Know the Facts

As we approach the election on April 7, 2015,  we continue to provide a forum for the truth relating to issues in the campaign and to push back against the blatant lies and distortions that David DeRango and Dominick Jeffrey continue to perpetuate. Here are our responses to some of the more reckless and irresponsible statements made by DeRango and Jeffrey in print or at public events.

Claim:
David DeRango and Dominick Jeffrey claim to be personally responsible for the increases in library circulation and improved customer service over the past two years.
Fact:
There are many problems with this outrageous claim. First and foremost, all of the success for circulation and service at the library is a direct result of the outstanding efforts of the library staff and has nothing whatsoever to do with the actions of Mr. DeRango and Mr. Jeffrey. Second, all of the achievements cited in their claims took place in the last two years, a time period in which these two trustees were in a minority role when they opposed virtually every proposal and project offered by the other trustees. To step in now and claim credit for the fine work of others is the height of hypocrisy.

Claim: 
David DeRango and Dominick Jeffrey state that they are personally responsible for holding the line on taxes and putting a halt to "wasteful spending" at the library.
Fact:
These two men have been making the same tired and baseless statements since they appeared on the scene a few years ago. They have never offered a shred of specific evidence to back up their assertions that taxpayer money has been wasted, and they seem to totally disregard the fact that the budget for the Carol Stream Library compares favorably with all other libraries in the nearby suburbs. All of the previous trustees before DeRango's shameful tenure on the Board took great care in managing the budget and controlling expenses, and the current Board has returned to that same level of fiscal responsibility. The tax claim is just as ridiculous since the portion of our tax bill that goes to the library is a tiny fraction of the total tax bill and has been that way for DECADES. Sadly, the only wasteful spending over the past few years has been the unnecessary legal fees associated with the frivolous personal lawsuits that the families of DeRango and Jeffrey filed against the library as well as those related to the unjustified firing of a respected Library Director a few years ago.

Claim:
David DeRango charged that "our challengers campaign is being run by someone outside our community" and he has also stated publicly that the STL campaign is being bankrolled by the Friends of the Library organization.
Fact:
The STL organization was formed legally before the 2013 election and is solely comprised of residents of Carol Stream who want to protect our library against the destructive and dishonorable actions by David DeRango and Dominick Jeffrey and their cronies. The Friends of the Library has no connection whatsoever with the campaign. The primary mission of the Friends is to support the mission of the library and help to pay for special programs, hospitality items at library events, and other resources that would not otherwise be possible within the library's budget. If Mr. DeRango had bothered to attend one of the Friends meetings open to the public before he made his reckless statements or pay the $5 annual fee to become a member, he would have learned about the source and the disposition of every penny in the Friends budget just like every other member of the organization. It seems Mr. DeRango would prefer to perpetuate vicious lies than to take the time to learn the truth. This is a dishonorable strategy that he and Mr. Jeffrey seem to apply to every issue related to our library.

Claim:
The current library board "gave" the property on Kuhn Road to the Park District for $1 after turning down an offer to sell the property for $1.35 million.
Fact:
David DeRango and Dominick Jeffrey continue to intentionally mangle the truth regarding the Kuhn Road property to try to cover up their own dishonorable actions. First, the property was not "given" to the Park District. The two public entities entered into an inter-governmental agreement (IGA) to serve the public and temporarily convert the vacant property into a multi-purpose park that all residents can enjoy. That agreement can be revisited in future years when the real estate market improves and library trustees can explore options that are in the best interest of taxpayers. As to the potential sale of the property in 2013, David DeRango and his cronies were trying to fast-track a very foolish land sale just to satisfy their own narrow political goals. The parcel of land on Kuhn Road was valued at $1.8 million in 2013, yet DeRango and his allies were desperate to sell the land for $1.35 in their final days of power on the Board. The newly elected trustees halted the sale because it would have been a foolish decision that would have cheated taxpayers out of more than $450,000. The decision to sell the property may come at a date in the future, but the current trustees are protecting our interests by waiting until the real estate market improves.

