Grant Park’s Mayor Ben Detloff called a special meeting on March 9 to question the police committee about the purchase of a police vehicle, which was approved at the last board meeting.
The March 2 vote to purchase the vehicle was approved by all board members except for Trustee Jodi Wackerlin who offered no reason as to her “no” vote.
The police committee is made up of three board members, including Wackerlin and trustees Susie Wiedl and Angie Nowak.
Although the February 17 board meeting was not available on the village’s YouTube channel, the meeting minutes reflected a discussion about purchasing a used 2020 Chevrolet Tahoe from the Bradley Police Department for $25,000.
Police Chief Carl Frey indicated at the March 2 meeting that obtaining the vehicle from the Bradley Police Department would mean it could be equipped with the video system compatible with the donated body cameras, saving the police department and village that expense.
“The vehicle is totally equipped — the only thing they’re taking out is the radio and the computer,” Frey said at the March 2 meeting.
“So, it’s going to be good to go for a long period of time and, as I explained earlier, it’s kind of a fleet maintenance thing. It extends the life of our entire fleet, and it does keep our maintenance costs down,” Frey added.
Before the March 2 vote, Detloff asked if anyone had any questions.
No one from the finance committee, nor Wackerlin, asked any questions on March 2.
After Frey’s comments, Trustee Nowak offered a brief comment before the vote, indicating she hoped this purchase would postpone the need for another new vehicle for the next six years.
Nowak made the motion for approval, which was seconded by Trustee Gerry Morgan, who is on the village’s finance committee.
The special March 9 meeting lasted 15 minutes and centered on funding for the police vehicle and concerns from anonymous residents.
It was unclear who the residents were or why they had concerns about the purchase.
“The purpose of this meeting is to address concerns of village residents that I cannot answer, due to the fact that I don’t know what was explained to the board,” Detloff said.
Detloff was present at both of the village board meetings where the purchase was discussed. He did not pose any of his own questions.
“The people in the village want to make sure the new board members got all the material, all the information, before they made a vote concerning a new police vehicle,” he said.
Detloff then rattled off several questions to the police committee, at times not pausing for a response, questioning the police committee about funding, who told them the village had the money, what fund it would come from, and what the re-payment terms would be, whether it would be five years or 10, what the need was for the purchase of another car, whether it was explained.
Nowak said she was advised the money would come out of the sewer fund, but the village would need to repay the funds. Specific repayment terms were not discussed.
When Detloff asked her how the funding would work, Nowak said she was under the impression it would be a budgeted expense.
Detloff brought up past police expenses totaling $85,348 that need to be paid back to the sewer account. Then Detloff brought up expenses for public works equipment and said that the department was reimbursing the sewer account.
“Why would we have to wait from 2023 to this year to actually make any kind of payment?” Detloff asked.
Nowak, who was appointed to the board in November, said she didn’t have an answer.
Detloff did not pose those questions to Trustee Wiedl, who has served on the board for many years and was re-elected in April 2023.
“I think it’s important we made it public, and everybody is informed of what’s going on,” Detloff said.
At that point, Chief Frey interjected to ask a question.
“Who determines when and how much money is paid back?” Frey asked.
Detloff didn’t answer him and instead asked Frey whether he would ever make a payment on the police car.
Frey said he doesn’t make payments for the village.
“Well, was money ever going to be taken out of your budget, or you just buy it, and you don’t pay it back?” Detloff asked.
“It’s not handled by me,” Frey said.
No one could explain why police funds were being drawn from a sewer account.
“Right now, it’s my concern. So, I have to figure out a way to do it,” Detloff said.
It was unclear why Detloff would be the sole person to figure out the budget, or why there was so much confusion, given that a budget meeting had been held recently.
At the January 20 board meeting, Trustee Morgan reported a finance committee meeting had been held before the board meeting, and the revenue budget had been reviewed.
“The Village President Ben and I will meet to determine what the departmental budgets should be for expenditures,” Morgan said at the January 20 meeting.
“Then each of you will receive what your department expenditures are expected to be, and then you’ll be given the budget line items that you can work with the people in your department to figure out what those are, basically to be submitted by the end of March, early April, and then the board will vote on that part at the end of April,” Morgan said at the January 20 meeting.
Though there are three members of the police committee, Detloff seemed to only pose his questions to Nowak, who responded and referred back to her notes.
Wackerlin was never directly questioned about her “no” vote.
Detloff asked Wiedl and Wackerlin if they had anything to add. Neither did.
Detloff asked if anyone in the audience had questions, and resident Valgene Raloff inquired if it was a done deal.
“I don’t know if you can go back and revote because if you did that, then it means you can go back and revote again and again until you have the outcome that you want,” Detloff said.
Raloff responded the village already has a practice of voting and re-voting and, in fact, just did so at the last meeting.
“We have changed ordinances and things over time to make it better for the village. Like you said last week, the line dancing, we voted again not to have the line dancing, so we can hold, we can retract things over time,” Raloff said.
Detloff said Raloff should approach a trustee to see if they want to bring it back up for another vote.