This website is dedicated to providing accurate, up to date news on current events and issues pertaining to government, social events, news and information pertaining to residents living in and around Island Lake Illinois. This website is not affiliated nor is it supported, sponsored by the municipal village of Island Lake.
If you can't, or are unwilling; to identify "ZRFA"? Then why shoud we care - other than that someone decided they need support a winning slate and argument?
No - I don't know who you mean - and our readers and Citizens don't know whom you mean, either. And the fact that you refuse to speak plainly? Further makes you look like an *sshole in their eyes. It doesn't matter what *I* think, "Berry". It matters what THEY think. And what it is that "THEY" think? As of late? "They" are VIRULENTLY against you and Herrmie by a 75% to 80% margin.
Why not hit "the right keys" and just "say it", our "berry"-newest Herrmaphrodite anon? Theoretically, you're just ONE keyboard "click" away from the reality and accuracy that you claim. That you can't even devote a mere 10 seconds via mouse and keyboard in support of your claim? Or to correct yourself? Or a posting of a simple and verifiable link? Yeah, right! LOL!
You've yet to actually "say it". Because you can't. You won't. You don't.
Why not include a web link to your stated "reality", "Berry"? If it were "there" in the first place? I and others consistently include verifiable weblinks - yet you provide nothing.
Myself and others have ALWAYS included a web-link. Why don't you do so as well? Probably because you cannot also include ANY web links of ANY KIND in support of the Herrmaphrodites. The "United for Progress for Herrmann" slate. If it be so? Just say it - just post it - rather than self-apologize for the fact you can't adequately negotiate a keyboard and mouse. But at the same time? Provided I and other voters would allow you some sort of handicap?
Have you any relevant links in opposition to the ftpil.com slate, as opposed to non-quotable non-cited and NON-EXISTANT weblinks to the Herrmie and the Hermaphrodites slate's site? NOPE - because they have yet NO site, NO outreach to the voters of Island Lake. NO facts they'd wish to officially state.
No? Gosh - when "transparency" is a relevant and telling issue in this upcoming election? That you and Herrmie have nothing to run on.?
"Berry" - provide the weblink as informs you as regards The For The People Slate. But until you can provide the equal weblink for the "United for Progress for Herrmann" slate "report"? Don't bother otherwise. We have a slate that is all about "transparency", vs you and the Hermaphrodites that continue to post NOTHING in ANY regard.
All that "We, The People" know of; AND at this late date? At the time of an incredibly cryptic and idiotic posting by yourself?
That the "United for Progress for Herrmann" slate, as of this late date, has NOT as of yet - made even ONE filing with the State Board of Election that you'd wish to cite yourself, or remark upon? Or gosh! Might there have been a filing already that might implicate either Field (Kodiak) or Sharp? DO TELL. Or else? DO NOT tell at all! LOL!
That the "United for Progress for Herrmann" slate, as of this late date, has NOT; as of yet - even made available a website by which participation and enthusiasm opon your part - for Herrmie & The Herd - can even be rallied? Oh - that's right - you guys USED to have a website until Herrmann spilled the beans, and then Dan Field RETRACTED it! LOL!
That the "United for Progress for Herrmann" slate, as of this late date; has NOT as of yet -even hosted one "Meet 'n Greet" for "candidates"? When in fact, the FOR THE PEOPLE slate is already campaigning, already hosting events, while the Herrminna of Herrmannistan Party has not?
Sounds to me that the Herrmina of Herrmanistan campaign is so far being advanced as a funereal "wake" for the Village and Herrmina herself.
Whereas the campaign being advanced by the "For The People" slate is not a "wake" of Island Lake - but more, a celebration of the life of Island Lake and what it COULD be.
The "For the People" slate has an identified campaign manager, has an actual and active website, has held actual meet 'n greets, has actually reported the existence of a campaign, at least as "Berry" reports.
Yet Herrmina of Herrmanistan? "Nothing to report".
ANY Signs of Life in terms of Herrmina of Herrmannistan?
Nope!
Thanks so much Berry - in pointing out whom it is that's "phoning it in", and whom it is that is actually campaining, actually running.
I guess it can be described by two pairs of words DBTR. Active - Nonactive / Proactive - Reactive It appears that For the People is Active and Proactive. Whereas Herrmann's slate can only claim one word - Nonactive. Quite an observation Mr River.
"berry" swears to herself/himself that there IS an active campaign against Herrmann and her toadies as regards the "For The People" slate. Yet he/she cannot point to any signs of life in terms of any campaign being waged by Herrmann & Her Herd - The United for Progress for Herrmann Party Slate. I guess all they're banking on is their current Objection Campaign via Field and Sharp against having ANY opposing Mayoral candidate at all - rather than having to argue for the very sorry record of "Mayor" Herrmann in the first place.
"berry" blathers on about a purported "donation" to the "For The People" campaign, but can't even be bothered to accurately identify the alleged donor, nor is willing to provide the web link to his/her "discovery". Yet, has ALSO denied you, our readers, in providing you all any equally relevant web links to those donors as may or may not, have donated to the United for Progress for Herrmann Party Slate either.
