[Peace] Call for turnout in support of Linda Abernathy TONIGHT (TUESDAY) 7PM

Tue Aug 5 00:40:14 CDT 2008

This is short-notice, I know, but please consider turning out for this. I
wanted to get this out sooner, but it did take some time and I had a
variety of frustrating computer problems.

Call to action Summary:
------------------------
This is a call for turnout at tonight's (TUESDAY, August 5) City of
Champaign Township monthly meeting in support of Linda Abernathy, Township
Supervisor. Linda was sharply harassed at the last Township meeting (July
1) with a political smear instigated by Vic McIntosh (and reinforced by
Tom Bruno). There will be public comment to spotlight the attack,
criticize it, and request apologies. I think Linda could really use some
moral support on this with a big turnout.

Turning out for this will require *very little time* - the meeting starts
at 7PM sharp and public comment is at the very beginning of the meeting.
There will be no need to wait for an appropriate agenda item to come up.
But it *is* important to ARRIVE EARLY - *before* 7PM, since there will be
no delay and things will happen at 7PM SHARP.

Full details below.

CHAMPAIGN RESIDENTS - if you feel inspired to make your own public
comment, please do so. A 5 minute time limit is anticipated per comment
(and directly addressing Township Board members will probably not be
allowed).

Details:
-------
For over 3 years, Linda Abernathy, the City of Champaign Township
Supervisor (see http://www.cctownship.com ) has rather heroically been
trying to fulfill her primary duty to provide "General Assistance"
financial support to the poorest of the poor in Champaign (folks that are
unable to work and are unable to qualify for other assistance), despite
inadequate funding and despite a lack of support from the Champaign City
Council (which serves as the overseeing "Township Board"). That lack of
support has now turned to outright hostility and harassment, in particular
from Councilman Vic McIntosh (backed up by Councilman Tom Bruno).

At the last monthly Township Board meeting, on July 1, in the middle of
discussion regarding next fiscal year's Township budget, McIntosh took aim
at Abernathy with a political smear. He insinuated that Abernathy was
padding her salary on live television. Audio of the meeting obtained from
the City reveals McIntosh grilling and trapping her by first stating
incorrect figures for her salary increases, then challenging her in an
accusatory tone that her annual salary increases were higher than the 3%
they were supposed to be, providing the insinuation of impropriety.
Inexplicably, he did all this despite being specifically informed at the
beginning of the meeting that Abernathy has no influence whatsoever on her
salary or annual increases.

Here is the audio of his accusation:

http://imsahp.chambana.net/~randall/champaign_township/accusation.mp3

Transcript: (McIntosh) "Going back and looking at past General Assistance
fund salaries for the Supervisor, I come up with 2002 of  $44,124;  2003
$46,169 and in '06 I come up with $56,614 and now we're at $59,553 *and
that's more than 3%*!"

His harsh and accusatory tone when he emphasized "and that's more than
3%!" was remarkable.

By the way, Mr. McIntosh's figures are all incorrect. The actual salary
figures, as stated in the appropriate ordinances, are:

2001-2002: $47,866
2002-2003: $49,322
2003-2004: $50,804
2004-2005: $52,338
2005-2006: $53,924
2006-2007: $55,562
2007-2008: $57,252
2008-2009: :$58,994

Coming into the meeting, McIntosh was apparently ignorant of the fact that
Abernathy has no possible influence on her salary. In fact, the Champaign
City Council (acting as the Township Board) sets the Supervisor salary
(including annual cost-of-living increases) *before* each supervisor
election. That is, Abernathy's salary for each of the four years of her
term was set by ordinance before she was even elected. Abernathy informed
McIntosh of all this when he first broached the issue.

Here are Mr. McIntosh's first words on the matter:

http://imsahp.chambana.net/~randall/champaign_township/original-question.mp3

Transcript: (McIntosh) "How are salaries raised? Do we do that or is that
just a - is it set in statute?"

After some confusion about which salaries he was concerned about,
Abernathy provided the following (factually correct) answer, having
received advice from the City Attorney, who was sitting next to her.

http://imsahp.chambana.net/~randall/champaign_township/linda-answer.mp3

Transcript: (McIntosh) "Well, it talks a salary of the Supervisor on page
4 of the budget of $59,453 - is that your salary?" (Abernathy) That is my
salary. That salary is set every 4 years. That salary was set before I
took office. So those salaries are set - and then once every four years,
they - and that comes up again in December - you all set it again and
that's what goes on for the next four years and it's set up to go
approximately 3% every year, up." (Macintosh) "OK, thank you, for right
now."

