You are currently browsing the tag archive for the ‘trustees’ tag.
News reports are that Trustee Linda Ramirez-Sliwinski was removed from the ballot in the upcoming April 7, 2009 election.
It is a shame to hear this news. But, I am glad to hear that Trustee Ramirez-Sliwinski is intending to supply affidavits from at least 6 who’s signatures were removed, certifying that they are, in fact, registered voters in Carpentersville. I actually hope she produces many more than the 6 she needs to reinstate her position on the ballot.
Considering the 40% Hispanic population in Carpentersville, it only seems logical that there would be at least one Hispanic member vying for a position on the Board.
Good luck, Linda!
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.
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.
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.
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.