Mr. Quigley, the head of the Valley View School Board, has had his nomination petitions challenged while running for office in the April 5 election. His 90 signatures that he turned in have many problems. First, he needs 50 valid registered voters. Second, people signed other people's names.
A local resident and disabled vet had submitted the objection. Mr. Quigley has not taken lightly to his objection, and does not understand that this is a part of the electoral process of being an elected official. Nothing is handed to you unless you are liked and respected in a community you run for office in.
Furthermore, Quigley has raised the taxes the last two years on the residents, with the school being the one that hits the pockets the deepest of the residents. It is not wonder that his pompous attitude of "how dare you object to me" has spurred many residents to see him for who he is.
We received an email yesterday calling him an egotistical, money hungry, arrogant, SOB that feels he is OWED the world on tax payers dimes. This letter goes on and on about how he chooses to send his kids to private school, does nothing as the chair to improve the education levels, and raises taxes while cutting needed services.
Although we don't state that about Mr. Quigley, we really don't know him enough to deny it.
We contacted Bonnie to get her feel about this elected official and she stated that she witnessed his attack against the retired vet for objecting to the petitions.
Bonnie states, "Although it is every citizens right to object to faulty petitions, Mr. Quigley yelled that he wasted his time to do so and the time of each person that signed the papers. He did not claim any fault for the many printed names I saw on there, non-registered voters that signed, people that signed multiple times, or lack of enough signatures. Last year I went through this process and understood that it is the right of anyone to object, that if I did something wrong it was my fault because it was my petitions. I was humbled and learned a great deal. I do not see that attitude reflected in Mr. Quigley's actions and nor did anyone else. Furthermore, he was trying to lead the board by telling them what to do during his own hearing. That was pretty pompous and demanding and I am just glad that my own husband is not like that."
We asked her if his attitude will stop him from getting his name on the ballot or for being a good candidate and she replied "no comment".
Is this really the type of people that we elect?
The hearing is scheduled sometime next week for the final objections. Mr. Quigley is trying to have it thrown out citing lack of evidence and a waste of his time. The objector is stating that the evidence is right on the page with not enough signatures, printing of names, and the same one writing in all the names of people they know. It will be interesting to find out if this process humbles this man into being a public servant or continues to allow him to do his thing, continue to raise taxes and cut services...
Monday, January 31, 2011
Ideas for Du Page Township to cut expenses
Du Page township Supervisor Bill Mayer would like to cut one position to lower expenses. That one position is Shirley V. who is the first NON Clarrite to get elected to office in a long while. She is not even a typical Republican elected official in Bolingbrook, being one of the first Democrats to represent the huge Democratic population of the community, which is largely Democrat.
However, cutting her position is only being done out of spite and to get a DDemocrat off the board. We have another better solution.
Anthony Morelli, the youth director that makes over $30K in his position annually within Du Page Township is clearly more expendable. The son of Trustee Morelli, his job is to book approx. 7 events each year for over $30K. These events include:
1. Learn to Skate - which means he sets up a time with Rocket Ice for August where people can go and ice skate. (Approx time to complete, 30 min.)
2. Castaway Fishing - Setting up a two week fishing excursion (Approx. time to complete 30 min.)
3. Dinner and Movie night (Approx. time to complete 30 min.)
4. Take me out to the ball game - (Approx. time to complete 30 min.)
5. Tee it Up for kids - (Approx. time to complete 30 min.)
We called a local park district to ask how long these events would take for them to set up. Each one takes approx. 30 minutes to coordinate, make contact calls, and type up a flyer or advertisement. Each event runs approx. 2 hours long. Given that fact, it would take 2.5 hours of set up for the events, 10 hours of attending the events plus 5 hours to set up at the events. We will even give extra time for prep work, marketing, etc. of these events of 12 hours.
Total time to do these events equates to roughly one 40 hour work week at $30K per year for events that Park Districts already book and put in place.
Matter of fact, the ice arena does their own marketing and advertising for events. So does the golf course. So what exactly are we paying this man for? Is it a job given to someone for being politically connected? Matter of fact, it has been many months since an event has happened. Has he been collecting checks during this entire time?
The tax payers of Bolingbrook need to be aware that Du Page Township might do some wonderful things for the residents, but they also are responsible for blowing a great deal of money, while hiding under the guise of not being the largest taxing body in town. Just last year your tax dollars went to support a plaque honoring Roger Claar. Now most people would say that a plaque is not much money and at least it is not a statue. However, Du Page Township did not think just a plaque was enough and built a $22K garden area around it, now called the Roger Claar garden. (It really looks like a memorial site).
When we inquired last year to the lavish monument area set up to worship Mr. Claar on tax payers dollars, we were told it is a wonderful garden that people can go to for meditation.
I am glad that Du Page Township spent our $22K on a place I can go to meditate about Roger Claar, and worship him. However, I thought that religion and government are not suppose to mix?
Furthermore, Du Page Township offers free rent to pet not for profit organizations, housing CSC for free. This costs the tax payers as well.
It is time to tell Du Page Township that our tax money matters to us and we no longer need a Township taxing body. The food pantry can run under its own purposes and the cemeteries can all go back to Will County. The local tax assessor can work for the county and we can eliminate a whole taxing body out of Bolingbrook, saving tax payers a great deal of money. It is time to take a stand and say NO to elected officials that serve their own purposes.
However, cutting her position is only being done out of spite and to get a DDemocrat off the board. We have another better solution.
Anthony Morelli, the youth director that makes over $30K in his position annually within Du Page Township is clearly more expendable. The son of Trustee Morelli, his job is to book approx. 7 events each year for over $30K. These events include:
1. Learn to Skate - which means he sets up a time with Rocket Ice for August where people can go and ice skate. (Approx time to complete, 30 min.)
2. Castaway Fishing - Setting up a two week fishing excursion (Approx. time to complete 30 min.)
3. Dinner and Movie night (Approx. time to complete 30 min.)
4. Take me out to the ball game - (Approx. time to complete 30 min.)
5. Tee it Up for kids - (Approx. time to complete 30 min.)
We called a local park district to ask how long these events would take for them to set up. Each one takes approx. 30 minutes to coordinate, make contact calls, and type up a flyer or advertisement. Each event runs approx. 2 hours long. Given that fact, it would take 2.5 hours of set up for the events, 10 hours of attending the events plus 5 hours to set up at the events. We will even give extra time for prep work, marketing, etc. of these events of 12 hours.
Total time to do these events equates to roughly one 40 hour work week at $30K per year for events that Park Districts already book and put in place.
Matter of fact, the ice arena does their own marketing and advertising for events. So does the golf course. So what exactly are we paying this man for? Is it a job given to someone for being politically connected? Matter of fact, it has been many months since an event has happened. Has he been collecting checks during this entire time?
The tax payers of Bolingbrook need to be aware that Du Page Township might do some wonderful things for the residents, but they also are responsible for blowing a great deal of money, while hiding under the guise of not being the largest taxing body in town. Just last year your tax dollars went to support a plaque honoring Roger Claar. Now most people would say that a plaque is not much money and at least it is not a statue. However, Du Page Township did not think just a plaque was enough and built a $22K garden area around it, now called the Roger Claar garden. (It really looks like a memorial site).
When we inquired last year to the lavish monument area set up to worship Mr. Claar on tax payers dollars, we were told it is a wonderful garden that people can go to for meditation.
I am glad that Du Page Township spent our $22K on a place I can go to meditate about Roger Claar, and worship him. However, I thought that religion and government are not suppose to mix?
Furthermore, Du Page Township offers free rent to pet not for profit organizations, housing CSC for free. This costs the tax payers as well.
It is time to tell Du Page Township that our tax money matters to us and we no longer need a Township taxing body. The food pantry can run under its own purposes and the cemeteries can all go back to Will County. The local tax assessor can work for the county and we can eliminate a whole taxing body out of Bolingbrook, saving tax payers a great deal of money. It is time to take a stand and say NO to elected officials that serve their own purposes.
Wednesday, January 26, 2011
Bad propaganda or forgery?
The recent article about Lindsey Claar on the Patch has drawn much controversy. We have received emails from all over Bolingbrook talking about this article. They state that she sounds like a confused individual who is given special attention due to her father. It does sound like she has changed her mind in life quite a bit. In the short period of time most people complete their 4 year degree plus the first year of her Masters', she has moved to numerous schools, opened and abandoned a business, and left the state. Plus it has taken her twice as long to get to her schooling as most people her age.
So what would spark such an article? Why would someone draw unneeded attention to oneself like this? This is not an obituary, although it sure reads as such. It also reads as though the writer has a serious crush on this young lady, or her father.
More controversy about this article pertains to her ability to have signed petitions for people running for office. She left almost two years ago and has been in California ever since. So when and where was she able to sign a petition stating she was a resident and voter? She is listed at Pinebrook Drive, and that address is registered to Roger Claar according to the Will County Tax Assessor office. Does leaving a community make you a resident? Roger states it does not when it comes down to Bonnie Alicea running for office. So his daughters signature should be considered invalid. Is she even the one who signed her name?
The bottom line is the writer states, "Sterling academic credentials and a desire to continually help people has led Lindsey Claar to become one of the more influential people in our community today." The residents disagree. She is not even in our community today and we don't even know if she will return. Plus having a desire to help people does not actually mean she is CURRENTLY helping anyone other than herself.
It looks like a new writer just got stomped on due to his young ignorance of the community. He lost a lot of readers due to this article. Lessons learned...
So what would spark such an article? Why would someone draw unneeded attention to oneself like this? This is not an obituary, although it sure reads as such. It also reads as though the writer has a serious crush on this young lady, or her father.
More controversy about this article pertains to her ability to have signed petitions for people running for office. She left almost two years ago and has been in California ever since. So when and where was she able to sign a petition stating she was a resident and voter? She is listed at Pinebrook Drive, and that address is registered to Roger Claar according to the Will County Tax Assessor office. Does leaving a community make you a resident? Roger states it does not when it comes down to Bonnie Alicea running for office. So his daughters signature should be considered invalid. Is she even the one who signed her name?
The bottom line is the writer states, "Sterling academic credentials and a desire to continually help people has led Lindsey Claar to become one of the more influential people in our community today." The residents disagree. She is not even in our community today and we don't even know if she will return. Plus having a desire to help people does not actually mean she is CURRENTLY helping anyone other than herself.
It looks like a new writer just got stomped on due to his young ignorance of the community. He lost a lot of readers due to this article. Lessons learned...
Sunday, January 23, 2011
Library spends more to accomodate friends
Fountaindale Library spends more to hire friends as contractors then to hire internally. A look at their most recent available financials show that two companies are making a killing in profits. They can do this as "outsourcing" instead of internal hiring.
A common example is to hire a computer consultant for $250,000 per year when an internal candidate would have been paid $50,000.00.
Fountaindale library has been paying two contractors exorbitant fees to work for the residents. The first contractor is Karen Anderson, whose title changes with the seasons in order to keep her on the high payroll. Raking in a nice municipal retirement fund for leaving the library, she now rakes in additional as an overpaid consultant.
The second company is the GAD Group. According to Library Financials, The GAD Group charged the library/ residents over $130K for 10 months of web deign and hosting services.
They list their monthly expense to host the service at $1500 per month for content management. They list their Monthly managed care services at an additional $8,750.00 per month. Total costs per month are over $10G for the library to have a small and easily manageable web site.
So where were the bids before contracting these services? Most web developers make approx. $45-$60K per year full time. The web site is definitely not a full time project. Could this payment be a payment to a friend?
The owner of GAD group is Mr. Greg Dover. (Gregory Dover - Partner, Chief Technology Officer)
Greg serves on the Workforce Investment Board of Will County and is connected all the way at the top with Larry Walsh down to being an IT employee of Roger Claar's at the Village. He does the web site for the Rotary Club of Bolingbrook and the Valley View Educational Enrichment Foundation.
