Friday, December 5, 2014

Former Boone circuit clerk deputy pleads guilty to felony theft - News - Rockford Register Star - Rockford, IL

 

BELVIDERE — Former Boone County Circuit Clerk deputy Donna Osoria pled guilty to a felony theft charge on Thursday afternoon.
Osoria, 58, stole around $24,000 from the clerk’s office between March 15, 2010, and June 22, 2012. She declined to comment on her decision to plead guilty.
Osoria was no longer working for the office when she was arrested for theft and official misconduct charges in October 2012.
The theft charge is a Class 1 felony punishable by four to 15 years in prison. Official misconduct is a Class 3 felony punishable by two to five years in prison.
The state dropped the official misconduct charge on Thursday.
Osoria will be sentenced on Jan. 29, 2015

Click on the following for more details:  Former Boone circuit clerk deputy pleads guilty to felony theft - News - Rockford Register Star - Rockford, IL

Returning to the Present

image
By James Middleton

 
Monday December 1, 2014 was a day when the
swearing-in newly elected officials in Boone County
occurred. In addition, members of the County Board
selected their leaders for the new Board. The ceremonies
began early on Monday at the Boone County Courthouse
where the returning county clerk, county treasurer and
the assistant treasurer were swore-in to serve. Perhaps
the most newsworthy event Monday morning was the
investiture of the new Boone County Sheriff, David Ernest.
Sheriff Ernest is the first new Sheriff to serve the county in
36 years.
Monday night, the action moved to the Boone County
Administrative Center on Logan Avenue for the searingin
of seven newly elected County representatives. Two
of those sworn-in were returning representatives that had
been reelected while the other five were newly elected to
serve in the county.
Those representatives that were returning included Ken
Freeman (District #3) who will serve a two-year term and
Karl Johnson (District #2) who was elected to serve a fouryear
term. Those that were newly elected to the County
Board included Sherry Branson (District #3), Brad Stark
(District #3), Sherry Giesecke (District #1), Raymond
Larson (District 2) and Jeffrey Carlisle (District #2).
The Boone County clerk, Mary Steurer served as the
chairman of the meeting as the representative that had been
the chairman was no longer serving in that capacity as a new
chairman would be chosen. She opened the meeting and
managed the agenda through the swearing-in ceremony.
After the newly elected representatives were sworn-in,
Ms. Steurer presided over the approval of the agenda and
then moved to asking for nominations for chairman of the
County Board.
With that, representative Karl Johnson nominated Bob
Walberg (District #1) the former chairman to be reelected.
Ken Freeman then moved to nominate Craig Schultz
(District #3) to be chosen as chairman. The nominations
were then closed as no other nominations arose.
In a roll-call vote, Mr. Walberg was reelected to serve as
chairman of the County Board. The vote was 9 members
favoring Mr. Walberg and 3 members that were opposed.
Mr. Walberg was elected to serve another term.
The next item on the agenda was for the County Board
to select a vice chairman of the County Board. One
representative was nominated and that was Paul Larson
(District #2) with no other nominees that followed. In a
roll-call vote Mr, Larson was unanimously elected to serve
as vice chairman of the County Board.
The county administrator, Ken Terrinoni then took the
floor to enumerate how the county committee meetings
would run for December. In that the chairman and vice
chairman had just been selected and the roster of members

on the various county committees had not been set, the

December meetings were delayed one week.
The meetings will move forward through December
as follows: the administrative and legislative meeting
will occur on December 8 followed by the Public
Safety committee. On December 9, Roads and Capital
Improvements will be held followed by the finance and
employment committee. On December 10, the building,
planning and zoning committee will occur followed by the
city and county coordinating meeting. The final county
committee meeting, health and human services, will be
held on December 11.
At the conclusion of the meeting dates, Mr. Terrinoni
added, “In January we will go back to our normal schedule
of committee meetings.”
Mr. Larson then announced, “For all of the new
members, the December 11 meeting of the roads and
capital improvements committee will be very important
if we are to get bids for construction of the new animal
control shelter building before the end of the year.” He
said that time was growing short and the previous County
Board had wanted to begin the process before the end of
2014.
“We are planning,” Mr. Larson continued, “a new
building that would be on the highway department property
near the Maple Crest facilities. We expect to use an existing
well and we plan to attach to the city sewer line that is used
by Maple Crest. We need to be aware of some inspections
that had trouble with in the jail construction and we need
to correct some errors that we found in the construction
project for the Administrative Center, this very building.”
Mr. Larson emphasized that the new County Board must
make these decisions to reach that end of 2014 goal to
begin the process.
In the November General Elections, Boone County
voters approved to allow the Boone County Board to incur
debt to the extent of $800,000 to construct a new animal
control shelter. Pressure has been applied by some current
and former members of the County Board and some
residents that live within and outside the county have also
applied pressure to build a new shelter.
Mr. Larson concluded by emphasizing what the new
County Board must do on that matter and the meeting was
adjourned.
Mr. Walberg made only one comment following the
meeting regarding his reelection as the chairman of the
County Board. He said that one area he wants to emphasize
for county consideration in 2015 is to expand and enhance
economic development in the county. One element that
was emphasized that the county needs during the Fiscal
Year 2015 budget negotiations was how the county needs to
obtain more revenue from sales tax collections. Expansion
of sales tax collection by obtaining greater retail economic
development opportunities could be one area of interest for
the newly elected County Board chairman in 2015.

