What Is Freeport Township Hiding?
June 16, 2026 | Freeport, IL
A Simple Question
On May 20, 2026, Fighting4Freeport submitted a Freedom of Information Act request seeking aggregate information regarding the expenditure of taxpayer funds through Freeport Township's General Assistance program. What began as a straightforward request for public information has since evolved into a transparency dispute that raises serious questions about whether Freeport Township is meeting its legal obligations under Illinois' Freedom of Information Act and its responsibility to provide taxpayers with clear answers regarding the expenditure of public funds.
The question itself was simple. How many individuals receiving Township assistance are convicted Sex Offenders, and how much total taxpayer money is being distributed by township, to them or other felons, through those programs?
Before anyone rushes to conclusions, it is important to understand what was not being requested. Fighting4Freeport was not asking for names, addresses, dates of birth, Social Security numbers, case files, or any other personally identifying information. The Illinois Sex Offender Registry shows much of that. We were not seeking to expose recipients or publish private information. We were seeking aggregate information—numbers and totals that would allow taxpayers to better understand how public funds, collected by Freeport Township are being spent.
In other words, the question was not who.
The question was how many and how much.
That distinction would become increasingly important as this story unfolded.
Why FOIA Exists
Many Americans assume government transparency happens automatically. It does not.
Throughout history, government agencies at every level have demonstrated a natural tendency toward secrecy when questions become uncomfortable. That reality is precisely why transparency laws exist. Without them, citizens would be forced to rely solely on the statements of elected officials and government agencies regarding their own conduct.
In Illinois, one of the most important transparency tools available to citizens is the Freedom of Information Act, commonly known as FOIA. The law exists because government records do not belong to politicians. They do not belong to agency heads. They do not belong to elected boards. They belong to the people.
FOIA is not intended to be a political weapon. It is not intended to be used to harass public officials. At its core, FOIA exists for one purpose: verification. Citizens should not be required to simply trust what government tells them. They should have the ability to review records and reach their own conclusions.
When public bodies refuse to provide records, claim records do not exist, or provide responses that appear inconsistent, Illinois law provides citizens with a process for independent review. That process exists because government should never be the sole judge of whether it has been transparent.
The Request
To answer the questions surrounding Township assistance, Fighting4Freeport submitted a FOIA request on May 20, 2026.
The request specifically stated that we were not seeking names, addresses, dates of birth, Social Security numbers, case files, or any personally identifying information. The request sought only aggregate information sufficient to determine how many individuals fell into certain categories and how much taxpayer money was being distributed through the program.
Specifically, the request sought records sufficient to show the number of assistance recipients who were listed on the Illinois Sex Offender Registry, the amount of assistance distributed to those individuals, and, if no such records existed, the number of recipients with felony convictions and the amount of assistance distributed to them.
That distinction matters.
We were not asking the Township to identify anyone. We were asking the Township to account for public funds.
There is a significant difference between those two things.
The Township's First Response
The Township did not initially state that the information did not exist.
Instead, the Township sought an extension and later argued that fulfilling the request would be unduly burdensome. According to the Township, compliance would require reviewing approximately 2,400 client files spanning more than ten years.
In fairness, that is not an insignificant number. If the Township genuinely believed the request was too broad, there was a reasonable solution.
So we provided one. Rather than continue arguing over scope, Fighting4Freeport voluntarily narrowed the request from more than a decade of records to a single calendar year.
One year. Not eleven. One.
A reasonable person would assume that narrowing a request by more than ninety percent would make it easier to answer.
Instead, it raised even more questions.
The Response That Raised More Questions
On June 10, 2026, after the request had been narrowed to a single calendar year, the Township issued its revised response.
Rather than arguing that providing the requested public information would require substantial effort, the Township now asserted that responsive records did not exist regarding several categories of information requested.
That response immediately raises a question.
If the original problem was that locating and providing the information would require searching records, how does the same information later become nonexistent?
Those are not necessarily mutually exclusive positions. There may be a perfectly reasonable explanation.
But taxpayers have not been given one.
Adding to the confusion, the Township simultaneously produced records documenting a felony conviction of a single assistance applicant while maintaining that it could not provide aggregate information concerning recipients with felony convictions.
