Tressler Addresses Issues Raised in Odelson Report
Tressler lays out facts that it says will "set the record straight" during tenure as the village attorney.
Pdfs
The law firm that was hired in 2005 to handle Oak Lawn’s legal business has characterized claims raised in an investigative report that the firm overbilled and dropped the ball on important litigation as being full of inaccuracies.
Tressler, Soderstrom, Maloney & Preiss was hired in October 2005 at the recommendation of Mayor Dave Heilmann at a monthly retainer of $21,000. After the village’s legal fees tripled during the nearly four years that the firm had served as the village’s legal counsel, village board members hired attorney Burt Odelson to conduct an independent investigation into Tressler’s billings and practices.
The Odelson report that was submitted to the village board in closed session last month, and eventually was leaked to Patch, alleged that Tressler and another independent attorney hired by the village during the period, Norm Chimenti, may have cost the village an estimated $8 million to $10 million in economic damages.
Among the report’s allegations, Tressler mishandled collecting sales tax from Target, failed to communicate a female firefighter’s settlement offers concerning a sexual harassment lawsuit to the village board, and put attorneys inexperienced in municipal law in charge of the village’s legal business.
On Tuesday, Tressler attorney D.J. Sartorio told Patch that his firm did not see the report until it was posted on Oak Lawn Patch.
“We certainly weren’t provided with a copy before or anytime other than getting it off the Internet from Patch,” Sartorio said. “Had we not gotten it from your publication we only would have gotten it again through a freedom of information request.”
Tressler also issued a media statement last week concerning the allegations raised in Odelson’s “Investigative Executive Summary” addressing the issues raised in the report.
Duplicate Payments
Tressler claims that it submitted invoices according to processes established by the village. Sartorio included an email to Village Manager Larry Deetjen and Brian Hanigan, the village finance direcotr, regarding duplicate payments made by the village discovered by the firm. The village instructed Tressler to apply the overpayments as "credits" for other village business.
With respect to the two $21,000 payments that the report claims were duplicate payments, Sartorio claims that Tressler filed a Freedom of Information Act request for internal email between Hanigan and another village employee.
Sartorio said his firm reported to Hanigan that the two $21,000 payments were for the June and July 2007 retainer.
In May 2009, there was a payment for other legal work separate from that covered under Tressler’s retainer.
“(The) internal Oak Lawn document would appear to refute the claim that there were duplicate payments in those two instances,” Sartorio said.
Sartorio also added that the village still owes Tressler $96,000 on outstanding invoices.
The Januszewski Case
Tressler also maintains that strategy and settlement concerning Oak Lawn firefighter Sharon Januszewski’s sexual harassment lawsuit against the village and four Oak Lawn firefighters was fully discussed in a lengthy executive session of the village board in January 2008.
Sartorio said Tressler has requested a copy of the audiotape of the Jan. 7, 2008 executive session.
“We are currently in court attempting to obtain the audiotape through a lawsuit filed by our lawyers,” Sartorio said, “but the village has ferociously fought us at every turn to make sure that we can’t get that audiotape.”
According to Sartorio, trustees can be heard on the audiotape of the executive session weighing in on strategy, and some “complained bitterly” about how much money was going to be offered and were “insisting that it be offered in small increments.”
Tressler initially offered Januszewski a $50,000 settlement per the village board’s direction, and authorized Tressler to offer up to $200,000.
“We believe very strongly that the audiotape will establish as inaccurate the representation made with respect to that executive session,” Sartorio said.
Cooperation
Regarding claims that Tressler failed to turn over 250 documents requested by Odelson during the investigation, Sartorio said he had “no idea” what those documents were.
“(We) turned over the entire Target file when asked and did that in every other instance,” Sartorio said. “The (report) doesn’t identify what (the other documents) are. I’m unaware what they are. As I sit here today, there was no request for documents that we didn’t comply with.”
Municipal Lawyers
In 2005, Tressler merged with the well-known municipal law firm Moss and Bloomberg. The Odelson report has maintained that Tressler lawyers assigned to the village were inexperienced in municipal law.
Sartorio said that while not all of the firm’s lawyers assigned to work with the village were from the Moss and Bloomberg municipal arm of the firm, those who participated in village board meetings were “legacy” attorneys from Moss and Bloomberg.
Kathy Elliot, who is referred to in the Odelson report as mishandling creating an ordinance to set up a special service area that would have allowed the village to collect sales tax from Target, came to Tressler after 20 years of serving as the city attorney for Rockford.
“Miss Elliot repeatedly reminded the village that they needed to (set up the ordinance),” Sartorio said. “The village board for whatever reason repeatedly failed to put it on its agenda and that’s the reason why it wasn’t enacted.”
‘Triple Legal Fees’
Sartorio said that between November 2005 and June 2010, Tressler billed the village $3.4 million in legal fees. Roughly $930,000, he said, was attributable to the Januszewski case.
“Take her out of the mix, you end up with $2.5 million in fees spread out over 4.5 years, averaging $560,000 per year,” Sartorio said.
