In our last piece, we referenced Chuck Weikel's website to compare what he says with what he does. We conclude our series with one last piece taken from his own web-site:
What Weikel Says: "In 1992 he purchased ABC Industries, a 75-employee specialized manufacturing company based in Illinois and ran it as President and CEO until 2000. He met payrolls and grew the business to almost three times its previous size."
The company may have grown during Weikel's tenure, but it did not last. ABC Industries stands for, or stood for Agricultural Building Company which is apparently out of business. The only reference I could find on the web was a legal opinion in the US District Court for Minnesota on April 30, 2002 for a lawsuit that seems to indicate that the company Weikel co-owned and operated developed serious financial problems. The opinion says that "ABCI, suffered a series of financial setbacks. As a result, it ceased paying the policy's premiums after April, 1998." It also said that "Doubtless, Mr. Lucas and Mr. Weikel were "insiders" -- they were virtually the whole company. ... And there is no question the company was insolvent; that's why it owed money to AMCORE." It's an interesting case involving determining the beneficiary of the life insurance policy of Weikel's business partner who "died on April 6, 2000, from a self-inflicted accidental gunshot wound. The coroner examined the circumstances of the death and found Mr. Lucas's death was accidental." See: court decision
My letter:
Dear Sir:
The rest of the article is taken from things you have said and you have written so I do not require any verification or comment. I write this to you out of journalistic fairness although I don't think that this courtesy is either a necessity, nor is it anything you would extend to me or anyone else if the shoe were on the other foot. Indeed you have used emails to various people to personally attack me, but here I stick to facts and let them speak for themselves--another courtesy I don't believe you routinely extend to others either. However, if I receive a reply in a reasonable amount of time, I shall endeavor to include your response or comments on the above piece. I should remind you that the court was not making any judgment about any statements of fact, but accepted the situation as facts. The link I provide to the court case makes that doubly clear.
I hope you will agree that in the normative construct of American journalism, fairness is an absolute.
His Reply:
On Tue, Dec 30, 2008 at 3:29 PM, Chuck Weikel <cweikel@mac.com> wrote:
My Reply
Mr. Weikel:
No, I see no reason why I would be interested in speaking to you again. I was hoping you would explain what this is about. My email was clear. I am giving you the chance to comment on that excerpt provided in the previous email. It is your choice to do so or not, just as it was your choice to write all the things you have written and published.
Sincerely,
Paul Foer
His Reply: (Which he cc'd to Craig Purcell again and this time also to his brother Ben Purcell, a local builder.)
My Final Action...I did not bother to reply. I guess I'll just take his response as a roundabout way to say no comment.
However, as further example of his ongoing activities, Weikel sent an email to Democratic Alderman and putative mayoral candidate Dick Israel on December 31. He cc'd this email to Mayor Moyer, a Ward One list, Democratic leaders and activists, aldermen, reporters and of course, the Purcell brothers. He did not share it with CP. I had to get it second-hand. Remember, this is the man whose own website purports to support Democratic Party unity, and civil public discourse. This is a portion of Weikel's letter.
Dear Dick: You want to scuttle public debate on your own City Manager legislation. Do you really believe that a Rules Committee hearing held in the middle of the day suffices for a public hearing before the Council? [CP Note--there have been and there will be more public meetings on this--official and unofficial]
You know better. Its {sic} dishonest and unfair in a democratic system.
Unfortunately, you appear to be leading the way in the abandonment of the rules and process in this Council. ......It would be nice to be King and in charge. I am sure many problems could get solved with that authority.....You now want to undo that and concentrate power in your cabal of 5's hands {sic}.
One can speculate about your motives. In Annapolis especially {sic}. But your latest naked attempt to abandon lawful process stands out as a betrayal of democratic procedure and rule of law that you claim you care about protecting. Stop facilitating the usupring of power by the Council. Its {sic} both undemocratic and unDemocratic. Chuck.
The good alderman replied with a five point refutation of Weikel's charges but his opening paragraph bears repeating:
Dear Chuck:
Your electronic messages of New Year's Eve suggest that you have brought the season of goodwill to an early close. It would be tiresome for me to compose and for you and others to read a detailed response to your assorted jeremiads..... Sincerely, Richard Israel
By the way, according to City-Data.com, this highly partisan Democrat gave $250 on 6-23-99 through ABC Industries to Illinois Congressman Hastert, the Republican Speaker of the House! See: Weikel Hastert . That was back when Weikel was an Illinois businessman.
I hope that I have allowed this story to tell itself and in so doing have provided a public service that is timely and relevant to political activists and those concerned with our community and its governance. I have striven to be fair and to stick to the facts. Reader comments are welcome--unless they are offensive and derogatory. Anonymous comments will be published if appropriate. I don't think this is the last we will hear about Chuck Weikel.
Please send comments, subscribe, share with your friends, and support our sponsors. Join us at Ahh Coffee! in Eastport almost every Thursday from 8-9 am.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment