This website is new and not connected to the previous blog or blog operator. Regardless, Dan Fields, a business owner, vendor and friend of the Mayor, and resident of Island Lake created a website making many accusations, among them, followers of "blogs" being a sour grape gang.
What is clear though is that the sourgrapes website is malicious, makes unfounded attacks, offers no place to reply, is careful not to name names but simply to point to obvious offenders. Former Trustees, begrudged sitting Trustees. No names, no foundation for accusations. That would make your site guilty of what you are accusing other "blogs" of except this blog does not do that. The readers who comment may make attacks, but unless you see Fred, Freddy or Blog Administrator authoring personal attacks and unfounded accusations, you sir, are the sour grape.
Mr. Fields, where have you been? If you have been paying attention for several years like most of the folks on this website you would know the answers to so many of your accusations are not true, or misrepresented in some way or that you simply do not know the truth. I admit I do not know everything either, but I have not put out any accusations without any documentation or facts. What comments are put out is not the same as what is posted here on this blog. If you will call my website or the former blogs nothing more than sour grapes, you must also call the Daily Herald that as well because there is a story posted, and then a bunch of comments with accusations, personal attacks etc... No different from my site or the former sites. Where is your sour grapes website about the Daily Herald or Northwest Herald, Chicago Tribune, NY Times for that matter.
I would challenge you Mr. Fields to view a few random board meeting videos that are still archived at www.cbgil.com. Those videos sir tell the whole truth because they are complete, unedited videos of how business is done in Island Lake. I would also encourage you to actually speak to the people you are so unfond of. Have you ever sat down and talked to any of the canidates or former or sitting Trustees who are not fond of the Mayor or her administrations actions? For example, no where in your website did you say "I spoke to former Trustee John Ponio and heard his side and looked at documentation and came to the conclusion that he is a whackadoo". Instead, you go get your hair cut by another who has one-sided information, feeding to all who will bear to listen (including me) and also goes on personal attacks in anonymous websites. So you came to that conclusion based on mistruths, rumors, one-sided stories. You certainly did not do your homework, did you? Maybe you are a little sour that maybe your work for the village may be in jeopardy if Mayor loses her position. Maybe Mr. Sharp will have competition in Island Lake vs the past where Mike's Towing has been rewarded with red tags until he gave up and left. There is only one operating bar in Island Lake. Ever wonder why? There used to be several until Mayor took office, no we are down to one choice. Wonder why? Friendly business environment? Yeah right.
To Dan Fields"
ReplyDeleteIn your now SUDDENLY unavailable website? You asks whether or not anyone sits down with the "other side", as it were?
What many of The Herd have probably NOT told you? Is that may of us over the years have been seated on the other side of a table with virtually each and every one of them. And on myriad issues over time.
And that's why we're all on the side of the table we're all on now.
It's seems to me that thus far, you've been the one to sit solely on once side of said tables.
For the most part? We've had more than 10 years experience now. You have what? 10 months' worth of experience in all these matters?
ReplyDeleteAnd further - if you're so certain and correct an' all?
Why is YOUR website now suddenly hidden? While we've all been out there AND in in your face all along? Right or wrong as we may be. For over 10 years now?
While you, Dan, have been all and entirely about 10 minutes now, yet YOU then decide to hide your opinions? AND only after you "blew" you baby policital "wad"?
Oh, puuulleezzeee!
Dan Fields -
ReplyDelete1) Grow up and get a clue.
2) Find more, greater and lucrative accounts other than Island Lake. Because if your creative digital talents are summed up in the Village of Island Lake Website, buddy? I can't imagine a more appalling and embarrassing example of corporate "expertise" due your corporate "reputation", dude!
It's so "sad" - it's laughable!
Here we go - LMFAO!
There's been a Draft Report of the Island Lake Budget vs Expenditures as of 12/31/12 for the 2012-2013 VOIL fiscal year floating around now, and from varied sources. Doesn't matter where it comes from, because either way, it's a public document, right?
ReplyDeleteAnd unless one has VERY intimate knowledge over the billing and budgetary processes, and whether or not that intimate knowledge provides the reviewer with certainty as regarding all kinds of one-time and seasonal expenses? You can't be certain of EVERYTHING - yet there are some things in the report that one CAN be certain of, nonetheless. At least when it comes to predictable and SIGNIFICANT budget expenses?
What we CAN be certain of? Revenues as predicted by budget are pretty much on-target. Yay!
When it comes to budgeted expenditures on the Public Works and Water Departments? Expenditures as predicted are pretty much on-target. Once again, Yay!
What are NOT on target, in terms of projected budgetary expenditures - and in a BIG way, are those for the Admin, PD and Rec budgets.