When will we stop paying more for services that are not being sent out for proper bidding? When we stop hiring political friends....
A common example is to hire a computer consultant for $250,000 per year when an internal candidate would have been paid $50,000.00.
Fountaindale library has been paying two contractors exorbitant fees to work for the residents. The first contractor is Karen Anderson, whose title changes with the seasons in order to keep her on the high payroll. Raking in a nice municipal retirement fund for leaving the library, she now rakes in additional as an overpaid consultant.
The second company is the GAD Group. According to Library Financials, The GAD Group charged the library/ residents over $130K for 10 months of web deign and hosting services.
They list their monthly expense to host the service at $1500 per month for content management. They list their Monthly managed care services at an additional $8,750.00 per month. Total costs per month are over $10G for the library to have a small and easily manageable web site.
So where were the bids before contracting these services? Most web developers make approx. $45-$60K per year full time. The web site is definitely not a full time project. Could this payment be a payment to a friend?
The owner of GAD group is Mr. Greg Dover. (Gregory Dover - Partner, Chief Technology Officer)
Greg serves on the Workforce Investment Board of Will County and is connected all the way at the top with Larry Walsh down to being an IT employee of Roger Claar's at the Village. He does the web site for the Rotary Club of Bolingbrook and the Valley View Educational Enrichment Foundation.
When will we stop paying more for services that are not being sent out for proper bidding? When we stop hiring political friends....
Fountaindale Library Board does the right thing...
Fountaindale Library board has decided to do the right thing and use the money earned from the sale of old furnishings, to assist with the costs of the library expansion. Although it is not a lot of money, any money is less money out of the tax payers hard earned salary.
This comes in the wake of articles where Robert Kalnicky wanted to donate the money to a private organization.
We thank the library for doing the right thing and making the right decision.
This comes in the wake of articles where Robert Kalnicky wanted to donate the money to a private organization.
We thank the library for doing the right thing and making the right decision.
Thursday, January 20, 2011
The Fine Art of Deception, starring Roger Claar
Do we want our elected officials to use deceptive practices on the residents? No, we want honesty and humbleness in the elected officials that make the choices for the residents. Yet, in Bolingbrook, Mr. Mayor Claar is the epitome of deception and dishonesty. Here is why...
When you watch the meetings that happen bi-weekly on Channel 6, you notice a few things. First, they pass bills without explaining the real reason why they are doing so. For example, passing a bill last week to make it ILLEGAL to gather your own water and drink it, removed the human right of survival. Nowhere did they justify WHY they would take away your rights to have a well in your own yard. The real reason is more money in their deals and pockets.
These kind of deals happen bi-weekly, where they pass items that benefit themselves over the best interest of the residents. They use deceptive practices to ensure the residents do not know why they do what they do.
It is apparent during election seasons how far they will go to be deceptive and dishonest. Last year when Bonnie Alicea ran for Mayor, they knocked her off the ballot using deceptive practices. They said her signatures were not valid in an objection and when she proved they were valid, they changed the names they were objecting to. This year, when she ran for office they said she was not a resident during September through March, when she proved she was, they removed her for July and August, even though they knew she was a resident. It is all deception and dishonesty.
Think about a time when Mr. Claar has publicly stated that they are not using companies that donate to his campaign fund. You cannot remember when he has stated it, because he never has. Think about a time that the other elected officials promised anything in a campaign promise, for making Bolingbrook better. You cannot come up with one because they do not run on a platform or any campaign promise. Think about why all the local bars have to contribute to Mr. Claar's campaign funds. He is the local liquor commissioner and can shut them down.
High acts of dishonesty through deceptive practices are common in Bolingbrook. We urge the residents to look deeper into WHY they do what they do and why our attorneys fees are a million dollars, almost double the city of Chicago's. Question why the residents do not know of the over $400 million in debt we have, which is the largest per capita of ALL cities and villages in Illinois. Question why we cut village services while donating hundreds of thousands of dollars to private organizations that are loaded with public officials.
Don't just sit there and do nothing. Research, read, and learn to uncover the truth.
When you watch the meetings that happen bi-weekly on Channel 6, you notice a few things. First, they pass bills without explaining the real reason why they are doing so. For example, passing a bill last week to make it ILLEGAL to gather your own water and drink it, removed the human right of survival. Nowhere did they justify WHY they would take away your rights to have a well in your own yard. The real reason is more money in their deals and pockets.
These kind of deals happen bi-weekly, where they pass items that benefit themselves over the best interest of the residents. They use deceptive practices to ensure the residents do not know why they do what they do.
It is apparent during election seasons how far they will go to be deceptive and dishonest. Last year when Bonnie Alicea ran for Mayor, they knocked her off the ballot using deceptive practices. They said her signatures were not valid in an objection and when she proved they were valid, they changed the names they were objecting to. This year, when she ran for office they said she was not a resident during September through March, when she proved she was, they removed her for July and August, even though they knew she was a resident. It is all deception and dishonesty.
Think about a time when Mr. Claar has publicly stated that they are not using companies that donate to his campaign fund. You cannot remember when he has stated it, because he never has. Think about a time that the other elected officials promised anything in a campaign promise, for making Bolingbrook better. You cannot come up with one because they do not run on a platform or any campaign promise. Think about why all the local bars have to contribute to Mr. Claar's campaign funds. He is the local liquor commissioner and can shut them down.
High acts of dishonesty through deceptive practices are common in Bolingbrook. We urge the residents to look deeper into WHY they do what they do and why our attorneys fees are a million dollars, almost double the city of Chicago's. Question why the residents do not know of the over $400 million in debt we have, which is the largest per capita of ALL cities and villages in Illinois. Question why we cut village services while donating hundreds of thousands of dollars to private organizations that are loaded with public officials.
Don't just sit there and do nothing. Research, read, and learn to uncover the truth.
Monday, January 17, 2011
School Board Raises Taxes a few years in a row
The residents are being hit hard by increases in taxes. First the school board raises the taxes, then the state raises taxes. Who can the residents turn to?
They can turn to the voting booths. Each vote matters when placing proper school board members.
Has anyone else noticed that the taxes are being raised, but the level of education has not? The grades are down, the services to help children with problems are close to non-existent, and the top heavy salaries and positions never get cut.
Those are the sure signs of a non-workable school board.
Has anyone on the school board come up with solutions to better the standards and testing? Nope!
Get ready to vote on April 5th!
Sunday, January 16, 2011
Is Robert Kalnicki stealing from the Residents?
It has become apparent that a watch dog group needs to be created to monitor the library issues.
On the number crunchers website, http://www.thenumbercrunchers-bolingbrook.com/ a reporter writes about donating furniture, instead of selling it, to off set costs of the new library on the taxpayers. Robert Kalnicki wants this furniture donated to a good cause.
What this reporter failed to report was the connection between the one that recommended the donation and the place he wants to donate to.
Robert Kalnicki, head of the Bolingbrook Tea Party (according to Facebook), serves on the library board. He is the one that recommended this donation. He would like the donation to go to a private non-for profit called CSC.
The problem is that CSC's Executive Director is Robert Kalnicki.
According to this companies annual financial statement, Robert Kalnicki is listed as the highest paid employee of this company working 40 hours per week. His earnings in 2009 were $26,209.00. The majority of CSC donations come from taxing bodies such as the Village of Bolingbrook, Romeoville, Du Page Township, and others.
Matter of fact, there is a statement that asks for the name, address, and phone number of the person that keeps the books for the company. This lists Robert Kalnicki 719 Parkwood Ave in Romeoville.
In the tax line that asks for name and address of principle officer... Robert Kalnickly shows up again as the only name...
This organization lists that it does counseling for financial management.
So should a man who sits on the Trustee board be able to dictate that the furniture should be donated to his organization? Absolutely not. That is called fattening one's own wallet.
As a tax payer I am horrified that this is happening. According to law, he should have excused himself from this vote due to conflict of interest. Since he did not, the State's Attorney should be contacted.
On the number crunchers website, http://www.thenumbercrunchers-bolingbrook.com/ a reporter writes about donating furniture, instead of selling it, to off set costs of the new library on the taxpayers. Robert Kalnicki wants this furniture donated to a good cause.
What this reporter failed to report was the connection between the one that recommended the donation and the place he wants to donate to.
Robert Kalnicki, head of the Bolingbrook Tea Party (according to Facebook), serves on the library board. He is the one that recommended this donation. He would like the donation to go to a private non-for profit called CSC.
The problem is that CSC's Executive Director is Robert Kalnicki.
According to this companies annual financial statement, Robert Kalnicki is listed as the highest paid employee of this company working 40 hours per week. His earnings in 2009 were $26,209.00. The majority of CSC donations come from taxing bodies such as the Village of Bolingbrook, Romeoville, Du Page Township, and others.
Matter of fact, there is a statement that asks for the name, address, and phone number of the person that keeps the books for the company. This lists Robert Kalnicki 719 Parkwood Ave in Romeoville.
In the tax line that asks for name and address of principle officer... Robert Kalnickly shows up again as the only name...
This organization lists that it does counseling for financial management.
So should a man who sits on the Trustee board be able to dictate that the furniture should be donated to his organization? Absolutely not. That is called fattening one's own wallet.
As a tax payer I am horrified that this is happening. According to law, he should have excused himself from this vote due to conflict of interest. Since he did not, the State's Attorney should be contacted.
Question to the residents...
Do you think that Bolingbrook's personal relationships with China hurt or help Bolingbrook?
The Chamber seems to think they help our relations and spend money to send Mike Evans there each year.
Did we have any Chinese corporations coming to Bolingbrook since they began traveling? No.
Does it bring in tax dollars? No.
Matter of fact, many view relations with China actually hurt American products and sales. They make toys for kids that make the kids sick. Their products break easily. Their cheap products even put good products out of business, so that we cannot buy a good product.
We are asking the residents to take a vote. Email us to let us know what you think!
The Chamber seems to think they help our relations and spend money to send Mike Evans there each year.
Did we have any Chinese corporations coming to Bolingbrook since they began traveling? No.
Does it bring in tax dollars? No.
Matter of fact, many view relations with China actually hurt American products and sales. They make toys for kids that make the kids sick. Their products break easily. Their cheap products even put good products out of business, so that we cannot buy a good product.
We are asking the residents to take a vote. Email us to let us know what you think!
Bolingbrook's Snow Plowing
We have been getting mixed messages in this week about the plowing in Bolingbrook. Last year it was reported that the snow plowing was dismal. This year, the residents want to know what is taking so long for their streets to be plowed. They pay taxes, don't they? Is that not a service?
We are on the scene to see if the next snow sees govermental officials streets being plowed prior to other residents. Last year we saw this to be the case.
Reporting through the snow... The Brook Report!
We are on the scene to see if the next snow sees govermental officials streets being plowed prior to other residents. Last year we saw this to be the case.
Reporting through the snow... The Brook Report!
Objections to Objections launched in Will County
The kangaroo courts might not get the last laugh this year. Will County courts have verified that three objections were launched regarding the decisions that the local kangaroo courts have made.
When a process is faulty and a board is put together of people with conflict of interests, a kangaroo court is typically born. In Bolingbrook, this means that the decision was made before the trial even began. This happened in the case against Bonnie Alicea and all three school board members. This is not the first time this has been done to Bonnie Alicea.
So a filing was received in Will County to contest and appeal the kangaroo courts decisions. We are awaiting info to find out who was contested and why. We are hoping that the three candidates, whose hearings will be heard by Will County Judges, will include Bonnie Alicea.
We feel she should still be able to run and we support the fight. Go Bonnie!
When a process is faulty and a board is put together of people with conflict of interests, a kangaroo court is typically born. In Bolingbrook, this means that the decision was made before the trial even began. This happened in the case against Bonnie Alicea and all three school board members. This is not the first time this has been done to Bonnie Alicea.
