By: Diane Benjamin
I obtained the audio of the July Board meeting under the Freedom of Information Act. I also requested the past due TIF reports and the 2015 audit report. I was told “No records exist”. Since Kenny Adkisson mentions on the audio receiving TIF funds, I did another FOIA for how much he received. At the next meeting the Board members should ask where the required reports are! They are seriously past due.
Posting the audio will take some work. First, it has to be converted to video and then uploaded. I will post the applicable parts when that is done. It won’t be today.
About Dan Lush being on the Board:
The attorney for the Village used some faulty logic in deciding that Dan Lush is qualified to stay on the board. She claimed many legislators for the state have properties in Springfield. She claims that doesn’t disqualify them from running in their district. Of course, they are in Springfield on official business, Dan Lush sleeps in Leroy – NOT on official business. The two don’t equate! She may want to look at this court case: https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=17750173006947243434&q=10+ILCS+5/3-1&hl=en&as_sdt=4,14 Dan’s term is up next year. He is now ineligible to run for reelection.
I don’t know why Dan’s ability to be on the Board is so difficult to understand. Dan refuses to answer questions about the status of his Downs property. I could buy a house in Bloomington and rent it out. Does that make me eligible to run for the City Council? Nope! So what’s the difference?
About Violations of the Liquor Code:
The Village lawyer claimed ordinances aren’t always enforced! Evidently that justifies breaking ordinances. James claims he has repeatedly asked the Liquor Commission if they have a problem with Adkissons not meeting the requirements. Since he and two others are the only members and rarely meet, he produced no proof. Minutes do not reflect the commission members even knowing Adkissons is in violation.
Keep in mind Adkissons was out of compliance for 8 of 9 quarters – 24 months. Also keep in mind that James refused to give the reports to Mary Goveia. I obtained them under the Freedom of Information Act.
James claimed the Liquor Commission controls what happens with liquor licenses. If they don’t have a problem with being out of compliance, nobody else should either.
Ken Adkisson did not speak during public comment, but was given time during this discussion. Since the agenda did not give him authority to speak, his comments should have been restricted to public comment. Maybe Roberts Rule’s of Order isn’t used.
The entire conversation was to justify NOT following the law. Goveia’s bringing up the two issues was to find out why the ordinances are not followed, not hear justification for why they can’t be followed.
James admitted the Liquor Commission does not see the reports because they have numbers on them. Again, those numbers say nothing about profit and loss – only gross sales. It’s their job to see the reports!
James claimed “he takes great offense” at being accused of not enforcing the law. Again, he could have avoided the entire discussion by meeting with Mary Goveia when a meeting was scheduled. He FAILED to show and he failed to tell Mary why he didn’t attend.
James plans to convene the Liquor Commission to review the rules. He then tells Mary to stop the “blog”. She can’t. Either laws matter or they don’t. ONE MORE TIME – Mike: if you had met with Mary none of this would have become a big issue. If you had given her the reports she requested, none of this would have been an issue. Transparency always works better than hiding things you don’t want people to know!
The personal attacks continued on Mary. The guilty always attack rather than admit wrongs and fix the problems. Evidently Mary isn’t allowed to discuss town business with residents either, her loyalty is expected to be to the Board – not the people who elected her.
Current politics in Downs consist of CYA, not serving the citizens.
Anything hiding in those past due reports?
