Preface
If you have followed our page since its inception in April 2016, you would know that we are non-partisan and we are driven towards accomplishing one goal: LOWER TAXES. This goal can only be accomplished with ethical government leadership and a government leadership that is willing to downsize the size and scope of government.
This page is not intended to accuse or allude to any accusations. This page is, however, intended to highlight concerning information coming out about our new administration. Featured below is public information gathered to organize what has been occurring in our Village since the new administration took office on May 1, 2017.
We're just private citizens looking for answers. We're looking to find out what is going on within our Village. Our politicians never participated in a debate, they're elusive on what their vision is for our community, and after the election on 4/4/17 our new leadership's website was taken offline. So, we really have no clue what we're in for and that has us concerned.
That's where this page comes in. We're organizing data trying to understand what this new leadership is all about and what their direction is, because to date, they have not provided any answers for us. Even citizens' questions go unanswered (or are met with vague responses) at Board and Commission meetings.
With the campaign promises that are on record, our new administration already appears to be breaking them. In fact, it looks like "politics as usual" in addition to the appearance of a more ideological grand plan with certain supporters that want major development in our community as soon as possible... with little discussion or debate with the rest of the community.
To be fair, certain board and commission members have proven that they can be independent voices among a panel of politicians that appear to have their own agenda. It's never been more important to follow what's going on in our Village (and School Districts too). Pay attention to Board and Commission meeting dates and ATTEND! Ask questions! Watch the meetings online. Support the independent voices and support the leaders who have our best interests at heart.
Residents are concerned and here's our research...
This page is not intended to accuse or allude to any accusations. This page is, however, intended to highlight concerning information coming out about our new administration. Featured below is public information gathered to organize what has been occurring in our Village since the new administration took office on May 1, 2017.
We're just private citizens looking for answers. We're looking to find out what is going on within our Village. Our politicians never participated in a debate, they're elusive on what their vision is for our community, and after the election on 4/4/17 our new leadership's website was taken offline. So, we really have no clue what we're in for and that has us concerned.
That's where this page comes in. We're organizing data trying to understand what this new leadership is all about and what their direction is, because to date, they have not provided any answers for us. Even citizens' questions go unanswered (or are met with vague responses) at Board and Commission meetings.
With the campaign promises that are on record, our new administration already appears to be breaking them. In fact, it looks like "politics as usual" in addition to the appearance of a more ideological grand plan with certain supporters that want major development in our community as soon as possible... with little discussion or debate with the rest of the community.
To be fair, certain board and commission members have proven that they can be independent voices among a panel of politicians that appear to have their own agenda. It's never been more important to follow what's going on in our Village (and School Districts too). Pay attention to Board and Commission meeting dates and ATTEND! Ask questions! Watch the meetings online. Support the independent voices and support the leaders who have our best interests at heart.
Residents are concerned and here's our research...
Quicklinks to page section:
- The administration's campaign promises
- 5/1/17: A new Trustee is appointed before the Board votes
- 5/8/17: The campaign contributor lobbyist
- 5/15/17: The Mayor's family wants special code changes
- 5/23/17: A cringeworthy Mayoral speech at the 2017 Tinley Park Business Breakfast
- 5/26/17: HUD complaint filed against the Village
- 6/7/17: Trustee Younker speaks off mic at a Public meeting
- 6/8/17: The Mayor allows police to live up to 30 miles away...
- 6/11/17: The Village is "going in a different direction" (a.k.a: you're fired)
- 6/12/17: The Village chooses union status over LOW PRICE?
- 7/11/17: Alliant/Mesirow and MADIGAN
- 7/21/17: Mayor Vandenberg and Trustee Younker don't purchase Vehicle Stickers?
- 7/26/17: The Mayor's "Traffic Cones Incident"
- 8/28/17: A NEW Political PAC named JAKE 4 MAYOR
- 9/19/17: How'd Graefen get to the top 2?
- Following the money in Board "Connections"
- Political Connections and PAY-TO-PLAY politics?
- Misconduct of elected and appointed officials
- Familiarize yourself with the Village's Code of Ethics
The "Concerned Citizens for Tinley Park" political slate said we needed to replace the "Old Guard" for a transparent government...
News articles:
|
But the "Concerned Citizens for Tinley Park" political slate appears to have their own agenda...