But, inexplicably, later in the meeting, in the middle of discussing
another topic, Mr. McIntosh completely disregarded Abernathy's answer,
dragged out his previously prepared (incorrect) numbers on her salary and
leveled his accusation anyway. Again:

http://imsahp.chambana.net/~randall/champaign_township/accusation.mp3

Transcript: (McIntosh) "Going back and looking at past General Assistance
fund salaries for the Supervisor, I come up with 2002 of  $44,124;  2003
$46,169 and in '06 I come up with $56,614 and now we're at $59, 553 *and
that's more than 3%*!"

Ironically, Mr. McIntosh was not only a member of the 2004 City Council
that approved Abernathy's salary for each of the four years in her term,
but township records (minutes and video recording) show that Mr. McIntosh
was, in fact, actually present during the vote approving that salary at
the October 5, 2004 Township meeting (as ordinance 1104-01).

And there is another dimension to this smear. Not only did McIntosh make
his accusation despite having been informed that Abernathy has no
influence on her salary, he did so in a clearly discriminatory manner. Mr.
McIntosh claimed that he was not trying to put Abernathy on the spot, but
that he was just acting out of concern for the fact that there has been a
shortage of funds, citing past dire straits of the township finances and
past cuts to General Assistance:

http://imsahp.chambana.net/~randall/champaign_township/on-the-spot.mp3

Transcript: (McIntosh) "The reason I am asking these question is not to
put you or anything on our [sic] spot, but we have been through - we just
talked tonight about - we went through a time where we thought maybe state
receivership may be the way because there wasn't money - we've had to go
through all kinds of cuts."

However, despite Mr. McIntosh's claim that he wasn't singling out
Abernathy, Mr. McIntosh made no mention of the *Township Assessor's*
salary increases, which are identical to the Supervisor's (the Assessor
and the Supervisor are the two primary employees under the Township and
they receive the same salary, though the Assessor's annual increases come
7 months later in the year). The Assessor's salary also appeared as a line
item in the same budget that Mr. McIntosh had in front of him. Mr.
McIntosh attempted to pass off his accusation as an attempt at fiscal
responsibility. But Abernathy's salary increases were of acute interest to
him (so much so that he dug up historic, though incorrect, information on
Abernathy's salary in previous years) while the Assessor's identical
salary warranted no mention. This betrays Mr. McIntosh's claim of studious
fiduciary concern and further exposes his attack as targeted, political
and possibly racially or sexually discriminatory.

Once Abernathy (who is a black woman) realized that she was being
specifically targeted with this possibly discriminatory smear (Brian
Christie, the Assessor, is a white man), she spoke up to point this out:

http://imsahp.chambana.net/~randall/champaign_township/salaries-are-the-same.mp3

Transcript: (Abernathy) "Are you talking about me, specifically?"
(McIntosh) "Yes." (Abernathy) Brian's salary and my salary is pretty much
the same with the difference of the timeframe."

But that had no effect on Mr. McIntosh, who then immediately launched into
his accusation described above. Once again:

http://imsahp.chambana.net/~randall/champaign_township/accusation.mp3

Transcript: (McIntosh) "Going back and looking at past General Assistance
fund salaries for the Supervisor, I come up with 2002 of  $44,124;  2003
$46,169 and in '06 I come up with $56,614 and now we're at $59, 553 *and
that's more than 3%*!"

At this point, recognizing the smear attempt, Abernathy protested.

http://imsahp.chambana.net/~randall/champaign_township/protest.mp3

Transcript: (Abernathy) Unless Brian and I have been being mispaid, and we
go by the book, there is no - and I kinda *resent* that Vic. I resent is
that you would wait until this meeting. (McIntosh) Would you like to
see... (Abernathy) No, that's a spreadsheet that Steve Barnes did, but I
resent it because if you had these questions..." (McIntosh) Is it correct?
(Abernathy) "... you could have easily come and figured that out!".

Mr. McIntosh ignored her protest, immediately changing the subject.

