Such Venom. Sowing leadership by urging the board to break the agreement and pay a $50,000 fine. Such agressive no holds barred thinking. That's just what we need running the village of Oak Lawn.... NOT!
The board voted to accept a settlement that included a confidentiality clause. My guess is that the settlement would not have occurred if the board didn't accept the confidentiality clause. Now you want to stick the taxpayers with a $50,000 penalty?
It seems pretty clear that the board cut its losses in this matter after spending $430,000 on Trustee Tommy Boy's frat buddy. Imagine if this dog case had gone to trial. The village would have been on the hook for millions in legal fees because tommy boy wanted to get the mayor. If there was wrongdoing by tressler or the mayor, which you seem to insinutate, the frat buddy attorney would have been bound by ethical rules to report the wrongdoing.
Whhat is the point with your constant posts on every story? None of it seems fair because you only seem willing to attack people who are not your allies (who voted to keep the report confidential). It seems like a lot to do about nothing. Much like your campaign......yuk yuk

District 666 Resident: Please help me out. Exactly why are you supportive of a confidential agreement, crafted behind closed doors which is derived to conceal the truth about elected officials from taxpayers? Why aren't you in the slightest bit concerned about "$2,359,083" in misspent taxpayer dollars?

Your only question when presented with these facts is, "Whhat is the point with your constant posts on every story?" Seriously?

Consider what could be done around Oak Lawn for $2,359,032.00. Programs for kids? Seniors? Extra cops to fight gangs? Seed money for business development? Is there a sane person around who would think the best use for that kind of taxpayer investment is to line the pockets of lawyers who are friends of Mayor Heilmann?

It’s simply horrifying what has happened. All the personal attacks, school yard name calling and smear campaigns will not change the facts. This is not one argument you can make that this is good for Oak Lawn.

I’d encourage you to spend some time talking to seniors who are living frugally so that they can keep their head above water. They skimp on food. They skimp on medicine. They don’t buy things they need. What they will always do is pay their taxes. And proudly.

And what has been done with those tax dollars? That public trust? This kind of spending? And then they want their deeds hidden?

The report will see light of day.

SB, I understand your point but how do you break a; Definition of 'Confidentiality Agreement'
A legal agreement between two or more parties that is used to signify that a confidential relationship exists between the parties. A confidentiality agreement is used in strategic meetings where various parties become privy to sensitive corporate information, which should not be made available to the general public or to various competitors.

Fred,

What we have here is not "sensitive corporate information", at least from the perspective of the Oak Lawn taxpayers. What is being kept confidential under this agreement could potentially be criminal acts and/or misappropriation of public funds. We have a right to hear the truth.

JR, How about petitioning the signers of the agreement to void the settlement. Maybe then whomever wants to review it can look it over. In April it can put on the ballot and the voters can decide to accept or reject the settlement. Now our rights will be intact.

#1 Doesn't janie give the Yea or Nay for the FOIAs?
#2 “You can torture numbers to make them say anything you want,” Phelan said. Patch Brunswick zone 6-16-11
Lost all credibility in.... well, forever.

“You can torture numbers to make them say anything you want,” Phelan said. Patch Brunswick zone 6-16-11

Fred: If you read the confidentiality agreement (find it on Patch) you will see the stated purpose for it is "to prevent the release of false or misleading information." A child can tell you the best way to do that is not to keep the truth hidden, but to make it visible, on public record and in writing. The worst way to do that is to keep it hidden.

Don't forget Fred, your elected officials work for you. Or should work for you. They are representing you. You are footing the bills. You are part of the equation. They cannot lock you out. Any business arrangement or use of taxpayer dollars should be transparent to you. This is what the Freedom of Information Act is founded on, and it is a wonderful thing.

This gives you the taxpayer the tools you need to make the best decisions when you do your civic duty and vote. With free access to information, the citizens can do their job. Cut off access to this type of information and you as a voter are deprived of essential facts you need.

If the board should petition Tressler to release it, and Tressler concurs, there should be no fees if all parties agree.