May 1, 2017
Apparently before the new team even took office on May 1, 2017 there was already a trustee appointed to Jacob Vandenberg's vacant trustee post? New trustee, Michael Mangin, was given a Village phone number BEFORE the new administration was sworn in and a DAY BEFORE it was voted on by the Board. A FOIA request was made inquiring about anything that the Village had with Michael Mangin's name on it to confirm if there were ANY deliberations, conversations or meetings related to this new trustee appointment and the FOIA came back with nothing... except for a document showing when Trustee Mangin got his Village phone number. For a group of people who ran on a platform against "backroom deal-making" they sure are off to a good start with the backroom deals. This is a textbook case of what a "backroom deal" looks like. Obviously this new trustee was discussed behind the scenes and no matter what citizens might have said at the Village meeting, it was apparently already decided what the board was going to do. It's quite hypocritical when you consider the platform of TRANSPARENCY that they ran on. If you notice in this FOIA, there's no original resume mentioned on page 25 and the Mayor's email address is redacted on that page, but it's shown on the first page. Perhaps it's a different email address? Maybe that's where the first version of the resume is hidden and why the Village failed to produce it on this FOIA? Is the Trustee/new Mayor using a private email address for public business? |
|
May 8, 2017
An "old guard" lobbyist was quickly replaced with a lobbyist that has ties to Jacob Vandenberg and Orland Township, where Mr. Vandenberg served as a Trustee. This new lobbyist, Frank Cortese, is also a campaign contributor to the Concerned Citizens slate... At the last Village Board Meeting our new Mayor, Jake Vandenberg, was asked why he chose the new lobbyist for the Village and his answer was just that lobbyists "are a dime a dozen." It turns out that the truth is something different. Our new lobbyist also works for Orland Township, where Jake Vandenberg was a Trustee and Brian Younker is currently the Highway Commissioner as well as a Trustee in Tinley Park... and William Brady our newly elected Trustee was an hourly employee... If you want to understand the "new direction" in Tinley Park politics you might need to familiarize yourself with the politics of Orland Township. More on this topic is provided below. Where's the TRANSPARENCY? Why didn't Mayor Vandenberg, Trustee Younker or Trustee Brady simply inform the citizens that the new board was going to use the lobbyist that they do business with at Orland Township... the lobbyist that they already have a relationship with? Why were they evasive on this? Why the obfuscation? Why the secrecy? The FOIA on Frank Cortese is provided. |
|
The vote for the lobbyist seemed out of place in last week's agenda. The last time the lobbyist was discussed citizens were left with the impression that the trustees weren't aware of what the lobbyist was doing, what the deliverables were, if it even made sense financially. To go from that uncertainty to a rushed vote on day one of the new Board looks suspicious to say the least."
How will the new Mayor's personal ties impact the Village?
May 15, 2017
144-Unit Development Planned in Tinley Park “The Residence at Brookside Glen” near 191st Street and 80th Avenue have a familiar name involved in the new development: VANDENBERG. "Petitioner Andrea Crowley of Griffin & Gallagher, LLC on behalf of Karli Mayher and DJM-Vandenberg Brookside Joint Venture are seeking a site plan approval and a special use permit at the meeting at Village Hall on Thursday." A few vocal supporters of the new Mayor and his slate said this project has been "on Paula's white board" since June 2016. That very well may be. So why didn't Trustee Vandenberg and Plan Commissioner Tim Stanton recuse themselves in June 2016? It wasn't until May 2017 when citizens began questioning the new Mayor's involvement in this development did he then recuse himself stating he had "no interest in the property or project, that includes financial or otherwise as defined by the Tinley Park Village Code or any ethics statute he's aware of"... while also stating that "certain social media sites" are "patently false" for trying to insinuate he had any involvement in his family's project. On a side note: Jacob Vandenberg became a Village Trustee starting in May 2015, and his family has had a political history with the Village dating as far back as the early 90's. The reason why Plan Commissioner Tim Stanton recused himself on 5/18/17 was reportedly due to an "indirect familial relationship with the owner of the subject property." Most community residents were actually surprised by news of a new apartment development of this magnitude and further outraged to find out that an ordinance from 1990 could drastically impact their community. The developer stated that they would not have to do a traffic study, nor would they have to address citizens concerns over school crowding because of this 1990 ordinance... which seemed to surprise both the plan commission and the residents. One resident even stated that they went to a WCDT (Will County Dept of Transportation) public hearing with Tinley Park Village officials present where the 80th Avenue bridge project was discussed... it was stated by a Tinley official that there has been "no interest" in the vacant land at the intersection of 191st and 80th Avenue for years (see the video at time 2:20:45 for this discussion). I thought when we were fighting the Buckeye project that it was pretty well accepted that Tinley Park has plenty of available rental units? Typically we would only give special use variances to a project that the community really needs. This sounds like a really dense, really tall project that is going to fill that space up with as many units as the developer can possibly fit into it. It all sounds too familiar..." |
"The Residence at Brookside Glen" discussion begins at 27:15 and the comments begin at 2:06:00. You will see a resident discuss the 80th Avenue bridge meeting from March 9th at 2:20:45.