So a filing was received in Will County to contest and appeal the kangaroo courts decisions. We are awaiting info to find out who was contested and why. We are hoping that the three candidates, whose hearings will be heard by Will County Judges, will include Bonnie Alicea.
We feel she should still be able to run and we support the fight. Go Bonnie!
Saturday, January 15, 2011
Personal Thanks for Bonnie
We wanted to personally thank Bonnie Alicea for her ongoing heroism to the local political culture in Bolingbrook. Many people do not know that Bonnie has been in the hospital with double pnemonia.
To show our gratitude, we would like to assit Bonnie in pushing her heroism farther. First, we have sent people and tons of flowers to her bedside. We have gathered people together in support of Bonnie's cause and have formed a local team of fighters to take this political scene to the next platform. The first item of importance is to change the electoral board corruption in this community by making it public knowledge and expose the corruption, the people involved, and the greed.
Why is this so important? We feel that controlling the election process is unconstitutional. We also think that this has hurt over 70,000 residents to financially benefit a handful of local politicians. They are taking ADVANTAGE of the residents. We will expose each item, one by one to the residents to make them become aware of the corruption. We will be posting charts of who is connected to whom, what they are making because of it, and why they are involved. The public has a right to this knowledge.
Our team is called "the freedom fighters of Bolingbrook" and we have started to go door to door. We will walk each and every door between now and the election.
We are asking that each resident sign our local petition which will be given to the highest people that can assist with change. It is hard for authority to ignore 70,000 signatures. It is equally upsetting to politicians that we do not care if people are going to be "registered voters". We want all RESIDENTS, regardless of age, sex, or voting power to sign this. This is an effort for the RESIDENTS and TAXPAYERS to make a difference in their community.
We will see each and every one of you soon!
To show our gratitude, we would like to assit Bonnie in pushing her heroism farther. First, we have sent people and tons of flowers to her bedside. We have gathered people together in support of Bonnie's cause and have formed a local team of fighters to take this political scene to the next platform. The first item of importance is to change the electoral board corruption in this community by making it public knowledge and expose the corruption, the people involved, and the greed.
Why is this so important? We feel that controlling the election process is unconstitutional. We also think that this has hurt over 70,000 residents to financially benefit a handful of local politicians. They are taking ADVANTAGE of the residents. We will expose each item, one by one to the residents to make them become aware of the corruption. We will be posting charts of who is connected to whom, what they are making because of it, and why they are involved. The public has a right to this knowledge.
Our team is called "the freedom fighters of Bolingbrook" and we have started to go door to door. We will walk each and every door between now and the election.
We are asking that each resident sign our local petition which will be given to the highest people that can assist with change. It is hard for authority to ignore 70,000 signatures. It is equally upsetting to politicians that we do not care if people are going to be "registered voters". We want all RESIDENTS, regardless of age, sex, or voting power to sign this. This is an effort for the RESIDENTS and TAXPAYERS to make a difference in their community.
We will see each and every one of you soon!
Hot Tip!
Objections were filed in Will County for an appeal to the decision to keep or remove people from the ballot in Bolingbrook. More news coming on this soon!
Thursday, January 13, 2011
State of the Village should be called Scam of the Village
Every year the Chamber of Commerce makes a killing by setting up the State of the Village. This event is where Mayor Claar presents the numbers to appear in his favor, citing growth since 1986, not in the last 5 years or even 10. This event is charged a hefty price tag to attend and is sold out to officials that charge the taxpayers to attend the $50 per dinner. So your local library officials are sure to attend, the Village trustees, Du Page township officials and even School officials will go for the free pricey dinner at the same ol' Golf Club. (Free time at the Golf Club as well!) Forget including the local residents, let's fill the room with Kool Aid drinkers and donating vendors...
For example, last year Orange Crush got a great response... weeks before Bonnie made it be known Orange Crush was not a beverage, but a mafia owned and operated, high donating, vendor of the village.
Claar is the keynote speaker for the event which hundreds are expected to attend.
The program is scheduled for 11:30 a.m. Thursday at the Bolingbrook Golf Club, 2001 Rodeo Drive.
Tickets for the luncheon are $55 for Chamber members and $75 for non-members. A portion of each ticket will be donated to a non-profit organization of Claar’s choice. We know that will be his daughters organization or Carol's. Notice how he does not explain this to the media?
For information, or to purchase a ticket, contact the Bolingbrook Chamber of Commerce at 630-226-8420.
For example, last year Orange Crush got a great response... weeks before Bonnie made it be known Orange Crush was not a beverage, but a mafia owned and operated, high donating, vendor of the village.
Claar is the keynote speaker for the event which hundreds are expected to attend.
The program is scheduled for 11:30 a.m. Thursday at the Bolingbrook Golf Club, 2001 Rodeo Drive.
Tickets for the luncheon are $55 for Chamber members and $75 for non-members. A portion of each ticket will be donated to a non-profit organization of Claar’s choice. We know that will be his daughters organization or Carol's. Notice how he does not explain this to the media?
For information, or to purchase a ticket, contact the Bolingbrook Chamber of Commerce at 630-226-8420.
Wednesday, January 12, 2011
Bad play of the year goes to.... Mr. Claar
Well Mr. Mayor Claar, it seems that the opposing Independent Party outplayed and out maneuvered you. I believe in a game of chess, you booting Bonnie would have been a check mate. So how did she get your queen?
Bonnie Alicea knew there was no way to get a fair hearing in Bolingbrook. She knew her option was to go to Will County. Since her hearing was suppose to be based off the objectors objections, she would have immediatly had it overturned in Will County and re-entered the race. Why? Mr. Kavanagh and Mr. Claar forgot a few rules of the political game...
First, Mr. Kavanagh's entire objections were based off the month of September to March. This was prior to the April 5th deadline. It would appear that he did not spend enough time researching law to write this document. Bonnie was prepared for the hearing based on all her evidence showing April to June timeframes. Since she had the attorneys beat hands down, Roger went for additional time. He made an executive decision to remove Bonnie from the ballot for not having proof to her whereabouts in July and August.
It is not the chairs decision to add information to an objection. Did Bonnie disprove her objectors claims, yes. But that is not how kangaroo courts in Bolingbrook work. She knew that when it happened to her last year. Matter of fact, just yesterday she laughed when she stated that it was funny to see new accusations included in the final decision. Accusations that the objector never supplied, their attorney never produced, and the board did not bring up. It was adding new evidence after a hearing. When I asked her like what, she mentioned her business PO Box was apparently a last ditch effort to stake a residency claim on her.
So how can a board add things that an objector did not file in the objection or that their attorney did not bring up in the documents? They don't in the real law. Throwing Bonnie off a ballot because she brought proof to contest the objections, then the board changing the objections during the hearing is as low as it comes.
So although the objections stated her residency in question from October 2009-March 2010, she was booted off the ballot for after she sold her home in June because there was not ENOUGH evidence brought to the hearing to clear that. (Even though these dates or objections were NEVER lauched by anyone other than the board.)
So the fact that she did her online change of address for her drivers license meant nothing to the head of the Police Mr. Claar, who Bonnie asked to have it run, right there and then, to prove the allegations. He asked TWICE when she ran it. So he knew she did. Why did he not run it to prove the case? It is called a kangaroo court residents!
Furthermore, the ultimate joke is on the board. First, Bonnie knew how corrupt they were and selflesly threw her name in the hat for trustee. She knew that they would be so hell bent on getting her off the ballot, and for protecting the school board members, they had no choice then to focus on that and not bumping others off the ballot. She took the 5% chance that they would let her on and ran anyways, distracting them enough to get four other good candidates access to the ballot.
Well the plan worked. While Mr. Claar wanted to hunt Bonnie down and allow his anger and power take over her hearing and access to the ballot, others slipped right by him. This should teach Mr. Claar a good lesson on treating people a certain way.
But incase he does not follow the drift, here are the lessons he should have learned.
1. Don't under estimate the intelligence of a woman who knows IL politics are a broken system and can find her way around it. Expecailly when they use the same game plan two years in a row.
2. When you spend too much time and anger on one person, you fail to see the others creeping up behind you.
3. When you have only one attorney to do your biddings, it might not be enough to save your and others asses next time.
4. When you remove someone from a ballot, you narrow the odds against your own people. Since there are more then one person running this time, you have given your candidates a death sentence in politics. There are four highly educated, highly well known members of the community that are running against your three candidates, two of which have been wating to retire anyways.
Now let the games begin during this election cycle!
Bonnie Alicea knew there was no way to get a fair hearing in Bolingbrook. She knew her option was to go to Will County. Since her hearing was suppose to be based off the objectors objections, she would have immediatly had it overturned in Will County and re-entered the race. Why? Mr. Kavanagh and Mr. Claar forgot a few rules of the political game...
First, Mr. Kavanagh's entire objections were based off the month of September to March. This was prior to the April 5th deadline. It would appear that he did not spend enough time researching law to write this document. Bonnie was prepared for the hearing based on all her evidence showing April to June timeframes. Since she had the attorneys beat hands down, Roger went for additional time. He made an executive decision to remove Bonnie from the ballot for not having proof to her whereabouts in July and August.
It is not the chairs decision to add information to an objection. Did Bonnie disprove her objectors claims, yes. But that is not how kangaroo courts in Bolingbrook work. She knew that when it happened to her last year. Matter of fact, just yesterday she laughed when she stated that it was funny to see new accusations included in the final decision. Accusations that the objector never supplied, their attorney never produced, and the board did not bring up. It was adding new evidence after a hearing. When I asked her like what, she mentioned her business PO Box was apparently a last ditch effort to stake a residency claim on her.
So how can a board add things that an objector did not file in the objection or that their attorney did not bring up in the documents? They don't in the real law. Throwing Bonnie off a ballot because she brought proof to contest the objections, then the board changing the objections during the hearing is as low as it comes.
So although the objections stated her residency in question from October 2009-March 2010, she was booted off the ballot for after she sold her home in June because there was not ENOUGH evidence brought to the hearing to clear that. (Even though these dates or objections were NEVER lauched by anyone other than the board.)
So the fact that she did her online change of address for her drivers license meant nothing to the head of the Police Mr. Claar, who Bonnie asked to have it run, right there and then, to prove the allegations. He asked TWICE when she ran it. So he knew she did. Why did he not run it to prove the case? It is called a kangaroo court residents!
Furthermore, the ultimate joke is on the board. First, Bonnie knew how corrupt they were and selflesly threw her name in the hat for trustee. She knew that they would be so hell bent on getting her off the ballot, and for protecting the school board members, they had no choice then to focus on that and not bumping others off the ballot. She took the 5% chance that they would let her on and ran anyways, distracting them enough to get four other good candidates access to the ballot.
Well the plan worked. While Mr. Claar wanted to hunt Bonnie down and allow his anger and power take over her hearing and access to the ballot, others slipped right by him. This should teach Mr. Claar a good lesson on treating people a certain way.
But incase he does not follow the drift, here are the lessons he should have learned.
1. Don't under estimate the intelligence of a woman who knows IL politics are a broken system and can find her way around it. Expecailly when they use the same game plan two years in a row.
2. When you spend too much time and anger on one person, you fail to see the others creeping up behind you.
3. When you have only one attorney to do your biddings, it might not be enough to save your and others asses next time.
4. When you remove someone from a ballot, you narrow the odds against your own people. Since there are more then one person running this time, you have given your candidates a death sentence in politics. There are four highly educated, highly well known members of the community that are running against your three candidates, two of which have been wating to retire anyways.
Now let the games begin during this election cycle!
Sunday, January 9, 2011
Tomorrow's Verdict Reading on Bonnie's Ballot
Carol,
I will be unable to attend the hearing tomorrow. I would like this statement read as my final statement before the closing of the hearing. Please email me the final documents later tomorrow.
