More McHenry County Blog

If it's percentage of land they're after, that's the wrong formula from the outset. The formula should be priority driven, with the Voters' directly in the line of fire served first.

While Southern McHenry County chokes on its own exhaust, we're to thank MCCD for blowing smoke up our collective tailpipes by redistributing our income and purchasing land elsewhere, at OUR exclusion?

It's not selfish to demand the NEXT $73 Million which was just approved to be "invested" in southern McHenry County. It's of utmost importance to set aside much-needed land for natural water and air filtration, heat absorption, to offset further crowding, and even provide for future transportation corridors (like Camp Algonquin). CHANGE MCCD's CRITERIA to allow for purchase of smaller sections of land. This is what's needed TODAY. If the formula would have been in place over a decade ago, would we be receiving a "D" grade on our air quality today?

I don't hold out much hope, as MCCD wouldn't even share with the voting public where the next target areas are to purchase. Why not? Is it outside our line of sight once again? Probably so. Any good lawyer knows not to show the cards early on - especially when early polls indicate an apathetic electorate.

Sure I'm in the minority, but I'm in favor of a total reorganization and streamlining of area government to be more responsive and less costly. Be the "Southwest Airlines" of local government and go for it.

Perhaps it will be the kick-off to a long overdue slim-fast governmental diet.

With MCCD in the middle, muddying the waters, we're one MORE step away from realizing progress, and we're once again paying MORE for LESS.

Funny, years ago, well-meaning folks intending to preserve land, water and air quality in this so-called "Republican" county went and created another layer of governmental oversight; another layer of control, taxation, as well as opportunity for Daley-esque patronage jobs.

It did some good, to be sure; however, at the same time, it further diluted the role of our REAL local representatives - our Municipal Council Members and our County Board Members.

While meaning well, my 2-cent conclusion is that the move did more harm than good. Now, MCCD stands unfettered in no-man's land, and mitigates Voters' rights to experience fair treatment. While folks up north and west experience a higher "quality of life," we in the south suffer from HIGHER air pollution and MORE legitimate fears of impending water shortages, and continuing arterial clogging of our TOTALLY UNFUNDED roadways.

To top it off, ironically, we PAID for the inequity, and it looks as if we'll continue to pay.

Folks, it's just like our taxes and rolling-toll road funding dollars geting hoovered right into Daley's hepa-approved money filter. We're getting sucked dry, and worse yet, we don't seem to care.

Weird.

Democrats, don't worry about a thing. Quit killing yourselves to get a seat at the table. Look around, you're already here. Sure, our voting record out here in McHenry County may officially say the word "Republican," but take a look around and breathe in. It smells a lot more like donkey and less like elephant to me.

"Governments tend not to solve problems, only to rearrange them." -Ronald Reagan

-John Coonen

Labels: John Coonen

Stygar is popular amongst his neighbors, active in his community. His background as a consultant to other associations helps him with the big picture but perhaps makes him less of an accessible concept to the people who make up the picture. Arnos, especially, would benefit from a campaign with a more listening and responsive attitude, and a more grass roots feel.

Arnos is a credible and reliable candidate. His background as a police officer has broad appeal; his promise to secure more support and funding to take the Wonder Lake Police department to 24-hour service affected all residents equally.

This appeal was overshadowed by the grandiose hyperbole of the joint Stygar/Arnos campaign; bright tomorrows, progress riding a white steed, etc. And in the background, the Other Side: sullen, frightened, holding flaming torches, ready to take down Dr. Frankenstein’s brilliant yet misunderstood new subdivision, Thatcher Meadows.

Would he have won had it not been for the way the Ed Peters endorsement was handled (see story below)? It is unlikely this greatly affected the outcome, although it did not reflect well on the process. However, it is this writer’s impression that the overall tenor of the campaign, the hiring of a large outside entity to produce the campaign, did not do the new candidates any favors. It lacked substance and heart.

Thatcher Meadows will be built, the current Village Board has not blocked it. Some have reservations, notably the two reelected incumbents Reinard and Heger. The rhetoric over growth in the village has been excessively polarized for some time.

