Home » Featured

January open thread [2013]

11 January 2013 Elgin Illinois 86 Comments

Elgin Fresh Market Elgin Fresh Market (Photo by Elgin Town).

January open thread. Discuss what you want.

Possibly related posts:

1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars
Loading ... Loading ...

86 Responses to “January open thread [2013]”

You can subscribe to these comments via RSS.

  1. harmony says:

    Well with all the candidates running for City Council I am able to lower that number by 3. Gilliam, Dunne and Armstrong. As for Gilliam, been on the council to long and basically lives in Arizona, that is a no brainier. Dunne has been a great disappointment, running as a conservative and voting as a liberal. Armstrong has shown me that he will side with his North east neighbors. Also all three are not going to be open enough to attend OCTAVE’s candidate forum.

    • bennie says:

      Congrats to the Elgin Octave you did a wonderful job very professional putting together an impressive Candidates forum for the upcoming Elgin city council. you presented thoughtful questions no gotcha questions and I was impressed with all candidates however, disappointed with so many incumbent members absence I would have liked to have been able to compare their answers to those of new candidates vying for a chance to represent the citizens of this community I look forward to a full slate of candidates at some point in the process. Thank you Elgin Octave Good Job

  2. Chuck Keysor says:

    Hello Harmony and Bennie! I have posted copies of your comments in the page about the forum. Thank you so much Bennie! Chuck

  3. Gibster says:

    I’m making a list of Candidate Facebook, Twitter and Webpages for the 2013 Elections (Council, Boards and Trustees).

    As of 1/13… Toby Shaw is out front with his website and now YouTube videos - check it out (comment is you like) and add more resources to the thread here!


  4. Gibster says:

    FYI: The Elgin City Clerk updated her website with information about Primary and Early Voting.


  5. Today on Left Right and You, I’m going to ask Supervisor Harney about Elgin’s Rain Tax.


  6. ElginSpirit says:

    Feb 26th - City Council Primary Early Voting information (2-year seat) is posted for the public - #Elgin2013


  7. Elgin Patriot says:

    These are the people I will be voting for in the upcoming election and I hope you all look into them. I am still trying to find who will be my fourth 4 year candidate!

    4 Year Candidates I will be voting for:

    John Prigge-

    Terry Gavin-

    Cody Holt-

    2 Year Candidate I will be voting for:

    Jason Dusenberry-

    Others 4 year:

    Richard Dunne-

    Bob Gilliam-

    Mitchell Esterino-

    Rosemarie Kahn-
    Nothing I could find!

    Steve Knight-

    Thomas Armstrong-

    Andrew Cuming-

    Jerri McCue-
    couldn’t find any information

    Carol Rauschenberger-

    Grace Richards-
    No information

    2 year candidates:

    Toby Shaw-

    Daniel Schultz-

    Tom McCarthy-

    Larry Wegman-

    Craig Dresang

    Michael DeBrocke-

    Roy Chapman-
    Nothing I could find!

    Chindavanh Keomuongchanh-
    Couldn’t find anything about him either!

  8. Terry Gavin says:

    Hello Elgin citizens. Yard signs & campaign literature are available for Gavin for City Council, please call 847-697-8620 to support smaller city government, less taxes, less spending on non-core issues. You can also visit my website http://www.citizensforgavin.com hope you’ll join us in bringing common sense back to Elgin City Hall!

  9. John says:

    In light of the fact that the long-form tree-cutting moratorium ordinance is on the city council agenda for this Wednesday, January 23, 2013, I would like to make the following comments beforehand. I would’ve liked to have commented on the Wednesday, November 14, 2012, city council meeting (during which they discussed the 90-day tree-cutting moratorium ordinance) at the time it occurred, but the real-time stream was blacked out online. As such, consideration of the 90-day tree-cutting moratorium ordinance should have been tabled until the community had time to read through and review it. The rush job and the online blackout of the council meeting, even if it was just a technological failure, make the passage of this ordinance look untoward and certainly not in keeping with the standards of the Illinois Open Meetings Act.

    These tree-cutting moratorium ordinances exemplify the “agenda” in the U.N.’s Agenda 21. The U.N.’s Agenda 21, or more precisely, Sustainable Development Agenda 21, “…is about changing the very infrastructure of the nation, away from private ownership and control of property to central planning of the entire economy. Sustainable development’s agenda includes gun control, open borders, cap and trade, food control, farming ‘reform,’ refusal to drill American oil, population control, and U.N. global governance.” (http://www.thepilot.com/news/2011/nov/20/agenda-21-anyone/) Those not familiar with Agenda 21, which former Councilman Terry Gavin referenced in his prior comments regarding the hydro-electric dam proposal, should please read up on it at the following sources: “Agenda 21 In One Easy Lesson,” http://www.rightsidenews.com/2011040713218/life-and-science/energy-and-environment/agenda-21-in-one-easy-lesson.html . You can also download this free booklet (in PDF format), entitled “Understanding Sustainable Development – Agenda 21.” http://www.freedomadvocates.org/images/pdf/SD%20A21%20pamphlet-2010.pdf . Note: “sustainable” and “Agenda 21″ are considered by the U.N. to be synonymous.

    Following is the worst of what I have picked out of these unconstitutional tree-cutting moratorium ordinances:

    1. These ordinances use the pretense of health, welfare, and safety under home rule to supposedly justify their legitimacy. But these tree-cutting moratoriums don’t hold up under home rule doctrine when you consider that Agenda 21 is not “rationally related” to the health, welfare, or safety of the community. In fact, quite the opposite. Another way to put that is, just because you invoke home rule doesn’t mean you can outright negate constitutional rights, and certainly not for spurious reasons.

    2. The rush job that was the 90-day ordinance in particular appears improper. It preempts public discussion (and therefore public dissension) and looks to be more of an end-around. The council can say that they did so on what could be called an “emergency” basis in an attempt to prevent developers from hurriedly clear-cutting their development properties, but given the obvious Agenda 21 aspects of the ordinance, it has the appearance of the council trying to slip one by Elginites.

    3. And, because they are invoking home rule status as their “authority” in both the long-version ordinance and the 90-day ordinance, it is particularly alarming that the following clause exists and was passed as part of the 90-day tree-cutting moratorium ordinance:

    “…as a home rule unit the City of Elgin may exercise any power and perform any function pertaining to its government affairs…” (p. 1).

    Apparently the City of Elgin has just given itself dictatorial power to do anything and everything it wants under the guise of home rule!

    4. These ordinances also have an element of what has been called “guardianship.” Guardianship, or at least the guardianship espoused by radical environmentalists and animal rightists, pushes for trees (or wildlife, or domesticated pets, or oceans, or beaches, or wildernesses, etc.) to have legal standing under the care of a guardian or steward. Under guardianship, guardians have the “right” to make legal decisions on behalf of, in this case, trees. What they fail to mention is that in order to give trees, etc. “legal standing,” your property rights (or some other rights) must first be negated. To understand this very unAmerican movement further from the vantage point of those pushing it, please read the piece “Guardianship: Should Trees Have Legal Standing?” (http://blog.oup.com/2010/03/real-life-lorax/). And if you think this tree cutting moratorium ordinance isn’t on its way to guardianship, consider what Mayor Kaptain had to say about it during the November 14th, 2012, city council meeting:

    “…that is just the way that government has to work to protect the rights of people and to protect the rights of the land that’s around it…”

    And there it is: Protecting “the rights of the land” is guardianship because the city council arrogantly assumes that they and the U.N. are better “guardians” of your land than you are. It violates fundamental constitutional rights, and it’s an indication that your mayor subscribes to radical environmentalism, which certainly doesn’t protect the rights of people. Anything but. Although, it’s kind of obvious that Elgin has gone radical since they accepted an award from the Sierra Club during the same meeting; the same Sierra Club that has, according to the Department of Homeland Security, “known or possible links to ecoterrorism” (p. 9, http://www.scribd.com/doc/12251436/DHS-Eco-Terrorism-in-US-2008). By the way, the Sierra Club is also one of the Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) accredited by the U.N. to implement Agenda 21. Some of the other NGOs are the Nature Conservancy, the National Audobon Society, the American Planning Association, the National Teachers Association, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, and the U.S. Farm Bureau (p.14, http://www.freedomadvocates.org/images/pdf/SD%20A21%20pamphlet-2010.pdf). It is also notable that the Sierra Club is a proponent of rewilding, which I will explain later in this writing (http://rewildingnorthamerica.weebly.com/organizations.html).

    5. As noted above, guardianship negates fundamental constitutional rights. These tree-cutting moratorium ordinances in particular negate owners’ rights to their real property (5th, and 14th amendments), their privacy (4th amendment), due process (5th and 14th amendments), and certainly life and liberty (5th and 14th amendments). Another way to put that is that these ordinances are the very epitome of governmental intrusion under the guise of “public health, safety, and welfare.” And again, home rule doctrine is not a rational basis by which to negate fundamental constitutional rights when you consider the real reason for these ordinances, Agenda 21, and the ordinances’ true source, most likely the Sierra Club or some other Agenda 21-aligned organization.

    6. It is important to remember too that the 14th amendment — which protects the rights to life, liberty, property, due process, and equal protection of the laws — was ratified in 1868 after slavery was abolished precisely because it has long been understood that property rights go hand-in-hand with freedom. So then, if the right to protect one’s property via due process and the right to property itself are negated, we don’t have freedom; we have the beginnings of slavery.

    We can clearly see how these tree-cutting moratorium ordinances negate property and privacy rights and life and liberty, but perhaps the due process violation is a little harder to understand. Due process is the constitutional provision that prohibits the government — federal and state — from unfairly or arbitrarily depriving a person of life, liberty, or property or the enjoyment of life, liberty, and property. The city via the 90-day ordinance has deprived land owners of the free use of their land without any real opportunity for remonstrance or appeal. Nor does the longer ordinance’s “appeals” process restore due process. That’s almost like saying the “administrative hearings” provision that Prigge passed as part of his onerous dog ordinance in 2010 is the equivalent of due process. Those hearings are anything but due process since they are not performed in front of a qualified judge, are not held in a proper court of law, the accused does not have access to proper legal representation, and may not necessarily be allowed to confront his/her accuser. So, just because the longer-form tree-cutting moratorium ordinance supposedly has an appeals process built in doesn’t mean that’s due process. Indeed, Prigge’s admin hearings are the equivalent of what this tree-cutting moratorium ordinance’s “appeals” process will be: A negation of due process and the right to defend oneself against rogue government satraps. In other words, with these admin hearings and these appeals boards, you’re attempting to argue your rights to your property in front of the very entity that unconstitutionally abridged or outright negated those rights in the first place. Again, this is not due process; it’s the negation of due process.

