Written by Diane Benjamin - editor

Illegal emails on raising liquor fees:

By:  Diane Benjamin

This story expands the previous post:  https://blnnews.com/2016/06/27/tari-sees-objects-ripe-for-fleece/

I have emails from Aldermen Diana Hauman and Jim Fruin, Mayor Renner, and JAMES.  I believe that JAMES is James Jordan, member of the Liquor Commission.  I have MANY emails written by Jim Fruin over the past few years – none of them say JAMES.  Jim Jordan made a presentation at the April 25th City Council meeting in support of raising fees on Liquor Licenses and Video Gaming machines.  On the City website, Fruin is Jim – Jordan is James.

For the record:  The Liquor Commission only has three members.  Tari Renner, Jim Jordan, and Sue Feldcamp.  Sue replaced Geoffrey Tompkins in April.

I believe Tari created a small commission so he could control it.  Under Steve Stockton the commission had at least 5 members.  Laws matter, just not to Tari.  The Open Meetings Act law applies to the Liquor Commission too.  A majority of the Board can NOT discuss policy anywhere but in posted meetings.  The majority of 3 members is 2.  Even lunching together would give the appearance of a violation, emailing to discuss a Council meeting obviously violates the OMA.

What laws can you get by with breaking?  Refer back to Saturday’s story:  https://blnnews.com/2016/06/25/when-public-servants-arent/

Government doesn’t exist for We the People.  Liberty and Justice for all is just a nice slogan.

The local States attorney’s office has been asked to review this and other violations.

The Illinois Attorney General has been asked to review this and other violation.

Get ready to see We the People get zero justice.  Government exists for them – not us.

 

8:09 am
email1
2:54pm
email2

Insert Tari’s long email here. Around 8:00pm

https://blnnews.com/2016/06/27/tari-sees-objects-ripe-for-fleece/

8:28 pm

renner2

 

9:37 pm (Previously posted with misspelled words)
email4

10:28 pm

renner1

From the Illinois Municipal League:  https://www.iml.org/page.cfm?key=1476

Public Meetings

What officially constitutes a “meeting” for purposes of the Open Meetings Act?

Pursuant to section 1.02 of the Act (5 ILCS 120/1.02), “meeting” means any gathering, whether in person or by video or audio conference, telephone call, electronic means (such as, without limitation, electronic mail, electronic chat, and instant messaging), or other means of contemporaneous interactive communication, of a majority of a quorum of the members of a public body held for the purpose of discussing public business or, for a 5-member public body, a quorum of the members of a public body held for the purpose of discussing public business.

The OMA law:

http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/ilcs/ilcs3.asp?ActID=84&

. . . In order that the people shall be informed, the General Assembly finds and declares that it is the intent of this Act to ensure that the actions of public bodies be taken openly and that their deliberations be conducted openly.

The local paper made a HUGE deal of violations of the OMA by the County Health Department.

They buried the story of the Council being found guilty of the same a few weeks ago.  They will bury this too, it doesn’t fit their agenda.

 

 They always read, then ignore!lee

 

 

 

 

5 thoughts on “Illegal emails on raising liquor fees:”

  1. Oh my! Imagine business owners and citizens contacting the Council members to express their concerns. The Mayor considers that to be lobbying. How much lobbying does he and others do behind the scenes through emails and lunches. This email conversation is one of many. How else would the agenda items get “passed” prior to the Council meetings?

    Reply

      2. Agreed, but that is not appropriate to print and I have much more self-control and better editing skills than the Mayor.

        Reply

Leave a Reply