►
From YouTube: Ethics Commission Meeting 7/3/2018
Description
Ethics Commission Meeting 7/3/2018 10:30 AM
A
A
C
D
A
C
C
E
E
She
also
advised
us
to
repair
in
a
more
detailed
statement
which
did
subsequently
come
in
I
advised
her
that
I
had
commitments
for
the
rest
of
the
week
at
that
time
would
not
be
able
to
get
into
the
actual
work
on
the
complaint.
Until
the
following
week
on
the
19th
I
received
an
email
stating
she
was
withdrawing
the
complaint.
E
E
E
E
Myself
and
I
don't
know
the
other
individuals,
but
by
means
of
the
email,
a
copy
of
being
sent
to
me.
I
acknowledge
receipt
of
that
at
that
point
in
time,
clear
back
when
all
this
began,
as
I
had
advised
the
Chairman
and
the
state's
attorney's
office
and
people
here,
I
gave
up
my
license.
So
I
am
not
in
a
position
to
give
legal
advice.
I
will
not
go
into
that
type
of
process
whatsoever.
B
E
Again,
this
is
section
and
division.
Seven
section,
two
dash
two,
eight
six.
Whenever
any
officer
employee
of
Kankakee
County
reason
believes
evidence
exists
that
another
officer,
employee,
has
perpetuated,
gross
mismanagement,
gross
misuse
or
waste
of
public
resources
or
funds,
abuse
of
authority
in
connection
with
administration
of
public
program,
etc,
etc.
E
That
have
come
to
light
because
of
this,
this
whistleblower
complaint,
but
nevertheless
back
to
the
fact
that
it
came
from
the
auditor's
office
that
I
contacted
the
Chairman's
office
again
outside
legal
counsel
was
procured
from
the
appellate
process
prosecutor's
office,
which
is
standard
process.
If
a
state's
attorney's
office
cannot
handle
it
and
through
the
course
of
working
with
the
this
attorney,
the
two
determination
was
made
that.
A
E
File,
this
type
of
an
action
purpose,
I
believe
over
all
of
the
whistleblower
protection
is
so
employees
of
a
governmental
entity
do
not
have
to
be
fearful
of
losing
their
job
if
they
file
these
type
of
complaints.
So
again,
that's
that's
the
protection
that's
afforded
out
there
again.
This
individual
is
or
at
the
time
of
the
filing
of
the
whistleblower
complaint,
was
no
longer
an
employee
at
the
county.
A
E
Don't
really
know
the
complete
details
of
it
and
that
I
know
that
the
person
was
discharged,
I,
don't
know
how
agreeable
was
I,
you
know
based
on
what's
contained
and
some
of
it
there
was
some
disagreement
in
the
complaints
with
the
different
things
that
have
been
found.
There
was
some
difficulty
that
was
occur
between
the
department
head
and
the
employee
and
again
because
of
the
fact
that.
A
E
Approaching
this
at
the
current
time
as
I
would
any
other
time
that
a
complaint
is
filed,
I'm
not
going
to
be
bringing
out
names,
even
though
the
gentleman
sitting
over
here
is
full
aware
of
who
the
names
are,
and
everything
I'm
still
going
to
approach
it
from
the
perspective
that
I
don't
think
it's
proper
for
me
to
discuss
the
individuals
name
out
in
the
general
public.
However,
I
will
put
out
that
the
individual
involved
was
an
employee
of
the
state's
attorney's
office.
E
E
Impact
or
influence
from
within
the
office
and
I
felt
it
was
advisable
for
the
state's
attorney's
office
that
they
not
be
involved
because
it
removed
them
from
being
subject
to
an
argument
that
you
know
they
weren't
shooting
straight
I,
just
felt
that
it
was
necessary
that
independent
counsel
be
appointed,
and
ultimately,
chairman
wheeler
agreed
with
that.
Also.
E
I'm
in
the
ordinance
we're
supposed
to
give
notice.
Well,
let
me
let
me
step
back
again
in
that
I
sent
a
copy
of
the
legal
opinion
out
to
the
complaint.
I
got
an
email
back
and
basically
advised
the
complainant
that,
in
all
fairness
to
them,
I
and
the
gist
of
the
decision
or
the
opinion
from
the
outside
legal
adviser,
was
that,
due
to
the
fact
that
this
person
was
no
longer
employee
and
employee,
they
were
not
protected
by
the
whistleblower
ordinance.
E
E
I'm
supposed
to
investigate
as
to
whether
or
not
there's
a
basis
to
bring
an
action
in
front
of
the
ethics
commission
I
advise
the
complainin
that
this
was
the
opinion
that
was
given
by
the
outside
legal
counsel.
The
response
I
got
was
I
expected
as
much
and
in
the
letter
I
had
said.