 *     *     *     *     *     *     *     *     *

In the months leading up to the elections in April, 2013, Michael Wade and his running mates who controlled the Library Board at that time unleashed a long list of distorted statements and outright lies in what can only be viewed as a desperate effort to fool voters into thinking that they had acted in a productive and ethical way.  In our continuing effort to provide factual information so that voters could make informed decisions when voting, we provided this examination of the key issues for which Michael Wade and his running mates made public statements that were either totally false or grossly distorted. Sadly, two remaining trustees who sided with Michael Wade--David DeRango and Dominick Jeffrey--continue to make many of these same false and misleading statements in their public statements and letters to local newspapers. It is the ongoing goal of the STL organization to set the record straight and provide residents with factual and accurate information.


Claim:   
“Vice President Bailey was responsible in whole or in part for 41% of the total legal costs this year.”
Fact:   
This totally baseless statement was made by a trustee candidate named Justin Moran in a letter to The Examiner on February 27. What the statement really reveals is how little Mr. Moran understands about board procedures and the role that the Board attorneys have played in past years as compared to the events of the past few months since Michael Wade took control of the Board. Here are the facts. For years, the presence of a board attorney at regular board meetings was extremely rare, and thus historically the annual cost for legal fees was quite small. Beginning with the July 25 meeting in which the previous director was unjustly dismissed by the current Board led by Mr. Wade, the current Board has now made it customary practice for an attorney to be present at almost every meeting—an unnecessary and excessive practice that has cost taxpayers many thousands of dollars. If Mr. Wade and his four cronies had not staged a phony “censure” hearing (there is no legal provision for a censure procedure in the bylaws and even the Board attorney warned them that the action had no legal bearing whatsoever), there would have been no need for the attorney to be present at any of the meetings that Mr. Moran so insincerely cites in his letter. It is absolutely ludicrous to assert that Mr. Bailey was responsible for the escalated attorney fees this past year--fees that are more than 200% of the amount budgeted for legal matters. Taxpayers have had to bear the burden for many additional thousands of dollars because of Michael Wade’s unethical conduct in the dismissal of the former Director, the unnecessary re-writing of library bylaws done only to enable Mr. Wade's political agenda, the recent phony “censure” spectacle, and the unwarranted challenge to the nominating petitions that were legally filed by all five STL candidates. Mr. Bailey was clearly not responsible for any of these actions.

Claim:   
“The STL Candidates have plans for a 4th referendum to build a new library.”
Fact:   
The blatantly and completely false statement has been previously made by candidates on the slate of candidates headed by Michael Wade and was repeated during the presentations at the Candidates Night on Tuesday, March 12. There has been no talk of a referendum by any library official for over six years and none of the STL candidates has ever made any such claim in any written document or public statement. It is a complete fabrication and a very deliberate attempt by the opposing candidates to create a controversy where none exists and has never existed. It is an extremely dishonorable campaign ploy designed to fool or scare uninformed voters.

Claim:   
“We are responsible for the purchase of  59 new high-speed, state-of-the-art computers and upgrades to the library WiFi network.”
Fact:   
As reported in the July 27, 2012 issue of the Daily Herald, this computer and network upgrade was a project that Ann Kennedy, the previous Director, was working on when she was fired. The new Board did not get around to acting on her recommendations until January. Michael Wade and his group are falsely trying to take credit for the work of the previous director—in fact, they should be apologizing to the public for delaying these much-needed computer upgrades for six months. It should also be noted that when the computer lab for public use was first installed in 2010 under the leadership of the previous Board and Ann Kennedy, Michael Wade was the sole trustee to vote against the remodeling project that also included the public computer lab area. David DeRango, Dominick Jeffrey and Jerry Clark have frequently spoken against this important initiative that has benefited so many families in Carol Stream.

Claim:   
“In the 7/27/2012 Daily Herald it was suggested that work was being done toward upgrading the computers, yet there is nothing in the CSPL minutes to verify such a statement.  If anyone was working on purchasing or leasing new computers it was never brought before the Library Board. ”
Fact:   
Despite indisputable evidence to the contrary, Michael Wade and his running mates continue to falsely claim credit for the research and planning for the computer and network upgrades that were belatedly approved by the current board in January. This recent empty statement is posted on one of the new Wade campaign pages that bears the hollow label of “Transparency”. Once again, they refuse to give credit to the hard work that the previous Director had devoted to this project before she was unjustly fired last July and they have again made an unsuccessful attempt to con residents into thinking it was their initiative. More notably, they make the absurd statement that there is no evidence of the planning efforts last summer because no mention of this upgrade appeared in the library minutes until the vote in January. The truth is that most of the day-to-day work completed by all of the library professionals is not recorded in the minutes until official action, if required, is taken by the Board. In this case, had the previous director not been unexpectedly fired without any advance notice or just cause, a discussion of the upgrades would have been a part of Board business many months ago. More importantly, the upgrades would have been in place many months ago and patrons would have been enjoying the benefits long before now. 