    7. And besides negating fundamental constitutional rights and most likely having their sources from an Agenda-21 aligned NGO, these tree-cutting moratorium ordinances have an even more insidious underlying agenda. These ordinances appear to incorporate movements called “rewilding” and “nativism.” Rewilding means introducing or reintroducing (animals or plants) to their original habitat or to a habitat similar to their natural one. In order to reintroduce plants and animals to their original habitat, proponents must maintain or restore the trees and grasslands as they were before humans. But, uh oh. What to do with those pesky humans who own property in the cities and suburbs in what used to be plains and wooded areas? Well, with stepping-stone legislation like a tree-cutting moratorium which uses specious reasoning and complicated, ill-defined wording to negate your property rights, perhaps your property already isn’t your property.

    Likewise, nativism is the policy or practice of preserving or reviving an indigenous culture. In other words, wild animals and plants under nativism would take precedent over domesticated animals (and one must conclude humans) because wild animals are seen by these extremists as unadulterated by human intervention (i.e. domestication) and wild animals were here first. That’s why so many radical animal “rights” and environmentalist groups lobby for legislation that goes on to kill so very many domesticated animals. That’s why, for instance, I believe the Audobon Society is opposed to feral cats. Feral cats, while not technically domesticated, are products of human selective breeding and, we’re told, kill too many native birds. As such, many are opposed to Trap-Neuter-Release programs and think feral cats should be killed. Breed-specific dog bans and even very strict dangerous dog laws, like the ordinances Prigge pushed three years ago, also kill many innocent dogs because the radical animal rights groups that push them on the back channels want to end all domestic animal ownership and they do so via stepping-stone type legislation. All they need do is buy off (er I mean, finance the campaign of) a willing politician. It’s the same with puppy mill bills that put both bad and good breeders out of business. Same with the relentless stream of agriculture bills that constantly restrict farmers’ ability to farm, ranch, and maintain dairy herds.

    All this legislation will eventually add up to no more farming and no more domesticated animals, which not only means no more pets, but no more food. In case you were wondering, that’s the “food control” part of Agenda 21. Research the rewilding and nativist movements and you will come to understand more and more about just exactly what is meant when the Elgin City Council uses the word “sustainability” — which is the Agenda 21 word meaning, as Harvey Ruvin, Vice Chairman of the International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives (ICLEI) and The Wildlands Project put it: “Individual rights will have to take a back seat to the collective.” By the way, Elgin is a member of the ICLEI (http://www.icleiusa.org/about-iclei/members/member-list), though I don’t remember that membership having been discussed openly during a city council meeting.

    I would argue that nativism and rewilding are already quietly underway here in Elgin and all across the Illinois landscape, and not just because of the tree-cutting moratoriums. Those foxes in Wing Park weren’t pushed there due to “urban sprawl” as they would have you believe. I believe they were put there by rewilders. Those coyotes that these suburban “officials” along with the radical animal rights group the Humane Society of the United States tell us to “haze” aren’t being seen by us in such great numbers because we pushed them out of their forests and into the suburban landscape. I believe they’re there because they were put there. Same with all the hawks that just seemed to spring up overnight. Talk about decimating your local bird and small critter populations! And notice how this scheme works: The rewilders/nativists are the cause of these problems, and are presented as being the only ones with the seeming “solution.” So for rewilders/nativists who want to return the land to its “original” “wild” state, this means replacing domesticated animals — by killing them or severely reducing them with extremely restrictive legislation — with wild animals. Eventually it will mean reducing or eradicating humans as well.

    Elgin is a fairly God-fearing town as well with the majority of folks being conservative and believing in God. So consider too that what they propose flies in the face of God’s creation design. Animals and plants may have come first, but God made humans in His image (Genesis 1:26-27) which is what makes humans exceptional to animals and plants. Then God went on to say,

    “‘Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth, and subdue it; and rule over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the sky and over every living thing that moves on the earth.’ Then God said, ‘Behold, I have given you every plant yielding seed that is on the surface of all the earth, and every tree which has fruit yielding seed; it shall be food for you; and to every beast of the earth and to every bird of the sky and to every thing that moves on the earth which has life, I have given every green plant for food’; and it was so.” (Genesis 1:28-30)

    This is not to say we should not take care of God’s creation, because “a righteous man has regard for the life of his animal” and nature (Proverbs 12:10), but God created humans as extraordinary, regardless of the order in which He created them. Genesis 1 describes God’s design and yet those behind Agenda 21 propose to defy His law, usurp Him, and declare themselves gods. I can only imagine the wrath of God that they will incur by defying God to His face. I think it’s interesting too that the second part of the Proverbs 12:10 verse says that “even the compassion of the wicked is cruel.” Does the animal “rights” movement show compassion? No, it is cruelty to the innocent animals it kills. Does the environmentalist movement show compassion? No, it is cruelty to the innocent animals it kills and to the people whose rights it negates.

    8. Beyond the use of the word “sustainability” over and over, the council’s repeated use of the phrase “quality of life” is of concern because it was prior used by Hitler as euphemistic, eugenics speak. Hitler — who was also a proponent of radical animal rights and environmentalism (http://www.enterstageright.com/archive/articles/0506/0506og.htm) — and his socialist/Nazi regime began by murdering the handicapped, infirm, and mentally ill using the same exact “quality of life” phrasing. Another word for “quality of life” is “viability” which I’m sure you’ll be hearing a lot more about with the burgeoning of socialist, rationed healthcare. Another example comes to us from eugenicist/socialist George Bernard Shaw who said in “The Intelligent Woman’s Guide to Socialism and Capitalism” that,

    “Under socialism you would not be allowed to be poor. You would be forcibly fed, clothed, lodged, taught, and employed whether you like it or not. If it were discovered that you had not character enough to be worth all this trouble [i.e. were "inviable"], you might possibly be executed in a kindly manner; but whilst you were permitted to live you would have to live well.” (pg 470, 1928)

    Isn’t it chilling that Shaw said these words less than 20 years before Hitler and his socialist/Nazi regime began killing millions of people in death camps? So you see “to live well” is just another “quality of life” euphemism. Therefore if, hypothetically, you have been determined by the elitists/eugenicists to not have a “quality of life,” then the powers-that-be may decide to “euthanize” you, you know, kind of like they murdered millions of “undesirables” during the Holocaust and most recently Terry Schiavo. Yes, it is absolutely astounding that we have forgotten the lesson of the Holocaust: Words, and particularly euphemisms, can kill. Think it can’t happen again? Look at the euphemisms a contemporary eugenicist used in 2007:

    “We need to radically and intelligently reduce human populations to fewer than one billion. We need to eliminate nationalism and tribalism and become Earthlings. And as Earthlings, we need to recognize that all the other species that live on this planet are also fellow citizens and also Earthlings. This is a planet of incredible diversity of life-forms; it is not a planet of one species as many of us believe.” — Paul Watson, Founder and President of Sea Shepherd Conservation Society, who can currently be seen on the ‘Animal Planet’ show “Whale wars.”

    Well now how does one “radically and intelligently reduce human populations” and to fewer than one billion, no less? There are approximately seven billion people on the planet. Do you think the population can be radically reduced to below one billion just by the Agenda-21ers limiting how many children you can have like they do in China, or even through forced sterilizations? So do you see where we’re headed? And it makes me wonder what these treasonous and corrupt politicians have been promised in order to carry out the will of these poisonous, would-be murderers. For instance, do they get to be Hunger-Games-style satraps in the U.N. takeover already planned and which can be seen in the U.N. Core and Corridor map which depicts what will become of the U.S.?

    And what is this tree-cutting moratorium ordinance if not socialism (and globalism, radical environmentalism, nativism, rewilding), especially since your council is audacious enough to use the same “quality of life” language as Hitler used to “justify” murdering millions of people under the same brand of socialism? Yes, don’t you wonder how a predominantly republican/conservative city like Elgin came to have a socialist city council? Regardless, beware the “quality of life” language (and now the word “sustainability”), because we already have ample evidence of where it leads. Indeed, Nazi eugenics by any other euphemism would be just as deadly. Consider too that some of this “sustainability” stuff comes from the Ford Foundation and that as older folks and certainly Jews may remember, Henry Ford was awarded a medal by Hitler himself and was the only American mentioned in ‘Mein Kampf.’ (http://history.hanover.edu/hhr/99/hhr99_2.html)

    9. Any time I see a severability clause in a piece of legislation, I am extra careful about going over it because it’s as if its author (and who was that again?) knows beforehand that the ordinance is unconstitutional. The severability clause (p. 17 on the longer ordinance, and p. 3 on the 90-day ordinance) states in part that, “If any provision, clause, sentence, paragraph, section or part of this ordinance…for any reason be adjudged by a court of competent jurisdiction to be unconstitutional or invalid, said judgment shall not affect, impair or invalidate the remainder of this ordinance…” And it should be noted that clauses in similar tree-cutting moratorium ordinances have been voided for vagueness. It’s rather conspicuous that the council failed to mention that these ordinances have been found to be unconstitutional, don’t you think? How could a truly open debate about these ordinances possibly exclude such information?

    10. Penalties for non-compliance to these ordinances are in the staggering amount of $200 per inch of tree diameter measured at Diameter Breast Height (DBH) and/or $1,000 per tree removed respectively. (p. 17 of longer ordinance, and p. 3 of 90-day ordinance.) These fines are outrageous and exorbitant considering it’s difficult to even understand how to comply with either of these ordinances due to their complexities and their vagueness.

    11. These ordinances are littered with incomprehensible, double-speak terminology. As an example of a poorly-defined term, which on its own should render the ordinance void for vagueness, the longer ordinance refers to something called “tree banking.” First tree banking is referred to as a “donation” as in “A program that allows a monetary donation for the planting of trees within the City” (p. 4). Later, it is referred to as a “fee” as in “…the city shall charge a fee in lieu of some or all of the replacement tress [sic]…The fee to be charged in lieu of replacing any tree shall be equal to Two Hundred Dollars ($200.00) per DBH inch. The proceeds of any fees collected under this section shall be used for the planting of trees on public parkways or other public properties in the city.” (pp. 13-14) So, not only should the tree bank clause be void for vagueness since it’s incomprehensible, it smells of the scams that are carbon credits (cap and trade/emissions trading) and electric aggregation, although it’s hard to tell because it’s unintelligible. So, these ordinances should immediately be withdrawn and never considered again because they don’t promote public health, safety, or welfare; they are impossible to understand and therefore comply with; and they reek of an underhanded, environmentalist scam.

    12. City Attorney Bill Cogley used the words “balanced approach” 3 or 4 times in his November 14, 2012 presentation of the tree-cutting moratorium ordinances. If something really and truly is balanced, you hardly have to say so over and over. (Kind of like how the Patriot Act had nothing to do with patriotism since it likewise went on to negate so very many of the fundamental constitutional rights we true Americans hold so dear.) Cogley also listed several cities in Illinois that likewise had tree-cutting moratoriums as reason why Elgin should pass such an ordinance as well. And if your friends treasonously sell out their country should you do it too?

    13. Some on the council repeatedly talk about not entertaining “outside” influences or “outside” forces: Moeller, who does not care about those supposedly cold-hearted banks outside Elgin and their attempts to liquidate their foreclosed properties, and Prigge who would not entertain reason from anyone outside (or inside) Elgin when he attempted to steamroll his “pit bull” ban over everybody as he cited the radical animal rights group PETA in his “research” — PETA, which is not only an outside influence, but also one “with known or possible links to ecoterrorism” (p. 9, http://www.scribd.com/doc/12251436/DHS-Eco-Terrorism-in-US-2008). And don’t you wonder where Prigge’s ordinance came from? I don’t think Elginites were ever privy to that information either but I’m guessing it also came from an “outside” source, and a radical one at that. Likewise, don’t you wonder where this tree-cutting moratorium ordinance came from? They’ve acknowledged many communities nationwide have passed similar ordinances. Where did this one come from? Because if it’s from the Sierra Club, well now, isn’t that an “outside” influence too, and also one “with known or possible links to ecoterrorism”? (p. 9, http://www.scribd.com/doc/12251436/DHS-Eco-Terrorism-in-US-2008). And since we know the Sierra Club is beholden to the U.N., well, the U.N. is *really* outside. The U.N. is so outside it’s global. So, is it only the “outside” forces and influences that disagree with them and their agenda that this council won’t entertain? And if this is what they’re trying to pull in a public (albeit blacked out) city council meeting, don’t you wonder what goes on outside of the public’s view?

    14. These kinds of ordinances train people, if only incrementally, that government has the “right” to usurp your constitutional rights to your property, adversely affect or interfere with commerce as they see fit, and to, as they say in their own ordinance, “exercise any power and perform any function pertaining to its government affairs…” Is this America or did we suddenly wake up in communist Russia? Why swear an oath to the Constitution, why pledge allegiance to the flag, why have an invocation imploring God for fair governance, if you’re just going to “exercise any power,” including ill-gotten power, to erode or outright negate fundamental constitutional rights?

    And what does the God this council falsely petitions have to say to them?:

    “Woe to those who enact evil statutes and to those who constantly record unjust decisions, so as to deprive the needy of justice and rob the poor of My people of their rights, so that widows may be their spoil and that they may plunder the orphans.” -Isaiah 10:1-2

    “Woe to those who call evil good, and good evil; who substitute darkness for light and light for darkness…!” -Isaiah 5:20

    “Woe to those…who justify the wicked for a bribe, and take away the rights of the ones who are in the right!” -Isaiah 5:23

    The former, and I stress *former* Mayor Schock once quipped that, “[God's] got bigger issues on His mind” than to trouble Himself with how much time Schock had left on the council. Apparently not since Schock was not re-elected. I issue the same godly warning to the current council: “Do not be deceived, God is not mocked; for whatever a man sows, this he will also reap” (Galatians 6:7) and you can be sure “your sin will find you out.” (Numbers 32:23) In the day of God’s wrath, your idols will not save you:

    “When you cry out, let your collection of idols deliver you. But the wind will carry all of them up, and a breath will take them away…’There is no peace,’ says my God, ‘for the wicked’.” (Isaiah 57:13, 21)

    • Todd Martin says:


      Are you familiar with or perhaps a member of the John Birch Society? I think your views and comments may closely align with their perspective on things.

      • paul says:

        “Are you familiar with or perhaps a member of the John Birch Society? I think your views and comments may closely align with their perspective on things.”

        Are you familiar with the JBS, Todd? I am quite sure you’re attempt to paint John as a JBer was meant to disparage him. That you DO NOT argue a single point he makes but rather attempt to label him disparagingly without any basis or foundation labels you as what, Todd? Uncivil is the absolute kindest label I can come up.

        Here is the very first line of Wikipedia description for JBS:
        “The John Birch Society is an American political advocacy group that supports anti-communism, limited government, a constitutional republic[1][2] and personal freedom.”

        Sounds like President Reagan!

        On that basis most people posting here are JBers. With the clear exception of you, Todd. You are more of the opposite. What is the opposite of anti-communist?

        Here is the 1st line of the 2nd paragraph which comes under the label of values:
        “The organization identifies with Christian principles, seeks to limit governmental powers, and opposes wealth redistribution, and economic interventionism. It not only opposes the practices it terms collectivism, totalitarianism, and communism, but socialism and fascism as well”

        Are you opposed to those values, Todd? Or are you too a John Birch’er? What do you label someone opposed to those values?

        • Todd Martin says:

          Why am I “disparaging John” when I ask him if he is a member of the John Birch Society? Particularly if you believe most people on Elginite are members? I was polite even if you want to think otherwise.

          I do disagree with many of his statements and will rebut for your pleasure.

          1) The UN “Agenda 21″ is not relevant since the City of Elgin (to my knowledge) is not a member is ICLEI. The idea that “it’s my land I can do what I want with it” may sound appealing to property owners, but Zoning, Building codes, and other regulations are VERY COMMON and accepted restrictions accepted by the community to promote public safety, business, and quality of life. Constitutional rights are limited. Your 1st Amendment right to free speech does not allow you to yell “FIRE” in a movie theater for fun, as an example.
          2) The 90 day moratorium was a precaution without any undue hardship by property owners. Clear-cutting forests in a real estate bust during the winter is not high on developer’s priorities.
          3) A lawyer wrote the language specified and I trust his professional opinion over the legality beyond an anonymous posting.
          4) Government does play an important role in protecting private lands from pollution and destruction. Do you want your neighbor to start an open garbage dump or burn tires in his back yard? Thank God we do have an EPA, a Clean Water Act and a Clean Air Act. Our country is much better off with these regulations. I am grateful I live in a community that protects my family from lead in the drinking water.
          5) Landscape regulations, such as a tree ordinance, is constitutional. You don’t see any of our neighboring communities getting sued because the courts recognize there
          6) Not every appeals process goes before a Federal judge. Local control saves time, money, and improves accountability. It is a lot easier for Elgin citizens to change how their city government administers a program than if you put that control in Washington DC.
          7) The idea that someone is secretly releasing foxes and hawks into Elgin is ABSURD. This is your “Tin Foil Hat” alert. Does anyone think there is a “hawk farm” out there (love to see how it would make a profit) and dumping them at dead of night? This sort of conspiracy theory is exactly why many find the John Birch Society to be a collection of lunatics.
          8) Hitler talk and extermination of the Jews. Regulation of trees is NOT equivalent in morality to Hitler or eugenics. The comparison is offensive.
          9) Lawyer language. Boring.
          10) You think these fines are outrageous? How about a $500 fine for playing your car radio too loud? Get that overturned and we will talk.
          11) If someone doesn’t understand the ordinance, then ask instead of complain. Ordinances can’t be easily written in plain language since they are legal documents. Lawyers get paid big money to be precise in their writings.
          12) Balance is there.
          13) If someone finds a bribe or campaign donation toward enacting this ordinance THEN you have an outside influence. Otherwise, this is a lot of ranting about the UN and PETA which has nothing to do with Elgin’s landscape regulations.
          14) Bible passages can argue many points. How they apply to protecting trees is mostly (in my opinion) in favor of the tree.

          OK, you’ve got my rebuttal. I don’t expect to change John’s mind or your own, Paul. Honestly, I don’t believe any of us would choose to live in a society without regulations (like Somalia) and I do agree that regulations CAN get to be too restrictive. I did my part in helping the Tree ordinance be a better piece of legislation. There’s a spot in there that allows the Developer to propose their own tree species instead of only getting to choose from a list. I take pride that my suggestion was incorporated into the document.

          • One Vote says:

            Are you familiar with or perhaps a member of the Communist Party? I think your views and comments may closely align with their perspective on things.

        • paul says:

          “Why am I “disparaging John” when I ask him if he is a member of the John Birch Society? ”

          And then you unwittingly proceed to demonstrate EXACTLY why you meant it as a hateful disparaging remark.

          “many find the John Birch Society to be a collection of lunatics.”

          YOUR WORDS. Not a quote, your words!

          “I was polite even if you want to think otherwise.”

          I doubt a single person here had any doubt as to what you meant given your bent toward socialist/fascist big government.
          Classic neo liberal fascism - label anyone you disagree with as a lunatic. And then you lie about it! Wow!

        • paul says:

          “Particularly if you believe most people on Elginite are members?”

          Flat out LIE, todd. FLAT OUT. And guaranteed you know full well it is a lie. But that is the very essence of you, Todd.

          I didn’t say ANYONE was a member.

  10. SIE says:

    As I look at the $3.70 Municipal Tax I have to pay to Elgin on my gas bill it makes me so happy to live here.

    I can’t even get the newsletter they supposedly send to everyone in the city. Our mail person never got them to deliver and the city doesn’t even know why. Second time it has happened.

  11. Harmony says:

    I feel I try to keep up on City affairs, but this morning took me by surprise. The council is already to vote on and have the contractor ready to go work on $370,000 City hall remodeling including(I love this one)Bullet proofing the council chambers.WHAT HAPPENED TO THAT BIG DEFICIENT? Also put the community development department into a smaller space, Wait I thought the Chamber of Commerce was being paid to do that.Why didn’t they outsource that department also? Code enforcements a joke.

  12. ElginSpirit says:

    Jan 23 Live Tweet of Elgin City Council starts at 5:55pm - #ElginGov #Elgin2013 It’s a VERY Big and Important Agenda for both meetings tonight.

    More Info: http://elginspirit.com/2013/01/jan-23-city-council-agendas-and-live-tweet-and-video/

  13. John says:


    I see no reason why you will not post my comments, even as you are posting others’ comments. The information I submitted about the tree-cutting moratoriums is time-sensitive and the public has a right to know. If you are indeed an open forum as you say, please publish my comments from yesterday or at least offer an explanation as to why you will not.

    • John says:


      Here is the link to the comments I tried to post on Elginite.org yesterday:



    • RS says:

      sorry about that. normally comments are held for moderation if they contain 2 or more links as a precaution against spam. but since the spam filter works pretty well on its own i’ve decided to remove that rule. so everybody can post multiple links from now without going into the moderation queue.

      • John says:

        Thank you.

        • Chuck Keysor says:

          Wow John, you are a gifted writer! I think we could all benefit from your thoughts on the proposed Storm water utility fee, aka “rain tax”, “revenue diversification”, as well as the Elgin Business License. Thanks, Chuck

          • John says:

            Thank you Mr. Keysor. I don’t know much about the storm water utility fee, but it sounds like the same Agenda 21 “sustainability” prattle as the tree-cutting moratoriums. I very much appreciated your demonstration showing that the city had a year-end surplus, however. And the business licensure scheme just seemed like another nanny-state, fund-raiser pretense for the city to stick its nose where it didn’t belong.

            And here are my thoughts about the ordinance passing in last night’s meeting:

            Backed by their lapdog media (a.k.a. The Daily Herald), the Elgin City Council last night regurgitated all the same propaganda about the tree-cutting moratorium ordinance as they did in November: that it’s “balanced,” that it will have a minimal effect on most Elgin residents, that other communities have done it, yada, yada, yada. Prigge played his part last night with his feigned man-of-the-people routine, offering the only seeming opposition to the tree-cutting moratorium ordinance. But Prigge cannot possibly oppose the tree-cutting moratorium ordinances because those ordinances propose to negate the same exact rights his “pit bull” ban would have violated, and which his current dangerous dog law (DDL) negates. Just like Prigge’s DDL, these tree-cutting moratoriums do not allow people the chance to properly seek redress from their government in defense of their property. Again, this outright negates property and due process rights. So how can Prigge possibly oppose a tree-cutting moratorium ordinance when his dangerous dog law is offensive for precisely the same reasons?

            And though Prigge and Kaptain played their parts well, exchanging barbs like fishwives almost as if they were on some horribly-scripted “reality” TV show, Mayor Kaptain seemed to end-around any further debate on the matter. So much for that “transparency” about which the council so often rails.

            Speaking of transparency, can someone please explain to me why the long-form tree-cutting moratorium ordinance didn’t first have to be vetted through the Meeting of the Whole? The 90-day, short-form ordinance did. And since the long-form ordinance is 17 pages — meaning it is full of information not included in the short-form, 4-page, 90-day ordinance — shouldn’t the longer ordinance have gone through the Committee of the Whole and the public been given time to debate it? From the comments I have seen regarding this ordinance, no one has the slightest clue what it means or how to follow it. I have read both ordinances and have had no end of trouble trying to understand them. Again, the lack of time given the public to understand and debate these ordinances and the vagueness and double-speak of these ordinances are not transparency; they are opacity. One could also argue the rush job and the end-arounding public debate is a violation of the Illinois Open Meetings Act. And so no, I am certainly not reassured by the fact that the “Sustainability” Committee unanimously approved of the ordinance.

            As I believe Mr. Keysor once so astutely observed, this council’s body language tends to change when its members are obfuscating. Gilliam clears his throat more, members get fidgety, Kaptain reddens, Moeller hisses more (which is extremely shrill when watching the meeting on TV or online), eyes dart, voices get higher, etc. God has given each of us a conscience, and no one can ever fully rid themselves of it no matter what they do. There is always a tell.


  14. Margaret Miller says:

    Hi, as I watch the city council meeting this evening I just witnessed the Elgin Symphony Orchestra cool presentation of name dropping and courteous begging of what I calculate a taxpayer funded grant over the next 3 years of over $500,000.00. However, they need to negotiate everything with the union.

    I say “Give them nothing!” Let them, like any other business, fail or succeed on their own merit. The presenter states he is not asking the City of Elgin for anything more that want has been given over the past 10 years.

    My math tells me that is $1 million of taxpayer dollars not including any years rent free plus office space at $20-30,000 per year.

    NOW THEY WANT ANOTHER $500,000.00 for the next 3 years. ($450,000.00 in grants plus back and current rent & office space.)

    Well I say enough! It reminds me of the movie Oliver. “Can I have some more?” How pathetic! Well ESO, there is no more money in the pot.The ESO only covers 40% of their total cost through ticket sales. That’s an awful percentage! They have no plan to pay back the money they currently owe The City of Elgin. The past debt was not even brought up by the presenter. The presenter mentioned “The Brand”. Who care about the ‘Brand” Look what General Motors “brand” is today. (another bailout rabbit hole who is now building in China.) Tell them to call the Annenburg Foundation for funding and fund raise on PBS. There seems to be no end for the organization in line for hand outs.

    • Margaret Miller says:

      The presenter says the Hemmens is “Goldilocks” to the ESO. Of course it is, no one else wants them.

      The presentor responds to Sean and says the ESO will be viable without the city’s financial help. Well I say let them!

      VOTE NO!

    • paul says:

      “$1 million of taxpayer dollars”

      Are you referring to the ESO’s back and future rent payments to the city of Elgin for using the Hemmens?

      Let us assume (probably correctly) that the Hemmens would NOT be rented otherwise on those ESO dates. So without the ESO there is NO $1 million dollars. The ESO IS NOT using up $1 million of city services.

      Another way to look at it, Margaret, is the City of Elgin is shaking down the ESO for $1 million. Most certainly the COE is using the ESO as a profit center to fund $1 million to the COE’s operating budget. The $1 million doesn’t exist if the ESO doesn’t exist - lose/lose. I seriously doubt there a waiting list to rent the Hemmens.

      Are the city golf courses charged rent for the use of the land? Are the Little League baseball teams charged rent. Adult softball leagues? Etc, etc, etc.

      • Chuck Keysor says:

        Mr. Bearden had the interesting comment that the ESO was made for the Hemmens, it is what he described as a “Goldie Locks” fit. I found it interesting, if not unfortunate, that he did not point out that this unique fit, is actually a “two way street” mutually beneficial relationship. Without the ESO, what would the City do with the Hemmens? Won’t the Hemmens simply become an even bigger money looser if the ESO dries up and goes away?

        I do not know what the answer is to this difficult situation. But it would appear as though our City government, who is the guardian of the public’s assets, is as clueless about the Hemmens as is everyone else. For the high pay in City Hall’s upper management, we don’t seem to get much value or creativity. Well, they are pretty clever about coming up with new and creative ways that our council can tax us all.


      • Margaret Miller says:

        Hello Paul:

        Let me clarify if I can.
        ESO just asked for another $350,000.00 for the City of Elgin.

        TOn top of what Elgin has already given them over the past 10 years (as the presenter states) “nothing more than what we have been receiving for the last 10 years.”
        10 x $100,000.00 = $1 million

        Now, this self proclaimed viable organization (as stated by the presenter) is asking for another $450,000.00 over the next 3 years.

        One of the councilperson raises the question of “What about what you already owe Elgin?” and its explained at that time an additional $20-30,000.00 in rent free space as well and office space. I didn’t say it the council person did.
        The city does charge usage fees for the softballs fields. Just ask the leagues.

        How is it that the ESO receives free office space and rent? Why do we allow this? I think this explanation should end it.

        • paul says:

          The ESO is not getting any money from the COE now.

          The ESO owes the COE about $200K for back rent beginning in 2011 when the COE stopped its $90K annual allocation to the ESO.

          Stop for a moment and look at how that works - the COE was giving money to the ESO who would give it right back to the COE as rent.

          Now stop for a moment and consider what kind of city you want Elgin to be. A city that provides minimum tangible support to civic organizations - Little Leagues, softball leagues, Cinco De Mayo, , 4th of July, Golf courses, holiday decorations, roadside beautification, ELGIN Symphony Orchestra, etc etc etc. Or a city that provides nothing.

          It appears that what the ELGIN Symphony Orchestra wants is place to perform in ELGIN in a City of ELGIN already existing facility without being charged by the City of ELGIN for doing so.

          I don’t believe I have ever attending a ESO event. But I do take some pride in living in a town that actually has enough culture AND CIVIC PRIDE to support a symphony orchestra.
          AS ESO CEO Bearden said at your council meeting in question: “The ESO gives Elgin prestige by being one its most important cultural organiziations”. And that it does.

          I’ve suggested previously here that the ESO pack it up and move to Hoffmann Estates or Schaumburg since both are already paying the ESO to play there. Then the COE of Elgin can pay $90K annually to the Schaumburg Symphony Orchestra to play in Elgin!!!!

          “20-30,000.00 in rent free space”

          In an aleady existing COE space that would otherwise remain vacant??? Or maybe that space could be occupied by yet ANOTHER taxpayer funded social service organization! We never have enough of those.

          “usage fees for the softballs fields. Just ask the leagues.”

          Do you really want to go there? Very doubtful the fees even cover the Park and Rec overtime man hours during the games let alone a penny toward maintenance of the fields or the lost opportunity costs of the land itself.

          • One Vote says:

            The Hemmens is a bad place. $250K studies by the city reveal that it is an old building that doesn’t have good bathrooms.
            Tear it down. Go back to the COE file cabinets and find Ed Schock’s 13 story complex on the river plan. With the Hemmens gone they can build all that retail and upscale dining Ed wanted.
            Heck, if they make the plan big enough they can tear down The Centre as well.
            Seriously, the problem with Hemmens is that ESO acted like they owned the place, and WE paid the tab. Everyone else took a back seat to their wishes. Had they taken a more cooperative attitude maybe they’d still be doing well.
            As it stands today it is an old venue in a ghetto neighborhood, not worth much to anyone.

          • RS says:

            “$250K studies by the city reveal that it is an old building that doesn’t have good bathrooms.”

            lol. gotta love those studies!

            did they ever consider a scenario where the city gives the hemmens to the ESO? if ESO owns the hemmens then everything would be their responsibility. they might do a better job running it than the city does. just a thought.

          • One Vote says:

            RS- Though it seems logical, I think that ship has sailed. ESO wants the public to subsidize their orchestra. Of all groups who should fund their own luxuries ESO patrons are at the top of the list. They are generally uppercrust and the music is far from popular.
            Their benefactors and subscribers are on the decline and the office has mishandled them.
            Now, about little league. We have created this industry and ruined the sport. The leagues don’t need tens of thousands of city dollars to play baseball. But we’ve created a bureaucracy of adults. The magic’s gone and has been replaced with drudgery.

          • paul says:

            “did they ever consider a scenario where the city gives the hemmens to the ESO?”

            I take it people here DO NOT read the local newspapers.

            Just this past Saturday 1/26/2013 Page 1 continued to page 7 had nearly a full page articles on the potential demise of the COD orchestra and ESO funding.
            Prigge brought up that very point of a no cost lease of the Hemmens to the ESO to which Bearden replied he is “open to the idea”. Gilliam replied with “If we can’t make it profitable, they can’t.”
            Yet Gilliam is ALL FOR funding that East Side Rec center in addition to the Centre as evidently being the apex of culture in Elgin.
            One Vote, if the Hemmens area is a “ghetto neighborhood” then truly ALL of Elgin is a ghetto neighborhood.

            The cynical part of me says let the ESO go to hell, just like the many current councilfools are leaning towards.
            But the sliver of hope, optimism, and civic pride I have KNOWS that once the ESO is gone because of utter lack of support from the COE while at the Exact same time supporting low cultured venues like gang banger East side Rec centers and Cinco de Mayo festivities and other low rent attractions; this city will have sunk another few feet in the muck of being just another dirty nasty has-been town with little quality of life attractions that inspire us as being part of great community.

          • Chuck Keysor says:

            Paul, I agree! The thought of the terrible things the City does choose to fund is an outrage of its own. But to then fund things like the East Side Rec Center while kicking the ESO into its grave is almost too much to take in. Chuck

  15. Margaret Miller says:

    Can someone please explain to me the land swap with SanFillippo that the council is referring too. I thought the city gave a $5M proprety tax exemption to SanFillippo when they moved from Elk Grove to Elgin.

    • paul says:

      The COE gave the nut company land that was formerly occupied by the nut house. SanFillippo decided not to build a nut factory at the former nut house and chose to occupy the former Panasonic property where they are now; and keep the nut house property gifted to them by the COE.

  16. Margaret Miller says:

    VOTE NO ON THE STORM WATER (rain water) STUDY & TAX! If people’s homes flood,
    Priggi is correct, we will pay for a study that is actually a proposal on how to charge a tax!

    What am I missing here with this issue?

  17. Chuck Keysor says:

    Margaret, you can look at the first question on this survey to see where most of the candidates stand on the “rain” tax. http://elginoctave.weebly.com/ There have been some posts on this, from October when the council discussed the study the first time. You can search this site to find the past comments.

    Now, if you want to read a propaganda piece put out by the pro-storm water utility fee people, who think the taxpayers exist to fund the visions of those in power, read this. But before you start, remember, your money is your money, it is not something you are holding in trust for the government. http://www.cmap.illinois.gov/documents/20583/25603/Value_of_Stormwater_Utilities_Local_Govts_Chicago_Region-1-8-12.pdf/f93651d3-616d-4549-b199-a6a8df86aadd?utm_source=CMAP+Weekly+Update%2C+1-11-13&utm_campaign=Weekly+Update%2C+1-11-12&utm_medium=email

  18. Gibster says:

    Elgin takes step toward allowing video gaming. http://ht.ly/h63VC

    Do you think it should be allowed in the city?

    • Todd Martin says:

      Based on Wednesday’s City Council meeting, it’s clear that video gaming is coming to Elgin and that Elgin’s business community supports it.

      I personally think it is a shame we will go down this path. While it will help those businesses who participate and provide trickle down funding for social services, there is a larger cost to Elgin residents. Gambling does not create wealth, it redistributes money while sucking out a percentage. In the process, gamblers standard of living declines and their social needs increase. The community overall suffers.

      There’s fewer safeguards to stop gambling addicts or fraud. The revenues are mostly short-term, since everyone should know that the State will take more and more of the gambling revenue pie over time.

      I’ve never understood why anyone would volunteer to gamble knowing statistically you’re a sucker. I can avoid the Grand Victoria casino. My children (age 6 and 11) aren’t exposed to the “glitter”. With video gaming, I will have to make a hard choice between supporting local restaurants like Villa Verone while walking them past slot machines and hearing the bells & whistles OR stop going to those restaurants. That’s a bad choice.

  19. Sally Foster says:

    After last night’s Elgin City Council vote on the “Tree Ordinance Proposal”, Mayor Kaptain made a comment and referred to his working on this issue 14 years ago with Mike Nolan (our current State Senator). In his comment, Mayor Kaptain stated that the city should have done something long ago.

    REMEMBER…The fact is, when Citizen Nolan purposed his tree ordinance in 1997-1998, Citizen Nolan’s ordinance was rejected by the then city council 7-0.

    Included in that NO vote was current Councilman Gilliam.

    Last night, Councilman Gilliam voted YES and this”Tree Ordinance” passed 6-1. Though this new ordinance is less disastrous, it is only slightly better that the one proposed in the past.

    Hey, Councilman Gilliam, what changed your mind this time around? Elgin is not an Arizona desert.

    • Chuck Keysor says:

      Time has erased from my brain some of the clutter put there by our politicians. But as noted, when Mike Noland presented his tree ordinance, he was not an elected official. And the ordinance he proposed way back then was totally off the deep end.

      Noland gave a presentation to our neighborhood group at that time, asking for our support. One aspect I recall, I hope correctly, was that his proposal required a permit to even remove so much as a bush from your own yard. After he left our meeting, his proposal was completely rejected by our group. That proposal was far more radical than what the present council has embraced.

      With that said though, the new ordinance is still an infringement on personal property rights and individual liberty. This simply reflects the continued government is supreme in the eyes of this present council.


  20. Sally Foster says:

    Also at last night’s council meeting, Councilwoman Powell made reference to the Spartan Meadows / ECC Land Swap from 1996 between the City of Elgin and ECC. (This was a multi-million dollar deal.)

    Councilwoman Powell brought up that land swap, pointing out how it negatively impacted the property values of HER sub-division, Collage Green.

    Fact of history, in 1996 the proposal came to the then City Council. The Collage Green community organized, rallied and oppose it. After multiple deliberations, the then city council voted 4-3 in favor of the land swap with ECC.

    In spite of community opposition, then Councilman Gilliam, along with then Councilman Ed Shock, voted in favor of the land swap.

    Opposing the land swap were then Mayor Kelly and former Councilman Gavin.

    So Councilwoman Powell, your questions and concerns on the negative impact on your sub-division via that land swap, should be directed across the table at your fellow current Councilman Gilliam.

    Why don’t you ask Councilman Gilliam why he voted YES on the land swap back in 1996?

    • bennie says:

      Wow U guys r HOT time for a publication for All the citizens so they can keep up with what is REALLY going on in this city. Networking is important and that will help voters make up their minds of who to vote for in the upcoming city council election the information given in the Elginite.org is very important & informative for many who otherwise would not learn of this important informative information I would like to C it shared with the masses please consider a publication ASAP. Thanks

    • paul says:

      “Councilwoman Powell brought up that land swap, pointing out how it negatively impacted the property values of HER sub-division, Collage Green.”

      Incredibly that land swap negatively impacted my property value as well. From about 2008 and later. And I don’t live anywhere near ECC/College Green.
      How does a land swap between government entities which resulted in greatly reduced flow of traffic through the the villa estates of College Green due to a new much more efficient road through ECC area some how magically reduce her property value?
      Does Powell want compensation from the city for loss of property value? What was the reason she brought the subject up?
      There is an entire book’s worth of justifiable criticism about exactly what is wrong with the city government of Elgin in that land swap deal, but reduced property value in College Green AIN”T one of them.

      That land swap, plus another One Million dollars of Elgin taxpayer money, culminated in a subsidized low income housing complex in downtown Elgin. It is subsidized in the FACT that only low income are allowed to live there and the mere fact of being low income automatically enables welfare food stamp government assistance subsidy payments. As Councilfool Steffan said at the time “it’s a no-brainer”.
      Maybe I fail to see the big picture. Maybe I fail to recognize the massive transfer payments from the State and Feds funneling through that low income housing into the local bars, liquor stores, crack dealers, social service agencies, lawyers, police, and court systems as being a win for the taxpayers. Most certainly it increases the size and scope of Federal State and local governments but someone has to eventually pay the bill.
      The only bright side, Tish, is if it actually did decrease your property tax transfer payments. But alas, I bet large it did not! Maybe, in the big picture, you too can move to Arizona if you are smart like some councilfools and retire at 51 years old on a taxpayer funded government pension!

  21. Terry Gavin says:

    Here’s a early warning of something that may be coming to Elgin sooner rather then later, so called “smart” meters. As you can see from this article the City of Naperville sees no problem arresting it’s citizens for not wanting these potential dangerous meters placed on their homes.


    Rumor has it that certain Elgin businesses are already using these as a test case for ComEd. Most of us already know that Mayor Kaptain’s sustainability committee will approve anything that says GREEN on it.

    • Gibster says:

      Terry, there are already Wireless Water-Meters ALL over Elgin, operating on a low-frequency that is ‘read’ by a Water Department employee in a monitoring/equipped vehicle driving our neighborhoods to collect monthly readings. The question would be how are the ComEd units different and cause a bigger health concern? Very interesting, thank you for sharing.

      • Margaret Miller says:

        Hello Gibster:
        Let me jump in here with the words from my personal medical consultant. I believe Dr. Deagle explains the agenda and dangers quite nicely. Hopefully this will give you pause to rethink your position on this invasion.

        Smart Meters - A Call for Public Outrage
        Dr Bill Deagle MD AAEM A4M

        Smart meters are the latest technological imposition of utilities generating power to force with no option to opt out a system of control of billing power consumption of consumers at peak energy time rates. This should come as no surprise, but Smart Grid is an Agenda 21 population control Carbon Tax based population TAX ! There is no Federal Law mandating Smart Meters, and even if there was it would be between the Utilities and Federal Regulators and cannot include a non-contracted third party, the consumer. It violates the Federal Wiretapping Laws and clearly builds databases for sale of private information of power usages with the electrical signature of every appliance and time use in the home. This is powerful marketing and control data in the hands of control-freak bureaucrats and marketing gurus.

        Smart Meters thus have two primary areas of contention. First, they are a bold invasion of privacy and purport to have authority to gather data and modify behavior and consumption patterns of unwitting power consumers and market data to third parties and government and policing agencies. Second, they are a Class 2b Carcinogen even by WHO standards, and the mountain of toxic data is mounting that Smart Meters are thousands of times more toxic than even cell phones, causing cancer, insomnia, and numerous medical problems. The biological basis is energy transferred to cell membranes and molecules that open calcium and other ion channels and disrupt the non-covalent Van der Waals hydrogen bonds that hold the fragile double helix of DNA intact and cause 4D enzyme active site disruption with disturbed enzyme KMax and nutrient-enzyme interactions and cellular communications.

        What is the challenge and what must we do? We must first join by informing our neighbors and communities that we only win if all ELF pollution is dramatically reduced resulting in elimination of ALL Smart Meter Systems, reduction of Cell Towers and eventual replacement with Fiberoptic ports for public access such as the old style phone booths, and removal of WiFi networks proliferating everywhere.

        What am I doing? I am an environmental doctor and pro se activist filing a Federal Suit against the CPUC California Public Utilities Commission and SDG&E with the JurisDictionary Course by Dr Fred Graves JD and legal research by Ron McDonald, legal and constitutional genius at strategic action plans for this and other important issues of our day. Jonathan Emord’s legal group has been offered the job of taking on the challenge of taking my environmental research and colleagues with medicolegal expertise in this area such as Dr Wm Rae MD AAEM director of the Dallas Environmental Health Center. We will also move from a local to national level attacking not only other state agencies and utilities but also proceeding against business and neighborhoods who refuse to remove smart meters that pollute our families and ourselves.

        This is no small task, to take on the powerful utilities and control freak agencies with other agendas. However the alternative is total lack of personal privacy and irradiation causing the same micronuclei and DNA damage, premature aging and cellular pathology. Electrosmog ELF changes are similar to ionizing radiation from Chernobyl or Fukushima’s ionizing radioisotope particles, with health deterioration and behavioral problems, premature illness and death. We have really no choice but to stand up and take on corrupt government and authoritarian profit driven corporations with UN Agenda 21 driven population control plans. Join the fight, realizing that inaction and silence are complicity with this privacy and electro-pollution environmental extinction level event.

        Dr. Bill Deagle MD is a Prolife physician. He has been a board certified Family Medicine Specialist, board eligible Occupational and Environmental Medicine, Internal Medicine, Medico-legal, Anti-Aging Medicine, and Environmental Toxicologist. Currently he is a media liason activist and teacher for the American Academy of AntiAging Medicine and the American Academy of Environmental Medicine.

        Dr. Bill has been in private practice for 25 + years, and has worked as a contract physician with companies working with the US Government on NORAD, US Space Command, Advanced CRAY Supercomputers, Large Array and EMP Proof Microchips, and many other projects such as exit examiner for the Special Operations Chemical Munitions Team of the US Military for the OKC Oklahoma City Murrah Federal Building bombing in 1995, Operation Top Off and Dark Winter with FEMA and FBI and State and Federal Hazardous Materials and Biowarfare War Games 1997.

        • paul says:

          Please read this with your tin foil hat on:

          “Smart Grid is an Agenda 21 population control Carbon Tax based population TAX !”
          “It violates the Federal Wiretapping Laws”
          “the electrical signature of every appliance and time use in the home.”
          “a bold invasion of privacy ”
          “modify behavior and consumption patterns of unwitting power consumers ”

          “market data to third parties and government and policing agencies.”
          “a Class 2b Carcinogen”
          “biological basis is energy transferred to cell membranes and molecules that open calcium and other ion channels and disrupt the non-covalent Van der Waals hydrogen bonds”
          “total lack of personal privacy and irradiation”
          “Chernobyl or Fukushima’s ionizing radioisotope particles”
          “health deterioration and behavioral problems, premature illness and death.”
          “corrupt government and authoritarian profit driven corporations with UN Agenda 21 driven population control plans.”
          “this privacy and electro-pollution environmental extinction level event.”

          Dr. Dill Beagle - professional hysteric!

          • Todd Martin says:

            Regarding cancer risk and Smart Meters:

            “a Class 2b Carcinogen” per the WHO (World Health Organization)

            Note that Class 1 is a KNOWN carcinogen
            Class 2A is a PROBABLE carcinogen
            Class 2B is a POSSIBLE carcinogen
            Class 3 is NOT POSSIBLE carcinogen

            Smart meters send a signal via RF (Radio Frequency) with a 3 watt or 5 watt transmitter. ComEd units send a signal once every 30 minutes.

            The FCC regulates the safety of RF transmitters (Cell phones, smart meters, radio stations, TV stations, CB radios, baby moniters, etc.. The FCC has a nice web-page that explains the issues:


            I encourage anyone who is worried about getting cancer from electronic devices to read the science about the subject. The FCC considers the frequency, exposure time, power level, and other factors in deciding whether a piece of equipment is safe.

            I have a smart meter installed in my home and share the opinion of the FCC that it is safe for me and my family.

          • paul says:

            Tin Foil Hat alert: City of Elgin water meter invading my privacy. They now moniter my water usage and know when and how many times I flush my toilet. As PROOF I submit the letter I received from COE telling me of my middle of the night water usage indicating I might have a running toilet.
            This government monitoring of my toilet usage is a violation of my constitutional rights, my toilet usage data might be sold to private entities for nefarious purposes, and this electronic meter reading system could allow computer hacking and computer viruses that could shut down the entire water system!!!!
            AND the city of Elgin is STILL putting unnecessary chemicals florides into the water that MAY be long term poisoning us.
            Stay tuned for further tin foil hat hysterics.

  22. Margaret Miller says:

    Here is the WARNING from the Department of Neuroscience in Sweden to th United States.


  23. Margaret Miller says:

    By the way, all of this information was forwarded by me to Mayor Kaptain last year with the exception of the above Sweden post. He is aware that these meters are NOT UL Approved.

    City Council Discovers ‘Smart’ Meters are not UL Certified
    Posted on February 15, 2011 by onthelevelblog

    Underwriters Laboratory Confirms Meters Not Safety Tested, Raising Fire Safety Fears

    Capitola- During a meeting last week in which they joined six other local governments* who have passed laws criminalizing the installation of wireless ‘smart’ meters, the Capitola City Council discovered that the wireless ‘smart’ meters that CA utilities are trying to install are in fact not certified by Underwriters Laboratory, a certification that is required under the state electrical code for all electrical appliances and equipment within the home.

    The lack of certification was confirmed by Karl Moeller, a senior engineer with UL earlier today:

    Product certifications can be verified by going to http://www.UL.com then scroll down to the bottom and click on “on-line certifications directory”. You can search for active certifications at the On-line Certifications Directory. In this case I did a keyword search for:

    - Landis* There were a few matches, but nothing looks like a direct match.

    - Silver spring* No matches came back.

    In summary, I am unable to confirm these devices as being UL certified.

    Best Regards,
    Karl E. Moeller
    Senior Customer Service Engineer II


    HVAC, Appliances, and Lighting
    Underwriters Laboratories Inc.
    1285 Walt Whitman Road
    Melville, NY 11747

    The revelation came after Councilmember Termini, who is an electrician by trade, asked PG&E about the certification. After PG&E staff went to their car to fetch a ‘smart’ meter, the council and PG&E spent several minutes unsuccessfully trying to locate the UL symbol on the meter. This convinced Councilmember Termini that an immediate ordinance was required to protect public safety.

    A number of fires that started in the new wireless meters have been reported, and last month a whistleblower from Wellington Energy- PG&E’s installation contractor- alleged serious breaches in safety procedures by installers, who are temp workers- not trained professionals as required by the Federal Communications Commission. Reports of fires, shorts, and electrocutions are also being reported in other countries where ‘smart’ meters are being installed, such as Australia.

    “Gov. Brown must immediately act to remove President of the CPUC Michael Peevey, a former executive with Southern California Edison, who has been a symbol of the agency’s coziness with utility companies, a coziness that contributed to the San Bruno disaster as well as the current ‘smart’ meter debacle. The CPUC simply isn’t doing its job and it needs a change of leadership.” said Joshua Hart, Director of Stop Smart Meters!

    A Protest is planned tomorrow- Wednesday Feb. 16th Noon-1:30pm at the CA Public Utilities Commission, corner of McAllister and Van Ness in San Francisco. Representatives from grassroots organizations fighting the smart meter onslaught will be available for interview. Visuals include protesters with signs.

    *Counties of Santa Cruz, Marin, Mendocino, and Cities of Watsonville, Fairfax, and Rio Dell have criminalized smart meter installations. A total of 26 local governments in California have demanded an immediate moratorium.


  24. Terry Gavin says:

    Laurie, I guess this discussion is over. The fact is comparing Elgin’s low frequency water meters to the dangerous devices known as “smart” meters is a false premise. Thanks for bringing up the comparison.

    Margaret,well done research, I’ve seen lots of other research that backs up yours. Not to mention these devices also invade people’s privacy & can be easily hacked into to steal a person’s personal information that is kept by ComEd.

    • Margaret Miller says:

      Terry, thank you but it gets worse then I described above.

      What is happening with Smart Meters is basically an on going medical experiment being carried out on tens of millions of human guinea pigs without their full knowledge or consent.

      While machines can sometimes make us free, others can turn us into their slaves. While they can sometimes improve the quality of life, they can also expose us to hidden dangers that those profiting from their introduction will not willingly disclose.

      Utility companies operate as monopolies in their own markets and regions, and states. they exercise significant control over public utilities commissions, elected officials, and government bureaucrats. The interests of the consumer and the tax payer are always going to be the last consideration in a situation like this, which is why the proclamations by the power companies and the government that Smart Meters are being installed to benefit the public should be met with great skepticism.

      Traditional analog meters record power consumption, but outside of total kilowatthours used, they tell utility companies nothing about when, where, or how their customers are using electricity. However, Smart Meters are different, especially when they are integrated within a fully developed Home Area Network. Smart Meter systems will casually eliminate barriers that have been protecting our privacy forever, giving utility companies full access to all of the details about what we are doing with the power we consume. There is no guaranteed that only the utility companies would have access to information about our individual power utilization habits. But, if those who have Smart Meters already installed in their homes have been assuming that the details about their electricity consumption habits are being kept private, they should think again.

      Most of us naturally assume that we have exclusive rights to control who gets to see our personal information and under what circumstances. I don’t think the utility companies share this opinion. Their perspective maybe that the specifics about their customers’ energy utilization patterns and practices should actually belong to them, and as such it should be left entirely up to them to decide what to do with all of that data.

      In 2009, a Seattle-based computer security services firm called IOActive decided to perform an independent test to evaluate Smart Grid security. Using a reverse-engineered Smart Meter, they were able to demonstrate how an electronic worm could be injected into the system that would allow a hacker to seize control over various elements of the new digitalized grid. They also showed how this kind of malware could spread quickly enough throughout the larger system to cause power outages over a wide geographical area.

      If people don’t educate themselves about the true nature of this menace, and the usual public laziness and indifference manage to rule the day, it will be only a matter of time before pressure from the utility companies, Advanced Metering Infrastructure (AMI) manufacturers, and Smart Grid promoters convince the state and federal governments to pass laws forcing everyone to accept a Smart Meter, whether they like it or not, as a condition for staying on the grid.

      If the skeptics and critics are right, Smart Meters may, in reality, be the proverbial wolf in sheep’s clothing, primed to do the bidding of greedy utility companies as they devour our money, our privacy, and our good health.

  25. One Vote says:

    Gee, I wonder what a degaussing coil would do to one of those things?
    I’ll let you know two days after they install one at my house.

  26. Margaret Miller says:

    BREAKING NEWS: January 26, 2013
    Illinois’ credit rating downgraded; state drops to worst in the nation

    Illinois’ credit rating has taken another hit. Standard & Poor’s Ratings Service downgraded the state from an “A” rating to “A-minus”, making it the worst in the country.

    The New York ratings firm’s ranking means taxpayers may have to pay tens of millions of dollars more in interest when the state borrows money for roads and other projects.

    The downgrade is the latest fallout over the $96.8 billion debt to five state pension systems.

    The downgrade now ties Illinois with California, but California has a positive outlook.

    Illinois’ fragile overall financial status netted it a negative outlook, putting it behind California overall.

    The ratings came out now because Illinois plans to issue $500 million in bonds within days.


    The Illinois State Pension fund in underfunded by $97 BILLION

    • Chuck Keysor says:

      Elgin has A++ bond ratings (well depending on which agency you are citing). And to think that the worst rating for a state (Illinois) is A-. Talk about inflation!

      Maybe the City should fight this and work to widen the distance between our bond rating and that of the State of Illinois. After the new Rain Tax goes into effect, the City could raise more taxes so that they can try and get Fitch and Moody to give Elgin an A++++++. Wouldn’t that make City’s top management look oh so wonderful, and how the majority of the council would gush with awe and admiration!

      Vote for change! Chuck

  27. Gibster says:

    Just wanted to share another point of view about the “Stormwater Survey” from Councilwoman Anna Moellers Facebook Page.


    Out on the City Council campaign trail, there has been talk about a City “Rain Tax” that presumably, the Council is poised to impose on City residents and businesses. I would like to clarify some of the misconceptions that are out there concerning this issue. Rest assured, the Council has not approved a new tax on “rain.”

    On Wednesday, we did approve a study that will provide an analysis on funding options for addressing stormwater management- including flooding and stormwater / sewage discharge due to our antiquated combined sewer systems in the older sections of town, dealing with failed stormwater detention areas and new potential mandates from the IEPA and EPA on stormwater management regulations. This study will describe the scope and cost of the problem and timeframe for fixing the problem depending on the funding mechanism selected, including using property taxes, creating Special Service Areas or a new funding mechanism that other communities have recently begun using- a stormwater utility tax. A stormwater utility tax is calculated by determining the amount of impervious surface (paved parking lots for example) on a given property. Those with more impervious surface pay more because there is more stormwater runoff from impervious surfaces and those with less pay less. A stormwater utility tax is one option that is being studied, but again, has not been approved. I and I believe most of my fellow Council members are sensitive to the tax burden that we all bear. We need to explore the best option that fixes the problems associated with stormwater (flooding, basement flooding, sewage runoff etc…) within a reasonable timeframe while minimizing the tax burden on the community. More conversation and information will be available when the study is completed.

    • Chuck Keysor says:

      Thank you Anna for your suggestion that we wait for the study by Strand and Associates to be completed before we tackle the “Rain Tax” discussion. Conveniently, that water rate and storm water utility study by Strand will not be completed until AFTER the City Council elections. Anna’s suggestion that discussion of the “Rain Tax” during the election cycle is premature,is a move to help Gilliam, Dunne and all the other liberals who want to win in the upcoming council election.

      Anna’s suggestion infers that candidates should not be put on the hot seat to say where they stand on the issue of a “rain tax”. That is because when most homeowners and business owners hear about the “Rain Tax”, they are either stunned or outraged. Stunned and outraged voters will vote against anyone who supports or appears to support the “Rain Tax”. Again, that is why Anna would like this discussion to be deferred until AFTER the election so that her liberal tax and spend friends who either support or are likely to support the “rain tax” do not go down in defeat. It is as simple as that.

      Deferring a debate on the rain tax and learning where the candidates stand would be helpful to Dunne and Gilliam. They voted for ALL the tax hikes of December 2011, and both have unbroken tax and spend records, are therefor very likely to vote for a “rain tax”. And they refused to participate in the Elgin OCTAVE candidate questionnaire and forum, which allowed them to avoid taking a public stand on this important issue.

      Terry Gavin has wisely pointed out, that once you have a new tax, you’ll never get rid of it. So if the Citizens don’t want a “Rain Tax”, then the best time to fight it is NOW, before the tax is enacted.

      This fight against the “Rain Tax” is done on the first and most important level, by electing candidates who are opposed to the “Rain Tax”. And even more important, is to try to identify those candidates who are opposed to the very concept which the “Rain Tax” represents, which is our current state of excessive taxation that ignores the reality that most Elgin taxpayers are barely getting by, and simply can not afford to pay MORE taxes.

      We have been separating our storm water and sanitary sewers for years. But if separating the storm sewers has to be ACCELERATED, requiring bigger bucks sooner for this work, then take the money out of something else.

      As a good historic example of the City reallocating funds you should know about the fight that lead to the building of Fire Station 6 on W. Chicago Steet. For years there was an active coalition of citizens including fire fighters, who worked without ceasing, to get the city to build a Fire Station on W. Chicago Street. City Hall, time and time again said, “Sorry, the City has NO money for this, we can’t afford to build it”. Well, after maybe 3 years of this, at a heated council meeting with lots of protesters, the City finally caved in and said, OK, we will take the money out of the funds that were set aside to make the bike path go under Kimball Street. Suddenly there was all the money needed to build a fire station when even the day before, the City still insisted it could not afford to build that fire station.

      Since the early 1970’s the City has known they had to separate the storm and sanitary sewers. Yet somehow, decade in and decade out, the council has said having other things was more important. We need a Rec Center, oh, we need a second rec center. Oh, we need a second golf course…. oh, we need a THIRD golf course, Oh, we need to put trees down the middle of Wing Park Blvd, Oh, we need to rebuild Walton Island, Oh, we need to put bricks into the downtown and make a mall, oh, we need to tear the bricks out and put the street back, oh we need Art Space, Oh we need Riverside Drive, Oh we need to tear down the Channing Y, oh we need to build a little housing development there, oh we need to put in street and sewers there even though the company that was going to build the houses on Channing Street went bankrupt, oh we could sure use a hydro-electric dam on the Fox River, and oh and oh again……. But all along, we have been slowly separating our storm and sanitary sewers. After all these years, it is only the personal agenda of Dave Kaptain that has elevated the ACCELERATED sewer separation to the critical level as part of his personal green agenda.

      Out of the $277,800,080 in the total 2013 City budget, something must be less important than ACCELERATED sewer separation. If so, then throw out something that is less important. If nothing less important can be found, then fine, just keep doing the separation at the current pace. But you can’t pay for this with NEW taxes and fees because the Citizens are simply sick of being taxed to death.

      The council already has the resources, they are going to have to re-prioritize and work with the money they already have. If they CAN’T or won’t do that, then just shame on them for not being able to work within their means, and thinking they can avoid setting tough priorities by just raising new taxes!!!!!! And shame on Anna Moeller for wanting to put this TOP issue off of the table and wait until the coast is clear, AFTER the election to discuss the “Rain Tax”.


      • One Vote says:

        Thank you for the logic. The city has known for decades that they need to fix the sewers. And your list of projects they DID invest in was perfect.
        They don’t need a consultant to tell them they need to separate the sewers; they need a consultant to justify a new tax.
        And that’s what the rain tax is all about.
        Kaptain knows this. He knows we are ALL paying for the western sewers. He campaigned against Schock on that very issue.
        If only the voters understood. They lap up the four page city newsletter explaining the budget and can’t see what’s going on.

    • Margaret Miller says:

      This is not a question whether or not were going to do storm water projects its a question of HOW DO WE PAY FOR IT?

      Could the reason for the feasibility study be that it might be more efficient because it is LESS TRANSPARENT?

      Anytime you have to pay the city more money, whether its on your property tax or water bill, that’s a tax. It also gives citizens less control over the expenditures. The flexibility it may offer to the city takes it away from the citizens.

      If my water usage is too high I can change my own personal water usage habits. The assessment (tax) would be out of my personal control. So I may be sitting happily in my living room and the city decides my contribution to the run off is higher than average then suddenly I will be assessed more money without having done anything different. That possible increase would be totally out of my control.

      The only way they get more money is to take it away from the taxpayers. This is a bad idea and I am opposed to the storm water feasibility study and the creation of type of storm water district.

      2) The cost of the feasibility study - $250,000.00
      3) Start up costs and continued data collection is intensive & complicated depending on the methodology - UNDETERMINED
      4) Ongoing operational costs and monitering - UNDETERMINED
      5) Equity issues regarding fee structure & legal challenges - UNDETERMINED
      6) Utility service fees are not tax deductible - DETERMINED

  28. Common Sense Clarence Hayward says:

    According to an article in the Daily Herald it appears that Hoffman Estates is already counting on sending up Elgin taxpayer dollars into the sky with a big bang this coming 4th of july.


    Elgin and Hoffman Estates contributed $15,000 each to the festival last year, while Hanover Park contributed $10,000 and Hanover Township contributed $5,000. “To my knowledge everybody’s committed to at least what they’ve done in the past,” Village Manager Jim Norris said. “We’re going to formalize that in the near future.”

    I hope the new council will change their Village Manager’s assumption.

  29. Tim Palmer says:

    For the laugh of the day, go to the Courier News and read the “slop” about Prigge & Moeller and their FaceBook posts about the storm water tax.

    It’s easy to see who likes to dance around issues with double-talk. You have to admit Moeller is sharp, and knows how to say nothing in dozens of words.

  30. Sally Foster says:

    Talk about “Tin Foil Hats”!
    Perhaps the Mayor & city council had on their “tin foil hats” when they approved 7-0 the $375,000 contract for council chambers “remodeling”.

    Included in this excessive proposal is more security cameras, new metal detectors,(forgetting we have one that is not plugged in.) & Kevlar “bullet resistant” shield for ALL council members not just the Mayor.

    I guess the council is worried that taking all of those new massive tax increases from the citizens might make a group of seniors storming the council chambers with their canes or try to run them out out town on a rail.

    Goodness knows they’ve taken enough of our hard earned money to anger people but please a Kevlar shield for all of them? Maybe just voting out the big tax & spenders on this council on April 9 will “fix” the problem.

  31. Frustrated says:

    For several years the City of Elgin had a deconversion program for the older single family homes that had been converted into multi-family apartments to incentify the owners to deconvert at the rate of $30k per unit to deconvert. I live next door to one of these three units that the city paid $60k to deconvert. Shortly thereafter, I noticed between 7 and 8 vehicles (3 of which are the metal scavenger pick ups that we all see around with the built up sides carrying old appliances etc.) in the driveway and 15-20 people coming and going. I called the code enforcement several times to no avail. I eventually went down to the police station when I saw the kids in the families living there pushing multiple shopping carts home to throw in the trucks to scrap. As I write this tonight I see a truck pull up moving three new mattresses into the front door of the house. How do you all feel about your tax dollars lining the pockets of this landlord? How do you feel about the way your local government is handling it? I am sure this is probably just an isolated incident though. It’s probably just me being a nosey neighbor since I am the one with a vested interest here. Dunno.

    • One Vote says:

      I wholeheartedly agree with you. Taking out those pesky apartment doors only means you can stuff more people in the house. And Code Enforcement cannot/will not be aggressive in keeping out occupancy violators.
      Three years ago I asked the mayor (present and past) to do a longitudinal study of the deconversion program. Go back and look at all the properties you’ve given money to. Did the program enhance the neighborhood? Is it still single family? Is the parking better?
      I suggested that it be a project for the urban planning students at NIU, not a consultant study.
      And then the council could review the results.
      Of course, neither Schock nor Kaptain took action on the idea. I think they like operating in the dark. I KNOW they don’t want my input.

  32. Cody Holt says:

    Hello everyone. I figured I would wait till I had something very productive to share with everyone before I posted here. I see the conversation was turning towards enviornmentalism and Agenda 21. Now essentially my understanding of agenda 21 is that it is a movement towards centrlized government, redistribution of wealth, globalization, government control of producation and consumption, etc etc. Now an organization called ICLEI directly advocates Agenda 21 on a local level. Which disguises it as an enviornmental initiative. After much research and attention to detail I studied about our cities involvement in ICLEI. Please check out my link at the bottom. It will lead you to my page, on my website about ICLEI, which will talk about how ICLEI has directly effected our city and led to revenue diversification. I will make this an issue of the election. We must opt out of our membership of ICLEI. Their ideas put the communities rights and needs above that of the individual and limits freedom. Check it out and let me know. Thank you and I will be on alot more.


  33. Todd Martin says:

    Thanks Cody for the link and correction. I apologize. Yes, Elgin is indeed a member of ICLEI. I hope everyone who is interested will take a few minutes to learn more about that voluntary program for local governments.

    Just to clarify one point about the hydro-electric dam proposal: The City Manager reported the $400,000 feasibility study will only go forward if grants can pay for it. Zero city dollars are budgeted for the study. If the feasibility study does go forward, many requirements for the permits and data for its design would be provided. I would hope that everyone looks at the benefits as well as the costs for such a project. It’s sensible, for example, to consider an ROI (Return on Investment), the improvement it would make to river safety (fewer drowning deaths), and the reduction in maintenance expenses.

    And No, I’m not a member of the Communist Party. I do not believe the State should own all means of production.

    • Cody Holt says:

      Todd good points! I know the counter argument in support for the dam. But I do not believe it is a course that Elgin should follow. I do actually remember Steagall repeating himself several times saying “No state money no dam.”

    • One Vote says:

      I assume you are not a Communist. I only hoped it would open your eyes to throwing labels around.
      Perhaps we all need a little ideology-meter next to our name. We can place ourselves wherever we want.
      I do take issue with the dam study funding. You indicate that the project is based on grants.
      One of my pet peeves is people who think grants are free money. Illinois is broke. The United States is broke. Does grant money come from unicorn farts or something? No. We are paying. It is one redistribution or another, but somewhere we are paying for it with money we don’t have.
      The bureaucrat beancounters on Dexter Court may be clicking their heels because they don’t have to foot the bill, but it is still tax revenue (or future revenue) used to write the checks. Let’s stop thinking that just because a project is funded by a grant that it doesn’t ultimately cost us.

    • Terry Gavin says:

      Todd, the estimates for building the dam are in the $4.5M range not including the study. According to staff projections the ROI is estimated to take at least 28 years. This estimate of course could be way off since maintenance of hydro-electric turbines is very costly to say the least. While serving on the council in the past I looked at every issue from both sides & used common sense to determine the best course of action for the taxpayer’s dollars. The proposed dam is not sensible at the present time nor can anyone predict it would be in the future. The same could be said for the “rain” tax. In fact that tax would ONLY be good for those who want bigger government. I’d also support the city dropping it’s membership in the ICLEI for reasons mentioned by Cody. I’ve been aware of the city’s involvement with this group for some time now & it’s NOT good for our community.

      As for “labels” socialists/liberals come in different flavors, you’ve got Marxists who demand State ownership of all industry like the former USSR, China of the past. China today has embraced communist “lite” which allows a certain amount of capitalism but they still maintain centralized control of the people or “workers. This is largely due to the fact that when they took over Hong Kong they saw how successful they were, how much money could be made for the ruling class, & adopted it as their new model. But make no mistake about it human rights abuses against the people of China continues unchanged. Then you’ve got the form of socialism known as Fascists who control everything through centralized control but don’t own all forms of production they simply dictate to the private owners & people what they want done.

      So Todd, since you’re a admitted liberal are you also a socialist?

  34. Harmony says:

    Frustrated, What you are facing is a code department that is in name only. Over the last several years some of the best code enforcement officers have left the department. There is new management that don’t know what they are doing. It is time to combine that department with either the Police or Fire Departments with experienced management. Just a case in point, The code department does not enforce overcrowding anymore. There are codes on the books regarding scavengers example loaded trucks can not be stored on private property or on the street for over 2 hours. Call your council man or mayor. And ask for a result of the investigation.

    • One Vote says:

      The scrap trucks are hiding in plain sight on Hiawatha. Every night. Same house.
      How many police cars drive by that eyesore every night? And no one does anything about it.
      I got them to comply for about a month a few years ago. Now it is as if the problem doesn’t exist.
      Also, the problem house next to mine is once again over-occupied. There’s no follow-up. No political will to enforce our laws. (Does that sound familiar?)
      If only the city attorney would sign off on all those occupancy complaints on his desk maybe we could enforce the law.
      Like you said, Harmony. No leadership.

      • Frustrated says:

        I’ve given a good 9 year shot at getting involved, investing in the neighborhood and waiting to hopefully see a rebirth. I think it’s time I do as those before me and get out. Taxes are too high for the return and life is too short.

    • Terry Gavin says:

      Serious overcrowding violations need to be dealt with as a public health/safety issue, like we were doing in the 90’s. Harmony your suggestion of merging the Code Dept. with Police and/or Fire Dept. is a great idea. If elected to serve again I’d pursue that idea for enforcement of residential overcrowding based on national standards often referred to as BOCA codes.

      When people severely overcrowd a residence it puts an extra strain on city services, our school system and as history would tell us could very well lead to a tragedy such as a house fire with multiple people being injured or killed. Overcrowding is a very serious issue & must be dealt with as a crime. I for one would not stand for non-enforcement of the laws on the books. If the laws need to be changed then so be it.

  35. Harmony says:

    Terry you’ve got my vote now. And yes one vote you hit the nail on the head with the city attorney sitting on cases. For you that didn’t know Elgin now has it’s own “baby court” for local ordinance violations, talk about unconstitutional. They figured they could by pass the fees that the the real court charges and pocket it that. What a fair way of doing things charge someone then have them face a hearing officer hired by the city. What are your thoughts on this Cody and Terry?

    • Terry Gavin says:

      I’ve had a discussion with legal dept., council members and the Police Dept. regarding the “dog” court or as I call it the kangaroo court that I witnessed 1st hand during a so called “hearing” for my sister-in-law. My complaints were ignored for the most part but I expect the same heavy handed tactics are used by the local ordinance adjudication hearing. I complained that the hearing officer was denying people due process and was told he was not by our city government. It was take what we offer or else you lose. I didn’t like what I saw or was told but then again the old saying is “you can’t fight City Hall. If elected I’d take a long hard look at this “process” & see if it could be improved.

  36. Terry Gavin says:

    I guess it’s time to start the February open thread but in the meantime let me share this heroic true video of “Old 666″ B-17 during WWII. May we never forget the sacrifice that was made so we have the freedoms today we have! Please watch & remember that “many gave some but some gave all”.


    • Chuck Keysor says:

      Terry, thanks for sharing the WW2 documentary. I recommend it highly. Most of the WW2 vets I have known have all passed on, but I am still amazed and at a loss for even trying to imagine what it must have been like to be alive in those dark days where our entire way of life was under attack. Chuck