By: Diane Benjamin
You have to laugh at bureaucrats! The Attorney General’s Public Access office just sent me a final determination pertaining to Jeff Fritzen’s bike present courtesy of Chris Koos.
It took less than a month.
A few days ago I posted the Town’s response to the AG in this story: https://blnnews.com/2020/04/13/koos-bike-present-violated-town-code/
Keep in mind: The review requested by Marc Tiritilli because Koos cut off his public comment (on video) from last year is still buried in the AG halls of (no) justice.
Keep in mind: The review requested by Karyn Smith close to 15 months ago when she was denied speaking to a non-agenda item is also still buried.
The ruling I received should clarify why this office is mostly useless. Please read it: PAC 62248 Fritzen bike
The big question is:
Why is the Attorney General’s office protecting Chris Koos?
The AG rapidly (an understatement!) ruled on a case pro-Normal and are failing to rule on two others everybody knows violate the Open Meetings Act.
Just more proof justice isn’t equal in Illinois.
.
.
.
.
.
.
As Obama noted B-N as a jewel of the midwest the comment was made with Koos and Renner at the helm. Until the demonrats no longer control ILL-annoy, it’ll be dirty business as usual. “Just us” as no real justice is the norm for the extreme left.
All the AG said was the town did not violate FOIA. It also gives more support to your claim the purchase did not follow the purchasing policy because it was not approved. Who looks into town policy violations? Please don’t tell me it is the people who violated it in the first place.
Bingo!
But can a complaint be filed citing the violations by Koos, by a citizen? I understand this part of the AG office didn’t rule about the actual event, just the internal communication of said event. One would think with the wording in the AG’s letter they might take it upon themselves to look further. (I said that for comic relief). Was something similar done in the past concerning Tari’s live in’s payment of Japan trip? Or am I totally confused? If I am right I am not stupid enough to believe this will be handled as quickly if at all.
No recourse except voters throwing him out
I would think the City Manager and the town’s HR Department would be responsible for investigating internal policy violations, with CITIZENS being the ones to demand an explanation/use of the taxpayer dollar to pay for the gift. Since it was an elected official who is the subject of the potential violation, I would think that investigation is subject to FOIA, thus them having a responsibility to share with its citizens the outcome.
I’m not sure that is the same if it involved an EMPLOYEE — typically, internal HR investigations would not be subject to FOIA (although, I’m not 100% on that…Diane, do you know for sure?). If the violation was criminal in nature (not sure this situation rises to that scrutiny, although one could certainly make the case), you could ask NPD to conduct a criminal investigation. Fairly certain, however, the SA’s Office wouldn’t pursue charges on this type of allegation, so may not even be worth the time.
Regardless…the way to make this situation not just go away is to have CITIZENS of Normal show up to council meetings, virtual or otherwise, and speak at public comment asking for an explanation of the policy and whether or not it was violated in this instance.
Every government is supposed to have an ethics officer. In this case probably PAM, she’s in Koos’ back pocket so nothing will happen. Citizens need to speak up, even if it’s not on the agenda.
Koos = Pam. Birds of a feather flock together. When the ethics officer is complicit in the fraud and the majority of council members don’t give a rats ass then there is little recourse. Our choices are call every council person and remind them who they work for or vote them out in the next election.
Are you really surprised the Democrat AG sided with Koos?
Ethics Officer+ government body= Hahahaha!