Blog Nazi: Full Disclosure

Borrowing a reference from the popular sitcom, Seinfeld, I have been attacked by what I consider, in my opinion, the village "Blog Nazi," none other than Trustee Verciglio. Verciglio has repeatedly asked me to apologize for my blog and has over the last week suggested I remove certain language from my blog. I appreciate that he is an avid reader of the blog and website, however, that's all he is; he nor anyone else shall dictate my blog and website. His statements and suggestions which border an ultimatum in my opinion, have come in the form of email. He is not the only elected official who has attacked me for my blog, but he is the most aggressive in my opinion and in my opinion to wants to control me in the boardroom and on my blog. His attacks don't end with me; he recently suggested that village resident, Mr. Ptak apologize at the next board meeting for "misinforming" the public. It is this kind of mean arrogance that has divided this village. If a resident is misinformed or doesn't understand something, it is in my opinion, a knee-jerk reaction for certain elected officials to attack and demand apologies and recants etc... The village officials or employees can correct residents and ensure they are properly informed, but to ask a resident to apologize: the nerve! If the majority of this board and our Mayor is concerned about residents being properly informed, they can make moves to be more transparent, beginning with full disclosure via our village website; instead their focus, in my opinion, is on how to control me and the bookends with board policies; and the new FOIA law! Oh my, apparently it is an issue for some that the village may as well open up our file cabinets. Why do some in the government think public business is not the public's business?

This is what the hotly contested appointed trustee concerns himself with? If there was any wonder why three trustees contested the appointment of this trustee, I hope it is clear now.

The pot calling the kettle black

I just reviewed the Finance & Administration committee meeting. I could not attend this meeting due to ongoing health issues so there can be no accusations by anyone that I didn't bother to attend the meeting--I physically could not attend it. Now that we have cleared the air on that, let me give you, the public my reaction.

One of the issues I found in the hour long discussion on Board Policies is that the chairperson of this committee found that Board Policies to be priority for this committee (in my opinion) verses say, oh, village finances and how we can cut costs which should in my most humble opinion, include a mandatory policy that our village seek competitive bids for all projects and services the village purchases regularly except in the case of an emergency. I have not heard any valid reason for not bidding out work.

One of the major issues I have with these board policies is that in my opinion, they do not address the faults or shortcomings of all trustees; only it seems that the discussion was based around "they"; over and over I heard the reference of "they" not "we" leaving one to believe, in my opinion, the board policies are to keep trustees Rabattini, Ponio and Saville in line with what the Herrmann slate deems appropriate, not necessarily to create policies that fairly address all issues that concern all trustees and would eliminate much conflict. If these policies were meant to improve the communication and progress as a village, why then are there no policies to ensures nothing will come to vote without at least a public deliberation one week before voting? This has been a long ongoing problem with this board, yet nothing was put in these policies to address this problem. Second, there is nothing in the policies that requires trustees discuss all business with all trustees; for example, when censuring a trustee, no exclusion of any elected official as was the case in the censure of Trustee Saville; Trustee Ponio was excluded from discussions to censure Trustee Saville; why? as former Trustee Garling put it "you wouldn't have agreed" Also absent from policies was the promise to obey our own ordinances. A few months ago, then Trustee Garling posted executive session information on his blog, and to add fuel to the fire, what he posted was a settlement offer regarding ongoing litigation. There is an ordinance in which the ed, butlast board created to fine anyone who records what goes on in executive session; I think taking confidential material and publicizes it constitutes in my opinion, a "recording" publicizing a settlement offer is a gross violation of the litigation process, a violation to the litigator and of the ordinance, yet no action was taken against Garling including fining him for breaking the very law he voted for and no board policies were drawn up to address this sad and unprofessional act.

It is clear that this board does not get along and if you read between the lines, you also will see that too, and that's OK, we don't have to get along outside of the boardroom, but what's fair is fair and Trustee Mascillino decided to write up policies in which were based on, in my opinion, non-Herrmann slate elected officials whom have conducted themselves unbecoming to their standards, yet left out any flaws in their own behaviors as elected officials. What's good for the goose is good for the gander, isn't that right? Or in other words, it's like the pot calling the kettle black. I want to see policies added that will ensure future adherence to our ordinances, no exclusion of trustees and public deliberation at least one week prior to voting on anything that is not an emergency. I have many more ideas and will share them with the board PUBLICLY. I do not believe in opaque government on any issue--everything should be discussed open and support a transparent and honest government.