I
was
going
to
give
this
person
28
days
to
file
a
response.
If
they
were
a
disagreement
as
to
that
legal
determination,
the
response
again
I
got
back
was
that's
what
I
expected
I
didn't
know
how
to
take.
E
That
was
I
to
take
that
as
being
I
expected,
they
were
going
to
find
a
way
not
to
deal
with
it
or
I
expected.
That
was
going
to
be
the
result,
because
that's
what
my
own?
That's?
What
this
person's
own
independent
legal
investigation
had
determined
so
I,
let
it
run
the
28
days
and
right
about
the
time
28
days
was
running,
then
I
started
trying
to
get
a
hold
of
Toby,
so
I
could
come
and
report
to
the
Commission
in
this
fashion.
F
E
E
And
I
guess:
I
I
need
to
note
the
fact
that
there
were
some
other
allegations
contained
in
this
complaint
that
also
were
directed
toward
the
chairman,
so
it
was
even
difficult
having
that
kind
of
conversation,
County
George,
chairman
of
County,
Board,
Chairman
yeah,
not
yourself,
thank
you,
sorry
did
leave
that
open-ended.
Yes,
there
were
some
allegations
contained
in
the
complaint
and
the
whistleblower
action
that
were
directed
toward
chairman
wheeler
again.
E
Another
reason
why
I
felt
that
it
just
should
have
been
completely
outside
the
state's
attorney's
office
as
far
as
the
assistance,
the
legal
assistance
that
was
given,
but
again
even
that
made
it
difficult
for
me
having
to
have
that
conversation
with
him
and
since
he's
a
subject
matter
of
what
contained
in
the
complaint.
So
as
it's
something
that
we
need
to
maybe
discuss
as
to
how
can
we
create
a
process
to
where
outside
legal
assistance
can
be
procured
in
those
type
of
touchy
situations?
E
E
C
Well,
I
think
mr.
wounds,
woman,
you
did
exceptional
work
on
this.
It
was
a
difficult
complaint
to
start
with,
and
the
outside
legal
advice
was
very
good
and
what
I
think
in
our
case
in
our
responsibility
would
be
if
there
was
any
question
about
this
to
continue
on.
But
there
doesn't
seem
to
be
any
question
about
the
validity
of
the
resolutions
that
were
drawn.
E
E
E
E
When
the
committee
does
closed
the
complaints
due
to
the
lack
of
jurisdiction,
I
want
to
exercise
my
right
under
the
ordinance
to
have
the
ethics
advisory
refer
the
complaints
to
the
appropriate
agency
I,
don't
know
that
that
would
be
the
US
Attorney
for
the
Central
District
of
Illinois
because
of
the
alleged
misuse
of
public
funds
by
state
official
or
to
the
Attorney
General
or
the
office
of
the
executive
inspector
general
or
all
three
to
determine
the
jurisdiction.
But
I
wanted
to
give
you
the
heads-up
that
I
will
not
be
requesting
them
so
again,.
E
E
There
is
a
provision
under
the
ordinance
that
you
know
suggest
that
if
the
determination
is
made
that
we
don't
have
authority,
then
I
should
refer
to
this
agency.
Here's
the
difficulty
again,
it
puts
me
in
this
position.
I
first
of
all
would
have
to
do
all
the
investigation
to
make
a
legal
determination
that
there
is
a
basis
for
complaint
to
be
filed
against.
You
know
with
another
entity
again
something
else.
I
think
we
need
to
look
at
as
to
the
contents
of
the
ordinance.
What.
C
E
E
C
E
E
E
Have
no
documentation
from
outside
legal
counsel
that
says
that
there
was
any
basis
to
the
allegation
of
the
complaint.
Therefore,
I
have
you
know,
even
if,
if
there
is
just
again,
the
decision
to
us
was
based
upon
jurisdiction,
you
know
that
we
just
don't
have
jurisdiction.
Therefore,
we
can't
proceed.
E
Whether
or
not
there
is
any
validity
or
not
to
the
allegations
of
the
whistleblower
complaint,
therefore
we
don't
have
any
basis.
You
know,
I,
don't
have
anything
to
convey
to
you.
That
suggests
that
there
is
some
viability
or
there's
some
validity
to
this
complaint.
I
don't
have
anything
at
all
like
that
to
suggest
one
way
or
the
other.
That
basically
says
you
know
I
think
there's
something
there
or
I
can't
say:
I,
don't
think,
there's
something
there,
but
I
don't
have
anything
at
all
to
basically
give
to
you
to
make
a
determination
of
referral
and.