Growth/change is a natural phenomenon but it can take many forms and it can be managed. Resistance is futile yet equally inevitable. This resistance had produced frustration in the pro-growth sector, leading to demeaning rhetoric (although not in this campaign) that failed to reach out to those with suspicions or reservations.

Listening to the previous rhetoric of the pro-growth crew, one might easily have believed that the more cautious Heger and Reinard would be campaigning on the platforms of

1. No roof repairs to be permitted in Wonder Lake, ever again
2. At least three old plumbing fixtures and one piece of indoor furniture must be displayed at all times on each front lawn, and
3. Every Saturday, villagers are to get to together to smash printing presses and burying ringing telephones.

But that was not the case. Both incumbents have a long track record of service to the community at large and a willingness to listen.

On one side is a small core of active lakefront owners who will most directly benefit from a cleaner lake (but who may also have reservations about having hundreds more lake users), and, on the other side, a small core of those who wish to maintain the "Unincorporated Lifestyles" to which they had become accustomed.

But for the most part, there is probably more of a consensus than both extremes will admit to.

Evidence of this? Ed Peters, who occupied the middle ground in several ways, got the most votes. Growth-questioning voters could have abstained and voted for their 2 favored candidates instead of 3, which would have left Peters in third place at best.

In the middle are those who probably wouldn’t mind losing their well and septic as long as they could still afford to live here. They would get involved but they’re too busy working the three jobs they need to support their family. Most will probably get used to the higher traffic on the roads. The schools? You know what they say in McHenry County? Taxes, Death and School Referendums…

As a former resort/part-time community, Wonder Lake is possessed of a unique dynamic. Alongside the base of Wonder Lifers, there are longtime part time residents who have retired and become full timers. Entirely new residents and subdivisions with no institutional memory now join them. Wonder Lake has a higher than average proportion of renters, but as the village grows with new owner-occupiers motivated to vote, the proportion of renters will dwindle.

Eventually, Wonder Lake will be ten times its current size. Until that time, small town campaigns can still be effective. Inevitable growth doesn’t mean the Village can’t be assertive with developers. The Village should be less afraid of offending them in insisting upon watertight terms.

The lake is a rare and unique bargaining tool, dredged or otherwise. It is worth every effort to ensure developers plan carefully and pay upfront for the impact on the community. Profit margins are negotiable too. Passing on costs to the new subdivision residents may well come back to haunt current residents in the
form of dormant SSAs. We will be told not to worry; they will not be activated unless needed.

“?”

Exactly.

Attractive and community-friendly developments can be built, but the developers must be supervised.

Otherwise, in ten years, Wonder Lakers may be looking across a bleak tundra of damp cardboard and flapping Tyvek, whilst cutting Progress another yet another check and watching more dormant SSAs awake from their fiscal hibernation.

Unifying the community is not just a matter of bringing the Village and lakefront under one controlling body. It’s about bringing the people together. to circulate. The new developments will feature bike paths, but they are bike paths to nowhere. They do not unite the communities.

If we are to believe some economic forecasters, in 20 years there will be no Social Security or Medicare, meaning that “retirees” may also be working three jobs. This will have an interesting effect on small local government and homeowners’ associations across the nation. The collapse of Medicare should also mean
that public health is every community's priority.

There are many reasons why we need to get out of our cars. What’s needed in Wonder Lake is a circle tour, a bike and pedestrian path to the bank, to school, to our friends across the lake, and, Bull Valley permitting, to the Metra stations.

This may not sit well with some for whom unity is strictly about sharing administration. Good heavens.

Do we really want to share delinquents and offenders, too?

Labels: Wonder Lake

NORTH SUBURBAN BUSINESSMAN INDICTED FOR ALLEGEDLY ENGAGING IN SEPARATE MILLION-DOLLAR FRAUD SCHEMES

CHICAGO – A suburban businessman was indicted on federal fraud charges for allegedly engaging in four separate swindles beginning more than a decade ago, federal law enforcement authorities announced today.