Claim:   
“Past Boards placed over $2 million in non-interest bearing accounts. Under our leadership, these and other funds will be placed into interest bearing accounts, collateralized by the Federal Reserve Bank, and generate approximately $18,000/yr in interest for the Library.”
Fact:
This claim by Michael Wade and Jerry Clark was either meant to intentionally deceive taxpayers or it is an indication of their ignorance of the way that the finances of the Carol Stream Library (and most other public institutions) are handled. Let’s look at the facts. For over twenty years, previous trustees have carefully invested funds to create a hedge against unexpected expenses that may arise and threaten the day-to-day operations of the library. Those reserve funds have been invested in Illinois Funds, under the auspices of the Illinois State Treasurer, a fund that has historically offered interest rates slightly above average. The Board has for many years also invested in Certificates of Deposit at local banking institutions with staggered maturity dates to command the best possible interest rates and the protection of having the investments diversified in more than one bank.

The daily operating funds for the library, which sometimes total as much as $2 million dollars at the end of September when the Board receives the annual property tax payment, are held at a local bank. That account is spent down during the fiscal year to pay all operating expenses, and is replenished the following year when the next year’s tax payment is received. It is true that since the devastating financial crash of 2008, these operating funds have been placed in a non-interest bearing account, but that is only because previous trustees carefully studied the issue and concluded that the high fees that are now associated with interest-bearing accounts for government entities exceeded any returns on that investment that might be earned through the extremely low interest rates that were being offered. Further, the balance on this account used to pay daily operating expenses continues to shrink each month as salaries and bills are paid during the fiscal year, and so any interest earned on the account will continue to shrink as the balance shrinks. It is not a fixed balance of $2 million and thus any estimates of interest to be earned cannot be based on that figure. Mr. Wade and Mr. Clark never mention these steep account administrative fees or provide any factual overview of all library financial transactions and investments. It should also be remembered that Mr. Wade held the treasurer position on the Board for a few months, but it became immediately apparent that he lacked a fundamental understanding of public finance procedures, tax levies, or the daily operating budget of the library. He resigned that position a few months later.

Claim:   
“They can't read and they don't desire to read.”
Fact:
This contentious and direspectful comment was directed at all five of the STL candidates by current trustee Dominick Jeffrey in a recent article in the Daily Herald. It was made after a resident with direct family ties to this trustee as well as close ties to the slate of candidates led by Michael Wade tried unsuccessfully to have the names of all five STL candidates removed from the April ballot for a minor technicality that was no fault of the candidates. The fact is that the Carol Stream Village clerk inadvertently gave all five candidates incorrect nominating petition forms that were identical to the preferred forms in every way except for one insignificant detail. When the Village Clerk realized the error, she sent official letters to all five candidates assuring them that they could legally proceed with the forms they had been given. The five STL candidates legally fulfilled, and even exceeded, all of the filing requirements for the library trustee positions, and all of their forms were properly turned in before the deadline. In spite of this, their petitions were challenged and a public hearing was required—a hearing that needlessly cost Carol Stream taxpayers thousands of dollars. The ill-advised challenges were all denied and all five STL candidates deservedly remain on the ballot.

Claim:   
“The other group (the 5 STL candidates) want to tax the life out of you”
Fact:
This is another contentious but completely false statement made by Dominick Jeffrey in an article in the Daily Herald on January 8, but all of the candidates on the Wade slate have made similar unfounded claims on their web pages or in public statements. There is absolutely nothing in the STL platform or in the statements by any of the STL candidates that suggest any program or project that would provide any basis for such a false accusation. Michael Wade and his running mates have tried for years to manufacture claims of library taxes out of control and what they refer to as "rubber stamp" approval of recommendations made by the library professionals. As noted elsewhere, the portion of each resident's tax bill for library services has remained at about 3% of the total tax bill for the past several years and continues to be one of the tiniest segments of the total bill. The budget for the Carol Stream Library has always been very comparable with other libraries of similar size in nearby communities, and any claims of a "tax crisis" or "wasteful spending" in recent years are completely without merit. The actual statistics tell a much different story than the candidates on the Michael Wade slate would like you to believe.