The land that this apartment development is to be built on is owned by a Vandenberg family trust. Would a family trust include more than one individual? The developer is listed as Karli Mayher and DJM-Vandenberg Brookside Joint Venture. Does a joint venture indicate that multiple individuals are involved? Jacob Vandenberg only stated that this is his Uncle Scot Vandenberg's project.
As for Karli Mayher, her father is Jack/John Mayher of MGM Construction in Orland Park, Illinois. It has been alleged that "Mr. Mayher scammed a senior citizen out of thousands of dollars in 2009, which was a deposit on a now-failed condo development on 65th Street in Chicago. He took her deposit then went bankrupt shortly after, so I'm thinking he well knew his dire financial situation when he took her money. I would caution you to look carefully to see if he's involved in this real estate deal, as his failed condo development on 65th Street still sits abandoned, and his ethics seem questionable, at best." MGM Construction was involuntarily dissolved on 2/11/11. A Crain's Chicago Business article reported in March 2011 "A venture formed to build a lifestyle center in southwest suburban New Lenox has filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection, a move likely meant to stall a pending foreclosure case." MGM Construction has ties to many of the same politicians as Orland Township and the Concerned Citizens for Tinley Park slate. Coincidence? Scot Vandenberg has also had 2 construction companies fold? June 30, 2017: The Plan Commission recommends that the Village Board reject a special use permit for the apartment project.
The apartment building plan with 2 large structures did not advance and new plans are in development. To be continued... |
A cringeworthy speech by our New Mayor
5/23/2017:
It was reported that nobody laughed at this "opening joke" that was made at the beginning of the Tinley Park Business Breakfast on May 23, 2017. Nobody laughed because it's a "joke" regarding death and his family's business (Vandenberg's own funeral homes and a private ambulance company). It's not a great idea, Mr. Mayor, to "joke" about the aging population of Tinley Park and how it is good news for YOUR business.
If that wasn't bad enough, Mayor Jake Vandenberg made another bad "joke" about the state of our economy at this same Business Breakfast. According to Mr. Vandenberg, "our State is broke and broken and cannot do much to help the community grow... looking to Springfield for help is not a good use of our time or resources." He says that "we are pretty much on our own". If we are on our own, then why did he approve to hire a Lobbyist for our Village at the cost of $3,000.00 per month!? Mr. Vandenberg, since the State is broke, why are Tinley Taxpayers funding a lobbyist that can't help? We must mention that this Lobbyist contributed to Vandenberg's election campaign, which by definition could be considered PAY TO PLAY.
It was reported that nobody laughed at this "opening joke" that was made at the beginning of the Tinley Park Business Breakfast on May 23, 2017. Nobody laughed because it's a "joke" regarding death and his family's business (Vandenberg's own funeral homes and a private ambulance company). It's not a great idea, Mr. Mayor, to "joke" about the aging population of Tinley Park and how it is good news for YOUR business.
If that wasn't bad enough, Mayor Jake Vandenberg made another bad "joke" about the state of our economy at this same Business Breakfast. According to Mr. Vandenberg, "our State is broke and broken and cannot do much to help the community grow... looking to Springfield for help is not a good use of our time or resources." He says that "we are pretty much on our own". If we are on our own, then why did he approve to hire a Lobbyist for our Village at the cost of $3,000.00 per month!? Mr. Vandenberg, since the State is broke, why are Tinley Taxpayers funding a lobbyist that can't help? We must mention that this Lobbyist contributed to Vandenberg's election campaign, which by definition could be considered PAY TO PLAY.
More troubling LEGAL news...
5/26/17: This just in from an inside source! HUD complaint...
|
Trustee Younker is off mic at a public meeting?