Statement:
1. 65 ILCS 5/3 1-10 states "A person is not eligible for an elected municipal office unless that person is a qualified elector of the municipality and has resided in the municipality at least one year next preceding the election or appointment."
2. Election law defines residence as "that place where a person maintains a fixed and permanent principle resident and to which he, wherever temporarily located, always intends to return."
3. According to case law Pope vs. Board of Elections 370III. 196,201,18N E 2d 214, 216 (1938), "Where a person leaves his residence and goes to another place, even if it be another state, with an intention to return to his former abode, or with only the conditional intention of acquiring a new residence, he does not lose his former residence as long as his intention remains conditional".
In accordance to the three laws stated above, I have been a proud resident for 32 of my 35 years. I gave evidence that showed I:
1. Never relinquished my residency status.
2. Resided in the community for one year prior to the election.
3. Maintained a fixed and permanent residency throughout the year.
4. Returned when I had temporarily left.
It is apparent to me and other residents that the law was not abided here today. Instead, the electoral board used this hearing as a mockery of the law and to strip me of my Constitutional Rights to run for an elected office. Therefore, the decision to remove me from the ballot was made from financial greed, personal and political party selfishness, extreme board bias, and fear. However, removing me from the ballot will not stop me from fighting for the residents and informing them of the community issues, like your fiscal irresponsibility and lack of transparency.
Furthermore, the law also states that only residence have to pay property taxes. I will be expecting a full refund for my last 8 years of taxes, since your official court ruling will declare me a non-resident. I was 100% owner of my abode, therefore qualifying for a tax refund for paying property taxes to a village that my home was not counted as a residential home of Bolingbrook.
Thank you,
Bonnie Alicea
Thursday, January 6, 2011
Interview with George Smith
On the Spot Interview:
I ran into George Smith yesterday and asked if he could take a minute to answer some questions regarding the objections launched. He agreed to an interview.
I asked him "What made you decide to object to the school board?" George replied that he met with the Independent Party a few weeks back and Bonnie had pulled the signatures of the candidates. She was explaining to the Party that the mistakes the elected officials made were rookie mistakes. She made copies for everyone that wanted to run for an office in two years. I took an extra copy and we followed along as she explained the issues in each one's nomination papers. It was quite a gathering and we all pondered why Mr. Quigley only turned in 90 signatures.
I started thinking about the fact that these elected officials are under the impression that residents don't check their petitions and allow them to run for office without meeting the requirements. This seems unfair, as Bonnie was kicked off the ballot last year for many less infractions.
I spent some time prepping the reports and submitted them. I wanted Roger's people to see that it is stressful to be objected to. It cost time, money, and embarrassment to the candidates. This is no way to treat people. Yet in Bolingbrook, this is what they do to keep their strong hold. Karma is Karma...
I saw what Bonnie said about each line and the mistakes. I understood these to be issues. I saw that the minimum number of signatures were not met after their infractions. I objected on the basis of truth to the residents and fairness in local elections.
The night before the hearing I called on Bonnie to ask her to assist me. I did not need her to tell me what to object to, I had already done that. I needed her to help me by writing down what was being asked or said, as my hearing aid was destroyed in a fire at my home three weeks ago. It takes a long time for the VA to replace these things.
Bonnie was not fond of having to go, but she did it because she knew they would neglect my disability and because the board was rigged with Kavanagh on it. She told me ahead of time that the proof I had gotten at Will County was not notarized, but at least it was proof. She also walked me through the fact that no matter what was shown, they would not remove their own people. She told me to keep my cards in my hand and don't give them anything. I see why she said that now... Their counter objections has helped me prepare for each and every item in the appeal process. They laid down their cards and let me take a look.
Bonnie helped me that day through the hearing, so that I knew what they were asking of me. I am not sure why they do not have provisions for the hearing impaired. She has helped me in the last few days since then, to teach me the process in case I decide to appeal now or object in the future. She has helped me to organize my objections, gather the proper evidence, and prepare my appeal.
Bottom line, all three candidates fell short of the minimum number of signatures. If I appeal, I will have all my proof with me. If I take it to Will County, it will cost the candidates a great deal of legal costs, since Kavanagh cannot support them after sitting on the board.
Maybe I will do that. I don't think I will take Venegas to court. He felt the consequence of his actions. That was apparent. I truly don't think he will make the same mistakes again. I believe he learned something from this process. He learned about fairness and the American Way. He also shook my hand and thanked me for being a concerned resident. This shows some class.
However, Mr. Quigley berated me because I could not "hear" the hearing. He felt that this was not a part of the process of being an elected official. He felt better then the system. This pompous attitude, coupled with the fact that I reviewed all his signatures in Will County, should have him climb under a rock if I take my objection to Will County. He will not last there if I do. According to the law, he only has approx. 6 valid signatures. He should have checked them over, walked for himself like everyone else does, and seen what it was like to have to pay money, time, and energy to work for our jobs.
Mr. Gougis wanted to remove Bonnie from my corner. I guess he felt she was a threat. I guess nobody told him the objection was turned in a week before that. I do not understand why he would want me to go through a hearing that I cannot hear. That seems cruel to any hearing impaired veteran. I don't respect that. If he was blind, I would not take his walking stick.
In regards to Ken Cygan, I pulled his petitions to see what his signatures looked like. He did not submit the maximum, he submitted a little over the minimum. He had many issues. He had people sign for others, forgot to initial his scratch offs, and some signatures were so illegible that the address or name was not recognizable. He even was missing a notary stamp. He had less then 200 valid signatures according to Will County when I went there to review the signatures. The minimum was almost 300. The problem was that I did not have each sheet notarized. I had each signature, street values, etc. Now, where else would I get those signatures if not the will county office?
So he narrowly escaped, but it does not mean he has escaped for long. I have 5 days after tomorrow to object to his as well.
I will make that decision after conferring with some local residents. He came out of the box swinging at Bonnie, yet never met her. He has never contributed to the community and did not have enough valid signatures. I will decide soon.
In the meantime, I will continue to go to the meetings and tell people to come out and vote. I will still tell people to watch the local elections and to watch what happens in this Village. The independent party calls me the "watcher". I watch, I listen, I learn, and I do what I think is best for the community.
I ran into George Smith yesterday and asked if he could take a minute to answer some questions regarding the objections launched. He agreed to an interview.
I asked him "What made you decide to object to the school board?" George replied that he met with the Independent Party a few weeks back and Bonnie had pulled the signatures of the candidates. She was explaining to the Party that the mistakes the elected officials made were rookie mistakes. She made copies for everyone that wanted to run for an office in two years. I took an extra copy and we followed along as she explained the issues in each one's nomination papers. It was quite a gathering and we all pondered why Mr. Quigley only turned in 90 signatures.
I started thinking about the fact that these elected officials are under the impression that residents don't check their petitions and allow them to run for office without meeting the requirements. This seems unfair, as Bonnie was kicked off the ballot last year for many less infractions.
I spent some time prepping the reports and submitted them. I wanted Roger's people to see that it is stressful to be objected to. It cost time, money, and embarrassment to the candidates. This is no way to treat people. Yet in Bolingbrook, this is what they do to keep their strong hold. Karma is Karma...
I saw what Bonnie said about each line and the mistakes. I understood these to be issues. I saw that the minimum number of signatures were not met after their infractions. I objected on the basis of truth to the residents and fairness in local elections.
The night before the hearing I called on Bonnie to ask her to assist me. I did not need her to tell me what to object to, I had already done that. I needed her to help me by writing down what was being asked or said, as my hearing aid was destroyed in a fire at my home three weeks ago. It takes a long time for the VA to replace these things.
Bonnie was not fond of having to go, but she did it because she knew they would neglect my disability and because the board was rigged with Kavanagh on it. She told me ahead of time that the proof I had gotten at Will County was not notarized, but at least it was proof. She also walked me through the fact that no matter what was shown, they would not remove their own people. She told me to keep my cards in my hand and don't give them anything. I see why she said that now... Their counter objections has helped me prepare for each and every item in the appeal process. They laid down their cards and let me take a look.
Bonnie helped me that day through the hearing, so that I knew what they were asking of me. I am not sure why they do not have provisions for the hearing impaired. She has helped me in the last few days since then, to teach me the process in case I decide to appeal now or object in the future. She has helped me to organize my objections, gather the proper evidence, and prepare my appeal.
Bottom line, all three candidates fell short of the minimum number of signatures. If I appeal, I will have all my proof with me. If I take it to Will County, it will cost the candidates a great deal of legal costs, since Kavanagh cannot support them after sitting on the board.
Maybe I will do that. I don't think I will take Venegas to court. He felt the consequence of his actions. That was apparent. I truly don't think he will make the same mistakes again. I believe he learned something from this process. He learned about fairness and the American Way. He also shook my hand and thanked me for being a concerned resident. This shows some class.
However, Mr. Quigley berated me because I could not "hear" the hearing. He felt that this was not a part of the process of being an elected official. He felt better then the system. This pompous attitude, coupled with the fact that I reviewed all his signatures in Will County, should have him climb under a rock if I take my objection to Will County. He will not last there if I do. According to the law, he only has approx. 6 valid signatures. He should have checked them over, walked for himself like everyone else does, and seen what it was like to have to pay money, time, and energy to work for our jobs.
Mr. Gougis wanted to remove Bonnie from my corner. I guess he felt she was a threat. I guess nobody told him the objection was turned in a week before that. I do not understand why he would want me to go through a hearing that I cannot hear. That seems cruel to any hearing impaired veteran. I don't respect that. If he was blind, I would not take his walking stick.
In regards to Ken Cygan, I pulled his petitions to see what his signatures looked like. He did not submit the maximum, he submitted a little over the minimum. He had many issues. He had people sign for others, forgot to initial his scratch offs, and some signatures were so illegible that the address or name was not recognizable. He even was missing a notary stamp. He had less then 200 valid signatures according to Will County when I went there to review the signatures. The minimum was almost 300. The problem was that I did not have each sheet notarized. I had each signature, street values, etc. Now, where else would I get those signatures if not the will county office?
So he narrowly escaped, but it does not mean he has escaped for long. I have 5 days after tomorrow to object to his as well.
I will make that decision after conferring with some local residents. He came out of the box swinging at Bonnie, yet never met her. He has never contributed to the community and did not have enough valid signatures. I will decide soon.
In the meantime, I will continue to go to the meetings and tell people to come out and vote. I will still tell people to watch the local elections and to watch what happens in this Village. The independent party calls me the "watcher". I watch, I listen, I learn, and I do what I think is best for the community.
Appeals in line for Bolingbrook
With five days from Friday, Bolingbrook objectors/ objected get to file an appeal on their hearings. Typical costs to defend oneself with local attorneys are currently $5,000 attorney retainer plus costs. Will any of the incumbents pay this money to keep their non-paid school positions? If so, who is really paying for this?
It was apparent that the three school board members had free attorney help. It could have also been on tax payers dollars. Who will Tressler LLC and Kavanagh charge for their services? We will stay tuned to watch for this...
What was also apparent was that taking free help placed these candidates in a position that others in Bolingbrook do not get when they run for office. It is called an unfair advantage.
The stress of being objected to far outweighs the stress of what comes after the hearings. However, both ends are unbelievably stressful to the candidate. On one end you have to defend your petitions. There are no books that tell people how petitions are suppose to look, or how they can be objected to. Then you get hit with attorneys fees that take away from your campaign funds. Instead of walking door to door campaigning, you are in courts.
This is why this tactic of objections are used today. After the hearings, there is still Will County appeals. That is where the money costs...
Local decisions are made upon poor IL written laws that state incumbents sit on the board and there is high levels of bias, favoritism, and conflict of interest on the boards. That is why Will County sees so many cases after the local cases are done.
