EDGAR CO.—A group of concerned citizens have taken a step others throughout the state have only heretofore only wished they could do, and have filed a lawsuit to remove their county board chairman from office.
Alleging that Edgar County board chairman Chris Patrick is holding the office under a conflict of interest that is creating financial catastrophe for the county, the group of plaintiffs filed their suit Wednesday, June 5, 2013 in Edgar County circuit court.
John and Pamela Kraft, Richard and Stacey Wilken, Dianne Duzan, Steve and Marlene Terrell, Albert Schneider and Gordon Brown filed the Miscellaneous Remedy suit against Edgar County and Chris Patrick (individually, and in his official capacity as board chairman), and named also as defendants Ben Jenness, Mike Heltsley, Dan Bruner, Karl Farnham Jr., Alan Zuber and Jeff Voight, each individually and in their official capacities as Edgar County board members.
The plaintiffs state in official court documents that they are bringing the suit as a result of “implementation of (Patrick and the board’s) unconstitutional county board policies, including resolutions/legislation which impair, dilute and debase the voting rights of District 3 residents, including the Plaintiffs; and against Patrick for violation of the Illinois Governmental Ethics Act and State Officials and Employees Ethics Act which impairs, dilutes and debases” the voting rights of District 3 and the plaintiffs.
Massive ramifications
The ramifications of the case could be staggering.
What such a suit could lead to, should it succeed, is to show duly-elected local representatives such as county board members, city council members, township officials, and others, that the actions they take with impunity and complete disregard toward the laws of the state and the consideration of the voters whom they represent will not stand. The voters have the right to be represented according to the laws of the state…and when the flagrant disregard many elected officials show toward state laws comes to negatively impact the voters—as has been the case in Chris Patrick’s administration—the voters can and will fight back.
The background
In the particular case involving Patrick, court documents show that issues arose dating back to late 2011, when Patrick ran for county board but did not file the required documents under his “statement of economic interest.” By law and according to state electoral procedures, Patrick should have entered onto the state-required paperwork that he had an economic interest in Zimmerly Ready Mix, his concrete company…not just because it’s the law, but also because his company was frequently “engaged in doing business with a unit of local government,” the Illinois Department of Transportation, as regards highway, road and bridge work.
Patrick went on to win the election in District 3 on November 6, 2012. The win secured that Patrick would be required, by Illinois Constitution as a representative of the district, to vote on road, bridge, maintenance and airport projects, all of these involving Zimmerly.
It wasn’t until four months after holding the office that he finally submitted economic interest paperwork to be placed on file with the county about Zimmerly…which was continuing to do business with the unit of government, IDOT.
However, prior to the April 12, 2013, meeting of the county board, IDOT had recognized a potential financial conflict of interest regarding state and federal funds for highway projects in Edgar due to Patrick’s direct financial relationship with Zimmerly and Patrick’s current position as a voting member of the board.
As a result, IDOT put a “hold” on all state and federal funds until resolution of the issue.
What the board violated
The board uses Robert’s Rules of Order for all meetings, which includes the rule that the president of the voting body “has the exact same rights and privileges as all other members have, including the right to make motions, to speak in debate, and to vote on all questions. No member can be compelled to refrain from voting even if there is a perceived conflict of interest.”
On April 12, 2013, the board violated that rule when it adopted by a vote, a resolution/legislation which compelled Chris Patrick to refrain from voting on certain questions before the board if they had anything to do with funds as they regarded this potential conflict of interest between Zimmerly and road/bridge/airport maintenance and repair.
They also violated the Illinois State Constitution which governs the county board, in that as a duly-elected representative of District 3, Patrick must vote in order to properly represent his constituents in the District…otherwise, it “impairs, dilutes and debases” their rights as voters of the District.
Changed supervision
Further, the paperwork shows that a change made by the county board to the highway department, apparently in an effort to offset what DOT was having a problem with in the conflict of interest, was also done in direct violation of state statues.