6/7/2017:
This photo was sent in by a resident that appears to show Trustee Younker speaking to Trustee Berg OFF MIC at a PUBLIC meeting. Is it not required by law to have all conversation at a PUBLIC meeting recorded, ESPECIALLY all discussion by the Board?! This private comment/discussion took place at time 18:44 in the video recording of the meeting, which was at the time Trustee Glotz was making a motion to delay the vote on a new engineer. In case you missed the meeting, the engineer was approved. Possibly due to the timing of Trustee Younker's private interference during the public meeting, Trustee Berg did not second Trustee Glotz's motion to delay to vote on the new engineer. This engineer was chosen without 4 Trustees having any information on the new appointment. |
Tinley Park eliminates residency rule for police (and most municipal employees)
6/8/2017:
Regarding the Board vote that changed a long-standing police residency requirement, a June 8th Daily Southtown article states: "During contract negotiations, the union agreed to revamp the officers' health insurance coverage, with police paying higher co-pays and deductibles, which provided "a significant economic benefit to the village."... Tinley Taxpayers wants to know where the cost analysis is that shows this significant savings with "revamped health coverage"? More importantly, why wasn't the pay structure revamped now that there's a much larger pool of prospective employees?
Furthermore, the arbitrator (Martin Malin) stated "there is evidence suggesting that allowing officers to live outside the community they serve provides a measure of safety for them and their families" BUT WHAT ABOUT THE SAFETY OF TINLEY PARK FAMILIES? Doesn't a 30 mile residency radius hinder the RESPONSE TIME TO AN EMERGENCY? Public safety RELIES ON RESPONSE TIME.
Mayor Vandenberg was the deciding vote in approving non-residency. Our police officers can now live up to 30 miles away and there is a greater threat to public safety.
Who is representing Tinley Park citizens in these contract negotiations and why aren't the citizens being heard by Village leadership?
As of 9/5/17 additional Village employee residency requirements have been removed. Read more about that here.
Recently, Springfield Illinois reinstated their residency requirement for public employees for many of the same reasons residents in Tinley Park prefer the residency requirement.
Regarding the Board vote that changed a long-standing police residency requirement, a June 8th Daily Southtown article states: "During contract negotiations, the union agreed to revamp the officers' health insurance coverage, with police paying higher co-pays and deductibles, which provided "a significant economic benefit to the village."... Tinley Taxpayers wants to know where the cost analysis is that shows this significant savings with "revamped health coverage"? More importantly, why wasn't the pay structure revamped now that there's a much larger pool of prospective employees?
Furthermore, the arbitrator (Martin Malin) stated "there is evidence suggesting that allowing officers to live outside the community they serve provides a measure of safety for them and their families" BUT WHAT ABOUT THE SAFETY OF TINLEY PARK FAMILIES? Doesn't a 30 mile residency radius hinder the RESPONSE TIME TO AN EMERGENCY? Public safety RELIES ON RESPONSE TIME.
Mayor Vandenberg was the deciding vote in approving non-residency. Our police officers can now live up to 30 miles away and there is a greater threat to public safety.
Who is representing Tinley Park citizens in these contract negotiations and why aren't the citizens being heard by Village leadership?
As of 9/5/17 additional Village employee residency requirements have been removed. Read more about that here.
Recently, Springfield Illinois reinstated their residency requirement for public employees for many of the same reasons residents in Tinley Park prefer the residency requirement.
Select Plan Commissioners: "The Board is going in a different direction"
6/11/2017:
We hope ALL RESIDENTS are paying attention to this. Quite a bold, self-serving move here by our new Mayor. A resident's take on this: "What is the different direction they are referencing? More housing and more pocket lining? What's next - the ambulance contract or the garbage company? It's not enough that he has stacked the board, all committees and commissions should be hand picked by our new regime. Will he be dismissing Village staff next that dared to support his opposition?" The Daily Southtown news wrote about this bizarre occurrence! The article mentioned that the Village Board accepted resumes for plan commissioner positions? Did anybody get a memo that our Village board was accepting resumes for a plan commissioner position? Didn't think so. Apparently they've been planning to replace certain commissioners and have already picked replacements! Wonder who sent in resumes? A second Southtown/Tribune article about the issue stated "It doesn't look good when critics are dismissed from public service, especially when Vandenberg said on election night he would welcome dissenting opinions." That's correct... but we're also not exactly sure what specifically these specific plan commissioners did (or did not do) to get this letter from the Mayor. This new administration doesn't seem to have much diversity in thought nor do they seem willing to listen to and fairly represent all constituents. |
The Village chooses union status over LOW PRICE when spending tax dollars?
