Wayne Motley GOES WILD on constituents

[Danno]

The following is in response to Shawn White's questions:

I have been talking to the Waukegan Park District Board about environmental concerns (including arsenic) for over a year now. The Board agreed to do testing, but did not do appropriate testing. A clean bill of health from an inappropriate test does not mean much to me. After reviewing the Orchard Hills report, I told my concerns to the Park District Board, with no reaction. I then presented my concerns at a Wadsworth Village Board meeting, reading verbatim from the Stan Black email quoted in my previous post on this site. Park District Executive Director Greg Petry, who attended that meeting, was quoted in the News-Sun saying that I was providing misinformation and trying to create environmental hysteria. In December, I again went to the Park District Board meeting hoping to get them to do proper testing at Orchard Hills, and again they just sat there looking at me. Not one comment was made.

So on December 15th, I decided to take my concerns to the Waukegan City Council and tell the aldermen and public (both in the audience and via Comcast) of my concerns, hoping that others would hear me and push the Park District to do more and shallower soil tests at Orchard Hills before developing the site and stirring up whatever lies under the soil before we know that soil is clean.

However, the December 15th Waukegan City Council meeting was never aired on Channel 17 Public Access Television because of “an apparent programming error” by Comcast, according to Vic Walter of Comcast. Because of public interest, Comcast agreed to air the meeting out of order, pending approval by the City of Waukegan and the producer, Mike Hill. Hill gave his approval. According to City Clerk Wayne Motley, when Comcast contacted him to get the City’s approval to air the meeting, Motley said that he called the “attorney” and the attorney advised that since it was not precedent to air meetings out of order, the City did not have to give its approval, and would not give its approval to air the meeting. So, the situation was that the public would not get to see my report, Wayne Motley called me a liar at the meeting (among his other rants), and lo and behold, the meeting is now not going to be aired.

This situation did not make me happy, so.......

When I found out that the December 15th meeting was not going to be televised, I made a Freedom of Information Act request of the City for a copy of the DVD of the meeting. It took me some time, but I finally got a copy of the meeting DVD after paying $15 for it. And it took a little more time to figure out how to get it on You Tube, but I was eventually able to do it (with some help from the younger generation). The timing was not intended to be around election time - that is just how long it took to get that six-minute clip out on You Tube.

MOTLEY THREATENS SUIT OVER YOU TUBE USE: At the February 2nd Waukegan City Council meeting, I told the council that the December 15th meeting never aired, that Motley would not give the City’s approval, and asked that the City Council give its approval to air the meeting. Mayor Richard Hyde referred the matter to the Judiciary Committee. On February 18th, I called Motley to see if the Judiciary Committee made a decision regarding airing the December 15th meeting (the council met on February 16th). Motley asked me why I cared, since I had already put part of it on You Tube, and wondered why I didn’t just put the whole thing on You Tube. I said if I could have I would have, but it was too long. Motley then said that he had talked to the “attorney” (he must have him on speed dial) and the City was considering suing me for copyright infringement for putting part of the public comment portion on You Tube. I then advised him that there are limitations to the exclusive rights of a copyright owner, and that I did not violate Illinois copyright law. I added that even if my use of the City Council tape could be considered copyright infringement, I had contacted Mayor Hyde prior to copying and showing the DVD, and Mayor Hyde said that I had purchased the DVD of the meeting from the producer and that I could use it any way I wanted to. Motley was obviously surprised and said he would check it out. The Judiciary Committee took no action regarding airing the December 15th meeting, according to Motley.

Personally, I have a problem with City Clerk Motley threatening to sue me for making even a portion of the unaired December 15th meeting available to the public, and I find it laughable that on Motley’s Re-Election Website (motleyforclerk.com), he states: “I have attempted to increase the public’s awareness of municipal government by posting city council agendas and minutes on the internet and by airing the council meetings on cable television.”

Mr. White (and Motley) seem to think that being named City Clerk of the Year by Motley's peers should mean something to the people of Waukegan. I think the true measure of what kind of City Clerk he is is determined by how he treats the Waukegan public. Well, I am a member of the Waukegan public, and I don't think he's treated me too well. I have a feeling from the way he has treated me that there are others that he hasn't been too nice to either. Although he has referred to the City Clerk position as "his job," I think he has forgotten that it is more than just a job, it is an elected position that he gets to hold only as long as the people feel that he is working in their best interests. Well, the time for the people to decide that question is almost here. It should be interesting to see what they decide.

IT SHOULD BE NOTED THAT WAYNE MOTLEY WILL BE FACING OFF AGAINST HANK BOGDALA FOR CITY CLERK ON TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 24TH, IN THE DEMOCRATIC PRIMARY.


Linda Ryckman
Waukegan

[Following is a link to the You Tube site: <!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L9TbfqKAd4U">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L9TbfqKAd4U</a><!-- m -->]

Ms. Ryckman, I can relate to the abuse of power that you are experiencing. I've been through all of the same as you and more. $15 for a copy of the video? Suing you for copyright infringement? Just more reason to NOT vote for Motley. If I were not afraid to go to council meetings I'd start taping the meetings again.

There is recent case law concerning charges for a copy of a tape and the Illinois Appealate Court has said the municipality cannot charge. Mr. Motley should have just put the DVD in the public library like he is supposed to and told you to go there and check it out for free. I'm surprised they didn't accidentally "lose" it.

http://www.state.il.us/court/opinions/ap...070300.pdf