What - the United for Progress for Herrmann Party Slate has yet to make an official report? Is that because no one, as of yet, actually supports the Herrmie Party? Or is it that they're NOT being TRANSPARENT, as usual?
One can only surmise that to the extent that there are indeed, two active campaigns for the hearts and minds of VOIL voters? The "For The People" campaign is apparently ACTIVE, and is actively and responsibly REPORTING its activities according to "berry". Whereas and apparently, there is no TRANSPARENT and active reporting, if there is ANY reporting to be had at all; on donations to the United for Progress for Herrmann Party Slate? Unless "berry has info on that as well? And if not one, why not the other?
"berry" claims there is reported evidence on campaign contributions as far as the "For The People" slate is concerned. Sounds transparent an' all to me. And if so? Where is that web link? And if same exists, where is the web link on contributions to Herrmie? And if indeed there is some support there, where is THAT report? "berry"? Helloooo?
The "For The People" slate is actively campaigning - and has made their candidates available for many, many hours beyond those scheduled at official and public "Meet 'n Greets". The Herrmie campaign so far? No meets. No greets. No campaign. No nothing. (cue the crickets)
The "For The People" slate is actively campaigning - and has made available their campaign website: ftpil.com. Yet where is the Herrmie campaign website? Herrmie, in a direct quote to the Daily Herald, made known HER campaign website's name: sourgrapesgang.com. Not only is she "Ms Sour Grapes"? Her website ceased to exist just hours after making its address public. And STILL ceases to exist to this very day! Herrmie campaign website? (again, cue the crickets)
Sourgrapesgang! "sourgrapes" indeed. LOL! How apropos Herrmie! LOL! And how apropos United for Progress for Herrmann - that it both perfectly names it's candidates' raison d'être - but that it's currently unavailable as well! What poetry! What Reality! "I'm not here, I'm NOT available - and FU for asking anyway"! LOL!
Herrmie and the United for Progress for Herrmann slate offers you all nothing. Nothing other than "sourgrapes": - and even then, are no longer even willing to offer you THAT.
The "For The People" slate? It offers you EVERYTHING.
Even "berry" agrees!
Thanks, "berry" for putting it out there for us, for describing for most, our obvious choice this spring!
Too bad there wasn't a site to view what the other legal fees are at this time. Sharp and Field are obviously supporting Herrmann's "nonactive" campaign by their objections, which if proven will effectively remove ANY opponent to Mayor Herrmann. So one might perceive their payments to legal rep could be a back door campaign contribution. Hmmmmm. And what of the biased AG attorney who was being paid to sit as "advisor" on the electoral board and is being paid by village funds? Many may see this as another indirect campaign contribution to Herrmann's nonactive campaign? Hmmmmm. Sorry for thinking out loud here. And what of the fruitful contracts that Sharp (and now McDonald) and Field tend to lose? Hmmmmm. And the hundreds of thousands of dollars that the sitting village attorney firm tend to lose? Hmmmmm. Things that make you go Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm.
Check the records Sharp shows towing police cars and not charging the Village and that is on record in the Daily Herald. Now is that not paying for the 120 plus tow calls he gets from the Village.
Hello – Greg Jenkins here… I want to chime in to communicate some additional facts regarding the legal fees incurred by our village under the leadership of Mrs. Hermann and the administration. While the figure of 500k is being discussed, I would like to clarify some important facts and let the public formulate their opinion: First of all, getting information from the village is like a fishing expedition requiring you to access multiple avenues to acquire the data. Unfortunately the current administration puts less than a full effort in having the information available like all other communities. The reason for this is up to the reader to interpret but one could surmise they have something to hide. You should ask yourself and our elected officials to explain why they do not easily disclose the information for the public. Here we go…. The village codes or charts legal bills into 4 funds, generally called a chart of accounts. I pulled the figures (500k) from the villages own an estimate for fiscal year 2011/2012 and subsequent analysis pertains to this fiscal year. I have the revenue/expense summary estimates that list the following figures for each fund below: • General Fund #11402 (estimate) $385,000.00 • Police Protection Fund #55402 (estimate) $120,000.00 • Water Works Fund # 80402 (estimate) $2,000.00 • Police Pension Fund #75402 (estimate) $18,000.00 The total dollar amount our elected and appointed officials estimated legal expenditures for this fiscal year was $525,000.00 Here is where it gets dicey…. I pulled another report printed on 8-27-12 called the budget vs. expense that lists the actual expenditure for legal and all other chart of accounts. This report actually lists (in August after the close of the fiscal year) expenditures for legal: • General Fund #11402 (expenditure) $281,592.41 • Police Protection Fund #55402 (estimate) $122,740.83 • Water Works Fund # 80402 (estimate) $3,364.04 • Police Pension Fund #75402 (estimate) $0.00 The total amount our elected and appointed officials spent on legal (according to this report) was $407,697.25 I have yet more reports called the audited financials for fiscal year 2011/2012 that lists all the same chart of accounts detailing the “audited” or final