The papers have to be non-biased when reporting articles. Such as Bonnie being removed because she maintained a second home in another state. There was no law to state that having a second home disqualifies you from running from office from your prime residency. If that was the case, Obama could not be elected next term. Bonnie supplied proof to her primary residency, which is a drivers license, registration, and voting record. The decision rendered her a non-resident, even though the state, election authorities, and taxes prove she is.
The fix comes in when the boards want to keep someone from running. Both Bonnie and a lady from Lemont had lawsuits against the board members. This made it personal to the board to keep these candidates off. Both candidates spoke of corruption and mis-spending. The current administration does not want someone opening their books to the residents. They want non-transparency. Bonnie and the Lemont woman wanted the residents to save money, see the corruption, and fight for their communities.
We look forward to reporting on the Will County hearings for justice.
It was apparent that the three school board members had free attorney help. It could have also been on tax payers dollars. Who will Tressler LLC and Kavanagh charge for their services? We will stay tuned to watch for this...
What was also apparent was that taking free help placed these candidates in a position that others in Bolingbrook do not get when they run for office. It is called an unfair advantage.
The stress of being objected to far outweighs the stress of what comes after the hearings. However, both ends are unbelievably stressful to the candidate. On one end you have to defend your petitions. There are no books that tell people how petitions are suppose to look, or how they can be objected to. Then you get hit with attorneys fees that take away from your campaign funds. Instead of walking door to door campaigning, you are in courts.
This is why this tactic of objections are used today. After the hearings, there is still Will County appeals. That is where the money costs...
Local decisions are made upon poor IL written laws that state incumbents sit on the board and there is high levels of bias, favoritism, and conflict of interest on the boards. That is why Will County sees so many cases after the local cases are done.
The papers have to be non-biased when reporting articles. Such as Bonnie being removed because she maintained a second home in another state. There was no law to state that having a second home disqualifies you from running from office from your prime residency. If that was the case, Obama could not be elected next term. Bonnie supplied proof to her primary residency, which is a drivers license, registration, and voting record. The decision rendered her a non-resident, even though the state, election authorities, and taxes prove she is.
The fix comes in when the boards want to keep someone from running. Both Bonnie and a lady from Lemont had lawsuits against the board members. This made it personal to the board to keep these candidates off. Both candidates spoke of corruption and mis-spending. The current administration does not want someone opening their books to the residents. They want non-transparency. Bonnie and the Lemont woman wanted the residents to save money, see the corruption, and fight for their communities.
We look forward to reporting on the Will County hearings for justice.
Yet more coming in still...
Des Plaines candidate removed from ballot
By Daily Herald report
The Des Plaines Electoral Board has removed a candidate for the city's 6th Ward alderman seat from the April 5 ballot over discrepancies in his nominating papers.
The board — Mayor Marty Moylan, City Clerk Gloria Ludwig and 8th Ward Alderwoman Rosemary Argus — took candidate Cliff Matthews out of the election after a hearing Monday on claims of numerous errors in his documents, including unnumbered pages, improper binding and questionable signatures.
Roediger, chairman of the Citizens for Mark Walsten campaign, questioned minor irregularities with the other three candidates' petitions, including the validity of signatures of registered voters. The signatures will be verified with the Cook County Clerk's Office sometime today, Ludwig said.
The board — Mayor Marty Moylan, City Clerk Gloria Ludwig and 8th Ward Alderwoman Rosemary Argus — took candidate Cliff Matthews out of the election after a hearing Monday on claims of numerous errors in his documents, including unnumbered pages, improper binding and questionable signatures.
A hearing on objections filed to the candidacies of two more 6th Ward aldermanic hopefuls — Mario Palacios and Richard Hissong — has been continued indefinitely.
A fourth candidate for the 6th Ward seat, incumbent Alderman Mark Walsten, has no objectors.Roediger, chairman of the Citizens for Mark Walsten campaign, questioned minor irregularities with the other three candidates' petitions, including the validity of signatures of registered voters. The signatures will be verified with the Cook County Clerk's Office sometime today, Ludwig said.
Read more: http://www.dailyherald.com/article/20110104/news/701059830/#ixzz1AHRDH2F6
And again... another one...
Morales defends herself in Joliet candidacy challenge
Tuesday at 1:30 p.m. Joliet City Council candidate Alicia Morales said this week she does live in District 4 despite an objection filed last week challenging her candidacy.
The Joliet Election Board met Monday and scheduled a hearing next week – tentatively set for 10 a.m. Thursday – to hear arguments in the case. Valerie A. April who also lives on Francis Street filed an objection alleging that Morales did not live at her stated address. April did not attend the meeting, but was represented by attorney George Mahoney.
Morales, who is running for the District 4 council seat, said she has lived full-time in the district since December 2009 when she moved into a home on Francis Street, which is owned by her boyfriend. She said the Francis Street address is listed as her permanent address on her COBRA health insurance, voter registration card, unemployment benefits and a Mary Kay business she started in March.
“I feel like I know what Rahm Emmanuel is going through,” she said, referring to a residency controversy involving the Chicago mayoral candidate.
She also owns a home at 311 Hunter in Joliet, which is not in the District 4, but said she rents out the house.
“In this market, I can’t sell it,” she said.
She said she moved onto Francis Street shortly before she was laid off from her job at associate director of the Office of Institutional Diversity at the University of St. Francis in January 2010. Since then, she has started working as an interpreter for the Will County Department of Health.
Morales said she does not know April, whose name is not listed as a candidate for Joliet public office.
On Monday, several friends and neighbors of Morales attended the meeting prepared to speak in defense of Morales.
The District 4 seat is currently held by Susie Barber, who is seeking re-election, and is also facing opposition from John Connelly Jr. and Leah R. Cooper. The election is April 5.
The Joliet Election Board met Monday and scheduled a hearing next week – tentatively set for 10 a.m. Thursday – to hear arguments in the case. Valerie A. April who also lives on Francis Street filed an objection alleging that Morales did not live at her stated address. April did not attend the meeting, but was represented by attorney George Mahoney.
Morales, who is running for the District 4 council seat, said she has lived full-time in the district since December 2009 when she moved into a home on Francis Street, which is owned by her boyfriend. She said the Francis Street address is listed as her permanent address on her COBRA health insurance, voter registration card, unemployment benefits and a Mary Kay business she started in March.
“I feel like I know what Rahm Emmanuel is going through,” she said, referring to a residency controversy involving the Chicago mayoral candidate.
She also owns a home at 311 Hunter in Joliet, which is not in the District 4, but said she rents out the house.
“In this market, I can’t sell it,” she said.
She said she moved onto Francis Street shortly before she was laid off from her job at associate director of the Office of Institutional Diversity at the University of St. Francis in January 2010. Since then, she has started working as an interpreter for the Will County Department of Health.
Morales said she does not know April, whose name is not listed as a candidate for Joliet public office.
On Monday, several friends and neighbors of Morales attended the meeting prepared to speak in defense of Morales.
The District 4 seat is currently held by Susie Barber, who is seeking re-election, and is also facing opposition from John Connelly Jr. and Leah R. Cooper. The election is April 5.
Chicago Tribune posts similar story today
School board candidate removed from ballot after paperclip debate
Yesterday at 4:36 p.m. A member of the Lemont-Bromberek District 113A school board was disqualified Tuesday from running for re-election after an electoral board determined her nominating petitions were not fastened together.
Paul Chialdikas, a Village of Lemont Trustee and school district resident, and Jennifer Albrecht, a district resident with children in the schools, both filed objections against Janet Hughes because her paperwork was not “fastened together in book form” as required by state election law.
The District 113A electoral board – School Board President Lisa Wright, board member John Wood and attorney Nicholas Kefalos, who was appointed in place of a board member running for election – voted unanimously to disqualify Hughes’ candidate petitions after a public hearing. Two of the electoral board members were defendants in a lawsuit that Hughes filed in December.
“I’m disappointed that the voters right to decide who sits on the board has been taken away by two board members who had an interest in the outcome of this hearing,” Hughes said after the public hearing.
Hughes’ attorney, Kory Atkinson, said he is considering the possibility of an appeal. An appeal must be filed within the next five business days, he said.
The electoral board spent close to three hours considering the objections, evidence and the testimonies of Hughes and witnesses, which largely revolved around whether Hughes had used a paperclip to bind her candidate nominating petition papers together, as she claimed.
Chialdikas said Wednesday it was important to him Hughes follow the rules and have her petitions bound.
“Out of the 11 candidates, 10 of them followed procedure,” Chialdikas said.
Chialdikas, who says that he has children going to school in District 113A, wanted to make sure that whoever represents the district knows what they’re doing and understands the electoral process.
He said he has “no bias, whatsoever,” against Hughes and that he checked on every one of the candidates. When asked, Chialdikas said he is not affiliated with any of the defendants in Hughes’ lawsuit.
Hughes filed a lawsuit on Dec. 17 alleging the improper spending of millions of dollars by individual current and former school board members, and district administrators. Defendants named in the lawsuits include Superintendent Timothy Ricker, Wright and Wood. A bonding company and an accounting company are also named in the lawsuits.
In her suit, Hughes alleges that from 2007 through 2010 individual board members improperly spent as much as $12 million out of working cash funds without passing resolutions and without leaving a public record.
The potential bias of the electoral board was brought into question during Tuesday’s public hearing by Hughes’ attorney, who asked to have Wright and Wood replaced, but his request was denied.
Wright, spokeswoman for the school board, when asked to comment on Hughes’ lawsuit following the public hearing, declined to comment.
Wright said that while she is the spokeswoman for the school board, the board’s law firm, Scariano, Himes and Petrarca and its attorneys are spokespersons in matters of litigation. She referred questions to James A. Petrungaro, who also served as moderator for the electoral board public hearings.
Petrungaro, in a phone interview Wednesday, responded to the lawsuit filed against individual and current board members of District 113A, saying, “There’s nothing in the lawsuits that alleges that there’s any money missing from the school district. There’s no allegation of theft or fraud, just accounting mismanagement.”
He added that the school district finds it unfortunate that it is forced to spend its resources to defend lawsuits instead of being able to “use those resources to educate children.”
Paul Chialdikas, a Village of Lemont Trustee and school district resident, and Jennifer Albrecht, a district resident with children in the schools, both filed objections against Janet Hughes because her paperwork was not “fastened together in book form” as required by state election law.
The District 113A electoral board – School Board President Lisa Wright, board member John Wood and attorney Nicholas Kefalos, who was appointed in place of a board member running for election – voted unanimously to disqualify Hughes’ candidate petitions after a public hearing. Two of the electoral board members were defendants in a lawsuit that Hughes filed in December.
“I’m disappointed that the voters right to decide who sits on the board has been taken away by two board members who had an interest in the outcome of this hearing,” Hughes said after the public hearing.
Hughes’ attorney, Kory Atkinson, said he is considering the possibility of an appeal. An appeal must be filed within the next five business days, he said.
The electoral board spent close to three hours considering the objections, evidence and the testimonies of Hughes and witnesses, which largely revolved around whether Hughes had used a paperclip to bind her candidate nominating petition papers together, as she claimed.
Chialdikas said Wednesday it was important to him Hughes follow the rules and have her petitions bound.
“Out of the 11 candidates, 10 of them followed procedure,” Chialdikas said.
Chialdikas, who says that he has children going to school in District 113A, wanted to make sure that whoever represents the district knows what they’re doing and understands the electoral process.
He said he has “no bias, whatsoever,” against Hughes and that he checked on every one of the candidates. When asked, Chialdikas said he is not affiliated with any of the defendants in Hughes’ lawsuit.
Hughes filed a lawsuit on Dec. 17 alleging the improper spending of millions of dollars by individual current and former school board members, and district administrators. Defendants named in the lawsuits include Superintendent Timothy Ricker, Wright and Wood. A bonding company and an accounting company are also named in the lawsuits.