County Seeks Injunctive Relief

By James Middleton Since 2005, Plote Construction, Inc. has been involved in one form of litigation or another with Boone County. This is not to say that legal matters have occupied a significant allotment of legislative and judicial time. But, it is to say that Plote Construction came to Boone County with a goal that they obtained and their involvement with the county has required ongoing management by the Boone County Board and the Boone County state’s attorney Michelle Courier. Of late, a lawsuit was filed by Ms. Courier on behalf of Boone County seeking a temporary restraining order to require Plote to comply with the elements of their contract and the elements of the special use permit. On November 24, the honorable Judge C. Robert Tobin III handed down a written decision in the matter of County of Boone v. Plote Construction, Inc. et al. Judge Tobin’s decision denied a defense motion for dismissal of the lawsuit and he granted a temporary restraining order over Plote because of their violation of a contract with the county. The dispute that led to the lawsuit resulted from Plote allegedly operating their gravel extraction operation in rural Flora Township after the hours of operation that they had previously agreed. Judge Tobin’s written decision also denied Plote’s request that they should have extended hours of operation because Quality Aggregates enjoys extended hours of operation as part of an agreement with Boone County. Ms. Courier reasoned that the environment where Quality Aggregate operates is very different than the site operated by Plote. The extended hours request relates to a position advanced by Plote that is called “Most Favored Nation” (MFN) status that they believed should be granted to them to operate in a similar manner as does Quality Aggregate. The MFN status was included in the original agreement between Plote and Boone County in 2005 but after the special use zoning was granted to Plote to continue their operation and when a new contract was written, the MFN reference was not included. Judge Tobin opened his Opinion by recounting the history of the involvement between Plote and Boone County. The involvement dates back to 2005 when Plote filed a lawsuit naming Boone County and alleging that zoning changes made to the county zoning code were unconstitutional. The result of the lawsuit was for the then Boone County state’s attorney, James Hursh, to negotiate a settlement to the lawsuit. Plote wanted to reopen property that they held in rural Flora Township as a quarry. The essence of the settlement between the parties, according to Judge Tobin’s analysis, “They reached a settlement agreement that, in general terms, bound the County to issue a special use permit to Defendant’s for the use of the property as a quarry.” The county could impose their ordinances to govern the special use that would be extended for a five-year term and to allow for a renewal process. The initial agreement and special use process was approved by the Boone County Board and that agreement included the MFN language that allowed Plote to operate the quarry on days and at times comparable to the agreement with Quality Aggregate. During the contract renewal process, Plote sought to retain the MFN provision and this matter was debated at the County Board level. However, the MFN reference was not included in the new agreement and, instead, the County imposed specific hours and days of operation. What resulted were a number of resident complaints from those that reside in close proximity to the quarry indicating that Plote was operating in violation of the renewed agreement. On August 12, 2014, the Boone County senior building inspector, Drew Bliss, found that Plote was operating outside the parameters of the revised agreement. Plote had never applied for modification of the terms of the revised agreement. Judge Tobin also wrote, “Therefore, on August 12, 2014, Defendant’s were operating their quarry outside the hours of operation allowed for under their special use permit but within the

