Green Party County Convention tonight

The McHenry County Green Party held its County Convention this evening at the Woodstock Public Library. Required reports were made, officers designated, and selections completed for all items on the Agenda.

Pictured are Frank Wedig (candidate for County Board 5), Scott Summers (candidate for Illinois State Treasurer) and Gus Philpott, candidate for Sheriff.

The next meeting of the McHenry County Green Party will be during the State Convention in Chicago on April 17.

The Party is seeking interested individuals who would like to be considered for slating in National, State and County elections on November 2. A slating process can be followed to place such persons on the General Election ballot, after all requirements have been met.

For information about being considered for slating, please contact Frank Wedig, Chair, by email at wedigforboard5@sbcglobal.net or by telephone at 815.337.7331

Gauger Case likely to continue

Gary Gauger's request to Judge Maureen McIntyre for a new trial in McHenry County Circuit Court was denied on Monday.

Gauger, now 58, spent 3 1/2 years in prison, including nine months on death row.

The killers of his parents were caught, and Gauger was released and cleared.

Frankly, it's pretty stupid that McHenry County is putting up such a fight to avoid compensating him.

According to the Northwest Herald article on March 2 (the day after Judge McIntyre ruled), "James Sotos, an attorney for the sheriff's detectives, argued that the details about the later Outlaws investigation were not relevant." Nice try...

Gauger's attorney argued that jurors in his civil trial should have heard that it was federal authorities who were responsible for apprehension of the Outlaws' killers, not deputies of the sheriff's department.

Expect more legal action (and fees).

Adoptive Parent Webinar - Mar. 17

A special webinar presentation for those who are parenting adopted adolescents will be offered, free of charge, on March 17, 2010, at 12:00PM (noon) C.D.T.

Registration is required for this free webinar, and it can be completed online at https://cc.readytalk.com/cc/schedule/display.do?udc=7pvroc4bl63c

Presenters will be Gregory C. Keck, Ph.D. and Janelle Althen, LCSW (pictured). Dr. Keck is the author of Parenting Adopted Adolescents.

Registrants will be provided complete connection information. A "webinar" is a presentation made by computer and telephone. You watch the presentation online and listen by telephone.

The presentation is sponsored by Journey to Me, the Adoption Gathering Place. For information about Journey to Me, visit http://www.journeytome.com/

Postal service - massive deficit looming

The Associated Press reported that the Post Office plans to cut service and increase prices. The USPS expects a $7 Billion loss this year and a $233 Billion loss over the next 10 years. In just three years, according to the AP, "the number of items handled by the post office fell from 213 billion in 2006 to 177 billion last year. Volume is expected to shrink to 150 billion by 2020."

Has the USPS looked at the cost of delivering the mail? You never see in the news how much your friendly mail carrier earns. Just how much does s/he earn? And how about the window clerk? And the others "in the back"?

When I lived in Santa Fe in 1989-90, I went into a post office to purchase postal cards. The window clerk was stoned; he couldn't even count out ten postal cards in an efficient manner. I complained to the Manager and asked what that position paid. At that time, that window position paid $33,000/year. Plus benefits, of course.

I suggested she go down to 7-11 and hire away the clerk for minimum wage. She'd get a better employee and saved a lot of money! Minimum wage in 1990 was $3.80/hour; now it's $7.25/hour. That's $7,600 - $14,500 for a 2,000-hour year. OK, so pay double minimum wage.

So, who knows what the wages are for a USPS employee after 5-10-20 years? No doubt the union protects them, but ...

Contrast in meetings: Wdk. vs. Island Lake

I was amused last night at the Woodstock City Council meeting, when I contrasted the manner in which it is conducted with a meeting last week of the Village Board of Island Lake (Ill.).

When the audience in Island Lake disagreed with Mayor Debbie Herrmann's threat to call "an officer" if a Trustee kept talking, the audience broke its silence with cries of "Out of Order." And a few other choice words.

The discussion had become somewhat heated, and two-three board members were doing more talking and less listening. No one was respecting another's right to speak. (Maybe I should take my talking stick to their next meeting and offer it to them.)

There was no admonishment from the mayor for the audience to keep quiet.

And last night, at the Woodstock City Council?

The audience mostly sat there, like good little boys and girls, until one point when things got out of control at the front of the room. The audience objected and let the Council know it.

And they got hammered back into their silent mode. Wow! How easily we all cower.

The People of Woodstock are not kindergartners, to be ordered into silence. Yes, decorum is important and necessary, but the City Council chambers are not a courtroom and the mayor is not a judge.

The City Council needs to get prompt feedback when it's out of order. And the only way for it to get that prompt feedback is for the audience to object - on the spot. Ramblings like mine the next door or Letters to the Editor are insufficient.

So, people of Woodstock, don't act like bumps on a log. If you have something to say, make sure you say it.

Kick the "Louse" out?

Today's advertisement in the Northwest Herald for the law firm of Gitlin, Busche & Stetler is titled "Kick the Louse Out of the House: Orders of Protection." Are women going to offended when they are referred to as lice; errr, louses?

Is there any doubt as to whether the Gitlin firm is looking for female clients? Of course, it's their ad, so they can write it any way that they want and try to attract any clients they want.

The best advice (for a man or the party at risk of being defined as the "louse") is the possible response to the direction of a police officer for one party to leave the house. Mr. Stetler wrote, "Most people who are told to do so by the police do it, but what the police said, as a matter of law, is only a suggestion."

Let's say that the cops show up because a woman calls the police; the woman is ranting and raving, and the man is sitting calmly on the sofa. The man is being baited and verbally assaulted, but he remains calm. The kids are hiding down te hall. The highball glass is turned over on the coffee table.

There are no torn clothing, no bruises, no overturned furniture. Who are the cops going to haul away?

The cops tell you, the man, to leave. Do you have to? If you don't, will they arrest you for refusing to follow an officer's directions?

Find out ahead of time. You might call the beat officer and discuss it with him. If there is no evidence of threat or harm, ask if he can haul you away. Ask what the Department's policy is, so that you'll know what to expect if a different officer shows up.

Keep in mind that in the heat of an argument, somebody is probably going to lie the the cop. He won't know which party to believe. If things are "heated", somebody should leave, so that tempers cool down. A night in a motel is a lot cheaper than a night in jail. And leave the liquor bottle at home!

A while back one local attorney displayed open disgust to me at the advice given by Turning Point to its women clients. He thought women were coached to file for an Order of Protection too quickly, resulting in men (louses) being kicked out of their homes and being targeted with Orders of Protection.

Both parties need to be aware of their rights under the law and the risks and rewards of Orders of Protection. If you think you are going to have to get one, you should get legal advice in advance. If you think you might end up with one filed against you, you should get legal advice in advance.

No person, man or woman, should be at risk of harm. If you are, then an OP is the first step. And it's important to keep in mind that a piece of paper is not going to protect you. Make your plan ahead of any time of need; and, when you need it, follow it!

And remember. You have the right to remain silent, even before the cop tells you that you do.

Police asked to obey laws

At tonight's City Council meeting I asked the Council and the Mayor to ensure that the Police Department obeys laws while enforcing them.

At issue for me was the sting on February 18, when the Police Department supervised four minors and sent them into stores to attempt to buy tobacco products. They went to 23 stores, and in three stores the minors were successful in purchasing tobacco.

The police should be the first to obey the laws, not the last.

I also reminded the City Council that the Open Meetings Act training for the Board of Fire and Police Commissioners (BOFPC), directed by the City Attorney's May 19th letter, had not yet happened. The BOFPC has met numerous times for Special Meetings, and it has canceled its last two Regular Meetings (December and March).

The BOFPC violated the Open Meetings Act (OMA) by meeting in closed session without audio-taping the proceedings, and the City Attorney wrote a very stern letter to them. Not stern enough, I guess. Although it said he was to present OMA training at the next Regular Meeting, the BOFPC has not scheduled it. Along about November the City told me it would "try" to get them to schedule it.

I've always had a bug about the word "try". As Yoda said, "Try not; do, or do not." It's time to tell the BOFPC to schedule it!