Budgeted Admin Salaries - "salaries" mind you, which are fairly predictable otherwise - are now spent out - as budgeted - at almost 90% so far. To complete the fiscal year, it would take almost $40k more to make good on pro-rated Admin salaries for the balance of the Village's fiscal year.
ReplyDeleteBudgeted Admin Legal? ALSO are now spent out - as budgeted - at almost 90% so far. To complete the fiscal year, it would ALSO take an additional or greater $40k more on pro-rated legal expenses to make good on promised Admin Legal for the balance of the Village's fiscal year.
Budgeted PD Overtime? ALSO are now spent out - as budgeted - at almost 96% so far. To complete the fiscal year, it would ALSO take an additional or greater $30k more on pro-rated overtime expenses to make good on promised PD Overtime for the balance of the Village's fiscal year.
Budgeted Rec Salaries? ALSO are now spent out - as budgeted - at almost 82% so far. To complete the fiscal year, it would ALSO take an additional or greater $6k more on pro-rated expenses to make good on promised Rec salaries for the balance of the Village's fiscal year.
UN-Budgeted Petition objection expenses? For the two official Hearings on Field's finally
withdrawn (by him) Objections against Mark's Petitions for Referendum against the proposed new Village Hall? $5k.
UN-Budgeted Petition objection expenses? For the two promised official Hearings thus far on Field's Objections against Candidate Petitions? At LEAST another $5k.
ReplyDeleteTotal all THAT up? Why, it happens to be an un-Budgeted and unfortunate $136k projected deficit or so. And while the proposed savings of getting rid of the PD Dispatch is about $150K? Coincidence? Really?! I think not! It would appear that Herrmann is willing to destroy Dispatch in order to paper-over her's and McCorkle's totally unrealistic Budgetary assumptions in the first place, whether it be Admin Salaries, PD Overtime, or the continuing and excessive Ancel Glink legal billings that benefit not only them both, but The Herd's faulty judgement over all.
And under further questioning by Trustee Rabattini in the last Meeting? There is NO offsetting "official" figure on that projected deficit or offsetting "savings" figure to be had. And that even Herrmann's own Legal counsel in this matter - Attorney Anderson - admitted that his OWN counsel in regard to additional allowances for unemployment and litigation expenses as regards cashiering Dispatch? That he would advise allowing an additional $50k in expenses! So now we have a projected deficit of at least $50k, even after getting rid of Dispatch anyway!!!!
Gee - what does it all really mean, you might ask? All of the above-noted big-ticket and easily-budgeted overages that were obviously NOT adequately Budgeted for? Herrmann & The Herd are obviously hoping to "paper-over" all them "whoopsies" with false savings - and all on the altar of the PD Dispatch Center. And we're STILL likely to be left with a $35k+ deficit in the end! But as they say? "But wait! There's more!"
ReplyDeleteAnd who, primarily; are to blame for those original, falsely-budgeted and organical budgetary "pipe-dreams" - why it's Herrmann and McCorkle! And The Herd idiots who endorsed and VOTED for that Budget.. WOW - I find it to be so "shocking" an' all! LOL!
But consider further - on top of all this busy-work. Even getting rid of PD Dispatch? The Herd can't even paper-over the current structural deficit to begin with!
But further? The Herrmann & Herd-promoted- and proposed new village hall would have cost us all anywhere from $20k - $25k per month, And in the Public Meetings, promised to find those savings, yet never were able to provide those figures.
Apparently, they can't even find enough potential savings to even balance our current Budget, much less find an even still additional $20k - $25k per month for that new village hall either! LOL!
ReplyDeleteWhat frauds! What dunces! While The Herd may not care that they're well-used pawns, dunces, and frauds? Don't you - the village residents and voters; assume the same for yourselves! Just break out your calculators! The math (and Truth) is out there!
The United for Progress party slate - The Herrmann Slate - is willing to bet you can't figure it all out for yourself. In getting rid of the VOIL PD Dispatch they only BARELY are able to paper-over their Budgetary Deficits. Much less identify an additional $20k -$25k per month that could pay for a new and proposed village hall.
The For The People party slate? They're betting you CAN figure it all out for yourself!
Seems to me if we had a reasonably priced law firm we wouldn't NEED TO CUT EMERGENCY SERVICES TO THE RESIDENTS!
ReplyDeleteI predict this defiant act of FISCAL IRRESPONSIBILITY will be Herrmann, Corkey and Little's coup de grace.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteGee, Laker - no commentary on our current fiscal year budgetary failures as authored by The Herd? No comments on factual data?
ReplyDeleteYou know what, Laker? I proudly prefer the term "Horde" as well!
At the very least? A "horde" is a large group of people that act primarily in securing their own future, their own rights - at least as due their own, their family's and loved-one's needs. It's mostly democratic, ad-hoc and reality-based. And all in response to REAL human needs that are NOT being met. All in response to actual REALITY.