extended hours established in Quality Aggregates’ special
use permit.” Plote was operating their quarry as if the
MFN language remained within the revised agreement.
Judge Tobin also provided his analysis to support denial
of the motion by Plote to dismiss the lawsuit. He cited
the Illinois Code that details what a motion to dismiss is
designed to accomplish. “The primary purpose of a Section
2-619 motion is to provide a means to dispose of issues of
law or easily proved issues of fact. However, if it cannot
be determined with reasonable certainty that the alleged
defense exists the motion should not be allowed.” Judge
Tobin posed a number of questions within the context of a
motion to dismiss and concluded that the questions cannot
be answered. He wrote, “Based upon evidence unknown
to the Court, it is possible Defendants can assert a cause of
action; likewise, it is equally possible (again, based upon
evidence unknown to the Court) Plaintiff could have a
defense. Because of this uncertainty, the motion to dismiss
by Plote was denied.
Judge Tobin then engaged in an extended discussion of
the County’s motion seeking a temporary restraining order.
The purpose the county sought was for the judge to restrain
the activity of Plote and require them to limit their hours
and days of operation according to the previous agreement
and not according to the hours and days of operation
granted to Quality Aggregates.
Ms. Courier clarified, “Plote wants to be compared to
Quality Aggregates and their situation is very different from
Plote.” She explained that the environment where Quality
Aggregates operates is not adjacent to or near residential
areas that have been in existence for many years. The site
where the Plote quarry is located has residences that are
directly adjacent to where the blasting and rock removal
process is occurring.
Judge Tobin concluded his analysis of how and when
a restraining order may be granted and explained how
court approved tests were not successfully argued by the
Defendant to avoid imposition of the restraining order.
Judge Tobin wrote, “The Plaintiff alleges that an ordinance
was passed that controlled the hours of operation of the
Defendant’s quarry. There is a presumption that the
ordinance is valid. The Plaintiff submitted an affidavit
asserting Defendants have operated their business outside
the hours of operation allowed in the ordinance and special
use permit. Defendant does not deny such operation
occurred. The County Code grants Plaintiff the authority
to seek injunctive relief.” The judge asserted in that the
merits of a cause of action seeking a permanent injunction
would likely succeed and for that reason, the temporary
restraining order was granted.
It should be noted that the temporary restraining order
bars Plote from continuing their quarrying operations
outside the hours and days of operation specified in the
ordinance that guides that activity or in the special use
permit.
Ms. Courier said that another status hearing is scheduled
in Judge Tobin’s Court on January 15 when her office will
continue to pursue a permanent injunction. If successful,
the goal of the lawsuit would bar Plote from operating their
quarry in abrogation of the parameters of the ordinance and
the special use permit.

ZBA Hearing Officer Denied at Meeting

image

ZBA Hearing Officer
Denied at Meeting

By Ronnie Thompson
Though the Boone County Board approved an
amendment allowing for the construction of Wind Energy
Conversion Systems (WECS), the fallout of that decision
is still coming to seed in the public arena. One of the
issues to come out of the decision asks how to handle
future meetings where wind energy could cause contention
amongst the citizens of Boone County. Most recently, the
possible appointment of a Zoning Hearing Officer (ZHO)
has sparked debate.
During the November 25th meeting of the Zoning
Board of Appeals (ZBA), the Board voted against a text
amendment that would establish the ZHO to preside over
future wind energy hearings. Both sides of the wind energy
issue were present to make their case.
Tuesday’s debate was of a similar nature as the WECS
debates of the past, and it carried with it the shadows of
past divisions and emotions on both sides. It was debated
as a question between county residents losing a voice
against what county resident Deb Doetch called “running
a tighter ship” during the proceedings regarding the wind
energy issue.
In a line of questioning directed at the Board, county
resident Julie Newhouse raised concerns that hiring an
outside lawyer to control meetings could take away the
voice of the people. In her official testimony she asked the
Board if “the citizens of Boone County want to be heard by
five independent peers…or would the citizens want to be
heard by those who could care less about Boone County...”
ZBA associate planner Gina DelRose was present and
acting as representative of the amendment, defended the
item by claiming that “a hearing officer out of county
would be less likely to have an issue with bias.” She also
said that it can be hard for those on the Board to tell their
neighbors when the evidence they are presenting is either
irrelevant or inadmissible.
According to the text amendment, the ZHO would be
strictly in place to regulate the legal aspects of the meeting
– such as the giving of evidence or sworn testimony before
the board. Boone County state’s attorney Michelle Courier
added that “nothing will change, you will still be making
the final decision…it is just making it more efficient.”
One ZBA member, Joan Krumm, called the amendment
“the nastiest thing to happen to this Board.” She also
indicated that she was insulted at the insinuation that the
ZBA cannot run its meetings.
When asked why they thought the Board needed the
ZHO to control the hearings, Gina cited the many occasions
when members of the audience had spoken out of turn,
interrupted testimony, and boo’d speakers when they gave
evidence.
Though Joan said she remembered no booing or
outbursts, Deb Doetch corroborated the history, saying
that she “got boo’d, yelled at, and had fists shaken at her”
during her previous testimony. She also expressed her
feeling that the Board’s hearing of evidence was biased
during the WECS meetings.
In their final vote, the Board was unanimous in voting
not to recommend the text amendment. ZBA member
Brain VanLaar said, while he “was impressed” with how
meetings in Lee County ran with a ZHO, the Board “can
have order without a hearing officer.” Tony Sorvino,
chairman of the ZBA, admitted that the Board has room
for improvement in how it handles hearings, but he did not
think a ZHO was necessary.
Tuesday’s vote will not be the end of the issue, as the

question still must move through the Boone County Board
planning, zoning and building committee to finally be
voted on by the full County Board in the months to come