Again, perhaps there is a reasonable explanation. If there is, taxpayers deserve to hear it. Because transparency is not merely about providing answers. It is about providing answers that make sense.
Explaining Versus Answering
One of the more interesting aspects of this situation has been the Township's public response.
Prior to May 18, 2026, Township Supervisor Patrick Sellers had not posted publicly from his official Supervisor Facebook page since November 2025.
Then, on May 18, 2026, the Township published a lengthy public statement titled "Clearing Up Confusion," explaining that Illinois townships have no jurisdiction over sex offenders or child predators. Ten days later, on May 28, 2026, the Township published another extensive statement explaining why registered sex offenders may still qualify for General Assistance under Illinois law.
To be clear, there is nothing inherently wrong with elected officials providing information to the public. In fact, they should. Educating citizens about government programs is an important responsibility of public office.
However, there is an important distinction between explaining a policy and answering a question.
Throughout this discussion, taxpayers were provided explanations regarding why townships do not regulate sex offenders, why certain individuals may qualify for assistance under Illinois law, and how General Assistance programs operate.
What taxpayers were not provided were answers to the questions that started the conversation in the first place.
Explanations and personal views on leadership are not a substitute for records.
Public relations is not a substitute for transparency.
And Facebook posts designed to get ahead of the situation or change the narrative are not a substitute for answering legitimate questions regarding the expenditure of taxpayer dollars.
When Transparency Breaks Down
What is most concerning about this situation is not whether a sex offender receives assistance.
This issue is what happens when government stops answering questions.
In a representative government, taxpayers are not required to blindly trust elected officials. They are entitled to verify. They are entitled to ask questions. They are entitled to review records.
The moment citizens lose the ability to independently verify what government is doing, transparency becomes little more than a slogan.
Whether the issue involves roads, taxes, public safety, zoning, purchasing policies, or General Assistance programs, the principle remains the same. Taxpayers have a right to know how public funds are being spent and a right to expect clear, consistent answers when they ask legitimate questions.
When local government refuses to provide answers, provides inconsistent answers, or fails to adequately respond to public records requests, Illinois law provides citizens with a process to seek independent review.
That process exists for a reason. Government should never be the sole judge of its own transparency.
What makes this situation particularly troubling is that a simple FOIA request has now presented taxpayers with two possible explanations, neither of which should inspire confidence.
The first possibility is that responsive information exists and Township officials are choosing not to provide clear answers regarding those records. Whether that means unnecessary delay, avoidance, or an overly restrictive interpretation of the Freedom of Information Act is something readers can decide for themselves.
The second possibility is arguably even more concerning.
If the Township's responses are taken at face value, then taxpayers are left to wonder whether Freeport Township truly lacks the ability to determine how many assistance recipients have felony convictions or how much taxpayer-funded assistance is being distributed to those individuals.
In other words…. INCOMPETENCE. After being asked a direct question regarding the expenditure of public funds, the Township's position appears to be either that it cannot answer the question or does not know the answer.
Neither possibility should sit comfortably with taxpayers.
One suggests a transparency problem. The other suggests a management or supervision problem.
Both deserve public attention.
F4F Chairman’s Analysis | Joshua T. Atkinson
Perhaps there is a reasonable explanation for every inconsistency identified throughout this process.
If so, Freeport Township should welcome the opportunity to provide it. Transparency should never be feared by those with nothing to hide or those with future political ambitions.
The reality is that on May 20, 2026, Fighting4Freeport asked a simple question.
How many?
How much?
More than three weeks later, taxpayers are still waiting for a clear answer.
That should concern every citizen regardless of political party, ideology, or opinion regarding who should qualify for government assistance.
Because the moment government decides it no longer has to answer legitimate questions about taxpayer dollars is the moment accountability begins to disappear.
The most troubling aspect of this entire situation is that a simple request for records has left taxpayers questioning not only the Township's transparency, but also its competence.
Either the information can be determined and taxpayers are not being given a straight answer, or the Township genuinely does not know who the people are receiving taxpayer-funded assistance and how much is being distributed to dangerous individuals.
For an agency whose primary responsibility includes administering public assistance programs, both possibilities should be alarming.
The troubling reality is that many residents may find both possibilities entirely believable.
And until taxpayers receive a clear answer, the question remains: