►
From YouTube: Special Kankakee County Board Meeting 3/8/2021
Description
Special Kankakee County Board Meeting 3/8/2021 9:00 AM
A
C
B
A
Thank
you,
and
the
purpose
of
this
meeting
today
is
that
the
appointments,
the
precedented
appointments
of
county
board,
has
come
into
question.
We
at
the
county
board
want
to
be
transparent
and
want
to
operate
with
the
guidelines
and
guidance
of
our
state's
attorney's
office,
and
with
that
I
will
yield
the
floor
to
mr
rowe.
D
So
I
want
everyone
to
be
assured
that
the
interest
here
is
in
doing
this
process
correctly
and
doing
it
right
every
time
when
we
look
over
the
history
decades,
in
fact
of
appointments
that
have
come
before
the
county
board,
they've
been
done
in
many
different
manners.
Sometimes
a
vacancy
was
announced
orally.
A
vote
was
taken
on
the
appointment.
D
There
were
a
couple
occasions
I
believe
it
might
have
been
under
chairman
wenzelman
if
I'm
not
correct
once
or
twice
where
the
board
voted
on
it
vacancy
through
resolution
and
then
they
bought
it
voted
on
the
replacement,
but
historically
the
county
has
had
where
the
chairman
would
announce
the
vacancy
and
then
on
advice
and
consent
of
the
board.
They
would
vote
on
it
and
approve
it.
D
D
So
we
I
looked
at
see
what
what
do
other
counties
do
all
across
illinois,
some
of
them
don't
necessarily
matter
in
the
analysis,
because
they
may
have
a
county
executive
form
of
government
or
a
county
chairman
who's
been
elected
county-wide,
but
for
the
majority
of
counties
in
illinois,
the
county
chairman
is
selected
by
the
county
board,
much
like
our
form
of
government
here.
So
when
you
look
across
those
counties
and
just
who
declares
the
vacancy,
is
it
by
vote
of
the
board?
D
Is
it
by
public
announcement
when
you
start
to
run
through
that
list?
I
can
tell
you
the
super
majority
of
those
counties
that
are
organized
like
ours
have
a
process
where
the
chairman
announces
the
vacancy
orally
and
then
later
with
the
advising
consent
of
the
county
board.
They
vote
on
the
appointment
of
a
person
to
fill
the
vacancy.
D
D
Past
precedent
doesn't
matter
it,
it
doesn't
matter
to
me
and
I
don't
believe
it
would
matter
in
a
legal
analysis
if
something
ever
did
come
before
a
court
right
because,
let's
say,
let's
just
say,
for
instance,
if
if
we
did
something
wrong,
if
something
was
done
wrong,
just
the
fact
you've
done
it
wrong,
100
times
doesn't
mean
that
the
next
time
you
can
continue
doing
it
wrong
now
to
say,
sit
up
here
and
say
that
all
those
decades,
all
those
appointments
over
the
years
were
done
wrong.
I
can't
say
that
right.
D
That
would
be
something
a
court
would
have
to
resolve
and,
interestingly,
this
matter
has
never
been
adjudicated
in
front
of
a
court.
This
statute
on
declaring
a
vacancy.
Never
once
has
anyone
ever
opined
on
it
beyond
an
attorney
general
opinion
from
back
in
1975,
and
that
was
simply
it
wasn't
on
the
declaration
of
a
vacancy.
D
It
was
on
a
pointing
within
that
60-day
period
from
when
the
vacancy
exists
and
another
concern
we
had
is
well
what,
if
a
board
were
to
simply
kick
that
bucket
down
the
road
right,
kick
that
can
down
the
road
and
never
make
that
appointment
within
60
days.
You'd
have
the
same
tragic
outcome:
you'd
have
a
whole
district
of
people
who
have
no
voice
on
the
county
board
and
what
the
attorney
general's
opinion
says.
In
fact,
the
statute
says
with
advising
consent
of
the
county
board.
D
The
county
board
shell
within
60
days
of
the
date
of
the
vacancy,
occurs,
appoint
some
person.
What
they
found
was
that
the
outcome,
if
they
didn't
again
no
representation,
that
can't
possibly
be
the
outcome
if
you
followed
state
statute,
so
the
attorney
general
concluded
it
says.
In
conclusion,
it's
my
opinion
that,
while
the
officer
of
the
board,
with
advice
and
consent,
has
the
mandatory
duty
to
fill
a
vacancy
on
said
board
by
appointment
the
requirement
that
that
appointment
be
made
within
60
days
of
the
date
the
vacancy
occurs
is
directory.
D
D
So
the
60-day
thing
it's
directory,
not
mandatory,
it's
probably
ideal
that
it
always
be
done
within
that
60-day
period.
Otherwise
you
run
into
a
meeting
or
two
where
that
district
has
gone
without
a
voice
on
the
board,
potentially
on
some
important
votes,
but
it
is
not
a
bar
to
an
a
later
appointment.
D
D
D
If
we're
going.
If
we're
going
to
do
that
correct
on
that
one
going
forward,
then
I
have
to
look
and
say:
are
there
any
other
members
of
the
county
board
who
we
haven't
followed
that
process
for
that
are
serving
by
appointment
and
there's
only
one
district
26,
I'm
not
comfortable
just
leaving
that
one
kind
of
hanging
out
there
where
this
board
anytime
they
have
a
vote?
Do
you
really
want
to
look
in
the
rearview
mirror
and
wonder
it's?
The
right
thing
to
do
here
is
to
clean
it
up.
D
D
I
I
hope
that
you
know
last
time
this
issue
came
up.
There
was
a
lot
of
discussion.
A
lot
of
it
was
last
minute,
while
the
the
discussions
were
going
on.
There
were
legal
questions
raised.
I've
had
a
conversation
with
mr
snipes,
because
I
do
appreciate
you,
robert
bringing
this
stuff
to
our
attention,
especially
that
that
email,
you
sent
you
cited
some
additional
authority
in
there,
and
I
appreciate
you
doing
that
and
that's
what's
pushing
us
to
clarify
this
process
going
forward
at
the
april
meeting.
D
I
hope
to
bring
to
you
a
proposed
or
may
well
to
the
executive
committee.
It
will
go
first,
but
some
proposed
language
to
amend
our
county
code
of
ordinances
to
really
lay
out
this
process.
So
it's
in
writing.
Every
time
we
we
set
out
the
dates
and
as
best
as
the
county
board
can
do
in
the
future
meet
those
three-day
notice
deadline,
60-day,
appointment
deadlines,
although
they
are
again
directory,
not
mandatory.
D
A
D
E
D
That
that
is
what
I'm
going
to
do
at
the
executive
committee
and
then
the
april
meeting,
hopefully,
or
may
it
latest
okay
to
make
sure
that
it's
in
our
county
court
ordinances.
Just
so
it's
a
clear
process
because
really
the
way
you
look
at
it
now,
I
hope
you
can
see
how
someone
could
take
the
language
of
that
state
statute
and
really
play
with
it
in
such
a
way
that
leaves
1
28th
of
all
your
residents
without
any
voice
in
county
government,
and
that
would
be
horrible
and
and
yeah.
That's
something
we're
trying
to
avoid.
F
D
D
According
to
this
ag
opinion
by
a.g
scott,
it
is
mandatory
that
they
fill
the
vacancy.
The
60
days
is
directory.
Only
so
should
it
be
filled
within
60
days
absolutely
every
time
if,
for
some
reason,
that
60-day
requirement
is
not
met,
that
would
not
prohibit
the
board
from
still
appointing
someone
so
long
as
they
follow
the
valid
process.
G
Sometimes
we
come
to
the
meetings
of
the
minds
when
we
are
at
odds,
but
in
this
case
we
do
have
a
state's
attorney
and
we
also
have
the
attorney
general's
office
and
then
even
the
courts,
if
we
have
to,
I
did
have
a
quote
warrant
to
action
on
it's
on
my
desk
now,
which
now
I
don't
have
to
basically
mitigate
in
the
court,
to
bring
it
because
we're
now
going
into
a
a
process
that
we're
going
to
kind
of
follow.
As
far
as
declaration
is
concerned.
G
Sometimes
we
are
in
the
minority
when
we
are
doing
such,
but
just
rest
assure
that
it's
important
that
every
board
member
here
is
her
is
heard
those
individuals
that
were
black
mine
and
then
miss
peters,
miss
peters,
who
had
to
step
up
across
the
aisle
and
probably
got
some
some
unnecessary
comments.
You
know
again,
we
applaud
those
individuals
that
that
that
that
that
will
look
at
a
situation
that
we'll
call
that
we'll
ask
questions
like
she
did
and
others
to
kind
of
get
some
clarity.
G
D
D
D
D
H
D
Yeah
so,
but
the
vacancies
should
be
filled
within
60
days
of
the
occurrence
of
the
vacancy.
The
notice
should
be
sent
within
three
days
of
the
occurrence
of
the
vacancy,
but
there's
no
time
frame
from
the
declaration
of
the
vacancy
and
the
appointment
yeah.
The
60
days
is
really
from
the
date
of
the
occurrence
of
it.
Until
you
fill
it.
D
And
I
don't.
I
don't
want
the
board
to
think
that
it's
okay
to
go
beyond
the
60
days
that
that
60
days
really
isn't
relevant.
It's
it's
completely
relevant.
It's
so
important
because
you
don't
want
people
without
a
voice,
but
if,
for
some
reason
you
can't
fill
it
within
that
60-day
period,
you
just
as
long
as
you
do
it
legally
you're.
Still,
okay,.
F
D
That
that's
not
something
I
can
speak
to
that's
the
stuff.
That
is
that's
part
of
the
political
process
that
the
state
statute
affords.
I
don't
know
what
that
process
looks
like.
I
know
that
you
know
they're
appointed
with
the
advise
and
consent
of
the
county
board,
but
how
those
individuals
are
chosen.
That's
something
you
know
I.
I
can
tell
you
that
if
someone
is
a
if
the
vacancy
occurs
and
the
individual
who
was
in
that
position
was
a
republican,
it
has
to
be
filed
filled
by
someone
who's,
a
registered
republican,
same
thing.
D
E
D
D
E
A
Any
other
questions,
anyone
on
zoom
I'd
like
to
thank
mr
roe
for
his
opinion.
I
think
that
is,
I
think
that
makes
a
ton
of
sense,
and
that
is
the
right
thing
to
do
going
forward
and
we're
establishing
a
precedent
now
that
we'll
have
for
forever.
So
I
appreciate
mr
rose
opinion
and
thank
you
for
clarifying
that
so
moving
on.
Can
I
get
the
first
resolution
right
into
the
record
title
or
the
whole
thing?
The
let's
read
the
whole
thing:
it's
not
really!
Thank
you.
A
B
D
C
A
C
H
A
B
A
H
H
D
H
A
A
H
A
C
G
E
B
G
B
D
I
want
to
thank
the
board
for
being
understanding
of
this
process.
I
know
it's
been
a
hassle.
I
know
there
were
a
lot
of
you
know.
Emotions
involved
in
this
from
the
start,
and
thank
you
so
much
for
putting
you
know
the
politics
and
everything
else
aside,
so
that
we
can
correct
this
and
help
it
go
forward.
I'm
I'm
really
thankful
to
all
of
you
for
working
together.