NIOT: Hiding AGAIN?

By:  Diane Benjamin

Tari Renner signed the Not In Our Town pledge.  He even made a big deal about it at a Council meeting.  Other members of the Council signed it as well.   Evidently Judy Stearns was correct when she called it “window dressing”.  The pledge is meaningless when violators, especially signers, suffer no consequences for breaking it.

The pledge says:  “I share the Not In Our Town commitment to stop hate, address bullying, and build a safe, inclusive community.”

Yet, Tari is allowed to write hate filled emails bullying citizens over and over:  Where is NIOT hiding?

Council:  Did the pledge mean anything when you signed it?  If you are silent, you are just as guilty as Tari.  Hate and bullying must be okay if your side does it.  The word that word that comes to mind:  Hypocrite!  All the pledge signers are Hypocrites. 

NIOT:  Where were you when Alderman Hauman walked out on a black speaker during public comment?  Safe community?  Not if you don’t agree with the City!

 

Tari’s latest email:

Hello everyone,
I would hope that you would all consider attending the forum on July 7th at 7pm at the Lafayette Club.
This is a forum sponsored by Ald. Kevin Lower to discuss city issues.
He advertised it as discussing the city’s “Budget Tax Force” rather than “Budget
Task Force.”
It is important that voices for progress and improvement are heard at this forum – and not just the voices
of NO and WE CAN’T.
I am out of the country so I’m asking for your help in my absence.
Good people must have their voices heard so that the extreme views
of a vocal and nasty minority do not prevail.
Thank you!
Take care!
Tari Renner

.

Gee, posted in February.  He’s broken the pledge at least twice since then!

 

NIOT2

6 thoughts on “NIOT: Hiding AGAIN?

  1. One has to wonder if IWU would have to hand over any or all of the Mayor Professor Lawyer’s emails if asked to under the FOIA seeing how he is conducting city related correspondence using IWU’s email services and if so would any of his emails be subject to redacting.

    Like

    1. I was thinking the same thing. I know last year in champaign some city council members were texting during the meeting. Some citizens took them to court saying since it was during the meeting they have the right to foia those texts. If I recall the citizens won the lawsuit

      Like

    2. If Tari is trying to get around using his city provided e-mail account and hide official business, he is sorely mistaken. The case law is pretty clear that just because you have a private e-mail, it doesn’t mean it is not subject to discovery. However, IWU could be held responsible for punitive and maybe criminal damages if they do not have a policy that forbids using their e-mail to conduct personal business.

      I have not heard back from Chief Technology Officer for IWU regarding their policy. Maybe he alerted his boss.

      Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s