In one alleged scheme, the defendant, Patrick Del Monico,

• allegedly obtained approximately $1.2 million from his employer through fraud, while he


• allegedly attempted to obtain more than $2.3 million from the United States government in a separate defense contract fraud scheme.

He was indicted on 20 counts of fraud and related offenses by a federal grand jury late yesterday, announced Patrick J. Fitzgerald, United States Attorney for the Northern District of Illinois, and Robert D. Grant, Special Agent-in-Charge of the Chicago Office of the Federal Bureau of Investigation.

Del Monico, 64, of Long Grove, will be arraigned at a later date in U.S. District Court in Chicago.

According to the indictment, from 1993 through 2003, Del Monico was the transportation manager for suburban Wheeling-based Indeck Power Equipment Co., responsible for the coordination of all freight shipments for the company, which sold and leased power equipment, including complex boiler and emergency power generation systems. From June 2005 through February 2006, he was a sales representative for Demar Logistics, Inc., a Carol Stream-based company that engaged in warehouse storage and transportation logistics.

The indictment alleges that while at Indeck, between February 1994 and February 2003, Del Monico created fraudulent invoices for goods and services, using the names of Indeck’s vendors on some of the phony invoices, and using fictitious names on others. Del Monico submitted those fraudulent invoices to Indeck for payment, causing Indeck to issue checks which Del Monico misappropriated and used for his own benefit.

Del Monico falsely represented that Indeck owed money to the named vendors for services rendered, when, in fact, he knew that no services had been performed and no money was owed. This scheme resulted in a loss to Indeck of approximately $1.2 million. Del Monico allegedly used the funds he obtained to make payments on personal loans and credit cards bills, including payment of a $500,000 home equity loan.

In a separate scheme, the indictment alleges that between August 2003 and July 2005 Del Monico falsely represented to the United States that he had provided 10 emergency generators to the Department of Defense and the Air Force, when, in fact, he had not provided any generators.

Del Monico allegedly fraudulently attempted to obtain approximately $2.4 million from the United States, based on six fraudulent invoices that he submitted to the United States relating to the generators. According to the invoices that Del Monico submitted, five generators that were purportedly in Alaska, were also purportedly in Virginia at the same time, the indictment alleges.

In the third alleged fraud scheme, between June 2005 and February 2006, Del Monico allegedly falsely represented that two companies had agreed to hire Demar to manage the transportation of freight, which would generate millions of dollars of revenue for Demar. Del Monico created phony documents relating to one company, which he submitted to Demar to create the false appearance that Del Monico had generated substantial revenue for Demar. By promising that both companies were going to hire Demar within a short period of time, Del Monico was able to obtain payments from Demar of approximately $1,000 a week for approximately 25 weeks, as a draw against future commissions, and to obtain health insurance benefits from Demar. This scheme resulted in a loss to Demar of more than $40,000, according to the indictment.

Finally, the indictment alleges that in 2004 and 2005, Del Monico engaged in a separate bankruptcy fraud scheme involving his own voluntary bankruptcy petition that he filed in 2004. He allegedly lied about his income, failed to disclose that he was a plaintiff in a personal injury lawsuit, and falsified bank statements.

The government is being represented by Assistant U.S. Attorney Jacqueline Stern. The U.S. Trustee Program, which supervised the administration of the bankruptcy case, cooperated with the investigation of the alleged bankruptcy fraud scheme.

If convicted, the charges in the indictment each carry maximum penalties carrying from 5 to 10 to 20 years in prison and a $250,000 fine. As an alternative, the Court may impose a maximum fine equal to twice the loss to any victim or twice the gain to any defendant, whichever is greater. Restitution is mandatory and the Court would determine the appropriate sentence to be imposed.