The state requires that in counties with a population of less than 3 million, the county engineer performs all the duties given to the general supervision of the county board and to the rules and regulations of the department. In other words, the county engineer answers to the county board as ultimate and immediate authority.
On April 12, 2013, however, the Edgar County board passed a resolution which removed the supervision of the county engineer from the county board and turned his supervision over to the Road and Bridge and Motor Fuel Tax committees.
The allegations
Court paperwork shows that at this April 12, 2013, open public meeting, during which the Edgar County board approved and passed the resolutions/legislation which “impairs, dilutes and debases” the voting rights of the District 3 residents in question because Patrick, as their elected representative, “is barred from making any decisions…participating in any vote…and from participating in the award or execution of any contract relative to any airport, highway, bridge or local road construction that is or will be financed in whole or in part with State or Federal Funds,” the board violated the rights of the voters of District 3.
The District 3 plaintiffs, therefore, are asking that the court force rescindment of the “resolutions/legislation” that takes Patrick out of the voting loop, thus forcing him to attend, discuss and vote (as they have elected him to do) at the county board meetings, regardless of the subject matter.
When he does this, he will again be in direct conflict with the Zimmerly/DOT matter again.
And when he’s in direct conflict again, the plaintiffs are asking, they seek removal of him from the county board as their duly-elected representative.
Two counts
The plaintiffs in this case are being represented by the Redwood Law Firm of St. Joseph.
The plaintiffs are alleging very serious state violations against Patrick, the board and the county.
In Count 1, they allege Violation of Illinois Governmental Ethics and State Official and Employees Ethics Act by Patrick, as they claim, they’ve been denied their rights as voters in the District by Patrick’s removal from voting on certain matters over the conflict of interest, as well as have been denied knowledge of his interest in Zimmerly by no filing of economic interest statement.
In remedy, they are asking for Patrick’s removal, for an award of attorney’s fees and other litigation costs incurred.
Under Count 2, they allege Action for Redress of Violation of Voting Rights Alleged Against Defendants County of Edgar, Patrick, Jenness, Heltsley, Bruner, Farnham, Zuber and Voigt.
In this they state that the policies the board came up with to help Patrick avoid the conflict of interest between Zimmerly and DOT are unconstitutional and violate statutes, and they’re asking as remedy that the resolutions/legislations they put in place April 12, 2013, be declared unconstitutional and void, and that a recusal letter Patrick put on file to support this legislation also be declared void.
They also ask for Patrick’s resignation from the board in light of the conflict…along with attorney’s fees and other litigation costs.
State’s attorney in on it too
In short, the people of the county—the smallest unit of government mandated of a state by the Constitution—have taken the reins when that unit of government is completely out of control, as it appears the Edgar County board has been for a long time.
What’s even more reprehensible about the entire matter is the duly-elected state’s attorney—and the county’s legal counsel, by law—Mark Isaf, apparently was made fully aware of the illegal steps the board took along the way, and did nothing to stop them, up to and including the clear conflict of interest posed by Patrick voting on matters with DOT that enriched his own company, Zimmerly.
The “remedies” the board took on April 12, 2013, were also apparently given a nod by Isaf, who has been state’s attorney for a long time, but doesn’t act as if he knows anything at all about legally advising a county.
Of course, with a county as corrupt as Edgar, and county boards behaving as though they’re a runaway train for years and allowing such petty thugs as Dee Burgin to abuse positions, funds and other benefits as he did during his time in Edgar, it should come as no surprise to the citizens.
Those who have raised hell over Kraft and the Edgar County Watchdogs “costing the county money” with such lawsuits exhibit the height of ignorance.
If the boards and elected officials had been following simple state statutes (such as economic interest statements) all along, no such lawsuits would ever have had to be filed.
So under the circumstance, it’s certainly not a watchdog group that’s costing the citizens of the county any money.
It’s the elected and appointed officials who have been abusing the system for years who have cost the taxpayers money, and will continue until media outlets like the Watchdogs and Disclosure—as well as conscientious citizens like those in District 3—put an end to it with exposing of the egregious acts the public officials are taking.