Later in the meeting, Mr. Bruno defended Mr. McIntosh, scolding Abernathy
for being "thin-skinned". He tried to justify Mr. McIntosh's behavior as
legitimate questioning about a line item in the budget that's up for
approval, then attempted to paint Abernathy's protested as "chilling" his
"right to have a legitimate policy debate", ignoring both that:

1. Abernathy informed McIntosh to begin with (at McIntosh's request and
with the City Attorney's input) that she had no influence on her salary
and that it was determined by the Township Board before she was even
elected.
2. Abernathy was directly targeted despite the Assessor's salary being
identical to hers (Abernathy even reminded Bruno of this).

http://imsahp.chambana.net/~randall/champaign_township/bruno.mp3

Transcript: (Bruno) "the item on the floor right now is approval of the
budget and one of the biggest in the budget is the salary of the Township
Supervisor - and so, I think it was a little thin-skinned, Linda, that..."
(Abernathy) "Well, you can think, Tom" (Bruno) "No, let me finish please"
(Abernathy) "You can think that, but I think not" (Bruno) "Ok, let me
finish. It's entirely appropriate for Councilman McIntosh to ask questions
about the Supervisor salary..." (Abernathy) "And not ask about the
Township Assessor?, I mean come on now, we're making the same amount of
money" (Bruno) "Linda, Linda, please. Let me finish. I don't think you
should have called him out for talking about a line item on the budget
when the budget is the item that's up for discussion right now - that's
fair game - to talk about what makes up the budget. That's what we're here
for. And should he have called you privately to discuss this out of the
limelight? I don't think so. I think that tonight's the night, and the
time and the place to discuss the township budget. That's the whole nature
of the open meetings act. I would hope that we could do this on a
professional level, but I don't have my right to have a legitimate policy
debate chilled in some way that it's off limits for me to ask a question
about your salary, when we're talking about the approval of the budget. If
your salary is defensible, then you should defend it. If somebody
questions it, you should be proud to defend it, but it shouldn't be
off-limits to ask questions about it and I think you should be encouraged
to ask questions about line items that make up the budget."

Finally, near the end of the meeting, Mr. McIntosh stated that his
comments "weren't meant to pick on anyone" (though that's precisely what
he had done) and he then tried to disguise his attack as an example of
transparency in government.

http://imsahp.chambana.net/~randall/champaign_township/pick-on-anyone.mp3

"My comments tonight had absolutely in no way were meant to pick on anyone
or anything we do. But I find it just a little ironic - we sat as City
Council members and go through our annual budget and have 5 or 8 meetings,
sitting right here, in open public on everything we do. We meet once a
year on a Township budget and do not have a study session on it.
Resolution 2008-07-08 that we passed tonight that was voted on at the
annual town hall meeting, reads: "Shall the voters of City of Champaign
Township ask the Town of the City Champaign Township and the City of
Champaign to post all contracts and itemize expenses on their website so
that taxpayers  can see how their money is being spent? That's a
resolution that was asked for at the Town Hall meeting. One of the things
I, as a City Council member pride, is that we are open - we don't do
things in private - we do them in public. We ask our questions in public,
sometimes it causes a problem, but we do everything we can inherently do
to do our business in public. And so I do think that if there are
questions in a budget, whether it be a city budget or it is a township
budget,  it should be done in public so the public can hear and understand
and if anyone takes fault with that, I guess I apologize personally, but I
think open meetings is where government ought to be done. And it all ought
to be open. So thank you."

Here are the complete audio passages pertaining to this matter.

http://imsahp.chambana.net/~randall/champaign_township/mcintosh1.mp3
http://imsahp.chambana.net/~randall/champaign_township/mcintosh2.mp3
http://imsahp.chambana.net/~randall/champaign_township/bruno.mp3
http://imsahp.chambana.net/~randall/champaign_township/mcintosh3.mp3

Here is the audio of the entire meeting

http://imsahp.chambana.net/~randall/champaign_township/township-2008-07-01.mp3

Conclusion:
------------
McIntosh started out by asking Abernathy how Township salaries were
determined, feigning an innocent question as if he was trying to be a good
steward of Board finances. Abernathy answered very clearly that the
Township salaries (hers and the Assessor's, including annual increases)
were set by statute passed by the Township Board before she was even
elected. Her answer was informed by the City Attorney, who was sitting
right next to her. But it turns out Mr. McIntosh wasn't interested in the
answer to his question, because within minutes, he ignored it and leveled
an accusation directly at Abernathy, pointing to incorrect salary numbers
that he went to the trouble of digging up beforehand, insinuating that her
salary was too high and that she had something to do with that.
Furthermore, though Mr. McIntosh claimed to be only concerned with the
welfare of the Township finances, he made no mention of the Assessor's
salary and annual increases, which are the same as the Supervisor's. This
provides the strong appearance of a deliberate, pre-planned targeted
attack to embarrass and smear Abernathy.

That's certainly what I personally think has happened.