6/12/2017:
Isn't PRICE the typical determining factor when it comes to government bids? Isn't the LOWEST PRICE what's most important and in the best interest of taxpayers? Ah, but there's more to the story. Who is this new vendor you ask? It's KEVRON Printing. The politicians' printshop of course. Who uses Kevron Printing? Besides the Concerned Citizens for Tinley Park slate spending $86,000 with Kevron in political mailings over the years, you'll also find this shop printing political materials for Michael E Hastings ($108,000), Friend's of Paul O'Grady ($15,000), and at Mayor Vandenberg's direction Kevron even replaced a Village printer (cost: TBD). Kevron receives hundreds of thousands in work from political campaigns (and now Village work too), but you'll find NO contributions from the company or the owners (Jim Karls, Ronald Longanecker, Kevin Domenick). Nobody funnels that much money to one business without quid pro quo. The only option that makes sense is straight up kickbacks... |
Mayor Vandenberg and Trustee Younker... where are your vehicle stickers?
7/21/2017:
Vehicle stickers purchased after June 30th are late and incur a late fee. There's a 1 month moratorium on citations after June 30th. Police citations begin August 1. Who believes they're above the law? Our Mayor and Trustee Younker do! |
|
Alliant/Mesirow and MADIGAN...
7/11/2017:
On Page 266 of this agenda from the Special Meeting of the Village Board on 7/11/17 you will find a comparison of 3 health insurance brokers. There is no indication how these 3 brokerage firms were chosen as top-3 contenders out of the 10 bids submitted, but the top 3 brokerage firms were: Alliant/Mesirow, The Horton Group and Arthur J. Gallagher. Both Alliant/Mesirow and The Horton Group offered a monthly cost of $3,500 and Gallagher's cost was $3,175 (approximately 10% savings).
So what's the deal with Alliant/Mesirow? POLITICAL CONNECTIONS. The Tribune wrote about Alliant/Mesirow: MADIGAN'S SON'S employer rakes in suburbs' insurance business. "In the last two years, Mesirow has won new government business tied to Andrew Madigan in more than a half-dozen suburbs, according to public records and Tribune interviews. In at least three towns where Mesirow won business — Chicago Heights, McCook and Bridgeview — the speaker did favors for the mayors around the same time the suburbs hired the firm." Can they add Tinley Park to that list?
September 2017 update: It's been rumored that "Alliant/Mesirow will be going after the property and casualty next, and then the Irma contract. Andrew Madigan, son of Michael Madigan, would be the point man for the Irma contract. And remember, Niemeyer said he wants the Irma to be a long term not yearly... and we know what this means." Keep an eye on Alliant/Mesirow.
On Page 266 of this agenda from the Special Meeting of the Village Board on 7/11/17 you will find a comparison of 3 health insurance brokers. There is no indication how these 3 brokerage firms were chosen as top-3 contenders out of the 10 bids submitted, but the top 3 brokerage firms were: Alliant/Mesirow, The Horton Group and Arthur J. Gallagher. Both Alliant/Mesirow and The Horton Group offered a monthly cost of $3,500 and Gallagher's cost was $3,175 (approximately 10% savings).
- Minutes from the 7/11/17 meeting is attached here.
- The RFQ for Insurance Brokerage Services is attached here.
- The signed contract with Alliant/Mesirow from 7/14/17 is attached here. Why is the address and contact info on this cover letter blank?
So what's the deal with Alliant/Mesirow? POLITICAL CONNECTIONS. The Tribune wrote about Alliant/Mesirow: MADIGAN'S SON'S employer rakes in suburbs' insurance business. "In the last two years, Mesirow has won new government business tied to Andrew Madigan in more than a half-dozen suburbs, according to public records and Tribune interviews. In at least three towns where Mesirow won business — Chicago Heights, McCook and Bridgeview — the speaker did favors for the mayors around the same time the suburbs hired the firm." Can they add Tinley Park to that list?
September 2017 update: It's been rumored that "Alliant/Mesirow will be going after the property and casualty next, and then the Irma contract. Andrew Madigan, son of Michael Madigan, would be the point man for the Irma contract. And remember, Niemeyer said he wants the Irma to be a long term not yearly... and we know what this means." Keep an eye on Alliant/Mesirow.