I'll give Mayor Heilmann the benefit of the doubt for a moment and assume he didn't realize how this would inflame the residents of Oak Lawn. If that was the case and he truly cares, he still has an opportunity to do the right thing and petition for the immediate release of this report.

Again, does he have the character to do what is right for Oak Lawn?

QC: Clerk Jane Quinlan is a FOIA officer from Oak Lawn. Her duty is to make sure that responses are received, heard and processed. She does that perfectly, as do the other FOIA officers at Village Hall. The decisions on the FOIA requests come from either village attorneys or, in this case, Tressler. As far as your comment that you can juggle numbers and have them say anything, releasing the report will remove any speculation from people's minds.

The report will see light of day.

Sandra,
You asked why I am supportive of a confidentiality agreement. When did I say I support such an agreeement? The village entered into the agreement and I am for the village keeping its word and not acting like a spoiled child and "changing" its collective mind. We've elected these people and they voted to keep the report confidential. How do you square the idea of wasting another $50,000 on top of the $430,000 spent on the frat boy report?
Furthermore you site the number ($2,359,032.00) as being "misspent". The village settled for $500,000 so that ship of made up claims has sailed long ago. If the village could confidently push its claim for that amount forward, it would have but it chose to settle for a reasonable number. By the way, I thought Phelan once said it was $15 million. Are you now in agreement that he isn't good with numbers?

Tom Does Not share well with others. Especially Others that He Feels have slighted him in Any Way. Ergo, The VIP Tent tickets.

I have to agree, $50K seems like a drop in the bucket compared to all of the money that was wasted for no answers.

JR: I am fighting this FOIA denial to the fullest extent of the law and the people will win.

Yes this is certainly beating a dead horse. When 2 parties enter a settlement and include a confidentiality agreement they can't do anything to break that agreement or the settlement can be nullified with possible penalties.

The only dispute I would have with this would not be the wate of money if you are right and it really costs $20,ooo to do the audit...my concern is that if..BIG IF, but if somebody, anybody did stuff wrong, they should be fired, or elected to office, we the taxpayers should know about it so we have the option of UNelecting them. Because IF they are guilty of doing this stuff, (whatever it MIGHT turn out to be), who knows the actual cost to us, the Oak Lawn taxpayer? What if it is $10,ooo a year? Over five, six, eight years? More than covers an audit, and bad people are exposed and possibly out of office. Of course, if nothing is found, we might feel a little ripped, but really, $20,ooo to know that we AREN'T being pillaged would almost be a relief in this town at this point.

Dave W: really you'd spend 20k on a big "IF" to check a "wate of money "????Easy to authorize spending in 20k if the money isn't yours. You really should be elected to something since you have no qualms about spending.

A couple of things...wate of money. You were in such a hurry making your fake profile just to bash on me that you didn't even spell your own fake name right. So maybe work on that next time...also, is it really a waSte of money if they uncover wrongdoing and monetary mismanagement? It actually IS (a tiny bit) my money, since I pay taxes in Oak Lawn all the time. Property taxes, every store I go into...(I try to shop in town every chance I get...), window stickers...
Do YOU know how much is missing? (I say IF because unlike many people on this board, on all sides, I still think everybody, on all sides, deserves the benefit of at least SOME doubt until they are proven guilty...) What price is it you put on having a non-corrupt town? Even if the actual amount is say...$5000...wouldn't you want to know? So that whoever is at fault can be brought to at leat responsiblity...at least be voted out of office if nothing else? Also, on the other hand...what if it proves that there really was NOTHING? Shouldn't those people be vindicated? Wouldn't YOU want to be if it were you?
Does it suck that we the taxpayers (I presume you to be one) are stuck with having to pay for such things? Yes, but it is more irritating in principle than even the money...if it was $100 it would be sad that we have to spend it on this instead of ANYTHING else. Your shortsighted attack does nothing to solve the problems, and would infact only help to cover them up. Unless that is what you really want.

http://southtownstar.suntimes.com/13860109-522/oak-lawn-treasurer-rips-call-for-forensic-audit-of-fest.html and http://www.mcgoverngreene.com/specialists/mcgovern.html

TO INFINITY AND BEYOND!!!!

