Group session to cure ailing Board?

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?

Making the routine … difficult

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.

Enough

Over the past several days, I’ve been trying to find out more about what really went on “behind-the-scenes” of Autumn Fest.

But, despite having received a good deal of information, I began to wonder something … if more time was taken to get to the bottom of this, what should the consequences be?

I mean, how serious is this, really, in the context of everything going on in the Village?

So what that the Trustees didn’t get official invites in their packets?! Perhaps in the future there should be no expectation to either send or receive written invites to such events. After all, the Board was made aware of the event, given specific details about the event, and it was a Village coordinated event. Hopefully eliminating written invites in the future, we can make sure that no one’s feelings get hurt if there is misunderstandings or miscues that occur.

And, is it really a big deal that Trustees Sigwalt and Teeter participated in the parade, but didn’t pay the $10 participant fee?

Community pride and desire to be involved should have compelled everyone on the Board to participate appropriately. That some didn’t speaks more about their true feelings, but do any of these things require disciplinary action? Nope.

So what the heck is the Board doing wasting more time at meetings arguing about it?

The same goes for this talk of disciplinary action over private conversations. One should wonder what Trustee Sigwalt’s plan is to monitor all conversations — emails, phone calls, letters, or even conversations around the dinner table — of the Village President and the Trustees; or any of the Village staff for that matter? But, the idea is so preposterous that it shouldn’t be raised again.

Now, let’s start dealing with the real business of the Village!

Board meeting recap

Apologies to all for not getting this out sooner, but there was quite a bit to report on, and I also apologize for the length of this. I hope the amount of information provided makes it worth it.

Now, I’m a bit puzzled at why Trustees were so against going into Executive Session to obtain information from IRMA before making any final decisions on other business. From the look of his reaction, Attorney Rhodes was not pleased either, coming just short of shaking his head when the Trustees voted not to immediately move to Executive Session.

I’m sorry if this sounds like another slight against these trustees but they are just too damn willing to charge the hill without even determining if it is covered in land mines.

Anyway …

As was mentioned yesterday afternoon, Paul Lanspa addressed the Board about the water rate increase that the Board previously approved. You can read his own comments on the water rate increase thread, but basically said that he doesn’t mind paying the higher prices for his water and sewer, yet he thinks we should have notified the residents before putting the new rates on the October bill. He questioned the Board on the increase being retroactive. President Sarto suggested that they revisit this and try and do it in a more equitable way. He asked that Manager Anderson, Attorney Rhodes and Trustee Humpfer and Lisa Happ take another look at this to make it right.

A few folks were asked to sit down when they attempted to use public comments to attack a member of the Board or the audience.

Bob Sperlazzo was asked to sit down when he attempted to bring an email exchange between him and Sarto before the Board. He tried to get a member of the Board to appeal the ruling, but that went no where.

Gloria VanCleave was also directed to sit down after she began to attack resident, Paul Calusinski.

On actual matters of business being considered by the Village:

• the Board passed the amendment to the Vehicles and Traffic ordinance, adding a $250 administrative fee by what I thought was a 6-1 vote (Ben Lefebvre‘s report,mentioned 5-2, but it will be corrected. He stated that in addition to Trustee Ramirez-Sliwinski, Trustee Teeter also voted against it, but Teeter voted to approve it). It might have been a bit of a shock to some that Sarto voted for it. Sarto did clarify his position about unlicensed drivers, stating his support for an Illinois law presently under consideration in the General Assembly to provide driving certificate to illegal immigrants. (Folks can read previous statements from me on this issue here and here.)

• President Sarto also stated that he had a few more candidates to interview for consideration of appointment to the Carpentersville Improvement Committee (aka “code patrol”), so that item was basically passed by.

• Also, the Board discussed an overnight parking ban, voting 4-3 to direct Village staff to look into amending the current ban to bring back to the Board at a later date. It was suggested that only residents, with a valid Village vehicle sticker, be allowed to park on streets overnight. I’ll give my $0.02 on that next week, but will probably make it a “what’s your view” this weekend to see what you all think about it.

And, finally … again, I apologize for the length …

Trustee Sigwalt attempted to bring back the issue of changing the censure rules to cover emails, whether sent as a private citizen or as Village President. It basically went nowhere. She wanted the rules to apply whether sent from one’s personal computer to another individual or as Village President. Attorney Rhodes stated that such would be a First Amendment, Free Speech violation.

I’m going to hold off from reporting more on this because I would like to see if the Board will provide clarification of their positions on this issue before I post more.

Oh, and Sarto also read a proclamation of “Domestic Violence Awareness Month”.

Then … came Executive Session … which we are not privy to, of course.