legal expenses for this year as follows: • General Fund #11402 (expenditure) $239,234.00 • Police Protection Fund #55402 (estimate) $115,388.00 • Water Works Fund # 80402 (estimate) $3,364.04 • Police Pension Fund #75402 (estimate) $0.00 The total amount our elected and appointed officials spent on legal fees $357,986.04 So… to summarize the numbers above in approximate terms: $525k was estimated, 407k was listed as expenditure then they closed the books with an even lower number $357k. Come on people, this is absurd. Take any number you want and apply them to our village to come up with your own idea as to what our current administration is doing with our tax dollars. It begs to question how they could list expenditures at $407k then close the books at $357k. One could do this by representing multiple scenarios for the numbers which I will explain: you could put some of the expenses on to the next fiscal year which is done all the time in municipal finances, you could push expenses to other chart of account and represent them as say…. Consulting or administrative fees… or you could actually negotiate a lower fee with the firm. I do not have the answer but will continue to dive into our finances until the truth can be told… To close – I do not believe the current administration is being completely honest with this or other concerns going on in the community and they need to be held accountable to the people. This is our town Mrs. Hermann, not your personal one. Step down and stop wasting our tax dollars. Greg Jenkins 312-217-5862
Why quibble over any amount between 350 and 400K in LEGAL expense? Makes you wonder why a municipality would need to spend that KIND of MONEY to justify itself. Who runs Island Lake, Ancel Glink or the Village Board? When Mayor Amrich was Village President the annual billings for attorney fees was under 50K. Allowing for changes in the economy, that's still one helluva BIG difference between the Hyde/Herrmann administrations and Amrich's. The question is not so much the amount, but WHY?
Sam, yes the mayor does not vote to pay bills but she does create a large portion of the bills without board approval, and the board has no choice but to pay them.
Ultimately the mayor is responsible for the out of control legal fees but the blame should be on Fox and Morris. The mechanism or ordinances to control the mayors open checkbook to the attorney were put in place prior to the last election. Fox and Morris upon taking their seats as trustees decided to side with the mayor and not the residents. Put the blame where it belongs, Fox and Morris have enabled the mayor to continue with the reckless spending.
>>>> "Sharp and Field are obviously supporting Herrmann's "nonactive" campaign by their objections, which if proven will effectively remove ANY opponent to Mayor Herrmann.
Thanks for that thought, Machu -
That Herrmann is currently in command of a "nonactive campaign". That is, her "campaign" thus far solely consists of campaigning AGAINST those who challenge her, and in leveraging those who aren't even running for office in the first place, yet are poised to lose their lucrative influence after the election.
Rather than on running in SUPPORT of her and her fellow-slate-mates' supposedly superior records and ideas? Her campaign rationale, is in essence, running against those opposed to her own sorry record, in order that she might yet win.
Apparently, Herrmann perceives far more valuable fodder in her challengers' foibles, rather than in her own ACHIVEMENTS, which are basically nil.
Effectively, Herrmann's only current campaign thus far, is to rely NOT on her running ON her own "successes" - which in reality are only stupendous blunders and failures on her part - but to run (she hopes) unapposed upon mere hearsay Objections to get rid of any other candidates that she's so "unfairly" forced to run against.
Effectively, thus far she's willing to run NOT on her record - she's only willing to run ON the perceived errors of her challengers, rather than have to run against her ACTUAL personal failings and errors.
For once, and only this one time? It's desperately NOT about her.
>>>> "Mr. Jenkins, I appreciate your efforts, I am in agreement that this is a large amount of money. It needs to be reviewed. However, I think we should look at what this number actually represents. The Mayor has not notably voted to pay bills since 2011.
First off, Samantha - unless the Mayor is needed to break a tie vote or insufficient vote on bills, her lack of voting in having to pay the bills is an entirely moot point. As long as she has a majority, she neither need vote, nor vote at all. Her general lack of having to vote on these matters DOES NOT absolve her from responsibility for those votes of Her Herd. But as you stated, "not notably" - which in reality means that occasionally - she HAS had to vote to pay all those legal bills from time to time And she has.
Second? Yes, I am in agreement with you in that it is a "large amount of money" and "needs to be reviewed".
The problem is, Herrmann's and The Herd's arguments, in justifying/offsetting the legal billings have lately been:
1) A fair amount of those legal billings have theoretically been dedicated to development expenses, and that those bills are eventually offset by impact fees paid by the developers in the end. Huh! Well gee, Samantha, when was the last time, especially in the last 4 years; have we seen any recent, new and ACTUAL development in this town? For the most part now, the bulk of development legal expenditure is entirely devoted to the Village having to recognize there is no longer any recovery available, and is simply devoted to legally stating we're now all on the hook for these expenses, which we once believed we were owed, but now simply owe ourselves.
2) Prosecutorial expenses in both Lake & McHenry Counties. Again - fair enough. Yet what is the ticket income from the PD, which offsets this legal expense? We just don't know any longer. There used to a legitimate Committee process in this town, but no longer. Trustee Rabattini used to make a solid and valid point in Board Meetings to remove approval of "Committee Reports" from the Agendas when in fact, no Committee Reports were actually being submitted for approval in the first place. And that included Reports from the PD - whether as NOT reported by the PD Committee (inappropriately, and perhaps illegally; "chaired" by Herrmann), or NOT verbally from Chief McCorkle either? "Any comment or report, Mr. McCorkle?" "None."
Back in the day, Samantha, we use to have a report on ticket and PD revenue. We have not, any longer.
Point being? We no longer have publicly Reported income offsetting these meager legal expense dodges.
The reality remaining?
The vast majority of legal expense is currently devoted to whether or not anyone is allowed to take a sh*t on public property, much less that any one of our current "leaders" or employees are confident enough to even utter one syllable without any legal guidance any longer. How Sad!
Ms. Krafthefer provides an absolutely and incontrovertible truth - just as Charles Barkley once said, "I am not your child's role model"? Ms. Krafthefer reminds we readers, "“However, I do not represent any individual taxpayers in Wheatland Township (Village of Island Lake),” she said. “I represent the township (Village leaders) and the interests of the township (Village leaders), not individual taxpayers.” (Island Lake Villagers and Taxpayers)
Only and until Grafton Township no longer provided to be the splashy NW Suburban laughingstock and cautionary tale before Island Lake took up that dubious mantle this year?
Or until this tagged new article regarding Wheatland Township provided a welcome distraction from ugly reality in both Grafton and Island Lake?
There remain, amongst these 3 related stories, 3 "coincidences":
1) The representation of all 3 parties by Ancel Glink and Attorney Krafthefer.
2) 3 unwanted, unnecessary and unaffordable "new village halls".
3) Unwanted, unnecessary and unaffordable legal bills from Ancel Glink due all 3 parties.
Legally, Krafthefer is correct - she and her firm legally, and contractually, owe absolute fealty to the Village, as may be governed by the majority of the Board, and primarily as well, to the Mayor - as goes day by day contact and operational authority.
But regardless of day-by-day LEGAL niceties? How about MORAL certainties?
Charlie Amrich, back in the day, used to allow the then-attorney of record of the Village, to not "polish his knob" as it were (or is it Herrmann's "knub"), but to act in the best interests of ALL Village residents and taxpayers.
Debbie Herrmann, in THIS day. in this REALITY, has decided to utilize Ancel Glink, the current attorney of record of the Village, to primarily act in favor of HER interests and NOT the Village's.
While Herrmann is fully within her LEGAL RIGHT to do so? Particularly as Herrmann successfully continues to cultivate a rubber-stamp Herd, and that we, the residents and taxpayers in this town, are LEGALLY required therefore, to take it up our collective *sses?
Charlie was all about ensuring that the Attorney of Record of the Village of Island Lake put the RESIDENT'S concerns first. That was what HE once elected to do. That the attorney of record for the Village first represented THE PEOPLE, before any of his own parochial concerns.
Current "political" operatives might dismissively term such a notion "quaint".
I recall such a notion as being "honest".
How sad that actual honesty is being discounted currently.
Frankly? It's all at the option of the current Mayor, people.
Herrmann has opted to protect herself instead of the residents and taxpayers.
In the past, Amrich opted to protect THE PEOPLE, rather than himself. And will do so once again, if given even half a chance.
The only problem? The only campaign Herrmann has going right now is to protect herself, and the legal billings primarily designed to, um.., er... PROTECT HERSELF.
Meanwhile, the challenger, Charlie Amrich, and by past experience, is willing to utilize legal billings to PROTECT THE VILLAGE.
Is it any wonder that again, there are 3 vested interests against his inevitable Mayoralty?
1) Dan Field - lucrative and unproductive contract with the Village currently.
2) Louie Sharp - lucrative and unproductive "understanding" with the Village currently/
3) Ancel Glink - WAY lucrative and unproductive contract with the Village currently.
Hey Berry -
ReplyDeleteWho is "ZRFA"?
If you can't, or are unwilling; to identify "ZRFA"? Then why shoud we care - other than that someone decided they need support a winning slate and argument?
No - I don't know who you mean - and our readers and Citizens don't know whom you mean, either. And the fact that you refuse to speak plainly? Further makes you look like an *sshole in their eyes. It doesn't matter what *I* think, "Berry". It matters what THEY think. And what it is that "THEY" think? As of late? "They" are VIRULENTLY against you and Herrmie by a 75% to 80% margin.
ReplyDeleteWhy not hit "the right keys" and just "say it", our "berry"-newest Herrmaphrodite anon? Theoretically, you're just ONE keyboard "click" away from the reality and accuracy that you claim. That you can't even devote a mere 10 seconds via mouse and keyboard in support of your claim? Or to correct yourself? Or a posting of a simple and verifiable link? Yeah, right! LOL!