You should call Lisa Madigan... FOIA law states:
Public records cannot be withheld from disclosure under
subsection 7(1)(a) simply because the parties agree to a "gag order" and that order is entered by a court. Carbondale Convention Center v. City of Carbondale, 245 Ill. App. 3d 474, 477 (5th Dist.1993).
(5 ILCS 140/8) (from Ch. 116, par. 208)
Sec. 8. If any public record that is exempt from disclosure under Section 7 of this Act contains any material which is not exempt, the public body shall delete the information which is exempt and make the remaining information available for inspection and copying.
Where the denial is from the head of a municipality or other public body, except as
provided in subsection (b) of this Section, suit may be filed in the circuit court for the county where the public body is located.

The Circuit Court will then review the report to see if any exceptions apply that should be redacted. One would hope that if anything inappropriate has occurred the Circuit Court would notice..

Thanks Homegrown in OL - I have no doubt this confidentiality agreement will not stand when challenged. The desires of elected officials to keep closed door deals quiet will not override the taxpayers right to know if their elected officials represent them or the interests of themselves or friends. The truth will be known.

To a point I made in another comment section, this agreement will stand if someone with power wants it to stand. And while the Speaker Madigan influence is most likely not succintly evident in the agreement I'm sure, it casts a wide shadow. Please refer to http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2010-06-27/news/ct-met-oak-lawn-mjm-20100626_1_trustee-bob-streit-village-trustee-village-attorney.

I can pretty much tell from the comments what people expect to find. What I would expect are items that are not going to reflect positive light on several members of the Board, if not each and every one of them. I find it a little unfair to target only Mr. Heilmann as "The Crook" in all of this; commenters can hammer any of the officials regarding the release of the report but choose to zero in on The Mayor. Well, then again, that says what those commenters expect to find. Anyway, I'm far from an expert on FOIA and the process itself as it relates to this report, and the efforts to get it release, make the whole situation curiouser and curiouser. So - now I'm curious.

"Nothing changes by getting our hands on this report" - Um. Then why are certain elected officials still working so hard to conceal the truth? They have seen it. They are still stalling and fighting to keep it hidden. Do they think nothing changes?

Yes, it's time to move on. It's like a beautiful baby with an unbelievably stinky diaper. It fills you with dread and stinks so that you get the dry heaves, but you know the baby needs it changed so you hold your nose and get to work.

That's what I'm doing. The people will know the truth.

OLG it wouldn't surprise me that it's possible there are quite a few dirty hands involved in this. But this is an election year and some re trying to make this an issue where the mayor is the devil and all others are pure as the driven snow. Would I like to read the report? Sure. Do I expect any illegalities in there? No - nothing you could prosecute anyone for, As someone else pointed out lawyers are officers of the court and if they see evidence of a crime they have to report it or risk disbarment. Confidentiality agreements re very common in the case of settlements. I worked for a company once where I saw several NDAs crafted and the penalties are usually severe. But again there's an election coming up so this will be used as political fodder.

Political motivations? Perish the thought! Wait....just joking. Yep, the realignment of board members, indeed perhaps the genesis of this whole investigation, has politics stamped all over it.

@Sandra Bury, I explained why they would chose to keep it hidden in my post.

As far as your analogy goes. The baby's diaper was changed. What instead your asking for is to put the dirty diaper back on to the baby after its already been taken off to prove that the diaper does in fact have crap in it.

Grunty, you're mistaken if you think that my motivation is hate. My motivation is love. I love this community and the terrific folks who live here. I have no patience for elected officials who put their selfish interests first, and then contrive convoluted ways to conceal the truth from the very people they work for. It's wrong in every way you look at it and I'm sure a judge will agree.

This is exactly what I'm talking about. The confidentiality is most likely to protect the law firm, not the village officials....

If Phelan was Mayor you would be beating down the village hall doors to release the report. You claim Phelan has a frat brother( untrue ) on Godfrey and Kahn,but say nothing of the Mayor's admitted buddies at tressler. Who are the ones the report is on and did pay the village $450,000 for something. Let freedom ring!!!

Good Point Enough typing.. Someone should start a petition to demand a forensic audit