Courier-News too, but there was recent referral to its appearance in the Herald.
2. The “letter to the editor” by Sarto in 2000 regarding illegal immigration was about federal enforcement.
3. Sarto never claimed there were “none”. Rather, he stated — rightly — there was no evidence provided that showed that illegal immigration was responsible for the problems that were being attributed to it in Carpentersville. That is a significant distinction that these folks like to distort.
4. Sarto also never said anything that even hinted that “he didn’t trust OUR police department.” On the contrary, he cited the words of a report by OUR Police Chief.
5. It is a part of governance of the Village that the issue on this sale be considered and decided by the Board. It is also the right of the Village President, as the chief executive officer of the Village, to veto measures that he deems to be not in the best interest of the Village and community.
6. Sarto has no children.
7. This issue is not “outside of Village business”, therefore such statements about the “FEDs” are just plain foolishness.
If you received an email such as the above, that called you derogatory names, do you think you would be cordial in your reply? (I think I probably would not reply at all … and would hit the delete button. If I were Sarto, I would do exactly that. Someone who writes such things doesn’t deserve the courtesy. If you expect a reply, you will write respectfully. In contrast, all my correspondence with the Board and Village officials have been respectful and courteous. One wonders why they will humor these jokers while ignoring the respectful requests of their constituents … well, in reality we saw why they won’t answer in “The Trouble with Carpentersville” series last week. )
This is the kind of crap that our elected officials have to deal with, folks. This is what these “winners” keep our elected officials’ time wrapped up with. For being a significant minority of the population, they apparently take up a majority of time and are often behind the drive for particular actions in the Village.