68°FOvercastFull Forecast

Believes state’s attorney’s advice was ‘intolerable’

Published: Friday, Nov. 2, 2012 1:15 a.m. CDT

Mr. Dixon, after listening to the debate held on Oct. 22, I noted your inaccurate recollection of our conversation that took place on April 17 before the county board chairman’s public threat to charge me with a felony.

During the break in the board meeting, I walked up to the two of you, shook Mr. Seeberg’s hand, and introduced myself.

Mr. Seeberg voiced his disapproval of the recording.

I explained that it was legal, then you stated that you had to investigate the issue further, but you felt there was a potential for a felony to have been committed.

Mr. Seeberg then returned to the board meeting.

Along with a couple of family members, I took the elevator with you (not the stairs). When I referred you to the Open Meetings Act (not arguing with you), you stated that while you were sure I was a law-abiding citizen, as you knew my father, you were not in a position to offer me any legal advice.

You did not assure me you would not prosecute and did not suggest that some people might consider the recording “sneaky,” as you recalled during the debate.

That was the end of our conversation. I have had none with you since.

It was your advice to Mr. Seeberg that escalated the issue, not the newspaper, as you stated in the debate.

In my opinion, this was a classic example of bullying, intolerable even in the elementary levels of education.

National video

Reader Poll

A constitutional amendment on the Nov. 8 ballot would block Illinois from spending money collected through transportation taxes for non-transportation purposes. What do you think?
I support the amendment
I don't
Not sure
No opinion