You've yet to actually "say it". Because you can't. You won't. You don't.
ReplyDeleteWhy not include a web link to your stated "reality", "Berry"? If it were "there" in the first place? I and others consistently include verifiable weblinks - yet you provide nothing.
Myself and others have ALWAYS included a web-link. Why don't you do so as well? Probably because you cannot also include ANY web links of ANY KIND in support of the Herrmaphrodites. The "United for Progress for Herrmann" slate. If it be so? Just say it - just post it - rather than self-apologize for the fact you can't adequately negotiate a keyboard and mouse. But at the same time? Provided I and other voters would allow you some sort of handicap?
Have you any relevant links in opposition to the ftpil.com slate, as opposed to non-quotable non-cited and NON-EXISTANT weblinks to the Herrmie and the Hermaphrodites slate's site? NOPE - because they have yet NO site, NO outreach to the voters of Island Lake. NO facts they'd wish to officially state.
No? Gosh - when "transparency" is a relevant and telling issue in this upcoming election? That you and Herrmie have nothing to run on.?
"Berry" - provide the weblink as informs you as regards The For The People Slate. But until you can provide the equal weblink for the "United for Progress for Herrmann" slate "report"? Don't bother otherwise. We have a slate that is all about "transparency", vs you and the Hermaphrodites that continue to post NOTHING in ANY regard.
ReplyDeleteHey "Berry"?
All that "We, The People" know of; AND at this late date? At the time of an incredibly cryptic and idiotic posting by yourself?
That the "United for Progress for Herrmann" slate, as of this late date, has NOT as of yet - made even ONE filing with the State Board of Election that you'd wish to cite yourself, or remark upon? Or gosh! Might there have been a filing already that might implicate either Field (Kodiak) or Sharp? DO TELL. Or else? DO NOT tell at all! LOL!
That the "United for Progress for Herrmann" slate, as of this late date, has NOT; as of yet - even made available a website by which participation and enthusiasm opon your part - for Herrmie & The Herd - can even be rallied? Oh - that's right - you guys USED to have a website until Herrmann spilled the beans, and then Dan Field RETRACTED it! LOL!
That the "United for Progress for Herrmann" slate, as of this late date; has NOT as of yet -even hosted one "Meet 'n Greet" for "candidates"? When in fact, the FOR THE PEOPLE slate is already campaigning, already hosting events, while the Herrminna of Herrmannistan Party has not?
Sounds to me that the Herrmina of Herrmanistan campaign is so far being advanced as a funereal "wake" for the Village and Herrmina herself.
ReplyDeleteWhereas the campaign being advanced by the "For The People" slate is not a "wake" of Island Lake - but more, a celebration of the life of Island Lake and what it COULD be.
The "For the People" slate has an identified campaign manager, has an actual and active website, has held actual meet 'n greets, has actually reported the existence of a campaign, at least as "Berry" reports.
Yet Herrmina of Herrmanistan? "Nothing to report".
ANY Signs of Life in terms of Herrmina of Herrmannistan?
Nope!
Thanks so much Berry - in pointing out whom it is that's "phoning it in", and whom it is that is actually campaining, actually running.
I guess it can be described by two pairs of words DBTR.
ReplyDeleteActive - Nonactive / Proactive - Reactive
It appears that For the People is Active and Proactive.
Whereas Herrmann's slate can only claim one word - Nonactive.
Quite an observation Mr River.
"berry" swears to herself/himself that there IS an active campaign against Herrmann and her toadies as regards the "For The People" slate. Yet he/she cannot point to any signs of life in terms of any campaign being waged by Herrmann & Her Herd - The United for Progress for Herrmann Party Slate. I guess all they're banking on is their current Objection Campaign via Field and Sharp against having ANY opposing Mayoral candidate at all - rather than having to argue for the very sorry record of "Mayor" Herrmann in the first place.
ReplyDelete"berry" blathers on about a purported "donation" to the "For The People" campaign, but can't even be bothered to accurately identify the alleged donor, nor is willing to provide the web link to his/her "discovery". Yet, has ALSO denied you, our readers, in providing you all any equally relevant web links to those donors as may or may not, have donated to the United for Progress for Herrmann Party Slate either.
What - the United for Progress for Herrmann Party Slate has yet to make an official report? Is that because no one, as of yet, actually supports the Herrmie Party? Or is it that they're NOT being TRANSPARENT, as usual?
One can only surmise that to the extent that there are indeed, two active campaigns for the hearts and minds of VOIL voters? The "For The People" campaign is apparently ACTIVE, and is actively and responsibly REPORTING its activities according to "berry". Whereas and apparently, there is no TRANSPARENT and active reporting, if there is ANY reporting to be had at all; on donations to the United for Progress for Herrmann Party Slate? Unless "berry has info on that as well? And if not one, why not the other?
