Column: Frequently asked questions on the Crundwell case

Text Size: AaAaAaAaAa
Dateline Dixon is a weekly column discussing whatever Dixon is discussing. Emily 
Coleman has "office hours" from 1 to 2 p.m. Wednesdays at Books on First, 202 W. 
First St. Feel free to stop by to ask questions, suggest story ideas, or just chat. She 
also can be reached at ecoleman@saukvalley.com or 815-625-3600, ext. 526.
Dateline Dixon is a weekly column discussing whatever Dixon is discussing. Emily Coleman has "office hours" from 1 to 2 p.m. Wednesdays at Books on First, 202 W. First St. Feel free to stop by to ask questions, suggest story ideas, or just chat. She also can be reached at ecoleman@saukvalley.com or 815-625-3600, ext. 526.
Buy Sauk Valley Media Photos »

Q: Why is her bond so low?

A: Crundwell was released on a $4,500 recognizance bond, which means she put no money down, but will have to pay $4,500 and face detention if she violates the conditions the judge set to allow her to remain free. (For example, she can’t travel out of the general Dixon-to-Beloit area.)

Former federal prosecutor Joel Levin, who is not trying the case, told Sauk Valley Media that it’s not uncommon for a federal defendant, especially one accused of a white-collar crime, to be released on bond. A judge needs to determine whether a defendant is a flight risk or a danger to the community before making a decision on bond. A report compiled prior to Crundwelll’s bond hearing determined that she was neither.

You can find the whole story, “Expert: This case is ‘huge,’ ‘extraordinary,’” by clicking here.

Q: What’s her connection to the city’s refuse collector?

A: Rumors are swirling around Affordable Waste, which is owned by relatives of Crundwell.

While there is no way of knowing who, if anyone, the FBI is investigating, I did look into the bids for the city contract that were submitted in 2007, when Affordable beat longtime contract holder Allied Waste.

At the time, the city was considering switching to 60-gallon toters because it was getting complaints that the 35-gallon toters then in use were too small, Public Works Director Shawn Ortgiesen said.

The city took bids on 35-, 60- and 90-gallon toters.

Allied Waste would have been the low bidder if the city decided to stay with the 35-gallon toters.

Affordable Waste, though, was the low bidder for both the 60- and 90-gallon toter proposals. Its 60-gallon toter bid was about $50 a year less per resident than Allied’s, and about $80 a year per resident less than the third bidder, Moring Disposal.

When the city seeks bids, they are delivered to City Hall in sealed envelopes, which are opened all at once in council chambers, Ortgiesen said. A recommendation is then given to the council and a vote is taken. In 2007, the council voted 3-1 with Mayor Jim Burke and commissioners Roy Bridgeman, Ralph Contreras and Clark Kelly voting yes. Commissioner David Blackburn voted no because, according to meeting minutes, he didn’t think all residents should have to switch to a larger toter.

Comments

Blogs

» Out Here
Out Here

Good or bad? Depends on who you ask

Sometimes readers ask for more good news in the paper. They say we in the media only cover the bad. But one person's positive is another's negative.
» Extra! Extra! - A blog by Chris Heimerman
Extra! Extra! - A blog by Chris Heimerman

My kind of game

I would have gladly paid to take in the game I covered Saturday morning in Morrison.

Reader Poll

Memorial Day weekend heralds the arrival of summer vacation season. How much time do you plan to spend on vacation?

1 week
2 weeks
3 or more weeks
No vacation this year