Claim:   
“We placed the Kuhn Road property up for sale at $1.8 million to return the $750,000 plus profit”
Fact:
One realtor made this exaggerated estimate of the value of the property, presumably to get the library’s business, but many other realtors have scoffed at that estimate as being far too high in this current market. The land may someday reach that valuation, but it is certainly not wise to try to sell the property at the present time. If the current trustees exercise the common sense and fiscal responsibility that residents expect and drop their plans to sell the land now, the value of the Kuhn Road property will continue to grow. When that happens, the investment made by previous Board members will very likely reap generous rewards.

Claim:   
“We applied for tax exemption for the Kuhn Road property and received approval from the DuPage County Board so taxpayers pay zero property tax. The previous board paid property taxes needlessly.”
Fact:   
This is another intentionally false and misleading claim since the Library Board could not legally apply for tax exempt status on the property while Betty Lou Kammes, the owner who still resided on a portion of the property as part of the original agreement, was still alive. After Mrs. Kammes died in November, 2010, the trustees on the Board at the time were then legally able to study options and decide on the course of action that was in the best interests of Carol Stream residents. The Board voted in December, 2011, to approve the demolition of the house so that the property would be undeveloped and thereby taxed at a lower level. This action also cleared the way for the possibility of intergovernmental agreements with other community entities such as the Park Board. The previous Board did not pay any taxes needlessly.

Claim:
"The previous board purchased the Kuhn Road property behind our backs and continued to ignore residents by trying to ram three referendums down our throats."
Fact:
The original proposals to build a new library over a decade ago were based on the results of a comprehensive survey of residents that was conducted by an independent research firm. Since a majority of those residents who completed the survey were in favor of a new library, the library trustees hired an architectural firm to draw up plans for a new building that were then shared with the public. They next held public discussions on the issue of purchasing the land, and then after exploring potential sites in the village, they purchased the property before the first referendum vote. This is the essential first step in any public project of this type since a location needs to be secured before a referendum for a new facility can go to the voters. This land purchase did not involve any new tax increases since the board had prudently planned and budgeted for this contingency. The entire process was transparent and done in full view of the public. It is true that ultimately three attempts were made to seek public approval, but they were not "rammed down our throats." It is common for public entities to go back to the voters when referendums fail. Before each new referendum, the Library Board held discussions, carefully examined the issues and feedback from residents, and then made revisions to architectural designs to accommodate suggestions made by residents. At every step of the process, the public was invited to participate and share their opinions.

Claim:   
“We are responsible for no tax increase by Board over last three years while increasing circulation over 500,000 for the first time.”
Fact: 
The current Board has only been in control for a few months since May, 2012, yet here they falsely claim that they should be given credit for the sensible and responsible fiscal decisions enacted by the previous board for the bulk of that three-year period. The current majority can claim no credit for the fact that the previous trustees were good stewards of our tax dollars. In fact, you can go back many more years and see that the library portion of the annual tax bill has remained at about 3% of the total and is one of the tiniest segments of our annual taxes. As to circulation statistics, credit there goes to the hard-working and dedicated library staff since they are the ones who create the positive environment that encourages so many patrons to visit the library with their families. Statistics from the past decade or two continually show that the budget for the Carol Stream Library has always been very comparable with similar sized libraries in neighboring communities and smaller than many libraries that serve fewer patrons. There has never been a tax crisis as it relates to the library budget in Carol Stream except in the eyes of a small group of opponents who hold radically extreme political views.

Claim:   
“We changed bylaws to conform to Illinois Law which previous boards irresponsibly ignored.”
Fact:   
In fact, just the opposite is true. For many years, the Library Board followed an established set of bylaws that were modeled directly after Illinois Law and the American Library Trustee and Advocates Ethics Statement for Library Trustees. Once the current majority took control, Michael Wade set out to drastically rewrite these bylaws to enable his political agenda and would have gone further were it not for the Board attorney who had to repeatedly warn him that his proposed revisions would be in direct violation of Illinois Law.

