Shelby Co. (ECWd) –
This is Part VI of the exposure of misrepresentations and misinformation provided by Shelby County State’s Attorney Nichole Kronke during her oral testimony in support of legislation affecting every county in the state. We urge everyone to read Part I at this link, Part II at this link, Part III at this link, Part IV at this link. and Part V at this link.
- “So the Attorney General is saying had they added the proper language, then it is within the realm of the Constitution to lease the land to a private entity.”
We challenge everyone to read what the Attorney General’s office wrote in their letter at this link and find the language Kronke claims the AG is saying.
The fact of the matter, as covered in Part V of this series, Kronke omitted the most important word in the letter she quoted from and continues with the misrepresentation by applying her opinion that the AG was saying something while omitting key facts.
The reason her words are such misrepresentations is that the narrative she is creating is inconsistent with what the AG actually wrote.
“We note that the General Assembly is vested with broad discretion in determining whether a particular enactment serves a public purpose within the meaning of article VIII, section l(a), of the Illinois Constitution. Accordingly, when the General Assembly expressly authorizes a county to lease county property to a private entity, there is a presumption that a proper public purpose exists.”
People need to go no further than the language found in the AG Opinion issued to this same county on a similar issue in 2006. One paragraph in particular almost mirrors key portions of the letter Kronke claimed to be quoting from.
“This court has long recognized that what is for the public good and what are public purposes are questions which the legislature must in the first instance decide. [ Citations.] In making this determination, the legislature is vested with a broad discretion, and the judgment of the legislature is to be accepted in the absence of a clear showing that the purported public purpose is but an evasion and that the purpose is, in fact, private. [Citations.]”(AG Opinion issued to Shelby County in 2006)
What Kronke is doing is leaving out the very key points and language that hurts her position. Had she read the last part of the paragraph above from the 2006 opinion the legislature might have asked her why she is wasting their time on this.
What she wants the world to believe:
‘It is long recognized that what is for the public good and what are public purposes are questions which the legislature must in the first instance decide. In making this determination, the legislature is vested with a broad discretion, and the judgment of the legislature is to be accepted.’
The truth of the matter is there is more to the law than just what she wants the world to believe and it’s summed up in the last part of the paragraph written in the 2006 AG opinion in bold below.
“It is long recognized that what is for the public good and what are public purposes are questions which the legislature must in the first instance decide. In making this determination, the legislature is vested with a broad discretion, and the judgment of the legislature is to be accepted in the absence of a clear showing that the purported public purpose is but an evasion and that the purpose is, in fact, private. [Citations.]”(AG Opinion issued to Shelby County in 2006)“
There is no absence of a clear showing that the purported public purpose, making money, is but an evasion and the purpose is, in fact, private.
If this legislation ever gets passed and signed into law the County is going to be facing an uphill battle in court as there are numerous people ready to take legal action to force the county to follow the law.
Prissy DruthersPosted at 11:04h, 16 March
Part IV… At some point, this series comes across as less educational/news and either 1) more emblematic of an inability by the author to synthesize data and report it in one article or 2) the sign of an obsession on the part of the writer which detracts from the persuasiveness of the argument being made. Option 2 is the one that seems most likely.
Basically, it smacks of someone with way too much time on their hands and who can’t help but keep swinging at the random thoughts of corruption that occur to him.
My suggestion – take more time to say what you want to say the first time you sit down to type it. Follow-up reports should be based on NEW information, not new thoughts. It will come across as much more credible.
No need to actually post this comment. This isn’t said to call you out or embarrass you. Just pointing out that it has passed the point where you appeared credible.
Kirk AllenPosted at 17:17h, 16 March
Our credibility is not diminished by the truth. With almost 17 minutes of testimony, it is impossible to cover the misrepresentations in one or even two articles.
Cody L.Posted at 08:28h, 18 March
While I am sure you folks mean well, ive seen well thought out articles on 2 hour long sessions of congress get their point across in one or two articles. I appreciate you are passionate about this and I am sure by now everyone understands she is corrupt and the farm bill is no good.
While your point is well taken, I think you may be beating a dead horse at this point. I almost do not want to come check this website anymore because its only for this week information on this that I think is already understood. Just my two cents.
A. D. FizzPosted at 11:45h, 17 March
Us poor plebes need watchdogs. When the law becomes too obtuse for the average serf who will champion us?
NunYaPosted at 08:03h, 18 March
Ok we get it, this chick is corrupt. We understand…..I think we really understood by part II but I keep coming to this website every day to see NEW news, but it keeps being part I, II, III, IV, V VI, VII and im telling you we get it, she doesnt know what the law is……the proposed law is no good and repeating the point with a new segment of video everyday is no more convincing or less convincing then it was 4 days ago.
Justice SeekerPosted at 13:19h, 18 March
For those who “get it”, if you are a taxpayer in Shelby county why are you not calling for her resignation? Why do you allow corrupt elected officials? This is the reason we have watchdogs and corruption. Taxpayers know it is going on and sit idly by. Instead of requesting those exposing the truth to stop already, contact corrupt elected officials and ask them to resign or better yet get a group to file an ARDC complaint.