The Mayor's "Traffic Cone Incident"
7/26/2017:
'Mayor coming through': Tinley mayor moved cones for party bus after McCartney concert, records show. - Mike Nolan, Daily Southown Another article reads: Tinley Park Mayor Jacob Vandenberg has an alcohol induced Hissy Fit After Paul McCartney Concert. It is reported that the Mayor moved traffic cones at FOUR different intersections that night. "No mere “private citizen” could have gotten away with stopping traffic, moving cones, and heading down a barricaded roadway with no police consequences. In our opinion, the officers should not have complied with his demands." Oh... and it has been confirmed that Trustee Brian Younker was with the Mayor on this night, and the Village ATTORNEY was also pictured on the party bus with the Mayor. The news was even picked up by National Media outlets: The Washington Times U.S. News |
These FOIA documents were obtained by Tribune reporter Mike Nolan:
Soon-after details about this "traffic cones" incident became public, an Ethics Complaint was Filed Against Tinley Park Mayor Jacob Vandenberg. "As an update to an earlier report on Tinley Park Mayor Jacob Vandenberg’s alcohol-fuelled public spectacle after the July 26th, 2017 Paul McCartney concert, a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request has now produced an ethics complaint filed against the Mayor on August 11th, 2017. The complaint asks for the removal of Mayor Vandenberg from office and cites Village Municipal Code 39 as authority." Copied from a citizen's post: "With great sadness and disappointment, I am posting this foia that was published today on the village website. The sadness and fallout from the Mayor's actions on the night of July 26, for the Paul McCartney concert, is continuing to display a young man with no respect for our citizens of this great village. At the August 15th village board meeting, resident Michael Stuckly, asked Trustee Younker at the 1:07:28 mark, if he was on Mayor Vandenberg's party bus. He stated yes, and that it was not village business. Freedom of information request will show that not to be true. On the night of the same meeting, Mayor Vandenberg was asked by the same resident several questions. Mayor stated it was not village business at 1:08:17 mark of him being at the concert. On August 8th at the committee of the whole, Mayor Vandenberg stated it was a private event with family and friends at the 2:16:45 mark, which this foia request will show not to be true, once again. Then, at the 2:18:22 mark, Mayor Vandenberg said that he contacted the officers involved, again doesn't seem to be true, according to the foia. The truth according to the foia, shows everything that they have said is completely false and we have been sold a bad bag of goods again by the young kid. There is not only email after email from the Mayor to live nation, but emails that were withheld in previous foia requests by residents. Vandenberg not only wrote a letter on village stationery, stating from the desk of the mayor but represented and presented themselves as the Mayor, Trustee Younker and Assistant to the mayor to get inside the inner circle to meet Sir Paul. If this isn't abuse of power, I don't know what is!! We, the people, have had the wool pulled over our eyes once again by "Jake The Mistake"." Redacting the Mayor's cell phone number from this FOIA is a problem because it's listed on Village correspondence and it's apparently being used for Village business. There's good reason to be concerned about the Village and possibly even the Police Department concealing information about this "party bus incident". If we can't rely on FOIA and public bodies releasing requested records, we have a much larger problem here. There's not much "transparency" in the Village government. There have been a lot of issues showing up in FOIA responses. Another recent FOIA request has asked for all phone records showing when Jake Vandenberg called and "apologized" to the police officers involved. The FOIA response provided nothing. No phone records, no memos, nothing. The question is, are there phone calls and discussions taking place that are being hidden from the public? It appears this way. What's being discussed that they don't want us to know? |
|
There's no record Mr. Mayor...
A doctored FOIA video too?As if things couldn't get worse, video is obtained through FOIA that shows the Mayor walking in and out of the police station on the early morning after the Paul McCartney concert. Strangely, the video appears to be altered by the Police Department and/or the Vilage. This is a good analysis of the FOIA video of the Mayor walking in and out of the police station after the "party bus incident". Did the P.D. or Village doctor the FOIA video to conceal certain information? Security footage time is missing. Is there no footage from inside the building to give answers? This is bizarre. Citizens deserve answers from the Mayor and Police Department.
This security video you see here is from the early morning of 7-27-17 after the "party bus incident" on the evening of 7-26-17. See our Mayor stroll in at video time 2:25 (1:10 am) and stroll back out at 2:44 (1:11 am). |
New PAC: "Jake 4 Mayor" just established
8/28/2017:
Funds have been depleted from the Concerned Citizens for Tinley Park committee and there's a NEW campaign fund that was just founded on 8/28/17 called JAKE 4 MAYOR to support Jacob Vandenberg for Public Office. Interesting... |
How'd Graefen get to the top 2?
9/19/17 (see latest developments at the bottom):
At a Special Joint Public Works and Public Safety Committee meeting on 8/29/17 the construction management of a fire station was once again discussed, after being tabled on 8/8 (See 51:35 for the 8/8/17 vote). After reviewing the agenda and proposals, you may see why it was tabled. For instance, why would they recommend a firm that scored #8 out of 8? Click here to review the agenda. |
Also, according to section 7.2 item 3 of the Purchasing Policy, Graefen did NOT provide a certificate of insurance, while the other "finalist" firms have their certificates clearly listed in their proposals. So again, how did Graefen get recommended if not considered a "responsible bidder" according to the VOTP Purchasing Policy? Click here to review the full purchasing policy from the Village website.
|
Additional information has been shared with us regarding the Graefen Development connections to Trustee Brian Younker, and Paul O'Grady (Orland Township Supervisor and Village Attorney) who is also Trustee Bill Brady's boss. Also note, Paul O'Grady and our Village Attorney Patrick Connelly are partners in law firm Peterson, Johnson and Murray. All of this and Trustee Younker did not recuse himself from the vote to approve Graefen at the Committee of the Whole meeting on 8/8? Since Paul O'Grady is Bill Brady's boss, and Paul O'Grady recommended Graefen, why did Bill Brady also not recuse himself from this disussion?
The images below show these conflicts...
The images below show these conflicts...
9/19/17:
At the Special Joint Meeting of the Public Works Committee and Public Safety Committee on 9/19 the discussion on a fire station construction management company was continued. The agenda for the 9/19 meeting is attached here.
Trustee Glotz highlighted important information, such as Graefen adding costs on the back-end. While Graefen appears to offer a lower bid, they did not include front-end costs like the other finalist (and top rated firm) Wegman. Trustee Glotz asked to remove the general requirements from the cost comparisons, which then shows Wegman having the lower bid. A great question asked by Mr. Glotz was "How did Graefen get added to this list?". Village Manager, Dave Niemeyer, danced around the subject and mentioned Steve Tilton (who moved to Texas), but then he says YOUNKER... who has since recused himself from the discussion and vote! Graefen was not one of the original 6 firms ranked in step 1 of the RFQ process, and according to the RFQ process one of the original 6 firms should have been selected.
A Wegman representative spoke at this meeting and highlighted the importance of hiring a firm with fire station construction experience. Having experience saves time and costs, since the firm knows what typical issues come up with these types of unique buildings. Village Manager David Niemeyer then asked the Wegman rep (this is a summarized version): "How does a firm gain this experience? It has to start somewhere." Was our Village Manager defending a firm without experience in fire station construction (Graefen)? WHY?
At video time 27:45 Michael Glotz makes a motion to approve Wegman and then Bill Brady immediately makes a motion to have the staff go over the numbers again... Brady even asks for another Trustee to help the committee and asks Michael Mangin to work with the staff. Mangin is not part of the Committee... so how could he take part in this, and why did Brady ask for Trustee Mangin? What a bizarre display.
During public comments, a resident spoke and asked why Bill Brady did not recuse himself from the fire station construction discussions because his boss, Paul O'Grady with Orland Township, recommended Graefen. At a previous meeting Brian Younker recused himself because he was listed as a reference on the Graefen bid. Both scenarios appear to be a conflict.
At the Special Joint Meeting of the Public Works Committee and Public Safety Committee on 9/19 the discussion on a fire station construction management company was continued. The agenda for the 9/19 meeting is attached here.
Trustee Glotz highlighted important information, such as Graefen adding costs on the back-end. While Graefen appears to offer a lower bid, they did not include front-end costs like the other finalist (and top rated firm) Wegman. Trustee Glotz asked to remove the general requirements from the cost comparisons, which then shows Wegman having the lower bid. A great question asked by Mr. Glotz was "How did Graefen get added to this list?". Village Manager, Dave Niemeyer, danced around the subject and mentioned Steve Tilton (who moved to Texas), but then he says YOUNKER... who has since recused himself from the discussion and vote! Graefen was not one of the original 6 firms ranked in step 1 of the RFQ process, and according to the RFQ process one of the original 6 firms should have been selected.
A Wegman representative spoke at this meeting and highlighted the importance of hiring a firm with fire station construction experience. Having experience saves time and costs, since the firm knows what typical issues come up with these types of unique buildings. Village Manager David Niemeyer then asked the Wegman rep (this is a summarized version): "How does a firm gain this experience? It has to start somewhere." Was our Village Manager defending a firm without experience in fire station construction (Graefen)? WHY?
At video time 27:45 Michael Glotz makes a motion to approve Wegman and then Bill Brady immediately makes a motion to have the staff go over the numbers again... Brady even asks for another Trustee to help the committee and asks Michael Mangin to work with the staff. Mangin is not part of the Committee... so how could he take part in this, and why did Brady ask for Trustee Mangin? What a bizarre display.