When you're a member of a "herd"? You ignore your own and your loved-ones' and community's needs all in favor and support of a singular Herd Leader. Herrmann. Whose own needs and priorities are neither your own or that of your community's. A Herd is NOT democratic. A Herd IS a cult.
Be a cult member, Laker.
I'd rather be a COMMUNITY member.
A cautionary tale to all residents in Island Lake:
ReplyDeleteIF - as Mr. Sharp states, whatever it is he believes he "has" on Charlie? And if indeed, as he says; is all affirmed by Public Documents? By, um...FACTS? Then where are they? Why not post here publicly? After all, aren't they all Publicly-available Documents as he states? Why no sunshine, fresh air and oxygen, nor light of day? Why not at least point us in the right direction for independent research? Because that's NOT what they're actually offering. Because if they were, we'd have them by now - we'd HAVE it all, now wouldn't we? They only want to offer you all private OPINION, rather than public FACT.
Oh - that's right! LOL! Dan Field also thought he was in possession of "facts", and he publicly and prominently posted them. Yet suddenly withdrew the site/made it only available to a select few, if at all? And why do that if it were all, indeed, "fact" - or Publicly-available Documents? Hmmmmm?
There's a reason for Sharp's being desirous of a PRIVATE discussion with Jenkins - or Sharp's and Field's preferring PRIVATE discussions - or various Herd members preferring PRIVATE discussions - rather than any sort of PUBLIC discussion at all. You know - the kind of public discussion that has always been available here on the Blog.
Quite simply? If you cannot conduct your business in public, it's not worthy of being public business at all.
What's this? Louie offered to have a "meeting" with Mr. Jenkins? Really? But why? Jenkins made his statements in public. Why doesn't Sharp do the same? Something to hide?
DeleteLike so many dozens of past Officials in Island Lake that have broken from The Herd over the last 10 years in this town, I too; once learned a hard lesson on this type of "whispering campaign" many years ago. Like many of those who've jumped ship over the years in this town, I too; was once deeply involved in a certain local governmental unit. I was a "true believer" as it were. And for those in Office at that time, as well as their many powerful and influential supporters? They were all once my FRIENDS. And MANY of longstanding and DEEP trust, both personal and familial as well. DECADES of trust.
ReplyDeleteHowever, the "castle" was under siege, and I was expected to have been a loyal soldier in the fight. But all the while? And even being an "insider"? It was all about "whispered" "charges" against the challengers, or else just a lot of "trust me on this".
In the end, I was young and idealistic, yet I realized that if all those whispered "facts" about the challengers were indeed true and correct? CERTAINLY, why wouldn't the incumbents PUBLICLY expose those challengers for what they were if it were all true in the first place? Had any or all of those charges against the challengers been true (they weren't - gee, what a surprise!) AND PUBLICLY disclosed, why gee; those challengers would have never stood a chance in the first place! That was my very first clue. My second "clue" as it were? The challengers won (with my support), and the real truth finally came out as regards those I considered once-trusted friends and acquaintances.
Nothing rational, nothing TRUE; comes from PRIVATE campaigns or attempts of persuasion.
Only those things that can come to the light of day, that can be argued publicly; can ever be in service of The People. Or The Truth. Anything else can only serve PRIVATE interests and grudges. Think about it.
Please, everyone, DO call Louie Sharp at 847-875-6941.
ReplyDeleteJust be sure to ask him why it is he'd rather talk to you PRIVATELY, rather that PUBLICLY discuss and expose his supposedly righteous position.
If what he has is so accurate and so explosive an' all; why is he hiding his light under a bushel? Why not call the Daily Herald, for that matter, if it's all so true? Surely it must all be fit to print, being factual AND supported by Public Documents as he states? Surely, it could end this campaign and election right here and right now?
Hmmmmm......?!
And don't forget, whether it was Fields alone in the past, or Fields and Sharp now?
ReplyDeleteThey don't show up much in public - at the very costly public meetings their whining calls for - whereas the For The People slate and their supporters always do.
How can you be righteous when you can't or won't even show up PUBLICLY in support of what you believe to be vital and in support of The Truth?
Wow -
ReplyDeleteSounds like a whole bunch of logic, truth and FACT to me!
LOL!
But in the end?
ReplyDeleteYes, let's all just whisper naughty nothings to each other privately over the phone lines.
Herrmann? It's a losing strategy if the residents of this town actually start thinking for themselves.
If they figure out that a PUBLIC discussion of issues is far more worthy their interests rather than a private whispering campaign? You're done.
If they decide that PRIVATE discussion of issues is far more worthy their interests rather than a PUBLIC campaign? The whole town is done.
But hey - call Louie y'all. Let him explain why he and Dan aren't able to argue PUBLICLY about PUBLIC business.