|
[February 06, 2025]
The late great Rush used to say, “There’s too much
assumin’ goin’ on, people.” It’s time for us to put some facts to
the “assumin’.”
First of all, we (Beth and I) are not suing the “City.” The city is
a geographical unit of dwellings and buildings. We are suing
specifically named public officials in the City’s governing
bureaucracy elected and trusted to govern with due diligence in the
best interest of all Citizens. The political bureaucracy that wrote
the Federal law designed the law for their own personal protection.
The Federal law requires the plaintiff to name the public entity
that had the misfortune of electing the officials that committed the
malfeasance. Thereby, the politician can hide behind the façade of
“City” protecting his personal reputation and obligating the entity
to financially defend the offender. In the absence of due diligence,
costly mistakes will be made. God is perfect. We are not.
Unfortunately, we have politicians that think they can do no wrong.
Their idealization of themselves has created an ego that controls
their abusive behavior and their crude, condescending talk exposes
their self-centered feelings of chauvinist superiority. These
egocentrics are mean, irrational, and exhibit a moral philosophy
that is the antithesis of our Conservative Christian philosophy.
The State and Federal governments have enacted laws protecting
employees from harassment, discrimination, and invasion of privacy.
Also, financial and medical records are protected by confidentiality
laws (HIPAA). The Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 requires
accommodations of persons, employees, students, etc., with
disabilities. If a public official is not familiar with the law,
before making a decision concerning any employee, s/he should seek
proper legal guidance. The City government
provides legal counsel and the County’s State’s Attorney is also
available. Due diligence must be practiced before committing
egregious acts that have costly damaging consequences.
Obviously, it would be in the best interest of the “assumin’”
Taxpayers for this situation to be made public in court where the
truth will prevail. The offenders are being well-represented by a
Chicago law firm paid by the City’s liability insurance. Their
lawyers, like all good criminal defense attorneys, will use any and
all legal tactics to protect their clients from a public jury trial.
One would expect no less. We, of course, want a jury trial because
the Citizens deserve to know the truth. Both parties have been
ordered by the Court not to discuss the particulars of the lawsuit
with anyone other than their own attorneys. For the Citizens to be
well-informed of the case, the particulars must be made public in an
open Court of law and recorded on the public record at that time. We
have nothing to hide.
 [to
top of second column] |
With these unfortunate circumstances yet to be
resolved, and the facts being what they are, the Citizens/Taxpayers
should think seriously about reinstating the Civil Service Exam. The
present administration campaigned vigorously to do away with the
Civil Service Exam against the advice of the City Attorney. A Civil
Service Exam is the first line of defense in a municipal employee
discrimination lawsuit. To my knowledge, no established vetting
process for prospective employees has been brought forward for
public and legal perusal. It has become glaringly obvious that the
present public officials have no knowledge or regard for established
labor laws. The taxpaying Citizen should demand immediate action by
their elected officials to put in place the proper procedures to
protect the rights of employees and prevent discrimination lawsuits.
After listening to Lincoln City Council Meetings, it
is my opinion that the Council is making decisions without being
properly informed. For example, the Taxpayers are burdened enough
without paying for remodeling privately-owned property. The entire
situation with the burned-out building on 129 South Sangamon Street
is an example of mismanagement. The public officials responsible for
selling the abandoned buildings should have required property and
liability insurance for the sale. If the property is not insurable,
then the buyer should have posted bond to protect the Taxpayers from
the likes of the present situation. Taxpayers should not be paying
for structural improvements for a property that the City of Lincoln
does not own. Without a deed to the property in question, it could
become a trespassing offense for working on the structure. The
present owner appears to be the type of person to use a trespassing
offense for his financial gain. To protect the Taxpayers, a deed
should be secured, as well as applying liens on any and all
properties the present owner may now own.
Bureaucrats are good at spending other People’s money, and taxes
just keep going up and up. Fiscal responsibility has become a
forgotten virtue, no longer practiced.
I Sincerely Thank you,
Thomas S. Kavelman
Lincoln, IL 62656 |
