A copy of the approved July 22 Village Board meeting minutes can be downloaded here.
July 22 Village Board meeting minutes released
August 27, 2013 by Barrington Hills Observer
August 27, 2013 by Barrington Hills Observer
A copy of the approved July 22 Village Board meeting minutes can be downloaded here.
I don’t know who is responsible for the Village minutes when meetings are being held, but I would like to make the suggestion that if statements are going to be transposed, they should be verified before being included in the minutes and being published.
Bill Adair should provide the facts about the “publically professed prospective” that he is claiming that David Stieper made. Bill Adair has never had a conversation nor has Bill Adair met with David Stieper in person to have any dialogue with him relating to this statement or any other concerns he may have. Bill Adair was personally asked by David Stieper to meet with him to discuss all issues during this past-election so that Bill Adair and the equestrian community would know where David Stieper stood on all the issues. Bill Adair and the equestrian community remained silent and would not meet with David Stieper. I ask, Bill Adair, where are you getting this revelation from?
Bill Adair if you are going to make such an untruth about David Stieper, please take this advice before you decide to speak out against another resident in this community.
“Stop judging without merit and basing your opinion on what you have heard about a person from others.”
The minutes of the BH Village Board dated July 22, 2013, under public comment from BH Riding Club (“BHRC”) President, Bill Adair states in relevant part:
[Bill Adair] wanted to address the “fact” [emphasis added] that Mr. Stieper has publically professed that the Village is not an Equestrian Community . . . . .
An unfortunate but reasonable interpretation when reading these minutes is that such a publically professed statement by me actually exists; it does not. An actual recitation of what BHRC Pres. Bill Adair said at the Village Board meeting is as follows:
“As I [Bill Adair] “understand it” [emphasis added] Mr. Stieper has publically professed that the Village is not an Equestrian Community . . . . “ See, Audio of Village Meetings, public speaker no. 9
Just because BHRC Pres. Adair “understands” something to be so, does not make it “fact”. Nowhere contained in Adair’s comment to the Board did he provide an explanation as to what the “it” is in his understanding nor did Adair offer an iota of evidence supporting his conclusory remark. BHRC Pres. Adair whimsically said what he said but by approving minutes which reference it as fact, readers are likely to treat Adair’s remark as actually reflective of reality. I am of course dumbfounded how BHRC Pres. Adair would have any opinion of me given I do not know him but did contact him more than once during the prior election season to attempt to arrange a meeting with him to discuss my equestrian views but in the end, he declined.
My primary purpose for commenting is to inform your readers that this is not the first time public comment by residents has been mischaracterized in the Village Board minutes. Almost always, prior to approval of the minutes, we hear Trustee dialogue attempting to make minor changes as to what he or she might have said; but I can recall no meeting when a Trustee questioned the accuracy of proposed minutes when it came to public comment. Further, residents who make public comment are afforded no advance copy of the minutes containing the proposed language of his or her remarks. In the end, we have a process which provides public comment will say what the Board wants it to say in the minutes without any participation from the individual who actually made the statement.
Those of us who have run for office know how these minutes are researched and relied upon by opponents and quoted to the residents as gospel in political mailings. I believe serious consideration should be given by the Board to either releasing the public comment section of the proposed minutes in advance to those residents who have participated in public comment or as a standard practice approved minutes should simply state that regarding public comment, the reader should refer to the audio broadcast on the Village website. At a minimum, I would ask that the Board listen to the public comment section of the audio and compare it to what is written to assure it has some connection with what was actually said.
My concern is should these errors continue, many in the Village might be discouraged from speaking during public comment especially if he or she is considering running for office.
David M. Stieper