During public comments, a resident spoke and asked why Bill Brady did not recuse himself from the fire station construction discussions because his boss, Paul O'Grady with Orland Township, recommended Graefen. At a previous meeting Brian Younker recused himself because he was listed as a reference on the Graefen bid. Both scenarios appear to be a conflict.
10/03/17:
The Village Board votes on the construction management firm without having a recommendation by the committee (as seen above). Before the board vote there is some odd behavior, especially from the Mayor (who seemed concerned about the contract going to Graefen). Spoiler: After a lot of discussion, the majority vote goes to WEGMAN!
To the trustees that act like they aren't aware of what's being discussed at a meeting before a vote: DO YOUR HOMEWORK. Either attend committee meetings or watch the youtube video of meetings to stay informed. Read your packet.
The Village Board votes on the construction management firm without having a recommendation by the committee (as seen above). Before the board vote there is some odd behavior, especially from the Mayor (who seemed concerned about the contract going to Graefen). Spoiler: After a lot of discussion, the majority vote goes to WEGMAN!
To the trustees that act like they aren't aware of what's being discussed at a meeting before a vote: DO YOUR HOMEWORK. Either attend committee meetings or watch the youtube video of meetings to stay informed. Read your packet.
Following the money in Board "Connections"
Political ties and PAY-TO-PLAY politics?
The Vandenberg family has political ties in Tinley Park that go back decades. There have been Vandenberg family members that have ran for local office, held public office in Tinley Park, and donated to our longest serving Mayor and his team in local elections. Just politics as usual.
What is unusual about this is Jake Vandenberg and the Concerned Citizens for Tinley Park slate billing themselves as something new, when it doesn't appear very new when you follow the campaign money. |
Jake Vandenberg said during his campaigning: “If there is one thing that has been made clear to me during my time as Trustee, it’s that residents of Tinley Park want to be involved in their government and are frustrated that only and handful of insiders have controlled Tinley Park for decades... Our campaign will be about bringing people together and adding more residents who want to be a part of Tinley Park’s next great chapter.”
Donors to the CCTP political slate include: Citizens for Michael Hastings (Orland Township connection), Robert Sanfillipo (Orland Township connection), Frank Cortese (lobbyist and Orland Township connection), Robinson Engineering, LTD (Zabrocki connection), South Street Development LLC (prospective developer), Klein Thorpe and Jenkins LTD (Village attorneys), and even Scot Vandenberg (Trace Ambulance, Brookside Apartments).
A list of quite a few more interesting connections have been discovered. Take a browse:
Donors to the CCTP political slate include: Citizens for Michael Hastings (Orland Township connection), Robert Sanfillipo (Orland Township connection), Frank Cortese (lobbyist and Orland Township connection), Robinson Engineering, LTD (Zabrocki connection), South Street Development LLC (prospective developer), Klein Thorpe and Jenkins LTD (Village attorneys), and even Scot Vandenberg (Trace Ambulance, Brookside Apartments).
A list of quite a few more interesting connections have been discovered. Take a browse:
Why is unethical conduct of public officials not being addressed?
Have you been harassed by a public official or one of their supporters? Let us know.
This is NOT acceptable behavior. Our PUBLIC SERVANTS are behaving poorly both on-record and off-record and it's harming the reputation of our great community. This behavior is unethical, it's wrong and it must end. We will highlight egregious behavior in an effort to stop it. |
Familiarize yourself with the Village's Code of Ethics
Contribute:
Post Guidelines: Tinley Taxpayers welcome all Tinley Park residents and businesses to contribute data, research and information to assist in the movement to have property taxes reduced through lower Village and School spending. Content posted on this page is expected to adhere to the conduct guidelines. Content that violates these guidelines is not tolerated.
Page Links:
Home Page
Property Taxes
Village of Tinley Park Data
Stop Taxpayer-funded Developments
Tinley Park Schools Data
The Reserve
Salary Graphs
Legislators
Govt. Transparency
How did we get here?
How can we fix this?
Imagine If
Who we are
TIP LINE
Taxpayer Greivances
Collaborate
Open Forum
Sources
Downloads
FAQ's
Home Page
Property Taxes
Village of Tinley Park Data
Stop Taxpayer-funded Developments
Tinley Park Schools Data
The Reserve
Salary Graphs
Legislators
Govt. Transparency
How did we get here?
How can we fix this?
Imagine If
Who we are
TIP LINE
Taxpayer Greivances
Collaborate
Open Forum
Sources
Downloads
FAQ's