Prior to Tressler’s hiring in 2005, the village paid the former village attorneys approximately $550,000 annually in retainers and other litigation work.
‘Not Interested in Motivations’
Sartorio said his firm was not interested in any possible personal agendas that may have motivated the Odelson report.
“Frankly, my suspicions are that various trustees may very well not have the same motivations,” he said.
“Our only concern is that the picture being painted of our firm is inaccurate and unflattering,” Sartorio said. “We’ve made efforts to try to resolve this and we’ve always been open to discussion. We’ve invited discussion. The village has the right not to discuss anything with us.”
Sartorio said that he anticipated a lawsuit against his firm by the village.
“We had hoped that we could resolve this with the village, but now that his report has been leaked it appears unlikely to me,” he said. “With the number of matters that are raised in this presentation, the litigation would be lengthy and likely to be very expensive. That’s unfortunate, at least from the perspective of the Village of Oak Lawn, because we fully expect to prevail.”
He called the claims raised in the report “out of left field for us.”
“As much as we’re caught in the middle, we actually feel that citizens of Oak Lawn are caught in the middle too,” Sartorio said. “That’s particularly unfortunate because they are very good people.”
Oak Lawn Gal
10:30 am on Wednesday, May 4, 2011
Well if OL sues Tressler then the Jan 7, 2008 audiotape will have to be released. If the board discussed and agreed with the strategy and settlement offers for the Januszewski case then the mismanagemnet allegation against Tressler in that case is inaccurate. Also if the over billing is really payments of the retainer fee for separate months then that allegation would also appear to be inaccurate.
I would like to see Oak Lawn try to negotiate this issue with Tressler. Simply said litigation is going to burn money we could be using for better things in Oak Lawn.
OakLawnGuy
11:48 am on Wednesday, May 4, 2011
If Tressler is adamant about their innocence regarding wrong-doing, I doubt they will settle. They have the resources to battle this in court, while we taxpayers will foot the bill for the other side. I'm sure they have a trove of evidence to counter the Odelson report.
Oak Lawn Gal
1:26 pm on Wednesday, May 4, 2011
Yes they would probably reject a negotiated settlement. Any litigation is going to take years. What a waste.
andy skoundrianos
6:27 pm on Wednesday, May 4, 2011
Do you guys want Oak Lawn to fail?? If tressler is guilty lets fight em in court. At least the village will have better legal team defending them this time
Oak Lawn Gal
7:30 pm on Wednesday, May 4, 2011
If Tressler prevails in a legal action can they collect damages from the village?
Sam Wilson
9:28 pm on Wednesday, May 4, 2011
I'd think that they could collect damages from both the village and Odelson, including any outstanding balance the court would rule that is due them. Win or lose the core of this issue still remains. Why was this not caught back when it was happening?
Barb
9:35 pm on Wednesday, May 4, 2011
Yes, settle it and vote Phelan out next election.
Oak Lawn Gal
9:59 pm on Wednesday, May 4, 2011
I'd like to see All the billing numbers laid out by a neutral entity. The first question is are we dealing with intentional overbilling? Or was the % increase in billings due to the higher fees negotiated by the Tressler law firm and the higher settlement for the Januszewski case ?
andy skoundrianos
11:28 pm on Wednesday, May 4, 2011
You bloggers are all missing the point, Part of the investigation involves whether the Mayor was intenionally hiding certain legal activities from the manager and B.O.T. The question really should be if Tressler is guilty, What did the Mayor know, when did he know it, and what did he do about it??
Sam Wilson
7:31 am on Thursday, May 5, 2011
Andy, those are certainly valid points. There are a lot of questions, though, and I still contend that this should have been caught by the village finance office, who would then report it to the full board in the board's financial report. I'm not sure how you could keep it from the B.O.T. unless the village finance office intentionally kept it off the books. In which case, I'd think heads would roll.
Amos
7:38 am on Thursday, May 5, 2011
Andy, you are so blinded with love for the now fractured bob and yom alliance that you don't get that the odelson report appears to be nothing more than a national enquirer article. Tressler welcomes a lawsuit. Doesn't that tell you something? Smoke and mirrors? Do you read anything besides comic books? Bob backslapping you for being his pawn in the oldest trick in the book of throwing someone off the ballot doesn't mean you're his friend. You always ask for the truth. How much did and will you pay Brennan? Answer that and you may gain some credibility.
andy skoundrianos
10:41 am on Thursday, May 5, 2011
Didn't we have a radio show together??? Just askin
Oak Lawn Gal
7:50 am on Thursday, May 5, 2011
With the allegations made by Odelson it wouldn't be surprising to see Tressler sue the village and Odelson. The core question is whether there was intentional over billing. If the village sues I hope they have someone besides Odelson look at the numbers and evidence. I think the executive session recordings and all board and staff email/documents/correspondence etc will tell us what really happened.
