Q&A with Lantz

1. Why are you running for this office, whether for re-election or election the first time? Is there a particular issue that motivates you, and if so, what? What will be your main priority?

I am running for re election to the office of coroner because I take great pride in the service I and my staff give to the families we serve, and I would like to continue doing that. I like being a member of the law enforcement team and working for the good of the community.

2. For incumbents and non-incumbents. If you are an incumbent, describe your main contributions. Tell us of important initiatives you've led. If you are not an incumbent, tell us what contributions you would make.

I have gone into the area high schools talking to the teens about the dangers of drug and alcohol abuse and reckless driving. I also speak to Law in Government classes about the workings of the coroner's office in our county. I have given numerous presentations to local civic groups around the county about the coroner's office and our responsibilities.

I have recently read articles discussing the dangers of dumping drugs into our sewer systems and how it is affecting our groundwater. I feel that we need to take action to prevent further contamination. I propose that we work on legislation that would enable us to "recycle" these drugs. Instead of flushing them down the drain or putting them in the local landfill, we should have a central processing center where the drugs could be screened and processed and distributed to clients of local free clinics. Many of these people must make the difficult decision of using what little funds they may have, to either eat or pay for the drugs needed for various medical problems. We are now just dumping these medications when we should be "recycling" them. I have sent information on this to local representatives' and senators' offices.

3. The central issue in this race seems to be whether the incumbent fulfilled her duties as coroner during the investigation into the deaths at the Woodstock Residence. If so, please describe how. If not, please offer details as to why not.

The deaths that occurred at the Woodstock Residence were considered to be natural deaths. The patients in question were registered as hospice patients, meaning that they were in very poor health and not expected to live much longer. When the deaths occurred, my office was notified and the cases were returned to medical, meaning that the physician attending each patient signed their death certificate. None of the doctors called my office with any questions or concerns about the patients.

The first I heard of any questions surrounding any of the deaths was from a reporter who wanted to know "when we were going to be digging up bodies?" I was shocked to say the least and thought it must be some mistake. I was told the state's attorney was involved so I thought if any of this was happening, I would have been, AS REQUIRED BY STATUTE, notified. Then later that night I was contacted by a news station out of Chicago who said there was an investigation being conducted by the McHenry County State Attorney's office and the Illinois State Police. The next morning I still had not heard from the state attorney's office so went over there and met with Mr. Louis Bianchi and his assistant Ms. Nicole Owens. They both told me they had nothing to do with the investigation and said they had only issued subpoenas. I told them that meant they were part of the case and that I should have been notified. Mr. Bianchi later told me he did not notify me because they were COLD deaths not WARM deaths. I tried to explain to him that there is no such thing in the statute citing that notifications must only be made when a warm death occurs. I asked him to cite the statute that states there is such a thing and he never produced it. I then called Larry Trent, the head of the Illinois State Police, and told him that by statute we are to be notified of any suspicious death and that he had failed to do so. He told me he did not like my attitude and would offer no further information.

I was kept out of the investigation until they decided they wanted me to come and sign the petitions for the exhumations orders. I was then invited to the state's attorney's office for a meeting about the exhumations and asked to sign the petitions. I refused because I have not been given any information on the cases. The state police finally gave me copies of some of the interviews. I felt that if people were saying there had been a possibility that these people could have been murdered then an investigation, including exhumations, should be done.

I tried to tell them what needed to be done for an exhumation; permits, procedures, etc. and they blew me off. I told them they needed a permit. They said they didn't. I even called Springfield and got a copy of the statute governing exhumations and gave them all copies, but they refused to follow it, so the first body was removed without the proper permits.

So in answer to your question, "did I fulfill my duties as coroner in this case?" I wasn't allowed to. The state attorney's office failed to come forward and protect my rights in regard to the performance of my duties under the statute.

4. Does the coroner's office provide enough outreach in the community? Are there educational efforts the coroner's office should be undertaking that it is not currently? If so, what? Please be specific and offer funding sources.

I and some of the members of my staff go out into the schools and community and give presentations on the dangers of drug and alcohol abuse. We also work with the sheriff's department in their intern program, allowing law enforcement students to spend a week of their internship in my office. They are allowed to ride along on calls and are on hand for the various duties we perform. These students are also able to rotate through other county offices so that they become familiar with all facets of the law enforcement team.

5. Not including those issues already identified above, is there another issue you believe will affect the coroner's office over the next four years? If so, define it and explain how you would like to see it addressed.

Issues that will be affecting the office in the next four years will be a bigger case load and the possibility of being hit with the bird flu epidemic that may come our way. We are now updating our disaster plan to address those needs in the event of an epidemic. We also need to work to find ways to try to bring down the number of drug deaths that we are seeing in the area.

6. Please list the names of all relatives employed by or involved in contracts with McHenry County, their relationship to you and their position or area of business.

I have no relatives employed by or involved in contracts with McHenry County.