Comments on: Legal loopholes make a mockery of the Open Meetings Act http://peoriachronicle.com/2006/05/25/legal-loopholes-make-a-mockery-of-the-open-meetings-act/ News and Comment about Peoria, Illinois Sun, 14 Mar 2010 06:24:26 -0600 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: Chef Kevin http://peoriachronicle.com/2006/05/25/legal-loopholes-make-a-mockery-of-the-open-meetings-act/comment-page-1/#comment-1048 Chef Kevin Sat, 27 May 2006 21:19:36 +0000 http://peoriachronicle.com/?p=408#comment-1048 It's like stealing a car and then giving it back. Giving it back doesn't nullify or rectify the previous crime...it just doesn't make it look so bad. It’s like stealing a car and then giving it back. Giving it back doesn’t nullify or rectify the previous crime…it just doesn’t make it look so bad.

]]> By: Roman II http://peoriachronicle.com/2006/05/25/legal-loopholes-make-a-mockery-of-the-open-meetings-act/comment-page-1/#comment-1042 Roman II Fri, 26 May 2006 21:50:11 +0000 http://peoriachronicle.com/?p=408#comment-1042 PREDICTION: In the end, the Park District is going to get this property the School Board bought in a land swap between them, because theSchool Board has more respect for the wishes of the public they serve then does the administration of the school board. There is no wlay in heaven they can justify their actions under the table as demonstrated by these dealings. Wait until a real lawyer gets their hands on this case!! PREDICTION: In the end, the Park District is going to get this property the School Board bought in a land swap between them, because theSchool Board has more respect for the wishes of the public they serve then does the administration of the school board. There is no wlay in heaven they can justify their actions under the table as demonstrated by these dealings. Wait until a real lawyer gets their hands on this case!!

]]> By: C. J. Summers http://peoriachronicle.com/2006/05/25/legal-loopholes-make-a-mockery-of-the-open-meetings-act/comment-page-1/#comment-1038 C. J. Summers Fri, 26 May 2006 14:39:19 +0000 http://peoriachronicle.com/?p=408#comment-1038 Good points all, Gary. I'll look into it. Good points all, Gary. I’ll look into it.

]]> By: BJ Aberle http://peoriachronicle.com/2006/05/25/legal-loopholes-make-a-mockery-of-the-open-meetings-act/comment-page-1/#comment-1036 BJ Aberle Fri, 26 May 2006 14:03:09 +0000 http://peoriachronicle.com/?p=408#comment-1036 Dude....My intent is not to be mean, but, take a minute to run your comment through a spell check ........grasshopper Dude….My intent is not to be mean, but, take a minute to run your comment through a spell check ……..grasshopper

]]> By: Gary Sandberg http://peoriachronicle.com/2006/05/25/legal-loopholes-make-a-mockery-of-the-open-meetings-act/comment-page-1/#comment-1034 Gary Sandberg Fri, 26 May 2006 05:44:02 +0000 http://peoriachronicle.com/?p=408#comment-1034 CJ, You are looking at this with only onr monocle instead of glasses. Your lawyer confident stated hr/she didn;t know what if anything the School Board may or may not hsvr done. As that :previous" action is critical to the entire process, someone needs to determine where the money came from . . .. . . . . . As "Deep Throat" stated "Follow the money", so is it necessary to understand if the $877,750 was part of the APPROVED BUDGET for acquisition or if the money was in the budget for some other purpose such as "Life safety modifications" or some other capital line item. If the money was in the budget FOR THE STATED PURPOSE OF ACQUIRING LAND, then maybe the board just made a very bad PR move. If on the other hand, there was no money in the budget for property acquisitions, then perhaps the acquisition, purchase and later open meeting vote is merely the tip of the iceburg that belies the intent of the open meeting act and the exceptions for executive session and creates a greater violation than a simple PR move. I also don't understand how a public body ie School administration or City adminstration can/could enter into a contract with the real estate egency for grater than $10,000 without open meeting Board approval of that contract. Follow the money, Grasshopper . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . CJ, You are looking at this with only onr monocle instead of glasses. Your lawyer confident stated hr/she didn;t know what if anything the School Board may or may not hsvr done. As that :previous” action is critical to the entire process, someone needs to determine where the money came from . . .. . . . . . As “Deep Throat” stated “Follow the money”, so is it necessary to understand if the $877,750 was part of the APPROVED BUDGET for acquisition or if the money was in the budget for some other purpose such as “Life safety modifications” or some other capital line item. If the money was in the budget FOR THE STATED PURPOSE OF ACQUIRING LAND, then maybe the board just made a very bad PR move. If on the other hand, there was no money in the budget for property acquisitions, then perhaps the acquisition, purchase and later open meeting vote is merely the tip of the iceburg that belies the intent of the open meeting act and the exceptions for executive session and creates a greater violation than a simple PR move.

I also don’t understand how a public body ie School administration or City adminstration can/could enter into a contract with the real estate egency for grater than $10,000 without open meeting Board approval of that contract.

Follow the money, Grasshopper . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

]]> By: jethro http://peoriachronicle.com/2006/05/25/legal-loopholes-make-a-mockery-of-the-open-meetings-act/comment-page-1/#comment-1029 jethro Fri, 26 May 2006 00:02:12 +0000 http://peoriachronicle.com/?p=408#comment-1029 makes me want to move to dunlap sch dist. At least they approve big spending in public. 150 should be ashamed of this. makes me want to move to dunlap sch dist. At least they approve big spending in public. 150 should be ashamed of this.

]]>