ReplyDelete"berry" claims there is reported evidence on campaign contributions as far as the "For The People" slate is concerned. Sounds transparent an' all to me. And if so? Where is that web link? And if same exists, where is the web link on contributions to Herrmie? And if indeed there is some support there, where is THAT report? "berry"? Helloooo?
The "For The People" slate is actively campaigning - and has made their candidates available for many, many hours beyond those scheduled at official and public "Meet 'n Greets". The Herrmie campaign so far? No meets. No greets. No campaign. No nothing. (cue the crickets)
ReplyDeleteThe "For The People" slate is actively campaigning - and has made available their campaign website: ftpil.com. Yet where is the Herrmie campaign website? Herrmie, in a direct quote to the Daily Herald, made known HER campaign website's name: sourgrapesgang.com. Not only is she "Ms Sour Grapes"? Her website ceased to exist just hours after making its address public. And STILL ceases to exist to this very day! Herrmie campaign website? (again, cue the crickets)
Sourgrapesgang! "sourgrapes" indeed. LOL! How apropos Herrmie! LOL! And how apropos United for Progress for Herrmann - that it both perfectly names it's candidates' raison d'être - but that it's currently unavailable as well! What poetry! What Reality! "I'm not here, I'm NOT available - and FU for asking anyway"! LOL!
Herrmie and the United for Progress for Herrmann slate offers you all nothing. Nothing other than "sourgrapes": - and even then, are no longer even willing to offer you THAT.
ReplyDeleteThe "For The People" slate? It offers you EVERYTHING.
Even "berry" agrees!
Thanks, "berry" for putting it out there for us, for describing for most, our obvious choice this spring!
Too bad there wasn't a site to view what the other legal fees are at this time. Sharp and Field are obviously supporting Herrmann's "nonactive" campaign by their objections, which if proven will effectively remove ANY opponent to Mayor Herrmann.
ReplyDeleteSo one might perceive their payments to legal rep could be a back door campaign contribution. Hmmmmm.
And what of the biased AG attorney who was being paid to sit as "advisor" on the electoral board and is being paid by village funds?
Many may see this as another indirect campaign contribution to Herrmann's nonactive campaign? Hmmmmm.
Sorry for thinking out loud here.
And what of the fruitful contracts that Sharp (and now McDonald) and Field tend to lose? Hmmmmm.
And the hundreds of thousands of dollars that the sitting village attorney firm tend to lose? Hmmmmm.
Things that make you go Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm.
Check the records Sharp shows towing police cars and not charging the Village and that is on record in the Daily Herald. Now is that not paying for the 120 plus tow calls he gets from the Village.
DeleteIsn't it comical now that the Herald requires you to use a real name to post, all these Herminites crawl over here to spew their garbage?
ReplyDeleteI do not see too many people posting over there in defense of Hermy and her traitors.
You are so right satat
ReplyDeleteYou go Debra Where the hell is Pepsi plus when we are having this much fun
DeleteHello – Greg Jenkins here… I want to chime in to communicate some additional facts regarding the legal fees incurred by our village under the leadership of Mrs. Hermann and the administration. While the figure of 500k is being discussed, I would like to clarify some important facts and let the public formulate their opinion:
ReplyDeleteFirst of all, getting information from the village is like a fishing expedition requiring you to access multiple avenues to acquire the data. Unfortunately the current administration puts less than a full effort in having the information available like all other communities. The reason for this is up to the reader to interpret but one could surmise they have something to hide. You should ask yourself and our elected officials to explain why they do not easily disclose the information for the public.
Here we go…. The village codes or charts legal bills into 4 funds, generally called a chart of accounts. I pulled the figures (500k) from the villages own an estimate for fiscal year 2011/2012 and subsequent analysis pertains to this fiscal year. I have the revenue/expense summary estimates that list the following figures for each fund below:
• General Fund #11402 (estimate) $385,000.00
• Police Protection Fund #55402 (estimate) $120,000.00
• Water Works Fund # 80402 (estimate) $2,000.00
• Police Pension Fund #75402 (estimate) $18,000.00
The total dollar amount our elected and appointed officials estimated legal expenditures for this fiscal year was $525,000.00
Here is where it gets dicey….
I pulled another report printed on 8-27-12 called the budget vs. expense that lists the actual expenditure for legal and all other chart of accounts. This report actually lists (in August after the close of the fiscal year) expenditures for legal:
• General Fund #11402 (expenditure) $281,592.41
• Police Protection Fund #55402 (estimate) $122,740.83
• Water Works Fund # 80402 (estimate) $3,364.04
• Police Pension Fund #75402 (estimate) $0.00
The total amount our elected and appointed officials spent on legal (according to this report) was $407,697.25
I have yet more reports called the audited financials for fiscal year 2011/2012 that lists all the same chart of accounts detailing the “audited” or final legal expenses for this year as follows:
• General Fund #11402 (expenditure) $239,234.00
• Police Protection Fund #55402 (estimate) $115,388.00
• Water Works Fund # 80402 (estimate) $3,364.04
• Police Pension Fund #75402 (estimate) $0.00
The total amount our elected and appointed officials spent on legal fees $357,986.04
So… to summarize the numbers above in approximate terms:
$525k was estimated, 407k was listed as expenditure then they closed the books with an even lower number $357k.