Claim:   
“We believe in truthfulness and ethical behavior and to be fiscally responsible to the community.”
Fact:   
This STL web site is filled with examples that show clearly how Michael Wade has repeatedly violated the Library Board Code of Ethics since he has been president of the Board. He worked with the library attorney on his own without Board knowledge or approval to draft a legal document to fire the previous Director. He ignored the Bylaws Committee and rewrote the bylaws on his own to accommodate his personal agenda, and he attempted to bypass the Human Resource Specialist during the search for a new Director by setting up a secret e-mail account to receive applications. Lawsuits by the families of two of the current trustees, large fees for an executive search firm, and legal fees that have gone way over budget have already cost taxpayers tens of thousands of dollars.

Claim:   
“Our slate is stronger because four of the five opposing candidates have no Board experience.”
Fact:   
All five STL candidates—Jim Bailey, Bonita Gilliam, Patricia Johnson, Edward Jourdan, and Nadia Sheikh—have extremely impressive qualifications, and the list of their civic activities and professional accomplishments is beyond compare. Jim Bailey is a past Citizen of the Year, and all five candidates have been extremely active in local organizations. Just as important, they are all active library users and all members of the Friends of the Carol Stream Library. None of the candidates on the Wade slate can make any such claim. The STL candidates are well informed on all current library issues and they are committed to restore integrity and professionalism to the Board. Two of the current Board members on the opposing slate had no experience before they were appointed, and their sole qualifications were that they were political cronies of Michael Wade. They were not elected by Carol Stream voters.

Claim:   
“We were responsible for the success of the 50th Anniversary events at the library.”
Fact:   
This is one more example of the current Board falsely trying to take credit for the hard work of others. In fact, the Friends of the Carol Stream Library were solely responsible for several of the family activities in the weeks leading up to the date of the anniversary, and it was funds from the Friends organization that paid for all of those events. The Friends also provided all of the refreshments for the anniversary event and generously contributed funds for the purchase of the e-readers that were raffled off during the day. The library staff and the Friends made many of the anniversary events possible, but the current board refuses to acknowledge the efforts of these people and insists on taking full credit for themselves.

Claim:   
“In 2005 and 2006, previous Library Trustees repeatedly made arrogant statements such as ‘We have to punish the public’ and similar remarks”
Fact:   
This intentionally false claim appears prominently on the campaign web pages for Michael Wade and his slate of candidates. The facts reveal a much different picture. In 2005, the library trustees and members of the library staff met at a Saturday “retreat” to discuss issues relating to a recent failed referendum vote. They held discussion groups that focused on a variety of topics, and one discussion topic was titled “Sacred Cows of Referendums”—a listing of the arguments that opponents to a new library had raised to try to convince residents to vote against the issue they opposed. At this 2005 meeting, “if you fail, you have to punish the public” and other phrases quoted on the Wade campaign pages came up during that discussion and were noted in the minutes along with the notes from all of the other discussion topics. Thus, the statements contained on the web site of Michael Wade's slate of candidates are, in fact, the arguments that had been raised by the opponents to a new library during the campaign and not by the trustees themselves. These were not beliefs that were held by the trustees, and it is patently dishonest to intentionally suggest that they were when, in fact, just the opposite is true. The participants at the 2005 meeting were simply summarizing the opinions of the opponents to a new library in 2005—people like Michael Wade, Dominick Jeffrey, and David DeRango who had made public statements suggesting that the Library Board was trying to “punish the public” by putting the referendum on the ballot.

The Wade group further claims that the Library Trustees made the same “punish the public” statement in 2006, but the minutes they cite from a similar meeting on November 8. 2006 includes this statement by Trustee Rob Douglas that completely disproves the claim: “Plus, the Board never wanted to punish people for not passing the referendum.”  That statement is clear and unambiguous—there is no way that is can be misinterpreted. 

Claim:   
“Mr. Wade has stated that we do not need a new $26 million library.”
Fact:   
This has been a recurring claim by the current trustees for many years, even though a referendum issue has not been proposed for over six (6) years and none of the STL candidates has said anything that even remotely resembles this false claim. Mr. Wade and the other candidates on his slate have absolutely no basis for making this charge, and this false claim is meant only to deceive voters into thinking that a referendum is an issue in the 2013 election. It is a baseless argument.