The public is reminded that an indictment contains only charges and is not evidence of guilt. The defendant is presumed innocent and is entitled to a fair trial at which the government has the burden of proving guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

Labels: Indeck, Peaker Plant, Stop the Stacks

Wesley Woods in Lake Geneva's Williams Bay is in the need of the following:

• 4 wheel drive gator
• Shingles
• Post hole digger gas powered
• Sewer rod 100 foot
• 3 stage scaffolding
• Boats, vehicles, and sailboats
• Riding lawnmower
• Tents and camping equipment
• Meat slicer
• Pictures appropriate for camp
• Sports equipment
• Floor buffer
• Vacuums
• Mig and wire flux welder
• 4WD tractor
• Drill bit sets metric and SAE
• Bulk chain 3/8 low profile and 3/8 pitch
• Wood chipper
• Snow blower
• Lawn sweeper
• Rear tined roto tiller
• Audio visual equipment
• Door mats
• Nesco/portable steam heat pot
• Free standing wire racks

Labels: Wesley Woods, Wish List

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE 22ND JUDICIAL CIRCUIT
McHENRY COUNTY, ILLINOIS


LEONA NELSON, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Case No.:
)
CRYSTAL LAKE PARK DISTRICT, )
)
Defendant. )

COMPLAINT

Plaintiff, LEONA NELSON, by her attorney MARK W. DANIEL of RATHJE & WOODWARD, LLC., states the following as her Reinstated Amended Complaint against Defendant:
1. Plaintiff is an adult individual who resides in the City of Crystal Lake, McHenry County, Illinois.

2. Defendant is a municipal corporation incorporated under the laws of the State of Illinois with its principal office located in Crystal Lake, McHenry County, Illinois.

3. This is an action brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §1983 for a deprivation of Plaintiff’s rights.

4. Plaintiff was previously elected to the office of Park Commissioner in accordance with the laws of the State of Illinois.

5. Plaintiff’s term of office expired on or about May 1, 2001 and at all times relevant hereto Plaintiff was a duly elected Park Commissioner and was entitled to act in that capacity. Specifically, but not by way of limitation, the Illinois Park Code provides that Commissioners shall serve until their successors are elected and qualified. 70 ILCS 1205/2-12.

6. On April 5, 2001, a meeting of the Crystal Lake Park District Commissioners was convened. At that meeting, the Commissioners present voted to censure Plaintiff for certain alleged acts committed by Plaintiff. Those alleged acts included the purported release of executive session material and the purported making of comments toward a Park District employee. The censure imposed by the Commissioners was a one meeting suspension.

7. Conducting the meeting and voting to censure Plaintiff for the alleged conduct was done under the color of the statutes of the State of Illinois.

8. The Illinois Park District Code sets forth the powers of a park district operating in the State of Illinois, including Defendant. The Park District Code establishes that Defendant has the power to pass all necessary ordinances, rules and regulations for the proper management and conduct of the business of the board and district. 70 ILCS 1205/8-1.

9. On December 21, 2000, Defendant adopted the Crystal Lake Park District Policy Manual. Said Manual purportedly adopted regulations pertaining to the conduct of Defendants employees and elected officials. A copy of said Manual is attached as Exhibit A. Section 2.02 provides for the imposition of sanctions against Commissioners and provides:

If the conduct of a commissioner is deemed by a fellow commissioner to be inappropriate, the board may discuss this behavior in Executive Session with the commissioner. If such actions do not cease, sanctions may be placed upon the commissioner, by a 2/3 vote, if he/she is found to be violating this section of policy. Sanctions may be in the form of meeting suspensions or monetary penalties.

10. If the policy of Defendant is a valid exercise of its authority under the Park Code, prior to suspending Plaintiff for one meeting, Defendant was required to discuss the asserted inappropriate conduct with Plaintiff in executive session. Defendant did not discuss the asserted inappropriate conduct with Plaintiff in executive session and instead voted to summarily suspend Plaintiff.

11. The conduct of Defendant was contrary to its adopted policy and was therefore contrary to and in violation of the Park District Code as an action that was not authorized by a duly adopted rule or regulation.

12. Under the law of the State of Illinois, there is no remedy available against a member of a public body who discloses information discussed during a closed meeting or an executive session.