Come on people, this is absurd. Take any number you want and apply them to our village to come up with your own idea as to what our current administration is doing with our tax dollars.
It begs to question how they could list expenditures at $407k then close the books at $357k. One could do this by representing multiple scenarios for the numbers which I will explain: you could put some of the expenses on to the next fiscal year which is done all the time in municipal finances, you could push expenses to other chart of account and represent them as say…. Consulting or administrative fees… or you could actually negotiate a lower fee with the firm. I do not have the answer but will continue to dive into our finances until the truth can be told…
To close – I do not believe the current administration is being completely honest with this or other concerns going on in the community and they need to be held accountable to the people. This is our town Mrs. Hermann, not your personal one. Step down and stop wasting our tax dollars.
Greg Jenkins 312-217-5862
Why quibble over any amount between 350 and 400K in LEGAL expense? Makes you wonder why a municipality would need to spend that KIND of MONEY to justify itself. Who runs Island Lake, Ancel Glink or the Village Board? When Mayor Amrich was Village President the annual billings for attorney fees was under 50K. Allowing for changes in the economy, that's still one helluva BIG difference between the Hyde/Herrmann administrations and Amrich's. The question is not so much the amount, but WHY?
DeleteMary Jo Martin
Sam, yes the mayor does not vote to pay bills but she does create a large portion of the bills without board approval, and the board has no choice but to pay them.
DeleteUltimately the mayor is responsible for the out of control legal fees but the blame should be on Fox and Morris. The mechanism or ordinances to control the mayors open checkbook to the attorney were put in place prior to the last election. Fox and Morris upon taking their seats as trustees decided to side with the mayor and not the residents. Put the blame where it belongs, Fox and Morris have enabled the mayor to continue with the reckless spending.
ReplyDelete"Machu" Said:
>>>> "Sharp and Field are obviously supporting Herrmann's "nonactive" campaign by their objections, which if proven will effectively remove ANY opponent to Mayor Herrmann.
Thanks for that thought, Machu -
That Herrmann is currently in command of a "nonactive campaign". That is, her "campaign" thus far solely consists of campaigning AGAINST those who challenge her, and in leveraging those who aren't even running for office in the first place, yet are poised to lose their lucrative influence after the election.
Rather than on running in SUPPORT of her and her fellow-slate-mates' supposedly superior records and ideas? Her campaign rationale, is in essence, running against those opposed to her own sorry record, in order that she might yet win.
Apparently, Herrmann perceives far more valuable fodder in her challengers' foibles, rather than in her own ACHIVEMENTS, which are basically nil.
Effectively, Herrmann's only current campaign thus far, is to rely NOT on her running ON her own "successes" - which in reality are only stupendous blunders and failures on her part - but to run (she hopes) unapposed upon mere hearsay Objections to get rid of any other candidates that she's so "unfairly" forced to run against.
ReplyDeleteEffectively, thus far she's willing to run NOT on her record - she's only willing to run ON the perceived errors of her challengers, rather than have to run against her ACTUAL personal failings and errors.
For once, and only this one time? It's desperately NOT about her.
Samantha Said:
ReplyDelete>>>> "Mr. Jenkins, I appreciate your efforts, I am in agreement that this is a large amount of money. It needs to be reviewed. However, I think we should look at what this number actually represents. The Mayor has not notably voted to pay bills since 2011.
First off, Samantha - unless the Mayor is needed to break a tie vote or insufficient vote on bills, her lack of voting in having to pay the bills is an entirely moot point. As long as she has a majority, she neither need vote, nor vote at all. Her general lack of having to vote on these matters DOES NOT absolve her from responsibility for those votes of Her Herd. But as you stated, "not notably" - which in reality means that occasionally - she HAS had to vote to pay all those legal bills from time to time And she has.
Second? Yes, I am in agreement with you in that it is a "large amount of money" and "needs to be reviewed".
The problem is, Herrmann's and The Herd's arguments, in justifying/offsetting the legal billings have lately been:
ReplyDelete1) A fair amount of those legal billings have theoretically been dedicated to development expenses, and that those bills are eventually offset by impact fees paid by the developers in the end. Huh! Well gee, Samantha, when was the last time, especially in the last 4 years; have we seen any recent, new and ACTUAL development in this town? For the most part now, the bulk of development legal expenditure is entirely devoted to the Village having to recognize there is no longer any recovery available, and is simply devoted to legally stating we're now all on the hook for these expenses, which we once believed we were owed, but now simply owe ourselves.