C
E
C
E
C
E
A
E
C
C
E
B
E
Thirty
years
ago,
so
I
I,
don't
know
you
know
things
change
as
far
as
the
rules,
the
regulations
case
law
that
may
be
interpreted
things
that
succumb
I'm,
not
in
a
position
to
say,
yeah,
I,
think
there's
something
here
or
there
isn't,
because
I
haven't
researched
or
looked
at
it
and
again
I'm,
not
in
that
position.
To
give
that
type
of
recommendation
to
this.
This
group.
E
C
E
C
E
That's
part
of
it,
but
I
I,
guess
I'm.
Thinking
from
your
perspective,
do
you
want
to
be
perceived
as
an
entity
that
willy
nilly
hands
things
off
without
really
having
a
basis,
for
you
know
dude
when,
if
you're
going
to
be
sending
in
a
letter
to
the
Attorney
General
or
a
federal
prosecutor,
do
you
want
to
get
in
a.
E
E
Normal
scheme
of
things,
the
way
I
perceive
how
we
all
operate
together
is
the
complaint
is
received.
I
receive
that
I
investigate
it
I.
You
know
it's
different
than
doing
legal
research
on
it.
If
there's
issues
that
arise
during
the
course
of
my
investigation,
then
I
would
contact
the
state's
attorney's
office
and
say
this
is
something
I
need
some
guidance
on
as
to
I.
E
C
Of
the
words
that
they
use
in
the
our
little
law
is
gross,
you
know.
So
now
do
we
say
well
if
you're,
a
whistleblower
and
you're
saying
that
some
officer
in
the
county
spent
a
hundred
dollars
in
an
area
to
think
it
was
proper.
Is
that
gross
or
do
we
say
we
would
look
at
it
if
it
was
going
to
be
forty
thousand
dollars
or
it
was
going
to
be
a
hundred
thousand.
You
know
I
think,
maybe
that's
something
we
should
just.
E
F
E
Quite
honestly,
we're
going
to
need
the
state's
attorney's
office
to
be
evolved
with
him,
but
I
guess
you
know
and
I
kind
of
anticipated.
They
might
have
been
here,
but
then
again
once
I
saw
they
weren't
here
I,
probably
understand
why
they
aren't
here
it's
you
know
they
probably
wanted
to
keep
that
hands-off
approach,
but
yeah
I
understand.
E
C
C
My
personal
opinion
is
that,
since
we've
been
invited
by
outside
legal,
a
lawyer,
you
know
who
seems
seem
to
know
what
he
was
doing
and
whatnot
that
this
particular
complaint
is
that
germane
for
us,
because
it
was
made
by
somebody
who
is
not
employed,
and
that
seems
to
for
us
end
the
situation.
The
question
just
becomes
then:
do
we
send
it
on
right
right.
A
E
A
A
F
C
E
C
C
E
C
E
The
person
has
responded
in
that
fashion
and
acknowledge
receipt
of
things
in
that
fashion.
So
I
will
advise
the
individual
in
that
fashion,
but
again
with
that
being
done
as
we
segue
into
the
next
item
on
the
agenda,
if
we
can
I'm
gonna
need
some
assistance,
probably
a
time
probably
for
communication.
E
Go
through
some
of
the
things
that
I
found
as
a
result
of
this
well
things
I
guess,
maybe
we
need
to
note
and
then
maybe
my
suggestion
would
be-
is
to
set
up
a
meeting
and
maybe
they
could
be
conveyed
over
to
the
state's
attorney's
office
on
the
issue
of
ordinance
revisions
and
then
maybe
subsequently
set
up
in
a
meeting
to
discuss
them
further,
but
at
least
give
whoever
would
it
be
assigned
this
task
the
opportunity
to
to
look
at
them
a
little
bit.
I.
E
E
C
E
E
B
C
E
C
E
E
That
would
be
in
the
whistleblower,
but
okay,
looking
through
this
ordinance
at
the
current
time,
I,
don't
see
anything
that
specifically
puts
it
under
the
auspices
of
the
Ethics
Commission.
So
that's
another
issue
out
there.
That
again,
you
know
you
have
the
one
section
of
the
ordinance
that
talks
about
those
two
specific
things.
Then
you
have
an
ordinance
whistle
blower
ordinance,
but
it
doesn't
say
specifically
that
it
shows
who
the
report
is
to
be
filed
with.
But
again
let
me
go
back.
E
Okay,
well,
it
says
all
officers.
Employees
should
be
obligated,
cooperate
during
the
course
of
an
investigation
and
comply
with
the
request
for
information
from
the
Ethics
Commission
and
state's
attorney
I.
Guess
it
kind
of
suggests
that
it's
in
our
bailiwick,
but
it
doesn't
say
specifically
that
all
complaints
should
go.
You
know,
should
follow
the
processes
of
the
Ethics
Commission
ordinance,
and
you
know
maybe
it's
just
some
language
like
that-
may
specifically
put
it
there.
E
F
A
G
The
the
original
ethics
ordinances
was
drafted,
as
you
heard
by
the
person
who
filed
the
first
complaint.
Was
it
said
the
state's
attorney
is
the
ethics
adviser.
Okay,
I
asked
to
have
that
changed,
because
what?
If
it
was
somebody
in
the
state's
attorney's
office
had
filed
the
complaint,
it
was
provided
back
to
the
individual,
who
wrote
the
the
ordinance
and
they
changed
it.
Well.
G
We
have
since
realized
that
the
state's
attorney
is
not
an
employee
of
the
county,
and
only
ethics
violations
against
the
state's
attorney
can
be
made
to
the
courts
in
Springfield
and
I
may
be
a
little
bit
off
on
the
specifics,
but
it
has
to
be
made
with
the
other
ethics
okay,
because
they're
not
employee
of
the
county.
Hence
we're
in
this
weird
spot
right
now
and
I.
Think
that's
what
McCants
talking
about
here
and
so
when
we
talk
about
ethics
advisor
nine
times
out
of
ten
and
I
hope.
G
E
C
E
Finance
statement
of
economic
interests
very
okay-
the
ordinance
is
drafted
at
the
current
time,
says
that
I'm
supposed
to
review
those
I
haven't
seen
one
yet
I
believe
they're
due
May
1st
and
believe
me
I'm,
not
looking
forward
to
sitting
there.
I
I,
don't
know
where
they're
going
at
the
current
time,
where
they've
been
filed
previously
okay
and
see
right
now,
it
says
I'm
supposed
to
be
looking
at
those
I.
Don't
know
if
it's
necessary
I,
don't
know
how
many
of
you
get
but
again
I
think
that's
something
that
we
need
to
before.
E
C
E
E
Well,
I
guess:
if,
if
I'm
gonna
continue
looking
at
the
nun
statements
and
do
the
investigation,
then
maybe
it
should
be
administrator,
there's
kind
of
an
administrative
type
of
capacity.
If
this,
if
those
things
are
gonna,
go
by
the
wayside,
someplace
else
and
all
and
it's
gonna
be
more
of
Investigation,
then
maybe
it's
a
six
investigator
I
worry.
F
C
C
If
they're
a
hefty
complaint,
it
should
be
that
we
would
get
some
kind
of
legal
counsel,
whether
it
was
the
state's
attorney's
office
or
somebody
outside
of
there
before
we
made
a
decision
because
they
think
we
have
to
be
very
careful
as
since
the
complaint
was
given
to
the
reporter.
You
know
we
have
to
worry
about
and
we're
saying
that
what
was
in
it
was
not
applicable
or
whatever.
C
E
C
E
C
But
you
know
again,
we
don't
want
putting
out
people's
names
of
any
kind,
either
the
point
or
the
person
about
to
whom
they're
complaining
when
there
hasn't
been
any
investigation
into
it
or
any
thing
that
triggers
an
investigation
and
I
understand
totally
what
you
mean
about
being
used
because
God
knows
we
get
used.
I.
E
Fairly
in
that
I
I
perceive
it
as
trying
to
fulfill
my
role,
just
as
I
would
have
attempted
to
fulfill
it
for
the
last
22
years,
while
I
was
sitting
on
the
bench.
You
know
it's
not
me
to
make
that
final
decision.
In
many
of
these
cases,
it's
for
somebody
else
to
make
the
decision.
You
know
if
there's
a
jury
there.
C
E
E
Prior
I
said
basically
prior
to
the
prosecution
of
the
complaint.
When
we
get
to
this
stage
with
as
a
prosecution
of
the
complaint,
it
appears
that
the
advisor
officer
is
expected
to
do
all
I'm
expected
to
do
would
be
administrative
review
of
ethics
statements,
which
I
previously
discussed
or
investigate
the
possibility
that
you
know
a
complaint
should
proceed.
I
suggested
that
an
alternative
approach
would
be
once
the
investigation
is
completed
and
complaint
has
been
allowed
to
be
filed.
E
E
They
would
need
to
conclude
that
the
evidence
had
proven
the
complaint
by
preponderance
of
the
evidence
before
they
could
take
disciplinary
action
against
the
respondent,
so
suggestion
I
made
at
that
point
in
time,
was
that
all
right,
I've
done
the
investigation
I
feel
that
further
inquiry
should
be
made
with
an
opportunity
to
be
heard
before
the
Commission.
The
Commission
could
request.
Additional
people
to
attend
could
allow
for
live.
Testimony
to
be
provided,
you
basically
would
be
sitting
in
bunk
together
here
what's
being
presented,
you
would
have
the
investigative
information
that
I
would
procure.