13. Even if the release of executive session material by Plaintiff occurred, there is no legal basis for the imposition of a penalty against Plaintiff. Under the policy of Defendant, the conduct of a Commissioner must be “inappropriate” before a sanction can be imposed. Because Illinois law does not provide a remedy against a member of a public body who discloses information discussed in an executive session, Defendant’s sanction of Plaintiff for allegedly doing so is in violation of State law and is contrary to the authority conferred upon Defendant under the Park District Code.

14. Section 10.05 of the Park District Code identifies and defines what acts constitute sexual harassment. Despite being aware of the fact that what constituted the alleged harassing conduct, Defendant accused Plaintiff of creating an “intimidating, offensive or hostile work environment”.

15. For a hostile environment to exist, the conduct must be sexual in nature and must involve more than one incident. Neither of these criteria existed, yet Defendant imposed the censure.

16. The alleged conduct of Plaintiff did not violate the Manual of Defendant and could not therefore be found to be inappropriate. As such, the sanction imposed was contrary to the Manual and was therefore in violation of the authority conferred upon Defendant by the Park District Code.

17. Defendant exceeded the authority conferred upon it under the Park District Code and in so doing deprived Plaintiff of her statutory obligation to serve as a Commissioner until her successor was elected and qualified.

18. Defendant announced the censure against Plaintiff at a meeting of the Park Commissioners, included the censure in the minutes of the Defendant and otherwise disseminated that information to the public.

19. Plaintiff has resided in the City of Crystal Lake for in excess of fifty years and is generally well-regarded in the community.

20. The imposition of the censure and the dissemination of the alleged reasons for it have caused Plaintiff great embarrassment and humiliation in the community. As an example, but not by way of limitation, Plaintiff has been married for over fifty years and has been subjected to the wrongful publication and assertion by Defendant that she has sexually harassed a male employee of Defendant.

21. Contrary to its policy obligation of discussing the “inappropriate” behavior in Executive Session, Defendant announced not only the sanction imposed against Plaintiff but also announced the asserted reason including providing the name of the allegedly harassed individual and detailed the alleged conduct of Plaintiff all of which was subsequently published in the area new media.

22. The censure further deprived Plaintiff of her statutory right to serve in her capacity as a duly elected public official and deprived Plaintiff of her right to represent the interests of her constituents as required by the Illinois Park District Code.

23. A party who has sustained a deprivation of rights under Section 1983 is entitled to recover attorney fees against the party who has committed the violation.

24. Under 735 ILCS 5/13-217, this suit is a reinstatement of McHenry County Case No. 2001 LA 300 which was voluntarily dismissed on April 12, 2006.



WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, LEONA NELSON, prays for the entry of a judgement in her favor and against Defendant in an amount in excess of $50,000.00 plus cost and reasonable attorney fees under 42 U.S.C. §1988.
Respectfully submitted,
LEONA NELSON.

____________________________________
One of Her Attorneys


Mark W. Daniel, Esq.
RATHJE & WOODWARD, LLC.
300 East Roosevelt Road
Suite 300
Wheaton, Illinois 60187
(630) 668-8500
ARDC No. 6226696

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE 22ND JUDICIAL CIRCUIT
McHENRY COUNTY, ILLINOIS

LEONA NELSON, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Case No.:
)
CRYSTAL LAKE PARK DISTRICT, )
)
Defendant. )

RULE 222(B) AFFIRMATION

Plaintiff, LEONA NELSON, by her attorney, states that the damages being sought in this case exceed $50,000.00, plus costs and fees. This will be supplemented with a new affidavit due to adverse weather conditions that made it impossible to coordinate this.

____________________________________
LEONA NELSON, by her attorney and to be supplemented due to weather conditions



Mark W. Daniel, Esq.
RATHJE & WOODWARD, LLC.
300 East Roosevelt Road
Suite 300
Wheaton, Illinois 60187
(630) 668-8500
ARDC No. 6226696

Labels: Crystal Lake Park District, Executive Session, Leona Nelson, Sexual Harrassment

For more McHenry County Blog, click here.

Labels: Coventry Green, Crystal Lake, Enterprise Transportation Company, Helicopter, Route 14