2) Prosecutorial expenses in both Lake & McHenry Counties. Again - fair enough. Yet what is the ticket income from the PD, which offsets this legal expense? We just don't know any longer. There used to a legitimate Committee process in this town, but no longer. Trustee Rabattini used to make a solid and valid point in Board Meetings to remove approval of "Committee Reports" from the Agendas when in fact, no Committee Reports were actually being submitted for approval in the first place. And that included Reports from the PD - whether as NOT reported by the PD Committee (inappropriately, and perhaps illegally; "chaired" by Herrmann), or NOT verbally from Chief McCorkle either? "Any comment or report, Mr. McCorkle?" "None."
Back in the day, Samantha, we use to have a report on ticket and PD revenue. We have not, any longer.
Point being? We no longer have publicly Reported income offsetting these meager legal expense dodges.
ReplyDeleteThe reality remaining?
The vast majority of legal expense is currently devoted to whether or not anyone is allowed to take a sh*t on public property, much less that any one of our current "leaders" or employees are confident enough to even utter one syllable without any legal guidance any longer. How Sad!
And the reason all are so leary of just "get'n 'er done"?
ReplyDeleteBecause of Herrmann's fear of being undone.
And as we all now can plainly see, "at all costs".
For many of those all-too-well-acquainted with reality:
ReplyDeleteIn a previous post on this blog:
"Appeal Hearing Set for Thursday Morning, Feb 7 "
And specifically:
http://plainfield.patch.com/articles/wheatland-residents-fear-legal-battle-akin-to-that-waged-in-grafton-township
Ms. Krafthefer provides an absolutely and incontrovertible truth - just as Charles Barkley once said, "I am not your child's role model"? Ms. Krafthefer reminds we readers, "“However, I do not represent any individual taxpayers in Wheatland Township (Village of Island Lake),” she said. “I represent the township (Village leaders) and the interests of the township (Village leaders), not individual taxpayers.” (Island Lake Villagers and Taxpayers)
Only and until Grafton Township no longer provided to be the splashy NW Suburban laughingstock and cautionary tale before Island Lake took up that dubious mantle this year?
ReplyDeleteOr until this tagged new article regarding Wheatland Township provided a welcome distraction from ugly reality in both Grafton and Island Lake?
There remain, amongst these 3 related stories, 3 "coincidences":
1) The representation of all 3 parties by Ancel Glink and Attorney Krafthefer.
2) 3 unwanted, unnecessary and unaffordable "new village halls".
3) Unwanted, unnecessary and unaffordable legal bills from Ancel Glink due all 3 parties.
Legally, Krafthefer is correct - she and her firm legally, and contractually, owe absolute fealty to the Village, as may be governed by the majority of the Board, and primarily as well, to the Mayor - as goes day by day contact and operational authority.
ReplyDeleteBut regardless of day-by-day LEGAL niceties? How about MORAL certainties?
Charlie Amrich, back in the day, used to allow the then-attorney of record of the Village, to not "polish his knob" as it were (or is it Herrmann's "knub"), but to act in the best interests of ALL Village residents and taxpayers.
Debbie Herrmann, in THIS day. in this REALITY, has decided to utilize Ancel Glink, the current attorney of record of the Village, to primarily act in favor of HER interests and NOT the Village's.
While Herrmann is fully within her LEGAL RIGHT to do so? Particularly as Herrmann successfully continues to cultivate a rubber-stamp Herd, and that we, the residents and taxpayers in this town, are LEGALLY required therefore, to take it up our collective *sses?
Charlie was all about ensuring that the Attorney of Record of the Village of Island Lake put the RESIDENT'S concerns first. That was what HE once elected to do. That the attorney of record for the Village first represented THE PEOPLE, before any of his own parochial concerns.
Current "political" operatives might dismissively term such a notion "quaint".
I recall such a notion as being "honest".
How sad that actual honesty is being discounted currently.
Frankly? It's all at the option of the current Mayor, people.
ReplyDeleteHerrmann has opted to protect herself instead of the residents and taxpayers.
In the past, Amrich opted to protect THE PEOPLE, rather than himself. And will do so once again, if given even half a chance.
The only problem? The only campaign Herrmann has going right now is to protect herself, and the legal billings primarily designed to, um.., er... PROTECT HERSELF.
Meanwhile, the challenger, Charlie Amrich, and by past experience, is willing to utilize legal billings to PROTECT THE VILLAGE.
Is it any wonder that again, there are 3 vested interests against his inevitable Mayoralty?
1) Dan Field - lucrative and unproductive contract with the Village currently.
2) Louie Sharp - lucrative and unproductive "understanding" with the Village currently/
3) Ancel Glink - WAY lucrative and unproductive contract with the Village currently.
Charlie once used to conduct business with perhaps a "hamburger lunch" and a handshake.
ReplyDeleteCost? $25 plus tip.
Now, conducting business with Island Lake includes Ancel Glink, NO lunch, and No handshake.
Cost $500k per year. Plus no lunch. No wonder everyone involved is so hungry and crabby all the time! LOL!
Hey Herrmie?
ReplyDeleteWhy, I'd get all bitchy too.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete