Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: Checkbook cred
Next Post: Question of the day
Posted in:
* Adam Andrzejewski’s “Open the Books” organization sent out an e-mail this morning entitled “We Sued. Taxpayers Won”…
This is a watershed moment in our fight for transparent government. In a Cook County court room, during ten months of legal wrangling, we’ve shown:
1. Citizens own the State of Illinois checkbook spending information;
2. The Comptroller has a constitutional duty to provide this data on request;
3. The Comptroller has a duty under Freedom of Information Act to fulfill requests;
4. Citizens can request the state checkbook from the Comptroller, from 1996 forward.For the first time in state history, all public State of Illinois checkbook payments since 1996 will soon be online at OpenTheBooks.com. Turns out, “three days of work” wasn’t an “undue burden.”
Our suit forced the IL Comptroller to finally comply with the law. It shouldn’t have taken 18 months and a lawsuit. At OpenTheBooks.com, 40 of the 50 state checkbooks are already posted online.
“We aren’t asking the Comptroller to lead the charge on openness and accountability - only to follow the law.” January 8, 2013 Press Conference
Illinois Freedom of Information law has an enforcement provision that allows for return of reasonable legal fees. Through our attorney, Michael Lotus of Howard Law Firm, our demand for return of our $45,000 (so far) in legal costs is not negotiable. Non-payment would have a chilling effect on future citizen lawsuits of equal importance to rectify instances of trampled rights.
In these hyper-partisan times, Comptroller Judy Baar-Topinka (R) and Attorney General Lisa Madigan (D) found common ground attempting to hide the state checkbook from taxpayers- a position that pitted them against us all.
The taxpayer’s won. Pay up, Judy- and let’s move on. [Emphasis in original]
But, wait. Didn’t Andrzejewski’s group get this info months ago?
* So, I followed up with Andrzejewski. His reply…
We took our time in broadcasting the latest to give the Comptroller opportunity to settle this case. Topinka didn’t seize the opportunity to wrap it up. We are still assessing whether she’s turned over all public information and didn’t withhold or redact too much.
We are serious about driving a judgment and fully enforcing FOIA with return of our legal fees.
Ah, legal fees.
* The comptroller’s spokesman responded…
That “news release” is from left field.
He has the same information that he’s had all along and we haven’t lost a single motion in Court.
I’m not sure how that’s a victory for him, but if it means he is dropping his frivolous lawsuit, so be it.
It sounds like now all that’s left is his absurd attempt to soak taxpayers for his legal fees.
*** UPDATE *** Andrzejewski’s full response to Comptroller Topinka…
We were disappointed to see the response by the Comptroller to our announcement today. Here are some details to set the record straight.
Eighteen months ago we requested the State’s checkbook for 2011 under the Freedom of Information Act. How the taxpayers’ money is spent is a matter of the highest possible public interest. The Comptroller has a duty to the public to make that information available.
The Comptroller responded that it would take “three days” of work to produce these records, and that this was “an undue burden.” After repeated further requests, we were finally forced to bring a lawsuit to get the State’s checkbook. Here’s our complaint: http://forthegoodofillinois.org/wp-content/uploads/20130104-Complaint-by-For-The-Good-Of-Illinois.pdf
The Comptroller, represented by the Attorney General’s office, filed a motion to dismiss our complaint. They argued, among other things, that the State’s outdated computer systems couldn’t remove confidential information from the public spending record. Our response to the Comptroller’s motion is here: http://forthegoodofillinois.org/wp-content/uploads/20130408-Plaintiffs-Motion-For-Relief-Pursuant-To-IL-Rule-191b-1.pdf
We also filed a motion to take discovery, to get information to respond to the Comptroller’s motion to dismiss. The Court granted that motion, and we served written requests for information on the Comptroller. To be clear, we won that motion and the Comptroller lost it.
When the Comptroller saw our detailed, written requests for information, their office finally agreed to provide the information it should have given us from the beginning. The information we forced the Comptroller to disclose was not previously available to the public. For example, we now have itemized payments, which the Comptroller had not produced before.
