Open letter to the Bloomington Council

By:  Diane Benjamin

Go ahead and pretend you have a mandate.

4644 people voted AGAINST Tari Renner

Jamie Mathy only won by 319 votes, more than that voted against him.

Close to half the people in Ward 3 voted AGAINST Mboka Mwilambwe

Joni Painter only won by 97 votes

The guy ineligible to serve from Ward 7 got 146 votes against Scott Black who only got 421

Bray would have lost if only two people had been in the race

Go ahead and pretend that laws don’t matter.

If you want to spend the next 2 years in court for denying FOIA requests, I can make that happen.

Your personal emails are subject to FOIA.  You can not avoid the Freedom of Information Act by avoiding City owned methods of communication.

Rahm Emanual found that out:  Rahm Emanuel Personal Emails

Until you figure out you were elected to represent the people in your Ward – not the City – you will be held accountable here.

In the next two years you have two choices:

  1. Backlash, bad press, and waste of taxpayer money to hold you accountable in court


  2. Start acting like representatives instead of government puppets

Do you want a judge finding the City guilty over and over and over?

Tari is a non-voting member of the Council.  It’s up to you to set policy.  Following the law should be the highest priority.

Jeff Jurgens:  Are you going to tolerate the City breaking the law?  Is your Tens of THOUSANDS of dollars of taxpayer money every month worth it?  Do you have any integrity?

In case you missed it:  Tari’s Transparency Is A Joke/

Trying to start a war with citizens Tari? 








4 thoughts on “Open letter to the Bloomington Council

  1. FOIA only applies to agencies of the federal government. I believe you are requesting information under the Illinois public records law (5 ILCS 140/1). I know how much you value precision and accuracy in journalism, so I felt this an important point to bring to your attention.

    Your post also seems to imply that you would be able to obtain all of the council’s personal emails. If that was your intention, note that the law states: “This Act is not intended to cause an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy. ‘Unwarranted invasion of personal privacy’ means the disclosure of information that is highly personal or objectionable to a reasonable person and in which the subject’s right to privacy outweighs any legitimate public interest in obtaining the information.”


    I do wonder, are you ever actually going to post any of the corrective information I provide, or do you prefer not to have any public criticism? It undermines my confidence in the information you provide when you censure disagreements and fail to issue corrections.


Leave a Reply

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

You are commenting using your 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