From Racine Exposed:
"Newly revealed Documents from the IRS evidence that Monte Osterman’s business, Root River Council INC. was NEVER operated
as a legitimate Non-profit Organization and that there was collusion
between parties at Racine County to commit fraud and “fix” the
circumstances AFTER the fraud was discovered and a verified complaint was filed.
"Racine County Supervisor Monte Osterman has NEVER
produced a document that would evidence that Root River Council was
operated as a legitimate Non-Profit organization. In fact, IRS data
proves that Root River Council was NEVER operated as a Non-Profit
Organization, in contradiction to the claims of Monte Osterman, Racine
County and the Racine County Ethics Board. Racine County, at best,
failed in it’s requirement to perform DUE DILIGENCE, as discussed in the previous post,
Did Racine County Supervisor Monte Osterman Lie Before The Racine
County Ethics Board and Was There A County Initiated Cover-Up? At worst, Racine County public officials colluded with Racine County Supervisor Monte Osterman to initiate a cover-up."
Read more: http://racineexposed.wordpress.com/2014/10/03/re-exclusive-irs-data-evidences-racine-county-corruption-did-racine-county-public-officials-collude-with-racine-county-supervisor-monte-osterman-and-root-river-council-attorney-rebecca-mason-to-com/
Related: http://racinecommunitymedia.tumblr.com/post/98846412633/racines-machinery-row-rumored-to-be-dead-in-the
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
7 comments:
Ive read it all and have opinions. Not sure they are popular opinions.
Could very well be that shady transactions have taken place here somewhere, but I don't think that you've really stated your point well if there is, in fact, merit to this claim.
The date looks more like a received STAMP, which is archaic, but still is sometimes used. That alone, does not necessarily proclaim this to be altered or a forged document. Maybe I'm missing a bigger part of this? Perhaps because I don't know the whole background, omissions make your point seem less noteworthy?
There were multiple reasons listed why the document was not found and sent from the original file request. It never came out and said it wasn't on file? It said in a confusing and vague manner that some criteria necessary wasn't met. Bureaucratic mumbo-jumbo.
I guess I felt after reading it all that there is a significant lack of decorum here and a frustration on both sides.
I don't know either party. I have no personal stake in the matter, so previous comments that some of us support corruption are ridiculous.
I think it is great that citizens are watching these transactions. We do need transparency in this manner and that does seem to incite the opposition.
I link to these blogs as a public service. I do not particularly support any one of them, but citizens have a right to read something besides the Journal Times' pablum. Racine Exposed and Racine Community Media seem to top the list of alternative web sites.
No problem, Clint. I agree. It is important to read all sides of a story before making any decisions. Unfortunately, our local paper omits things it feels are too controversial, or might make those who are "influential" or who hold power, angry.
I also have to hear/read both sides.
Although it seem might suspicious that there is so many complaints against the city and some of their (city hall) people.
I hope the "hoopla" continues until it's all ironed out.
that there is so many
Beejay, that's my no gooder English.
should be "that there are so many"
Lol. You're safe, my friend.
Oops, i forgot to mention Racine in Ruins as another great alternative site.
Post a Comment