The Comptroller also stated that it had now written computer code that will allow it to remove confidential information and produce its other spending records. The Comptroller can no longer refuse to produce its entire checkbook by claiming that there are confidential records in it. Our effort in this case has conferred a benefit on everyone who wants to know where the public’s money is going in Illinois.
The Freedom of Information Act provides for attorney’s fees. There is a good reason for this. Citizens of Illinois should not have to fight a legal battle, and spend their own money, to get public records showing how their tax money is spent. Otherwise, the State could withhold public information with little chance that ordinary citizens could ever force that information to be disclosed. This is an important case which we brought on behalf of all Illinois citizens. Seeking our fees is exactly what the Freedom of Information Act provides for.
We are proud of the success we have already had in this case, on behalf of the citizens of Illinois, and we look forward to bringing this case to a conclusion.
posted by Rich Miller
Monday, Nov 4, 13 @ 12:18 pm
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: Checkbook cred
Next Post: Question of the day
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
So who actually owns the check register? The politicians or the taxpayers?
Comment by Allen Skillicorn Monday, Nov 4, 13 @ 12:30 pm
There are more than enough people here that can say I am a bit “light” when it comes to how things are, and I admit that, but what did Adam A. win again?
Adam had the information, admitted he got the info at the least weeks ago, Adam felt the “need” to hire a Law Firm to seem all legit and now the state of Illinois needs to … pay … to the “legal watchdog” … for info the “watchdog” got already …and it cost Adam A., a millionaire, $45K to get …what he already got?
What am I mising? Adam wants to be paid for whining, or better yet, Adam wants this Law Firm paid … for Adam’s whining?
This is what is called;
“I have no end game, so I better figure out fast how to claim victory and get my Lawyers paid for wasting everyone’s time”
Maybe Adam A. will go on that internet and have an annoucemet to clear that up for the likes of me. Maybe Adam A. can call Jason Plummer and they can “telethon” the $45K from those not willing to undeerstand… Adam had the info already, and is looking for anything to hang a hat on to get Lawyers paid from a frivilous attempt to seem relevent.
Maybe Adam A. can rent his helicopter to Jim Oberweis to fly over Soldier Field …”That will be $45K plus fuel”…
Seeking relevence is harder than being relevent, eh, Adam A.?
Comment by Oswego Willy Monday, Nov 4, 13 @ 12:31 pm
Wait, another historic breathing event from Team AA? This changes everything!
Since all of Adam’s “operatives” are with Rauner this means Bruce may start to poll in the double digits in the GOP primary!!!!!!!!
Comment by SuperDuperAbe Monday, Nov 4, 13 @ 12:32 pm
Will Adam A have another press conference to announce he did nothing
Comment by Son of SuperAbe Monday, Nov 4, 13 @ 12:50 pm
Um, if AA didn’t win a FOIA suit in court, I don’t know how he can demand payment for legal fees. I would assume, considering he did not “win” in court, he would have to prove to a Judge that hiring a lawyer was necessary to compel compliance.
Comment by Just Observing Monday, Nov 4, 13 @ 12:50 pm
Adam A., another guy many wish would just go away.
Comment by Downstater Monday, Nov 4, 13 @ 12:55 pm
Did Bill Bradys lite gov pick have any role in this lawsuit? Didn’t she run Adam A’s group for a while?
Comment by hisgirlfriday Monday, Nov 4, 13 @ 12:59 pm
This sounds like what happens when lawyers jump on redistricting lawsuits. Little is done by the latecomers, but they are right there at the end with their bill for fees, and the taxpayer has to pay.
Comment by Tom Joad Monday, Nov 4, 13 @ 1:14 pm
Please, he is Adam A, not AA.
Thank you kindly,
The real AA
Comment by Arthur Andersen Monday, Nov 4, 13 @ 1:17 pm
Kind of difficult to support an open government proponent who wants the government to pay for his efforts. Especially when he also panders for donations. Maybe “open the books” is simply code for “open the checkbooks” to pay his legal fees.