In her suit, Hughes alleges that from 2007 through 2010 individual board members improperly spent as much as $12 million out of working cash funds without passing resolutions and without leaving a public record.
The potential bias of the electoral board was brought into question during Tuesday’s public hearing by Hughes’ attorney, who asked to have Wright and Wood replaced, but his request was denied.
Wright, spokeswoman for the school board, when asked to comment on Hughes’ lawsuit following the public hearing, declined to comment.
Wright said that while she is the spokeswoman for the school board, the board’s law firm, Scariano, Himes and Petrarca and its attorneys are spokespersons in matters of litigation. She referred questions to James A. Petrungaro, who also served as moderator for the electoral board public hearings.
Petrungaro, in a phone interview Wednesday, responded to the lawsuit filed against individual and current board members of District 113A, saying, “There’s nothing in the lawsuits that alleges that there’s any money missing from the school district. There’s no allegation of theft or fraud, just accounting mismanagement.”
He added that the school district finds it unfortunate that it is forced to spend its resources to defend lawsuits instead of being able to “use those resources to educate children.”
Wednesday, January 5, 2011
To the residents from Bonnie
It is disheartening that a long term resident like myself, who spent a great deal of money this year to maintain my residency despite what was thrown at me, is not able to run for office because the Mayor has a personal issue against me. This started almost two years ago when I ran against him.
Despite the claims I was not a resident, I had a right to keep my residency status in Bolingbrook while I vacationed and worked elsewhere for a few months. My home was maintained and I continued to visit during that time. Many people do not realize that I am a traveling consultant. Trustee Morelli travels a great deal to and is allowed to maintain his residency and board position. This would seem slanted and highly biased.
Even Rahm Emmanuel was granted ballot access and did not have his home anymore. I had all the same proof of residency that any other resident had. I followed and obeyed all the laws to updating my Drivers License when I moved from one address to another in Bolingbrook. I paid property taxes. I voted locally. I can own ten homes, and that does not matter. What matters is where I register my plates, votes, and drivers license. That is my primary residents, my home, my community, my love... Bolingbrook.
I firmly believe that the process was based off of feelings, as there was no LAW to back up my being removed. They can claim it is a lawsuit, but lawsuits do not establish residency. If that is the case, maybe we should file a lawsuit in Naperville so our kids can attend school there instead???
It was a kangaroo court with Mr. Claar leading the pack. His goal is to keep me from the ballot, just like last year. The same attorney was against me... I am a threat to their way of life, which includes high taxation, high spending, and being non-transparent.
I have a few days to decide my next course of actions. I have a few options... I can appeal and get on the ballot. I can give that money to another candidate. I can save that money in my run for Mayor in 2013. I will let you know when I decide!
Thanks for all the support...
Bonnie Alicea
Despite the claims I was not a resident, I had a right to keep my residency status in Bolingbrook while I vacationed and worked elsewhere for a few months. My home was maintained and I continued to visit during that time. Many people do not realize that I am a traveling consultant. Trustee Morelli travels a great deal to and is allowed to maintain his residency and board position. This would seem slanted and highly biased.
Even Rahm Emmanuel was granted ballot access and did not have his home anymore. I had all the same proof of residency that any other resident had. I followed and obeyed all the laws to updating my Drivers License when I moved from one address to another in Bolingbrook. I paid property taxes. I voted locally. I can own ten homes, and that does not matter. What matters is where I register my plates, votes, and drivers license. That is my primary residents, my home, my community, my love... Bolingbrook.
I firmly believe that the process was based off of feelings, as there was no LAW to back up my being removed. They can claim it is a lawsuit, but lawsuits do not establish residency. If that is the case, maybe we should file a lawsuit in Naperville so our kids can attend school there instead???
It was a kangaroo court with Mr. Claar leading the pack. His goal is to keep me from the ballot, just like last year. The same attorney was against me... I am a threat to their way of life, which includes high taxation, high spending, and being non-transparent.
I have a few days to decide my next course of actions. I have a few options... I can appeal and get on the ballot. I can give that money to another candidate. I can save that money in my run for Mayor in 2013. I will let you know when I decide!
Thanks for all the support...
Bonnie Alicea
Bonnie Speaks Out...
from Bonnie:
I have my voters card and voting record in Bolingbrook for 15 years. Jesse White, my plates and DL state I am from Bolingbrook. My mail gets delivered here. I paid property taxes and utilities here. I participate in local functions, sent my kid to school here, assist local families in need, and shop locally despite the high sales tax. I tell people I am a proud Bolingbrook resident. I never gave up my residency. So if I am not a resident, who is?
Who strips someone of their residency and right to vote, or run for office for taking a vacation from here? Oh ya, Mr. Claar does if their name is Bonnie Kurowski Alicea. By the way Mr. Claar, can I please have my 2002-2010 property taxes back, since I am not a resident? Please make the check out to my Forest address. I will be there to sign for it... Even though you told the residents I don't "reside" here.
PS. Can you please write me a certified letter to Mr. Jesse White explaining my predicament. He wants to know where to register both Bothwell and Forest now that this is not a resident location of Bolingbrook for my license and plates. He is not sure what this makes me a resident of... can we call it Bonnie land of low- to- no taxation?
Sincerely,
Bonnie Alicea -
32 year resident who is 35 years old...
Population of Bolingbrook "0"
I have my voters card and voting record in Bolingbrook for 15 years. Jesse White, my plates and DL state I am from Bolingbrook. My mail gets delivered here. I paid property taxes and utilities here. I participate in local functions, sent my kid to school here, assist local families in need, and shop locally despite the high sales tax. I tell people I am a proud Bolingbrook resident. I never gave up my residency. So if I am not a resident, who is?
Who strips someone of their residency and right to vote, or run for office for taking a vacation from here? Oh ya, Mr. Claar does if their name is Bonnie Kurowski Alicea. By the way Mr. Claar, can I please have my 2002-2010 property taxes back, since I am not a resident? Please make the check out to my Forest address. I will be there to sign for it... Even though you told the residents I don't "reside" here.
PS. Can you please write me a certified letter to Mr. Jesse White explaining my predicament. He wants to know where to register both Bothwell and Forest now that this is not a resident location of Bolingbrook for my license and plates. He is not sure what this makes me a resident of... can we call it Bonnie land of low- to- no taxation?
Sincerely,
Bonnie Alicea -
32 year resident who is 35 years old...
Population of Bolingbrook "0"
Timeline for residency
Timeline for Bonnie’s Residency
With Florida
A. April 2009 Bonnie runs for Mayor as 8 year resident on Bothwell and 32 years total.
B. December 2009, Bonnie leaves to Florida.
C. March, Bonnie returns from Florida.
D. April 5, 2010 election one year cycle begins for residency
E. Bonnie is seen publically at special events throughout April to December.
F. Bonnie sells home in June
G. Bonnie moves Driver’s License to Forest in June.
H. Bonnie files a change of address from Bothwell to Forest in September in time to vote in the November election.
I. Bonnie’s residency is questioned in December.
Without Florida (law)
(See ILCS, 65 5/3, Pope vs. Board of Elections ruling and Fielding vs. Casualty ruling)
b. Bonnie’s DL, registration, and voters cards have ALWAYS been registered in Bolingbrook and nowhere else in 8 years.
c. Bonnie is a taxpayer for her property bill in 2010.
a. Bonnie is an 8 year resident.
Bonnie's Residency
Electoral boards are suppose to be fair and unbiased in a court of law. So we started by researching the actual law regarding residency.
65 ILCS 5/3 states "A person is not eligible for an elective municipal office unless that person is a qualified elector of the municipality and has resided in the municipality at least one year next preceding the election or appointment."
This means the date in question to establish a residency is April 5, 2010 to April 5, 2011. The question to her residency is "was she a legal resident on April 5, 2010."
However, due to poorly written election laws, no where in the law does it state what constitutes residency. It does not state you have to have a place to lay your head. It does not state you have to have a drivers license, plates, or even a voters card. Since there is no law, it cannot be proved someone is not a resident, unless they do not have an address that they can register to be a voter and receive mail.
So unless Bonnie did not have an actual residence, she should have won this case in a fair court of law.
Another well used law in IL for elections is the Pope vs. Board of election commissioners 370 iii. This states "Where a person leaves his residence and goes to another place, even if it be another state, with an intention to return to his former abode, or with only a conditional intention of acquiring a new residence, he does not lose his former residence so long as his intention remains unconditional.
If we took this previous law into consideration, Bonnie took a temporary leave to Florida and returned. She left to another state with the intention to return to her former abode and acquire a new residence, therefore she did not lose her former residence.
When asked if she had her license, plates, and voting rights registered in Florida, she responded that no, they were registered to her Bolingbrook address. This showed that she had every intention of returning. Her home was insured, taxes being paid, and people watching over her home in her absence. She never rented out her home. She never abandoned her home. She temporarily left for an extended work trip of 12 weeks... She is a traveling consultant, isn't she? She maintained her residency.
Therefore, she still qualified to be on the ballot, since she never lost her former residence and was in fact an 8 year resident on Bothwell Lane.
Her drivers license, according to our MVR report that she authorized today, shows that she registered her drivers license in June, right after the sale of her Bolingbrook home. Her move across town does not bar her from running for office, as they are both Bolingbrook addresses.
Her plate registration was current as a Bolingbrook resident and Jesse White certified she was a resident.
Election documents state that she never lost her residency and she is listed as residing in Bolingbrook for many years.
So the Secretary of State's opinion, the Election officials, and the taxes she paid for her property do not qualify her to be a resident according to Bolingbrook Mayor Roger Claar. So what does make a resident to him? Someone that donates to his campaign?
Remember, she does not even need these to prove residency, yet she supplied it anyhow.
She did not deny the fact she was in Florida for three months over the winter. According to Fielding V Casualty Reciprocal Exchange, "residence" is not synonymous with "domicile", through the two terms are closely related; a person may have only one legal domicile at one time, but he may have more that one residence."
Therefore, your main residence is established by where you pay taxes, register your vehicles, and vote. I know that this decision of the board will infuriate many people who own second homes or take vacations, as the board basically stated that these individuals lose their residency when they do so... despite the laws you see above.
So why would Mr. Claar, Ms. Swinkunas, or Ms. Penning think it is okay to ignore the laws as stated above, and use a court document to remove Bonnie? Fear...
Bonnie asked the board for anyone to prove there is a law that establishes "Court documents establish residency". No one on the board or even the other attorney had a response. This is no surprise, as NO Documents qualify residency. (See info on the law above).
Even if Bonnie had filed a lawsuit against Bolingbrook, Fielding vs. Casualty clearly states someone can have more that one residence. If any illegal immigrant could file a lawsuit and establish residency, we would be in serous trouble with immigration laws.
Furthermore, to rule someone off a ballot for residency based on a document that does not establish residency is very biased and unfounded by any law.
If Bonnie had a residence to send mail and register to vote, she was a resident. On April 5, 2010, Bonnie was a homeowner of 8 years on Bothwell Lane. In June she sold her home and transferred her mail and drivers license to Forest. She was and has always been a Bolingbrook resident.
Since Mr. Claar, Ms. Swankunas, and Ms. Penning did not abide by IL election laws and failed to offer a decision based on fact, but meer feeling, it will be no wonder this will get hard publicity.
This is the second year in a row that they have not allowed Bonnie ballot access. They have used the same attorney to remove her. They have publically called her a contributor to a stoke victims death that sent her to a temporary residence to protect her threatened family. It makes me wonder if they did this on purpose to run her out of town so that they could launch this objection this year.
I liked her statement when Carol Penning asked her if she still wanted to own a home in Bolingbrook with the high taxes, and Bonnie replied "I can do something about that". Penning replied, "I am sure you could". Isn't this why they ultimatly want her to be removed?
