[Update: Please read the Big Fat Correction I've made to this story.]
Well, I just had an interesting phone conversation. It seems an online comment I made about Ron Naylor’s letter to the Daily Chronicle about his upcoming ward meeting at Ellwood House — specifically, that he should pay the room rental this time! — is being disputed by Mr. Naylor. Apparently he’s saying he paid it out of his own pocket.
I’ve written about this before. I had been upset last June to find a check written to Ellwood House Association for $100 with the following notation: “RM RNTL 5TH WARD 1/19/10 MTG.” The payment was made May 28, 2010, several months after Naylor’s ward meeting and for some unknown reason written from TIF Fund 63. That same month, the Ellwood rental for the council’s strategic planning retreat was written from the General Fund.
Find the payment in question in the June 28, 2010 agenda packet, check register page 50.
I suppose it’s possible Naylor reimbursed the city. If so, I’d like to take a peek at the date on his canceled check, to see if he did it after June 30 (the date of the original blog post).
4 comments
Comment by Ivan Krpan on March 4, 2011 at 4:43 am
Tough to argue about the written memo for that CITY check Lynn. I notice that some of the typical naysayers out there really think that this $100 is no big deal. I just wonder how many more of these type of checks have been written. This is what happens with many of these elected officials, they get arrogant because they feel nobody can stop them when they are on a roll, invincible as things continue to go the way they want, wrong or right.
They also will tell you that they all favor transparency yet all their actions are anything but that. Let’s see your check reimbursing the taxpayer Alderman Naylor and you are probably righr Lynn, that check was more than likely written after you made it public.
It is amazing to me how the likes of Naylor continue to look for ways to cut Firefighters, Police, and Public Works employees while still finding ways to keep spending money on their projects and self and always crying about shortages and supporting every possible tax increase that comes in front of them.
Comment by yinn on March 4, 2011 at 6:33 am
Yes, I agree Ivan; and context is important here. At the time the city paid the rental, council recently had come out of a strategic planning session in which some serious financial “challenges” were discussed, they were talking about voluntary separations and layoffs, and Mr. Naylor himself said we needed to get back to funding core services, which I take to mean public safety.
Comment by Kerry Mellott on March 4, 2011 at 2:21 pm
Why was a check written FROM TIF FUND 63 to cover room rental at Ellwood House? That looks odd to me. Was there some sort of meeting of the public to discuss that TIF district or some sort of changes withing the boundaries of that district? Is this sort of expense an allowable use of TIF funds? If it was TIF business, why not meet in the council chambers or one of the smaller conference rooms at no cost? This situation is not just a matter of Ald. Naylor’s check dates, although that in itself is interesting.
You must be logged in to post a comment.