Comment by Jake From Elwood Monday, Nov 4, 13 @ 1:17 pm
Allen Skillicorn
The “check register” is owned by the people. Not just the taxpayers, but those who have confidential data on the checks. Approximately 60% of the checks, it seems. Please remember underneath all the improvements made by Topinka, the basic hardware and software are from Loleta Didrickson’s 1997 implementation of the SAMS System. Until Topinka has the funds (she’s estimated over $100 million) to implement a new system that was designed with FOIA in mind, this is as good as it gets.
http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2013-01-27/opinion/ct-edit-foia-0127-jm-20130127_1_public-access-counselor-comptroller-judy-baar-topinka-public-records-requests
Comment by Anyone Remember? Monday, Nov 4, 13 @ 1:25 pm
And keep in mind that SAMS that was developed in 1997 is still higher tech than healthcare.gov.
;)
Comment by John Bambenek Monday, Nov 4, 13 @ 1:34 pm
Any time you start bellyaching “for the taxpayer”, I tune out.
Over and out, AA.
Comment by Leroy Monday, Nov 4, 13 @ 1:39 pm
I, for one, and am getting scared about these comments from the future.
Comment by OurMagician Monday, Nov 4, 13 @ 1:50 pm
=== Kind of difficult to support an open government proponent who wants the government to pay for his efforts. ===
Disagreed. The clause allowing those that sue for access to public records recover legal costs is very important. It allows those that could otherwise not afford to go after the “endless” resources of the government fighting open government, to challenge government. If the government body loses in front of a judge, they should have been open in the first place. It’s a good incentive to compel compliance.
Comment by Just Observing Monday, Nov 4, 13 @ 1:50 pm
- Just Observing -,
Adam A. got his information. The got it. Suing to make something occur, that has already happened seems quite Dopey.
I look forward to Adam A. to expnad his footprint and go after the 10 or so states that do not have info on the internet …unless Adam A. can’t “shake them down”, I doubt Adam A. will do it.
It is cute Adam A. wants to think he is relevent to the discussion, but the minute he got the info and didn’t understand that suing looks quite ignorant, is just another mark on the side of the accounting column titled “Dope”
Comment by Oswego Willy Monday, Nov 4, 13 @ 2:03 pm
@Oswego Willy — Yea… I was commenting on the legal cost recovery clause in the FOIA in general… not specific to AA. As I stated in a prior post, I’m not sure how he can claim legal costs without actually winning a judgment.
Comment by Just Observing Monday, Nov 4, 13 @ 2:19 pm
Once again, wake me up when Adam actually does something. Exactly what we need less of in Springfield
Comment by Anon Monday, Nov 4, 13 @ 2:25 pm
Another alleged goo-goo out for a score on the taxpayer dime. And this one’s doing it in the name of fiscal restraint and transparency.
Can’t make this stuff up.
Comment by wordslinger Monday, Nov 4, 13 @ 2:33 pm
maybe someone should call for a “forensic audit” of AA. werent those the favorite buzzwords one or two cycles ago?
Comment by langhorne Monday, Nov 4, 13 @ 3:33 pm
Hey J.O.
The FOIA law is the law and I get it. As I understand it, the FOIA provides for reasonable legal fees if and only if the suing party is successful in compelling release of documents. Not if they lose and not if the government has already released the records requested. I think the government should have a right to recover the costs of the Atty General for non-meritorious actions filed under FOIA. Wasting governmental resources on non-meritorious public records issues costs all taxpayers, no?
Comment by Jake From Elwood Monday, Nov 4, 13 @ 3:38 pm
Dear “Open the Books”:
Pat Quinn has apparently infiltrated and commandeered your press shop. He is now ghost-writing press releases with your name on them.
Please resolve this situation forthwith.
Much obliged,
Illinois
https://capitolfax.com/2013/09/12/convenient-timing-on-hq-move/
=== Greg Hinz has an hilarious follow-up to the governor’s announcement that I told you about earlier today…
In fact, the U.S. headquarters of Mike’s Hard Lemonade Co. opened here in April 2012 — a year and a half ago. ===
Comment by Formerly Known As... Monday, Nov 4, 13 @ 3:55 pm
Again, Adam A. got his information weeks ago, so I ahve to ask … what the heck does his “response mean?