Mr. Claar also publically took the opportunity to criticize her over the lawsuit that was filed, calling it frivilous and that Bonnie cost the taxpayers $27, 000.00. At which point Bonnie retorted, "Let's set the record straight, I did not cost the tax payers money, Mr. Lawler did by publically calling me responsible for Ms. Bielawski's death. In turn, people tried to break into my house, threatened my family and caused me to leave."
Ya, I think that backfired on him. I am sure Claar does not wish for people to find out he caused her so much trouble and grief and she pointed out how "wrong this statement was" of them.
Her final statement to her objection was that she was a proud resident of 32 years, she would like to be on the ballot, so the residents have a choice.
This is one tough, witty, and smart lady. She conducted herself well, was clearly spoken and educated with the laws. She used some humor, was honest and forthcoming, and very humble despite the fact that the fix was in before the hearing.
Now, if the court would have recessed to discuss their decision then maybe they would have realized they booted her off the ballot with no law to support them. Maybe they would have made a different choice. However, since the court was pre-determined and personal grudges present with the board, ad none of them removed themselves due to conflict of interest, there is not much hope for any qualified or good candidate to run or they will be booted off as well.
We hope Bonnie appeals and wins, like Rham Emanuel did. He was placed on a ballot with the words... "Having a place to sleep is not a touchstone of continued residence." Therefore qualifying him to run for election with nowhere to even call home... So federal judges know there is no proof to kick someone off a ballot for residency. Roger must be better trained then those judges... or maybe just more pompous...
65 ILCS 5/3 states "A person is not eligible for an elective municipal office unless that person is a qualified elector of the municipality and has resided in the municipality at least one year next preceding the election or appointment."
This means the date in question to establish a residency is April 5, 2010 to April 5, 2011. The question to her residency is "was she a legal resident on April 5, 2010."
However, due to poorly written election laws, no where in the law does it state what constitutes residency. It does not state you have to have a place to lay your head. It does not state you have to have a drivers license, plates, or even a voters card. Since there is no law, it cannot be proved someone is not a resident, unless they do not have an address that they can register to be a voter and receive mail.
So unless Bonnie did not have an actual residence, she should have won this case in a fair court of law.
Another well used law in IL for elections is the Pope vs. Board of election commissioners 370 iii. This states "Where a person leaves his residence and goes to another place, even if it be another state, with an intention to return to his former abode, or with only a conditional intention of acquiring a new residence, he does not lose his former residence so long as his intention remains unconditional.
If we took this previous law into consideration, Bonnie took a temporary leave to Florida and returned. She left to another state with the intention to return to her former abode and acquire a new residence, therefore she did not lose her former residence.
When asked if she had her license, plates, and voting rights registered in Florida, she responded that no, they were registered to her Bolingbrook address. This showed that she had every intention of returning. Her home was insured, taxes being paid, and people watching over her home in her absence. She never rented out her home. She never abandoned her home. She temporarily left for an extended work trip of 12 weeks... She is a traveling consultant, isn't she? She maintained her residency.
Therefore, she still qualified to be on the ballot, since she never lost her former residence and was in fact an 8 year resident on Bothwell Lane.
Her drivers license, according to our MVR report that she authorized today, shows that she registered her drivers license in June, right after the sale of her Bolingbrook home. Her move across town does not bar her from running for office, as they are both Bolingbrook addresses.
Her plate registration was current as a Bolingbrook resident and Jesse White certified she was a resident.
Election documents state that she never lost her residency and she is listed as residing in Bolingbrook for many years.
So the Secretary of State's opinion, the Election officials, and the taxes she paid for her property do not qualify her to be a resident according to Bolingbrook Mayor Roger Claar. So what does make a resident to him? Someone that donates to his campaign?
Remember, she does not even need these to prove residency, yet she supplied it anyhow.
She did not deny the fact she was in Florida for three months over the winter. According to Fielding V Casualty Reciprocal Exchange, "residence" is not synonymous with "domicile", through the two terms are closely related; a person may have only one legal domicile at one time, but he may have more that one residence."
Therefore, your main residence is established by where you pay taxes, register your vehicles, and vote. I know that this decision of the board will infuriate many people who own second homes or take vacations, as the board basically stated that these individuals lose their residency when they do so... despite the laws you see above.
So why would Mr. Claar, Ms. Swinkunas, or Ms. Penning think it is okay to ignore the laws as stated above, and use a court document to remove Bonnie? Fear...
Bonnie asked the board for anyone to prove there is a law that establishes "Court documents establish residency". No one on the board or even the other attorney had a response. This is no surprise, as NO Documents qualify residency. (See info on the law above).
Even if Bonnie had filed a lawsuit against Bolingbrook, Fielding vs. Casualty clearly states someone can have more that one residence. If any illegal immigrant could file a lawsuit and establish residency, we would be in serous trouble with immigration laws.
Furthermore, to rule someone off a ballot for residency based on a document that does not establish residency is very biased and unfounded by any law.
If Bonnie had a residence to send mail and register to vote, she was a resident. On April 5, 2010, Bonnie was a homeowner of 8 years on Bothwell Lane. In June she sold her home and transferred her mail and drivers license to Forest. She was and has always been a Bolingbrook resident.
Since Mr. Claar, Ms. Swankunas, and Ms. Penning did not abide by IL election laws and failed to offer a decision based on fact, but meer feeling, it will be no wonder this will get hard publicity.
This is the second year in a row that they have not allowed Bonnie ballot access. They have used the same attorney to remove her. They have publically called her a contributor to a stoke victims death that sent her to a temporary residence to protect her threatened family. It makes me wonder if they did this on purpose to run her out of town so that they could launch this objection this year.
I liked her statement when Carol Penning asked her if she still wanted to own a home in Bolingbrook with the high taxes, and Bonnie replied "I can do something about that". Penning replied, "I am sure you could". Isn't this why they ultimatly want her to be removed?
Mr. Claar also publically took the opportunity to criticize her over the lawsuit that was filed, calling it frivilous and that Bonnie cost the taxpayers $27, 000.00. At which point Bonnie retorted, "Let's set the record straight, I did not cost the tax payers money, Mr. Lawler did by publically calling me responsible for Ms. Bielawski's death. In turn, people tried to break into my house, threatened my family and caused me to leave."
Ya, I think that backfired on him. I am sure Claar does not wish for people to find out he caused her so much trouble and grief and she pointed out how "wrong this statement was" of them.
Her final statement to her objection was that she was a proud resident of 32 years, she would like to be on the ballot, so the residents have a choice.
This is one tough, witty, and smart lady. She conducted herself well, was clearly spoken and educated with the laws. She used some humor, was honest and forthcoming, and very humble despite the fact that the fix was in before the hearing.
Now, if the court would have recessed to discuss their decision then maybe they would have realized they booted her off the ballot with no law to support them. Maybe they would have made a different choice. However, since the court was pre-determined and personal grudges present with the board, ad none of them removed themselves due to conflict of interest, there is not much hope for any qualified or good candidate to run or they will be booted off as well.
We hope Bonnie appeals and wins, like Rham Emanuel did. He was placed on a ballot with the words... "Having a place to sleep is not a touchstone of continued residence." Therefore qualifying him to run for election with nowhere to even call home... So federal judges know there is no proof to kick someone off a ballot for residency. Roger must be better trained then those judges... or maybe just more pompous...
Tuesday, January 4, 2011
Quigley Better Watch Out!
I took the time today to review Mr. Quigleys petitions on http://www.thenumbercruncher-bolingbrook.com/. I see where the objector could file an appeal. I went through each piece of evidence and could see that Mr. Quigley did NOT have enough valid signatures. No wonder they stacked the board to their favor. I believe the appeal time is fast approaching....
Disabled Vet asks for court assistance and is denied
Yesterday and today, a disabled veteran asked the electoral boards for assistance due to poor hearing. He was denied by Mr. Mike Evans and Mr. Claar. They conducted the hearings even though he could not hear properly.
I can see this going to court. I am not just talking appeals...
I can see this going to court. I am not just talking appeals...
Kangaroo Court Bounces Bonnie off Ballot
Although Bonnie presented all proper forms of ID establishing residency, the board still removed her from the ballot. They removed her without ANY law recognized evidence. Yes, that is right, there was NO law recognized evidence to support the claim that Bonnie was not here. They claimed a lawsuit was filed elsewhere. Bonnie asked for the law that states a lawsuit declares residency. They could not produce the law. Other then that, they had absolutely nothing. Bonnie supplied more than enough evidence to support her claim, when in fact all she had to do was state verbally that she was a resident. That is all the proof required by law. But we don't follow the law in Bolingbrook when Bonnie tries to get ballot access. Plus, I cannot wait to tell all the illegal immigrants to go file a court lawsuit and you will gain residency in Bolingbrook!
Bonnie presented a current and valid drivers license. A current and valid voters card. A current and valid state registration for her vehicle. She paid her annual mortgage taxes, voted in the election, supplied her work contract, and that still was not enough to be a resident.
So we can officially say that the population of Bolingbrook is NOT 72,000 residents, but just "0". If the proof she supplied above was not proof of residency, what is???
Well according to the law, there is no proof to establish residency except physical presence. Emanuel made it on the ballot today on the final decision stating "having a place to sleep is not a touchstone of continued residence." He did not even have a place to sleep, yet made it on the ballot.
Bonnie, who has a Bolingbrook home to sleep in, all the docs to prove residency, and has been a public figure during the time frame in question of April 5, 2010 to current, was not allowed ballot access.
Just another Kangaroo court...
Well, we hope Bonnie takes this to Will County where she will defiantly win her case. At that point in time, we would like to get a statement from Mr. Roger Claar about why he did not follow the law when voting on residency and booted her off the ballot. I would like to personally know what is so scary to Mr. Claar about Bonnie that he is so afraid to let her on the ballot and rig an unfair electoral board process to keep her off.
Bonnie presented a current and valid drivers license. A current and valid voters card. A current and valid state registration for her vehicle. She paid her annual mortgage taxes, voted in the election, supplied her work contract, and that still was not enough to be a resident.
So we can officially say that the population of Bolingbrook is NOT 72,000 residents, but just "0". If the proof she supplied above was not proof of residency, what is???
Well according to the law, there is no proof to establish residency except physical presence. Emanuel made it on the ballot today on the final decision stating "having a place to sleep is not a touchstone of continued residence." He did not even have a place to sleep, yet made it on the ballot.
Bonnie, who has a Bolingbrook home to sleep in, all the docs to prove residency, and has been a public figure during the time frame in question of April 5, 2010 to current, was not allowed ballot access.
Just another Kangaroo court...
Well, we hope Bonnie takes this to Will County where she will defiantly win her case. At that point in time, we would like to get a statement from Mr. Roger Claar about why he did not follow the law when voting on residency and booted her off the ballot. I would like to personally know what is so scary to Mr. Claar about Bonnie that he is so afraid to let her on the ballot and rig an unfair electoral board process to keep her off.
Sunday, January 2, 2011
A bouncing we will go...365U Kangaroo Court Engineered by Kavanagh to Insure a Perverted Outcome of the 365U School Board Candidate Hearings
Kangaroo Courts are typically set up because of fear. So why is one set up for the hearing of Objector vs. Steve Quigley (School Board Chair)?
Did they have to go through such extremes to keep their power hold intact? Did they realize that Quigley did not have enough qualified signatures? Now who will pay the price when it has to go to Will County courts because Richard Kavanagh rigged the board before the board even heard the objections?
Steve Quigley has 6 valid signatures out of a minimum 50 needed. How will they get him out of this dilemma? This will be the hottest topic in town for the next few months other than Mr. Kavanagh supporting the objection against Bonnie Alicea running for office...AGAIN.
So the truth be told, the forming of the electoral board violated the constitutional rights of our elected officials, Ronnie Bull and Jim Curran. They were voted by the people, for the people to uphold their civic duty according to the law of elections for forming of electoral boards. Kavanagh passed them up disregarding the law like it did not matter, and spit them out to rot... We voted them in to do their job but Kavanagh does not care about our votes and what the parents of the 365U school children actually want.
Furthermore, this stomps on the constitutional rights of the candidates running for office. They deserve a fair election. This violates that statement. This is not a fair election. Ballot placement is very important in winning the election. Why should people that did not meet the requirements by law, be allowed to run?
This has now opened VVSD 365U and the tax payers to approximately 6 or more lawsuits. We believe it was Kavanagh that caused the last lawsuit due to a Kangaroo Court in the Village when Bonnie ran and was kicked off the ballot.
When this goes to Will County, who will represent Steve Quigley?
This rings a bell all to familiar. Below is a link to an article that demonstrates that Kavanagh has established a pattern of ignoring the will of the people... See you tomorrow at the hearing!
Did they have to go through such extremes to keep their power hold intact? Did they realize that Quigley did not have enough qualified signatures? Now who will pay the price when it has to go to Will County courts because Richard Kavanagh rigged the board before the board even heard the objections?
Steve Quigley has 6 valid signatures out of a minimum 50 needed. How will they get him out of this dilemma? This will be the hottest topic in town for the next few months other than Mr. Kavanagh supporting the objection against Bonnie Alicea running for office...AGAIN.
So the truth be told, the forming of the electoral board violated the constitutional rights of our elected officials, Ronnie Bull and Jim Curran. They were voted by the people, for the people to uphold their civic duty according to the law of elections for forming of electoral boards. Kavanagh passed them up disregarding the law like it did not matter, and spit them out to rot... We voted them in to do their job but Kavanagh does not care about our votes and what the parents of the 365U school children actually want.
Furthermore, this stomps on the constitutional rights of the candidates running for office. They deserve a fair election. This violates that statement. This is not a fair election. Ballot placement is very important in winning the election. Why should people that did not meet the requirements by law, be allowed to run?
This has now opened VVSD 365U and the tax payers to approximately 6 or more lawsuits. We believe it was Kavanagh that caused the last lawsuit due to a Kangaroo Court in the Village when Bonnie ran and was kicked off the ballot.
When this goes to Will County, who will represent Steve Quigley?
This rings a bell all to familiar. Below is a link to an article that demonstrates that Kavanagh has established a pattern of ignoring the will of the people... See you tomorrow at the hearing!
Saturday, January 1, 2011
Venegas... who is he?
Leo Venegas is the newest school board member. He was placed on the board when Dave Carlson recently stepped down. His association with the current board members landed him the position over more qualified candidates including a Principle, a mother, and an attorney. His qualifications were not as high, but it is all about being a Claar crony in this town. In lieu of this, this is the first election he is actually running and he made the same errors as the other two being objected to. It appears they do things in trio! This is the objection being heard on Monday at 2 p.m. with the kangaroo court:
1. According to the 2011 Election Guide, “The top portion (heading) of the nominating petition pages which include information relative to the election, the candidate, the office and political party, as applicable, must be completed prior to the circulation of the petition sheet. Mr. Venega’s has deliberately left off the portion that states (50 or more) signatures on the heading. He has done this on all sheets, which void’s all the sheets leaving “0” required signatures. This is less then the “50” needed to be on the ballot.
2. The minimum number of votes to get on the ballot is “50”. He does not meet the signature requirements for the below reasons as well.
a. Some voters are not registered voters
b. Some names cannot be verified due to illegible address.
c. Some signatures are invalid by means of “not their signature”, or “printed instead of signed”.
d. A registered voter must sign the petition in his own person. He may not sign for someone else, such as another member of his or her own family. [10 ILCS 5/7-10, 10-4]The law states that “
No signature shall be valid or be counted in considering the validity or sufficiency of such petition unless the requirements of this Section are complied with”.Therefore, both signatures must be struck. (See sheet detail below.) e. Under the same law it states [10 ILCS 5/7-10, 10-4]”At the bottom of each sheet of such petition shall be added a circulator's statement, signed by a person 18 years of age or older who is a citizen of the United States; stating the street address or rural route number, as the case may be, as well as the county, city, village or town, and state; certifying that the signatures on that sheet of the petition were signed in his or her presence; certifying that the signatures are genuine; and certifying that to the best of his knowledge and belief the persons so signing were at the time of signing the petition duly registered voters under Articles 4, 5 or 6 of the Code of the political subdivision or district for which the candidate or candidates shall be nominated, and certifying that their respective residences are correctly stated therein. Such statement shall be sworn to before some officer authorized to administer oaths in this State.” Since the signature gatherer allowed persons to write in other voters names, this would void the oath that the signature gatherer made and void the entire sheet of signatures. This would mean that pages 1, 2, 4, 5, and 6, 8, 9 would be voided, leaving only 17 valid signatures of the 50 required signatures needed to be placed on the ballot. Because of the two stated reasons above, I believe that Mr. Leonel Venega’s name should not be placed on the ballot.Gougis runs for school board but does he qualify?
Rick Gougis was placed on the board when Debbie Bielawski passed away last July. Many residents cried foul, as he is a Roger crony who got the position even after much more qualified people stepped forward.
This year he has to run for an actual election, and win, to keep his seat.
His objection is being heard on Monday, January 2. The objection states:
If he cannot follow the laws, why is he running for an office?
This year he has to run for an actual election, and win, to keep his seat.
His objection is being heard on Monday, January 2. The objection states:
- According to the 2011 Election Guide, “The top portion (heading) of the nominating petition pages which include information relative to the election, the candidate, the office and political party, as applicable, must be completed prior to the circulation of the petition sheet. Mr. Gougis has deliberately left off the portion that states (50 or more) signatures on the heading. He has done this on all sheets, which void’s all the sheets leaving “0” required signatures. This is less then the “50” needed to be on the ballot.
2. The minimum number of votes to get on the ballot is “50”. He does not meet the signature requirements for the below reasons:
a. Some voters are not registered voters.
b. Some names cannot be verified due to illegible address.
c. Some signatures are invalid by means of “not their signature”, or “printed instead of signed”.
d. A registered voter must sign the petition in his own person. He may not sign for someone else, such as another member of his or her own family. [10 ILCS 5/7-10, 10-4]The law states that “
No signature shall be valid or be counted in considering the validity or sufficiency of such petition unless the requirements of this Section are complied with”.Therefore, both signatures must be struck. (See sheet detail below.) e. A petition circulator must witness all signatures on each sheet he circulates and signs as circulator. [10 ILCS 5/7-10, 10-4] Therefore, if he allowed someone to write in multiple names, the validity of the affidavit is compromised. See “f”.
f. Under the same law it states [10 ILCS 5/7-10, 10-4]”At the bottom of each sheet of such petition shall be added a circulator's statement, signed by a person 18 years of age or older who is a citizen of the United States; stating the street address or rural route number, as the case may be, as well as the county, city, village or town, and state; certifying that the signatures on that sheet of the petition were signed in his or her presence; certifying that the signatures are genuine; and certifying that to the best of his knowledge and belief the persons so signing were at the time of signing the petition duly registered voters under Articles 4, 5 or 6 of the Code of the political subdivision or district for which the candidate or candidates shall be nominated, and certifying that their respective residences are correctly stated therein. Such statement shall be sworn to before some officer authorized to administer oaths in this State.” Since the signature gatherer allowed persons to write in other voters names, this would void the oath that the signature gatherer made and void the entire sheet of signatures. This would mean that pages 2, 4, 5, 10, 11would be completely struck from submission.3. Page 1, 2,3,7, and 8 of Mr. Gougis nominations clearly show he gathered signatures from visiting public property and Village employees. IL law states(50 ILCS 135/10) (from Ch. 85, par. 7610) Sec. 10. Political rights protected. (b) No employee of a unit of local government or school district may (i) use his or her official position of employment to coerce or inhibit others in the free exercise of their political rights or (ii) engage in political activities while at work or on duty. (Source: P.A. 87‑385.)(50 ILCS 135/5) (from Ch. 85, par. 7605)
Sec. 5. Definition; political rights. "Political rights" include, without limitation, the following political activities: to petition, to make public speeches, to campaign for or against political candidates, to speak out on questions of public policy, to distribute political literature, to make campaign contributions, and to seek public office.
(Source: P.A. 87‑385.)
Sec. 5. Definition; political rights. "Political rights" include, without limitation, the following political activities: to petition, to make public speeches, to campaign for or against political candidates, to speak out on questions of public policy, to distribute political literature, to make campaign contributions, and to seek public office.
(Source: P.A. 87‑385.)
4. Sheet 3 has no notary stamp. This sheet needs to be struckIf following the laws of elections and state laws, sheets 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 10, 11 would be struck from #2 and #3 reasons. All would be struck for #1 reason. Even if #1 is ignored, there are still only 23 valid signatures, falling short of the 50 to be placed on the ballot. Because of the four stated reasons above, I believe that Mr. Gougis name should not be placed on the ballot.Objections to Steve Quigley Petitions
Steve Quigley, chair of the 365U school board just raised our property taxes in December... again.
He is also under fire for not abiding by election law when filing his petitions for office. Mr. Quigley turned in only 90 signatures. Minimum is 50. The election is April 5, 2011. His objector's statement lists specifics:
This objection clearly states that Quigley was not abiding by the law when he had his petitions signed. His objection hearing is on Monday Jan. 3 at 2 p.m.. He already has a Kangaroo court in his favor.
As a resident, what do you think about Quigley being allowed on the ballot? What do you feel about the type of person you see above being the one setting the 365U budgets and repeatedly raising our property taxes?
He is also under fire for not abiding by election law when filing his petitions for office. Mr. Quigley turned in only 90 signatures. Minimum is 50. The election is April 5, 2011. His objector's statement lists specifics:
1. The minimum number of signatures to gain ballot access for the school board election in Bolingbrook for April 5, 2011 is 50. (See sheet detail below). Steven Quigley does not meet this requirement for 5 reasons:
a. Some voters are not registered voters
b. Some names cannot be verified due to illegible address.
c. Some signatures are invalid by means of “not their signature”, or “printed instead of signed”.
d. A registered voter must sign the petition in his own person. He may not sign for someone else, such as another member of his or her own family. [10 ILCS 5/7-10, 10-4]The law states that “
No signature shall be valid or be counted in considering the validity or sufficiency of such petition unless the requirements of this Section are complied with”.Therefore, both signatures must be struck. (See sheet detail below.) e. Under the same law it states [10 ILCS 5/7-10, 10-4]”At the bottom of each sheet of such petition shall be added a circulator's statement, signed by a person 18 years of age or older who is a citizen of the United States; stating the street address or rural route number, as the case may be, as well as the county, city, village or town, and state; certifying that the signatures on that sheet of the petition were signed in his or her presence; certifying that the signatures are genuine; and certifying that to the best of his knowledge and belief the persons so signing were at the time of signing the petition duly registered voters under Articles 4, 5 or 6 of the Code of the political subdivision or district for which the candidate or candidates shall be nominated, and certifying that their respective residences are correctly stated therein. Such statement shall be sworn to before some officer authorized to administer oaths in this State.” Since the signature gatherer allowed persons to write in other voters names, this would void the oath that the signature gatherer made and void the entire sheet of signatures. This would mean that pages 1, 2, 4, 5, and 6 would be voided, leaving only 6 valid signatures of the 50 required signatures needed to be placed on the ballot. This objection clearly states that Quigley was not abiding by the law when he had his petitions signed. His objection hearing is on Monday Jan. 3 at 2 p.m.. He already has a Kangaroo court in his favor.
As a resident, what do you think about Quigley being allowed on the ballot? What do you feel about the type of person you see above being the one setting the 365U budgets and repeatedly raising our property taxes?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)