Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout04/02/1940 VB minutes MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING 2,01 OF THE PRESIDENT & BOARD OF TRUST.ESS OF THE VILLAGE OF MT. /.F PROSPECT ILLINOIS, HELD ON APRIL 2ND, 1940. AT THE VILLAGE . HALL. President Besander called the meeting to order and upon the clerk calling the roll the following trustees were. found tQ be present, Trusteess Binkley, Greinke, Haas,: Haberkamp and Ville. Trustee Mortimer was absent. The minutes of the March meeting were approved on a C motion made by Trustee Haberkamp and seconded by Trustee Wille. A motion was passed tp place the following report of the treasurer on file, said motion made bi Trueness Haas and seconded by Trustee Haberkamp. TREASURERS REPORT General Funds Overdrawn last report (305.85) ,. Receipts 1326.49 9 1020.64 W Disbursements 1690.75 Overdrawn i 470.11 1 Vehicle tax & Road & Bridge Tai Funds Bal. on hand last report 352.81 Receipts 515.91 868.72 Disbursements 2,) .?4 'alano a 656.58 Water Extension Funds Bal. on hand last report 157.41 No receipts or disb. Water Deposit Funds Balance on hand last report 995.00 Receipts 3 Balanoe 1030.00 Old Water Fund: Bal. on hand last report 350.00 No receipts or disb. General *A* Funds Overdrawn last report 532.08 No receipts or disb. A motion made by Trustee aaberkamp and seconded by Trustee Greinke to place the special assessment report on file was ,passed. It was moved by Trustee Haberkamp and seconded by Trustee Greinke, that Mr Lon;iuist be permitted to beautify the , H C Country Club subdivision underthe supervision of the Sup't. of streets. The mot on was carried by a vote of acclamation. The matter of the Meeske's Atheletic association was referred to the Public :'arks comrittee for action. It was moved by Trustee Bonkley and seconded by Trustee Haberkamp to make the report of the committeeen the Bond bus- inesses a part of the record of the village board minutes. The motion was carded. Said record is a part of these minutes marked as pages 201 -A , 201 -B, 201 -C and 201 -D. A motion was made by Trustee Binkley and seconded +tktby Trustee Haas that the beard extend a voteof thanks to the commitee, in eking up said report. Motion carried. 202 The matter of railraod gates as taken up by the Village Attorney was tabled for the time being. It was moved by Trustee Binkley and seconded by Trsstee -- Haberkamp that the committee which was appointed to investigate the bond suits be disoxved . The motion was carried. A motion was made by Trustee Haas and secended by Trust,* - Haberkamp that the following bills be paid. The motion was carried with the following vote. Ayes: Binkley, 3reinke, Haas, Haberkamp and Ville. No nays. BILLS APPROVED: Frank A Bremer & Sons 1.34r Busse Motor Sales 24.631 Winkelmaas Sinclir Serv. 5.60" W. S. ''arley' & Co. 6.27 Lund Coal Co. 15.45 Eagle Stamp Works 5.50r- , Lutter Brick Co. 4.00s— Public Service Co. 65.07 • R. F. Huecker 17.96A Busse- Biermann 9.15c Wolf Coal Co. 30.00 H. B. Heintz ✓ 8.00 Edward Zinkel 8.00 Fred Wille. 12.001, Samuel Wodike 363.00t. Samuel Wodika 185.00 It was moved by Trustee Haberkamp and seconded by Trustee Wille that Mr. Roderic be hired to and *t the village records The motion was carried '14 the following vote, Ayes: Binkley, Greinke Haas, Haberkamp, and Wille. 8e nays. There being no further business to come before said meeting same was regularly adjourned en a motion made by Trustee Wille and seconded by Trustee Haberkamp. • . 3 aZo / -iir 4-2 -40 TO THE TAXPAYERS AND RESIDENTS OF THE VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT: wow We, the undersigned, were appointed by the Village Board to make an investigation of the litigation that resulted in the entering mew of a judgment against the Village and to make known to the citizens the present legal and financial problems that are confronting the Vil- lage Board. With this thought in mind, we will attempt to outline the difficulties as they have been presented to us, based on information re- ceived from reliable sources, which we believe to be correct. This report is not made to criticise the acts or doings of the past or present members of the Board or the Village officials, or to cast an unfavorable reflection on the reputation of any individual or group of individuals; therefore, names of all parties concerned will be omitted. Our first conference was with the Village Board, including the Village attorney,. at which time we were advised by idrrrY[ Th iw . koffeisr concerning all of the litigation pending at this time, and we sub mit a summary of the suits pending, as outlined by I I Circuit Court case No. 39 -C -8152. Albers vs. Village of Mount Prospect for the use of Charles H. Albers vs. Christian D. Busse and sureties. This is an ac- tion to collect the amount of judgment obtained for $11,416 obtained on January 25, 1937, in Circuit Court moo case 35 -C- 41538. I obtained leave to file my appear- ance for the Village of Mount Prospect, said petition to stand as an answer, wherein it is set forth that said suit is not brought by and with the consent of the Village of Mount Prospect, but that the relief prayed for should be granted. This case is not at issue. Total par of bonds involved $25,000. Net liability $11,416. ' Superior Court of Cook County case No. 57-8-4082, Mary F. Howie, et al vs. Village of Mount Prospect. This action is predicated upon a large number of spe- cial assessment bonds and is at issue. A number of re- quests have been made of Judge Williams for reference, but ever my objections thus far none have been made. In this case I filed a cross - complaint making the Treasurer and his sureties parties defendant; the cross- , complaint was stricken and the cross- defendants dis- missed out of the proceedings; it is from this order that an appeal is pending in the Appellate Court of II- linois, First District. Record, abstract and brief have been filed to the April 1940 term; and the time for the filing of brief by the former Treasurer and his sureties is running. I expect to file a reply brief if the situation warrants. Estimated par of bonds involved approximately $100,000. Estimated liability $50,000. Case No. 36 -C- 13946, L. L. Cooke, et al vs. grillage of Mount Prospect, is predicated upon ten $500 bonds where - in is claimed approximately $3400. This suit was filed . � m 26 /Ji. • -t- in 1936 and was referred to Master Gorman. Some testi- mony has been taken but no report has been made. The attorney for the plaintiff has in a number of instances attempted to make some sort of settlement. Total par of bonds involved $5,000. Estimated liability mow $3,400. Case No. 38 -C -9054, E. A. Webber vs. Village of Mount Prospect. This case was referred to Master Sheehan prior to the time that I filed my appearance therein. The Mas- ter has made a report finding that there is due the plain- tiff $2411.28. Objections filed to report have been over- ruled. I have just been served with notice that the mat- ter of approving the Master's report will come on March 25, 1940, before Judge Dunne. These objections were ordered March 25, 1940, to stand as exceptions to the report; and the exceptions to the report have now been set for argument. Total par of bonds involved $9,000. Estimated liability $2,411.28. Case No. 39 S 299, Ohio National Life Insurance Company vs. Village of Mount Prospect. This action was predicated upon an appeal from Justice of the Peace for an accounting of moneys collected on. one $1,000 bond., The matter was tried before Judge Allegretti on November 28, 1939, and 7 judgment was entered against the Village for $225.88. This judgment has been included on the 1939 -1940 appropriation. Total par of bonds involved $1,000. Liability $225.88. a Circuit Court case No. 38 -C -6263. Charles H. Albers vs. Village of Mount Prospect. This was a mandamus proceeding to compel the Village to levy a tax for the sum of 411,416, judgment having been obtained for said sum in Circuit Court of Cook County case No. 35- C- 41536. Writ of Mandamus was issued in this matter November 28, 1939. This judg- ment has been included on the 1939 -1940 appropriation. As above - No. 1. ,' We were also advised by the Board that an audit of all of the . 47 Special Assessment funds was under construction. by Lybrand, Ross Brothers and Montgomery and that substantially all of the work was com- pleted, but that the auditors refused to deliver the certified reports un- til payment of the agreed upon fee for their services in the amount of $750.00. Two representatives of the committee, at the request of the Chairman, and the approval of the Board, interviewed Lybrand, Ross Brothers and Montgomery, regarding the audit reports. Our reception by the account- ` ants was very cordial and,, , after a great deal of discussion, we learned .- that the time required for the completion of 47 certified reports of the various assessment funds, in summary form, would cost a sum far in excess i mom of $750.00, and, after a brief analysis of the work involved, the committee feels they are justified in their estimates concerning the cost of the completion of the audits. They submitted for our examination their time sheets, record- ing the time required in supervision and compilation of the two sample audits submitted to the Board, and on a per etbasis the cost was ap- proximately $800.00. 2.0 - C. -3- While it is true that a substantial amount of this time was required for the establishment of certain routines and formulas, it was reported to us that the actual cost applicable to the two completed audits was $450.00. Obvious- ly, the cost of completing the balance of the audits would be grossly in excess of the Village pocket book. II:J During the period of our investigation, we had heard certain reports that reflected unfavorably on the former Village attorney, and in order that we could look at him in a fair and equitable manner, we arranged a conference with him and the Village auditor, resulting in the production of legal papers evidencing that the imposition of the judgment on the Village was not exercised through de- fault or nonappearance of counsel for the Village, but was agreed upon by counsel because at that time he was of the opinion that there was no defense against the charges that the Village Treasurer had co- mingled funds, and he advised the Board regarding this situation, informing them of the eventual result, that is, a judg- ment in the amount of $11,416.00, which was imposed on the Village under date of November 28, 1939. We are pleased to report that the auditor advised us that at the present time the Village Treasurer is segregating collections applicable to pay- ment of interest and principal on Special Assessments bonds, as required by statute, and that in his estimation the accounting records of the Village and methods used appear to be adequate, from an accounting standpoint. We were also advised by the auditor that the preliminary work compiled by accountants for the Village, on the assessment bond accounts, was completed and that it is possible to determine from these work sheets data required in partially or wholly combating the pending lawsuits. 1:: The Committee is informed that a meeting was held sometime ago at the Lions' Club, composed of the mayor, the village trustees, the sureties and their attorney. At this meeting it was made known that the Albers' judgment together with the bonds involved in said suit could be purchased for the sum of $8,500.00. A suggestion was made that the practical solution of the Albers' judgment would be the purchase by the sureties of the judgment and the bonds involved. After some discussion, the sureties upon the advice of their attorney, refused to consider such a purchase. At a meeting composed of a majority of the committee and the sureties and their attorney, the committee was advised, through the sureties' attorney, that the sureties had no intention of attempting to evade any liability there may be existing or arising from the execution by them of various bonds on Village officials. To support this statement, the attorney said that none of the assets of these individuals, or the sureties, had been conveyed and that they did not contemplate any such action. i The attorney for the sureties said that in his opinion the question of liability on the individual sureties was a matter of law and that he felt it would be to the benefit of both his clients and the Village, if possible, to make a compromise with the Village for the purchase of the bonds that were instrumental in bringing about the present litigation, and therefore a meeting was arranged with the Village officials for the purpose of effecting a plan, 10 The result of this meeting, so we are advised by the Village Ad= ministration, was that they declined consideration of any such plan. As we have heretofore mentioned, it is not our desire to eritioixe nor is it our duty to recommend ghat action, if any, should be taken on be- half of the Village, in connection with the present litigation, but merely to state the facts as we have found them. We trust the foregoing will be enlightening to the tax payers and that they will become sufficiently interested in matters of the Village to attend more frequently the monthly Village Board meetings. 20 / Although the Committee is without power to make any recommendations, we have noted in the course of our investi®stibnthe decided lack of interest 4 shown by the tax payers in civic affairs. It is entirely possible that this attitude may have been one of the contributing factorsthat brought about this condition. We make one suggestion in the nature of a recommendation, which might be a safeguard for the future, that is the formation of an association composed principally of property owners of this community, who would be interested in and who would perhaps assist in the administration of Village affairs. Thus, enabling a closer relationship and a greater understanding between Village officials and the tax payers. Respectfully submitted. // �� 4