Again, Adam A., Seeking relevence is harder than being relevent.
What was won again? Items Adam A. aready got?
Comment by Oswego Willy Monday, Nov 4, 13 @ 5:00 pm
Oswego Willy, it means that Topinka lied twice in her response today: 1. It’s Topinka who lost the only motion with a ruling, 2. Andrzejewski didn’t have the information before filing the lawsuit, he received the information because Topinka/Madigan capitulated rather than answer the written deposition! Anyone who thinks Andrzejewski had the info before suing them is a blithering …,.. Topinka/Madigan were arguing “undue burden” and old legacy computer systems prevented them from producing the record. NOT!
Comment by Kirk Allen Monday, Nov 4, 13 @ 5:37 pm
Kirk Allen -
Please read the link below and then tell me with a straight face that Topinka is NOT using old legacy systems.
http://www.auditor.illinois.gov/Audit-Reports/Performance-Special-Multi/Performance-Audits/2011%20Releases/11-State-Fin-Rpt-Sys-Mgmt-digest.pdf
Better yet, read the full report.
http://www.auditor.illinois.gov/Audit-Reports/Performance-Special-Multi/Performance-Audits/2011%20Releases/11-State-Fin-Rpt-Sys-Mgmt-Full.pdf
Comment by Anyone Remember? Monday, Nov 4, 13 @ 5:46 pm
Um, - Kirk Allen -,
The dam A. is more concerned about getting his Lawyers Paid, and never mentions, not once, about gettting the information, who is kidding who here?
I think someone is blithering when Adam A. is more concerned about getting Lawyers paid by the people of Illinois, and claiming to be … “helping” the people of Illinois, and not stating that the docs in question, were given to Adam A. weeks ago.
So, that must mean no one is paying attention to Adam A. and instead of shining a light on what did happen, Adam A. is trying to make noise, about Lawers and not the inforamtion. That is blithering, and quite Dopey.
Comment by Oswego Willy Monday, Nov 4, 13 @ 5:58 pm
–We are proud of the success we have already had in this case, on behalf of the citizens of Illinois, and we look forward to bringing this case to a conclusion. ==
How about we conclude it and you waive the legal fees you’re trying to score off the taxpayers?
After all, why should they — the taxpayers — pay you when you were doing it for them — the taxpayers?
Stand strong, Kirk and JBT, real Illinois Republicans.
Every Illinois GOP “conservative” should tell Adam Ant “Better Call Saul” hustler to go chase his tail.
Apparently, he can’t make a buck in the private sector actually producing something, so he’s become a parasite on the Illinois Body Politic.
Who does he think he is, Dan Proft?
Comment by wordslinger Monday, Nov 4, 13 @ 6:02 pm
==Topinka/Madigan were arguing “undue burden” and old legacy computer systems prevented them from producing the record. NOT! =
You’ve just demonstrated that you have no clue. I understand the frustration people on the outside have with the FOIA process and I agree that abuses go on sometimes. But, for the most part, FOIA delays or denials have nothing to do with wanting to hide anything and has everything to do with not having the manpower or resources to comply.
Comment by Demoralized Monday, Nov 4, 13 @ 6:03 pm
@FakeJasonPlummer - Adam, give me a call, even I know trying to get money from the state for Lawyers, in the name of the “People” is pretty silly #SuingTheTaxpayersToPayLawyersDoesntMakeYouTheirAdvocate
Comment by Oswego Willy Monday, Nov 4, 13 @ 6:16 pm
JBT has already had an outstanding record of rolling out more and more information to the public over time. The improvements in transparent information have been incrementally delivered to the public for at least two years. The recent on-line delivery of easily readable and searchable local fiscal information is just the latest achievement.
For AA to think he was anything but a distracting irritant and interruption to this process of reform and transparency is mistaken. To try to get paid for what was a destructive and ego-driven activity, is disgusting.
Comment by walkinfool Monday, Nov 4, 13 @ 6:25 pm
Guys, tell it to the Chicago Tribune and Alton Telegraph who are the only two newspapers to editorialize on the lawsuit- they backed For The Good of Illinois, Andrzejewski position:
Chicago Tribune Sunday Editorial, Jan 27, 2013:
http://forthegoodofillinois.org/blog/corruption/2013/01/chicago-tribune-editorial-board-the-burden-of-transparency-this-much-abused-loophole-lets-officials-withhold-too-much-public-data-from-illinois-citizens/
Alton Telegraph Editorial, Jan 9, 2013:
http://forthegoodofillinois.org/blog/politics/2013/01/alton-telegraph-editorial-the-true-definition-of-undue-burden-to-the-comptroller-open-up/
Comment by Kirk Allen Monday, Nov 4, 13 @ 8:58 pm
- Kirk Allen -,
Those editorials are months old, and don’t address the idea that Adam GOT what he wanted and is shaking down the state of Illinois for his Lawyer to get paid, costing the state MORE money. What a DOPE!!
Adam A. cares about Adam A., and how to milk publicity for nothing but costing the state money, while claiming Adam A. Is all about “the people”.
Adam A. Got his docs. Weeks and weeks ago. Adam A. chooses a Session Week, after WEEKS goes by, to get his Lawyers paid? Adam A. Cares nothing’s re than about Adam A., and while real movers and shakers are doing the heavy lifting in government, gadflies like Adam A, beg for relevance, along with Legal Fees, for the “good” of Illinois.
Pathetic.
Comment by Oswego Willy Monday, Nov 4, 13 @ 9:18 pm
“The Comptroller responded that it would take “three days” of work to produce these records, and that this was “an undue burden.””
That’s a lot of man hours. Did we really learn anything important that we didn’t already know in slightly less detail?
When Adam A. comes back and says that he’s found a sincere misuse of funds from the information he’s gotten, then I’ll happily switch sides. But until then, he’s trying to get publicity. Furthermore, if he was in a real watchdog and was doing real work, he could get the money for legal fees pretty easily. Or he could do it out of the goodness of his heart, being a CEO of a company who employs Illinoisans and somebody who cares enough about Illinois to run for governor.
From one of Kirk’s links:
“A spokesman for Topinka says the request filed by For the Good of Illinois covers 15 million records. About 60 percent of them contain confidential information that would have to be excluded. No, the comptroller’s staffers wouldn’t have to redact the records with a Sharpie.”
So, 15 million records? Mostly in paper form that need to be typed up, and made sure that there isn’t any confidential information in them? 3 days of work to put together something remotely presentable and without confidential information seems a bit low. And 3 days of work is a long time; that’s at least 24 hours of work per employee for ??? employees. Seems like a waste of time.
Comment by Timmeh Monday, Nov 4, 13 @ 9:22 pm
AA- “Bruce can I go after those damn entrenched Springfield politicians?”
BR- “Yes Adam but I get the 3 running against me for Gov.”
AA- “Ok I’ll hit someone who is well liked by the voters, has a great record in office and could be the only chance we have at keeping a statewide officer in place by giving her opponent some new fodder!”
BR- “Sounds good, that’ll show those Springfield types I mean business!”
Comment by The DuPage Bard Monday, Nov 4, 13 @ 9:47 pm
The nuts are falling from the trees this Fall. Crack one. Can he just go away?
Comment by Northern Light Tuesday, Nov 5, 13 @ 2:58 am
It’s Adam’s fault that Judy wouldn’t release a simple database query or something?
Alternatively, JBT could have just followed the law and released the info without pending litigation. The law is fairly clear.
Comment by Backwards Tuesday, Nov 5, 13 @ 8:08 am
Backwards -
With all due respect, Loleta’s system isn’t “simple database query” friendly. It was designed to address Y2K and made limited dial-up modem internet queries possible - that’s all.
Comment by Anyone Remember? Tuesday, Nov 5, 13 @ 9:56 am