« Citizens' Council deadline extension fails to attract more village board candidates for endorsements | Main | Council backs Kuchler, Nowak for village board »

December 01, 2010

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Chris Walsh

Wow. I did not realize that these endorsement decisions were made by only 13 people, which is not even a majority of the members according to the roster on their web site.

I guess the answer is that their by-laws state that a quorum is 20% of the membership, which would mean that -- by the membership roster at the Council's web site - as few as 6 people could be responsible for endorsing candidates.

Jim Boo

Chris Walsh,
You contribute to wasting one million tax dollars on legal fees and fees that yield the citizens absolutely zero. You should try to keep a very low profile.

William Dobias

Wow. Chris - you sure jumped on this fast. You posted 45 minutes after the initial posting of the story! (Even after taking the time to research the roster of the Citizen's Council.) You seemed happy to take the Council's endorsement last year no matter how many people there were eligible to vote.

I guess that even you hate to see the possibility of an "outsider" having a seat in your club to see what is really going on.

Maybe the Citizen's Council is saying that they too would like to see a little more sunshine on your activities.

Have to go see if Tim Kelpsas ever filed proper documentation for the slush fund somebody gave him before the last election - you guys have a habit of "lending" that money to each other. It would be nice to keep this election table a little more level.

Chris Walsh

Jim: I'll keep whatever profile I see fit. Sorry if my freedom is offensive to you.

Bill:

I actually was a bit concerned about this whole endorsement thing when I ran for re-election. Katie Justak impressed me as being very, very concerned with assuring a fair process, and I therefore appeared before the council. As I recall, there were maybe 60-70 people attending, and I enjoyed answering questions. To me, the appearance was a great way to be as up front as possible about my views, etc (kind of the way I try to be here). As I said in the comment above, I did not realize how few people actually were making the endorsement decision (my concerns were more about Coryell's leadership role, given his court case, etc.). Maybe I should have known, and I certainly could have known, but I did not.

Anyway, I now know, and I have concluded that despite the obvious procedural fairness and good faith of Ms. Justak that I experienced, the organization is not one whose endorsement I will seek should I choose to run again (for reasons I will be happy to elucidate later if anyone cares).

Regarding your slush fund remark, in the last election, I spent exactly $0 on my "campaign". I had some signs left over and I modified 3 or 4 of them and put them up. I might have donated to Tim (but I don't think I did!), but if so, I ate more than the value of any donation at the event he had at Roly Poly :^) So, if you are accusing me of contributing to a slush fund, please back it with some facts, because I have no idea what you're talking about.

And by the way, it was one day and 45 minutes....

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Working...
Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.

Working...

Post a comment

Your Information

(Name and email address are required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)