Claim:
  
“Jim Bailey was censured for untruthful statements, using profanity, threatening a Board member, being disruptive at meetings, and repeatedly violating Robert’s Rules of Order.”
Fact:   
First, the charge has no legal bearing since there is no provision for a censure vote in the library bylaws. The library attorney advised the trustees of this fact before they took the meaningless vote, but they took the action anyway. More important, all of these charges are complete fabrications with one minor exception—a single common expletive muttered quietly under his breath in the midst of an exasperating Board meeting in which Jim Bailey was trying his best to represent the best interests of the library. All of the other claims are completely without merit and the current trustees have not offered a shred of specific evidence to substantiate the charges they have leveled against Jim Bailey. Since these unsubstantiated charges are now prominently featured throughout the campaign web pages for Michael Wade and his slate of candidates, it seems clear that the sole purpose of this baseless "censure" event was to try unsuccessfully to create a campaign slogan from this bit of political theater--an event that again cost taxpayers dearly in the form of more unnecessary attorney fees.


Beyond all of these examples that illustrate the false and distorted claims that have been made by Michael Wade and the other candidates on his slate, these candidates have also made a systematic attempt to link the current STL candidates to events and decisions that were made by previous trustees many years ago. They continue to bring up old referendum issues that have long since been put to rest and they pluck small segments out of context from library minutes from a decade ago in an unsuccessful effort to distort the ideas and positions of current candidates. Jim Bailey is the most experienced candidate in the election and a staunch supporter of the library, and he is largely responsible for many of the technology upgrades that users have seen in recent years.

The Support the Library organization was created to support qualified candidates who are avid library users and whose sole interest is to serve the residents of Carol Stream and work to be sure that our library will continue to meet our needs today and in the future.

If you value the Carol Stream Public Library, we ask you to remember these names and give them your vote on April 9, 2013:

Jim Bailey

Bonita Gilliam

Patricia Johnson

Edward Jourdan
Nadia Sheikh





6 comments:

  1. I have only lived in Carol Stream for 5 years and this is the first time hearing about this suite, can you tell me the total dollar amount of this because this could case my taxes to go up.
    Please let me know, thank you this is a nice web page.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Thanks for the feedback, John. We don't yet know the details of any agreement in the lawsuit with Linda DeRango (wife of a current trustee), but the settlement in the suit brought by Elaine Wierdak (girlfriend of Dominick Jeffrey) has been reported to be $39,000. The library has not been judged to be at fault in the suits, but attorneys agreed to pay the settlement to avoid even larger legal fees if the matters were continued--a common practice in suits of this kind. As a result, all but one insurance company flatly refused to provide a quote for coverage against losses because of these issues, and the one that agreed to continue did so with severe restrictions and reservations. The current board has already spent more than twice the budget for attorney fees with several months still remaining in the fiscal year. These are all costs that will eventually have to be borne by taxpayers.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Thank you for the update but how does someone go about and find this out, I want to know if this will effect my taxes!
    I will really get upset.
    How can I help your cause.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Any resident can file a request for this information at no cost under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). If any readers want to get the full facts about the DeRango or Wierdak lawsuits, the total attorney fees and insurance costs that this current board has run up, or the interest income/account fees associated with the board bank accounts, we encourage them to file FOIA requests and learn the facts. We think they will be outraged when they learn the truth.

    If you or any readers want to help, we encourage you to share the link to the web site with friends and neighbors who value the library. We invite you to join us at the fundraiser at RoccoVino's Ristorante on February 24 to meet the candidates and help raise funds for this important cause.

    ReplyDelete
  5. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Mr. Fenn- We encourage a healthy and honest dialogue on this web site, but we will absolutely not tolerate inaccurate or distorted information such as the statements you made here, and we reserve the right to remove such comments in the interest of accuracy. Several residents have asked Mr. Wade and Mr. Clark to remove the many inaccurate claims and outright lies that are currently published on their campaign web pages, but to date, they have not done that. In fact, they have recently created a new page filled with more distortions of the truth. They claim to be "honest" and "ethical," but when they continue to lie to residents with claims that the STL candidates are advocating higher taxes or another referendum, they prove otherwise and shame themselves in the process. We will emphatically reject those dishonorable campaign tactics and respond with the truth. There is nothing in the statements of any of the STL candidates to suggest anything about taxes or some fictitious 4th referendum, and the current dishonorable efforts by their opponents to raise such unfounded rumors are nothing short of disgraceful and an insult to honest citizens of Carol Stream.

    ReplyDelete