The City of Newton decided that they wanted to purchase 506 S Van Buren, they also decided that they did not want to
bother with any of the pesky state statutes involved with a public body purchasing property like putting the purchase to a
vote in a public meeting and telling the citizens what they are doing. So they bypassed all of that and just had Mayor
Bolander sign a Purchase agreement to purchase the property on 8/30/17.
On 9/30/17 I filed a Open Meetings Act Violation Request for Review of the purchase with the Illinois attorney general.
The Attorney General Responded and said "further action is warranted".
The city responded on 10/31/17, only 8 business days after the deadline for a response and it is hilarious.
City Attorney Tedford explains to the Attorney General that despite the fact that a purchase contract has been signed
and paid receipt delivered that final action has not yet been taken on the purchase and in fact they are planning on taking
final action at the 11/7/17 Council meeting. This vote to purchase 506 S Van Buren at the 11/7/17 council meeting is
a total sham, the fact is that the city of Newton already owns and will continue to own the property regardless of
how the vote goes, the vote is only a lame attempt to cover their tracks.
Attorney Tedford further explained that they were "having difficulty getting the audio file transcript in a format that can be
emailed" But promises to mail it via USPS. This is in reference to the audio recordings from the closed sessions that the
attorney general requested that should of been in the hands of the Attorney general weeks ago.
I get to respond to the totally honest and full disclosure about this matter that Attorney Tedford provided the Attorney
General and will post my response 11/5/17. I received Mr.Tedfords Response to my response
on 11/8/17 and it is funnier than the first one, will post my reply to this later.
While it may or may not be a violation of the Illinois Open Meeting act the Newton Illinois City Council and or Mayor
are definitely also in violation of:
65 ILCS 5/3.1-40-40) Vote required. The passage of all ordinances for whatever purpose, and of any resolution or motion
(i) to create any liability against a city or (ii) for the expenditure or appropriation of its money shall require the
concurrence of a majority of all members then holding office on the city council, including the mayor, unless otherwise
expressly provided by this Code or any other Act governing the passage of any ordinance, resolution, or motion.