Jay Washington
10:29 am on Thursday, May 5, 2011
In Bolingbrook we have the same issue. Tressler charges over a million a year and their misadvice leads to many lawsuits, which benefit the attorneys that gave the advice. They bleed residents dry and they need to go to court. There needs to be a class action suit with all villages they represent. Furthermore, there probably is a deal between the Mayor and the Lawyers. In Bolingbrook our mayor gets big donations from Tressler plus each attorney individually. I would check the IL campaign disclosures for 2005 to see what the deal was sealed with.
We also have problems with collecting tax from stores. Does all this ring a bell? I think guilty if they did not just have a "oops" oversight in ioak Lawn, but are doing it around Chicago. What do you think?
Jay Washington
11:10 am on Thursday, May 5, 2011
I see the large donations to Tressler and Dave at $5K a pop. This is standard for Tressler to the Mayors that they cut deals with. Follow the money and you will bury him! We have been following Tressler too. Furthermore, this is not a political issue, this is an issue about a crime to the residents. All the Republicans that try to fight this on here need to know that I KNOW about the large donations Jim Boan and Tressler give to the Will County Republican Party and Dick Kavanaugh's involvement with Tressler. Since that whole coverup is gone, let's get back to the residents and how they have been getting ripped off!
Y R U PO"D
9:51 am on Friday, May 6, 2011
jay o. washington or ol trustee- just where did YOU FIND THIS INFO???? if none of this is political hahahahah, why are you talking about republicans? btw several trustees here in ol are supposed republicans but they hold hands and gaze adoringly at the other guys! switch hitters?
scouter
11:54 am on Monday, May 9, 2011
And why do the people of Oak Lawn have to pay for the stupidity of our elected officials? Because we elect them! But we don't get to elect all of those who have a say in what our village does... just saying. As an idea - why can't we have a binding arbitration between these so called factions! I've listened to both sides, and I've looked at both sides of this issue - and frankly, a lot of this is more like spoiled children wanting it to be their way and only their way - ALL of the time! It's all fine and good when all are getting along, but if someone has a different idea, then all the rest gang up them and try to bully them to switch it the way THEY want it! And this is the history of Oak Lawn... REMEMBER KOLB? Come on Village Officials - GROW UP! Do the job we elected you to - and stop this crap!
Sam Wilson
10:10 pm on Monday, May 9, 2011
Scouter, I agree. The political shenanigans are really wearing thin on the residents. I don't think any of them see that.
Ron Williams
4:17 pm on Tuesday, May 10, 2011
Village Trustee's Son Charged in Domestic Battery; Tressler Addresses Issues Raised in Odelson Report, Oak Lawn Home Prices Drop, Village Explores Litigation Against Former Village Attorneys, Odelson Report Leaked to Patch As Oak Lawn Turns: Heilmann Says Investigation Is 'All-out Attack on Me'.Village Board Discusses Odelson Report in Closed Session,Oak Lawn Sued for Age Discrimination. Boy all this stuff just makes you want to settle down in our tight knit family community, open a business in one of the many empty store fronts, and buy some of those foreclosed properties accumulating in our neighbor hoods amongst the depreciated in value houses. Oak Lawn, gotta love it.
Dr. Linda Lorincz Shelton
9:57 pm on Wednesday, May 11, 2011
Why are they wasting our taxpayer dollars before they get both sides of the story? There is not enough evidence to make a case yet. Let Tressler and the other attorneys respond to the Odelson report in writing. Publish both the Odelson report and the response. Then have a committee of neutral volunteer businessmen and lawyers from the Village review them and see if there is a case. If there is, only then should a lawyer be hired to pursue it. What a waste of taxpayer dollars!
Joe Wilson
5:37 pm on Friday, May 13, 2011
http://provisoinsider.blogspot.com/2008/06/proviso-board-president-chris-welch_26.html Thursday, June 26, 2008
Proviso Board President Chris Welch Sues Former Proviso Lawyers Burt Odelson and Mark Sterk.
Also Sues Former Employer James J. Roche!!!
On information and belief, on May 21, 2007, District 209 fired Odelson & Sterk. On information and belief, on or about May 21, 2007, Odelson & Sterk called James Roche, blaming Welch for their impending dismissal as attorneys for District 209, and requested that Welch be fired in retaliation for his role in uncovering Odelson & Sterk’s alleged overbilling and unauthorized charging.
Joe Wilson
5:38 pm on Friday, May 13, 2011
On May 21, 2007, after Odelson & Sterk called James Roche, Roche called Welch and left a message for him to report to Roche’s office to discuss his employment status.
On May 21, 2007, Roche told Welch that, if District 209 fires Odelson & Sterk, for allegedly billing the district for legal work that was either not done or not authorized. not to report to work ever again.
On May 22, 2007, Roche fired Welch in retaliation for Odelson & Sterk’s firing as counsel for District 209.
As a result of his illegal termination, Welch suffered a loss of income.
On information and belief, Odelson, Sterk and Roche agreed to try to use Welch’s employment position as leverage to try to coerce him to use his position as Board President of District 209 to get the District to continue to use Odelson & Sterk, despite the fact that Odelson & Sterk were overbilling the District and, when that did not happen, agreed to have Welch terminated at Roche’s firm.