October 8, 2008
Bohlen makes statement at a recent candidate forum, saying he was personally opposed to siting a landfill in the city, although as attorney, he has been charged with representing the city of Kankakee interest in securing approval for the landfill.
In case you missed it, please read the Phil Angelo article in the Tuesday October 7 Daily Journal. The article is on the editorial page. It has a picture of the judge candidates including Chris Bohlen who is the long time City of Kankakee Attorney. Believe it or not, Bohlen made a statement at a recent candidate forum, saying he was personally opposed to siting a landfill in the city, although as attorney, he has been charged with representing the city of Kankakee interest in securing approval for the landfill.
Wow, Bohlen has found religion since he is running for judge. With this statement, he is clearly pointing the finger (in more ways then one) at Mayor Green for pushing the mob implicated Fred Barbara ,according to the Chicago newspapers, and his partner Tom Volini proposed garbage dump.
Voters may find his statement disingenuous to say the least. Dump opponents have attended hundreds of meetings over the last 6 years since the first Fred Barbara/Tom Volini dump application in 2002 and they have seen Bohlen get visibly angered over the county's and citizen groups fight against the dump proposal. This is a likely indication he was emotionally connected to the dump issue getting approved and open for business because of the millions promised to the City.
Will the voters be fooled by Bohlen's attempt to back away from the dump after all this time? Does his record, as the City of Kankakee attorney, show good judgment worthily of being elected a Circuit Court Judge? His record includes writing an ordinance for the city council to pass calling for the arrest and fine of anyone who was caught audio and or video taping any city council meeting without permission. The Attorney Generals office was called by area citizens and as a result got involved because this proposed ordinance was blatantly in violation of the Open Meetings Act. As a result of being contacted by the Attorney Generals office Mr. Bohlen pulled the ordinance.