County board put under citizen's arrest

Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:

No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.

If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

**Relapse**

These two guys just walked in and cleaned up:

http://www.ocalapost.com/entire-county-board-arrested-following-citizens-arrest-by-2-military-veterans/

**dogma**

So two guys from Edgar County are trying to ride herd in Clark County?

**SilverMK2**

Any chance of a copy and paste? My phone is blocking the site.

**Ouze**

SilverMK2 wrote:
Any chance of a copy and paste? My phone is blocking the site.

Entire county board arrested following citizens arrest by 2 military veterans

840
illinois, county board members arrested,
Clark County, Illinois — Sometimes citizens can be so frustrated with county board members they wish someone could just place them under arrest. Well, that is exactly what citizens in Clark County, Illinois did .
Illinois’ number one manufactured product is corruption. More than 95 percent of the Illinois legislature is safe in gerrymandered districts. The incumbent governor has three current federal investigations of his administration, but the Attorney General/state’s attorney class can’t find public vice anywhere.
Residents that voted in the recent election said they are hoping officials have learned from the past mistakes of others.
So what can the law abiding citizen do? The answer is coming from some regular guys in southern Illinois who decided to hold public officials accountable. They call themselves the “Watchdogs.”
Kirk Allen and John Kraft — two military veterans — live in Edgar County which just might be the most corrupt county in the country. For a couple of watchdogs, it’s a target rich environment.
In an effort to take back their government from self-serving politicians and bureaucrats, Kraft and Allen established a group called the Edgar County Watchdogs. Through a combination of public pressure, Freedom of Information filings, lawsuits, and media exposure, they have created a system that deeply threatens Illinois’ corrupt, entrenched political establishment. They operate a blog called Illinois Leaks that exposes corruption at the state and local levels. The blog is so popular that, it is trusted more than the local paper.
Considering the fact that, according to Forbes, their home county’s government has racked up over $79 million in debt all on its own while serving only 18,000 residents, Kraft and Allen have their work cut out for them.
By relentlessly pursuing justice for even the smallest infractions by bureaucrats and politicians, the Edgar County Watchdogs have driven 102 public officials to resign from their posts, including 33 officials in Edgar County alone. The pair busted the mayor of Redmond for attempting to hold office while living out of town. They represented themselves in court and beat Illinois Assistant Attorney General Emma Steimel in a lawsuit seeking access to state e-mails. Officials who have resigned due to the Watchdogs’ efforts include a property tax assessor, the Edgar County board chairman, an entire airport board and its manager, the attorney for Kansas Township’s fire department, Shiloh’s superintendent of schools, and Effingham’s health department administrator, among others. After they exposed corrupt, illegal, and self-serving spending habits by the Ford-Iroquois County health department, the entire bureaucracy was dissolved. In some cases, federal agents have even stepped in to investigate and issue subpoenas to local officials after receiving tips from Kraft and Allen.
Public boards are used to facing angry crowds, but most have never encountered what happened at one recent meeting in central Illinois.
In what was one of their most epic displays of political crime-fighting, which was captured on video, Allen and Kraft held the entire Clark County Park District Board under citizen’s arrest on May 13, 2014, for violating the Illinois Open Meetings Act, a Class C misdemeanor.
When asked if there would be public comment, one of the board members said, “I vote no.” Followed by five other board members.
Board attorney, Kate Yargus, could be heard on video saying there would be no public comment that night, and told the board members they were “free to go,” even after Kraft’s citizen’s arrest announcement. She tried to cite statute to Kraft, but before she could finish, he said, “Just sit down, you are making yourself look like a fool.”
Deputies were dispatched to the scene, but instead, Clark County Sheriff, Jerry Parsley, personally responded that night. Parsley said he knew it was a heated situation and felt it would be best if he handled it. He said that Kraft handled the citizen’s arrest responsibly, and the board was definitely in violation of the Open Meetings Act by not allowing the public to speak.
“It’s not that they should have. They’re mandated to,” Parsley said. “The people need to have their voice. It’s not a dictatorship. It’s a democracy.”
The sheriff arrested six of the board members. The seventh board member was not arrested because he voted against the other members. As they were escorted out of the building, the crowd cheered.
The board had previously laughed at the watchdog group, calling them trouble makers; however, the Sheriff and the State Attorney’s Office didn’t see it that way.
Kraft said, “Every citizen, in every state, county, and city, should take note. Make sure their local government officials are working for the people, and not for themselves.”
A lawsuit against the board is still pending. Their next board meeting is scheduled for late November.
–Barry Donegan, Adam Andrzejewski, and the Better Government Association contributed to this story.–

**LordofHats**

Ninjas.

I find this hilarious XD I imagine the board members were like "oh just call the cops and get them out of here" and the cops were all like "nope."

**Relapse**

dogma wrote:
So two guys from Edgar County are trying to ride herd in Clark County?

Looks like they are part of a group. Not sure how that works, but apparently the Sherrif's department went for it and arrested most of the board.

**whembly**

Okay... that's epic.

**Ouze**

This is a dated article btw; the incident was 6 months ago. The board has since: settled out of court, paid $414 in court costs to cover the suit that was filed, and adopted a policy that added 30 minutes of public comment time.

**SilverMK2**

Awesome work

We need a few people like that everywhere, making sure people involved in government stick to the straight and narrow.

**MWHistorian**

Love that story. That. We need more of that.

**dogma**

Relapse wrote:

Looks like they are part of a group. Not sure how that works, but apparently the Sherrif's department went for it and arrested most of the board.

A group Allen and Kraft founded.

**CptJake**

dogma wrote:
Relapse wrote:

Looks like they are part of a group. Not sure how that works, but apparently the Sherrif's department went for it and arrested most of the board.

A group Allen and Kraft founded.

So?

**Ensis Ferrae**

Ouze wrote:
adopted a policy that added 30 minutes of public comment time.

Because that's really going to help the situation of corruption/perceived corruption out at all....

I get that they are required to have "public comment time" but they shouldn't be limiting that time. If 50 people show up and all have a piece that they'd like heard, you're going to need more than 30 minutes.

**dogma**

CptJake wrote:

So?

Allen and Kraft derive income from the activities of the Paris County Watchdogs, something most members do not do. As such it is disingenuous to dismiss their role in the organization, especially as they founded it.

**CptJake**

dogma wrote:
CptJake wrote:

So?

Allen and Kraft derive income from the activities of the Paris County Watchdogs, something most members do not do. As such it is disingenuous to dismiss their role in the organization, especially as they founded it.

And how again is that relevant to the board breaking the law?

**easysauce**

dogma wrote:
CptJake wrote:

So?

Allen and Kraft derive income from the activities of the Paris County Watchdogs, something most members do not do. As such it is disingenuous to dismiss their role in the organization, especially as they founded it.

drawing a pay cheque so you can actually do the work for the foundation isnt a conflict of interest or disingenuous as you suggest...

otherwise we could critique every lawyers intention when they defend criminals and *gasp* also get paid to do so.

**dogma**

CptJake wrote:

And how again is that relevant to the board breaking the law?

It isn't clear that the board broke the law, it is clear that most of its members were arrested.

easysauce wrote:

drawing a pay cheque so you can actually do the work for the foundation isnt a conflict of interest or disingenuous as you suggest...

I didn't suggest that it was. I stated that it was disingenuous to dismiss Allen and Kraft's roles in the organization as they founded it, and draw income from it.

**Ensis Ferrae**

dogma wrote:
CptJake wrote:

And how again is that relevant to the board breaking the law?

It isn't clear that the board broke the law, it is clear that most of its members were arrested.

Except that it was clear in the OP article that the board was breaking the law. The law required time for John Q. Public to voice his concerns to the local government, something the board in question was not doing, at all.

**CptJake**

Ensis Ferrae wrote:
dogma wrote:
CptJake wrote:

And how again is that relevant to the board breaking the law?

It isn't clear that the board broke the law, it is clear that most of its members were arrested.

Except that it was clear in the OP article that the board was breaking the law. The law required time for John Q. Public to voice his concerns to the local government, something the board in question was not doing, at all.

Bingo.

**Ensis Ferrae**

CptJake wrote:
Ensis Ferrae wrote:
dogma wrote:
CptJake wrote:

And how again is that relevant to the board breaking the law?

It isn't clear that the board broke the law, it is clear that most of its members were arrested.

Except that it was clear in the OP article that the board was breaking the law. The law required time for John Q. Public to voice his concerns to the local government, something the board in question was not doing, at all.

Bingo.

Did I miss the Godwin??? My card is nowhere near filled up

**Jimsolo**

These guys aren't "cleaning up Illinois," in any direction. I live in Southern Illinois (which is indeed as corrupt as the header of the article suggests) but have never heard of these guys. At all.

It sounds like they got a win this time, but I'm suspicious of the list of "successes" they claim. I'd be more ready to believe the list of people they got to "resign" ignored them entirely, and moved on or retired when their plans suited them, only to have these yokels claim "we drove them out!" I'm also not sure how I feel about guys mucking around in local politics when they don't have any skin in the game. I'd be happy to see, say, Lance Jack thrown in the pokey, but I'd want a Carbondale resident doing it.

Still, it's nice to see a local board dragged away in irons, even if I'm not thrilled with the guys who brought it about.

**dogma**

Ensis Ferrae wrote:

Except that it was clear in the OP article that the board was breaking the law. The law required time for John Q. Public to voice his concerns to the local government, something the board in question was not doing, at all.

Well, no it didn't, and doesn't.

The Open Meetings Act requires* that sessions of a public body not be closed; meaning that citizens have the right to attend them. This does not guarantee the right to speak.

*Presuming the Illinois State government can find a way to enforce the relevant law.

**CptJake**

dogma wrote:
Ensis Ferrae wrote:

Except that it was clear in the OP article that the board was breaking the law. The law required time for John Q. Public to voice his concerns to the local government, something the board in question was not doing, at all.

Well, no it didn't, and doesn't.

The Open Meetings Act requires* that sessions of a public body not be closed; meaning that citizens have the right to attend them. This does not guarantee the right to speak.

*Presuming the Illinois State government can find a way to enforce the relevant law.

Wrong.

Is a public body required to allow a member of the public to speak at an open meeting? The Open Meetings Act requires that public bodies give members of the public an opportunity to speak at a public meeting. Public bodies are authorized to adopt rules regarding the public comment portion of a meeting. Such rules may limit the time allotted for the public to speak.

http://foia.ilattorneygeneral.net/pdf/faq_oma_government.pdf

And from your own link:

(g) Any person shall be permitted an opportunity to address public officials under the rules established and recorded by the public body.
(Source: P.A. 96-1473, eff. 1-1-11.)

**dogma**

CptJake wrote:

Wrong.

Is a public body required to allow a member of the public to speak at an open meeting? The Open Meetings Act requires that public bodies give members of the public an opportunity to speak at a public meeting. Public bodies are authorized to adopt rules regarding the public comment portion of a meeting. Such rules may limit the time allotted for the public to speak.

The segment of the FAQ you quoted straight up says that public bodies are allowed to limit the time allotted for the public to speak, which necessarily means that members of the public are not guaranteed the right to speak.

CptJake wrote:

And from your own link:

(g) Any person shall be permitted an opportunity to address public officials under the rules established and recorded by the public body.
(Source: P.A. 96-1473, eff. 1-1-11.)

Under the rules established and recorded by the public body, meaning that the public body has ultimate authority in the matter.

**CptJake**

Huge difference between limit time and not allow. But you're smart enough to know that even if you're too much of an ass to admit it.

I love how even when shown that the public must be allowed to speak, you continue to argue. You really ought to learn to accept when you feth up, as you clearly have in this topic.

Bottom line is the law requires allowing the public to address the meeting, and the county board did not do so. That just is not debatable given the facts presented in the article.

**dogma**

CptJake wrote:
Huge difference between limit time and not allow.

Indeed, and I never said otherwise.

CptJake wrote:

Bottom line is the law requires allowing the public to address the meeting, and the county board did not do so.

Are you claiming that Allen and Kraft are not members of the public? Because they were clearly allowed to address the county board during its meeting.

**Dreadwinter**

Jimsolo wrote:
These guys aren't "cleaning up Illinois," in any direction. I live in Southern Illinois (which is indeed as corrupt as the header of the article suggests) but have never heard of these guys. At all.

It sounds like they got a win this time, but I'm suspicious of the list of "successes" they claim. I'd be more ready to believe the list of people they got to "resign" ignored them entirely, and moved on or retired when their plans suited them, only to have these yokels claim "we drove them out!" I'm also not sure how I feel about guys mucking around in local politics when they don't have any skin in the game. I'd be happy to see, say, Lance Jack thrown in the pokey, but I'd want a Carbondale resident doing it.

Still, it's nice to see a local board dragged away in irons, even if I'm not thrilled with the guys who brought it about.

Carbondale resident here! WOO! Go Southern Illinois!

But really, these guys have a lot of work to do if they are going to clean up Southern Illinois. So very much work.