Letter: Sean Michels—the truth

By on January 28, 2010

I would like people to know that on Oct. 24, 2009, my husband asked me if it was all right if he ran for the Illinois State Senate. I was not shocked, because I knew he always had this idea in mind.

I want to make it clear that Sean was not asked by anyone to run. It was always an aspiration of his, and anyone who knows Sean well, knows that about him. Sean knew full and well that his being village president, and his dad’s firm being the village engineer, would come up. Did you think he wouldn’t?

The truth of the matter is, Engineering Enterprises Inc. (EEI) was the engineer of the town before Sean came into office. In no way did he steer or vote his board into keeping EEI as village engineers. He would not have been able to run for village president if the lawyers hadn’t done their job and saw that it was not a conflict of interest. Nor would he have been re-elected three times if the voters thought it was an issue.

On the Mallard Point issue, that subdivision was built before Sean became village president.

My husband is a good and honest man who has the people’s best interest at heart. He does his very best every day to make the people around him happy. That is why he works well with his constituents. He is the kind of man who says “hi” to everyone, asks how they are, and congratulates his kids’ classmates for a job well done at their sporting events; and he truly means it. Sean shares on similar issues with his opponent, but the difference is he works well with others.

As you can see in the papers, the only thing his opponent can find to make you question Sean’s integrity has no standing. It is not even an issue. If it was, he would have brought it up years ago. He knows Sean and his family and knows they are good people. Why else would he have taken campaign money from my father-in-law four years ago and send us an invitation to his Porky Pig fundraiser in August?

Would you vote for a man who uses intimidation to get votes? I won’t.

After 17 years in office, it is time for a new voice.

Every word I just wrote here is the truth; if it wasn’t, I would not be able to sleep at night.

Valerie Michels
Sugar Grove


  1. inside loop

    January 28, 2010 at 8:22 PM

    I agree it is time for a new voice, but not in the State Senate. We need the new voice in Sugar Grove so the village can actually start moving in a positive direction. With Sean gone, the village can stop feeding the pockets of his family through EEI and start saving some money by actually bidding out projects. Enough is enough. Citizens of Sugar Grove need to wake up and stop electing Sean into positions of power.

  2. sgmom

    January 29, 2010 at 8:08 AM

    I applaud Val Michels for putting her feelings into print. Sean has worked hard for Sugar Grove and will work hard as a state senator. I wish that people would lay off the “bid the engineering projects”. Service contracts are awarded on qualifications, not fees. Engineering Enterprises is qualified. They were serving as Village Engineers before sean was ever village president. it is time for these comments about their fees to end.

  3. RM

    January 29, 2010 at 7:38 PM

    Appreciate hearing another side. We’ve heard plenty of trash talk but the papers are reluctant to print anything that helps readers make a truly informed choice. I personally don’t know Sean or much about him but this letter at least shows a better perspective. Politics is too much about trashing people and not enough about electing people who can effectively move us ahead.

  4. Jojo

    February 2, 2010 at 4:14 AM

    If most Republican leaders had the same values, wisdom, courage and care for their constituents as Chris Lauzen, our nation would not be in the mess it is now. All this talk about Chris not bending so he needs to be replaced. What is it he’s supposed to bend towards? More taxes? More abortions? Change the definition of marriage? More power to the government? As noted in other comments on this site, Chris has done much to improve the lives of his constituents. A vote to replace Chris Lauzen is a vote for bending towards the desires of the corrupt leadership now in office. Why else would anyone want to replace this man who is steadfast in support of his people.

  5. RM

    February 5, 2010 at 6:33 PM

    Lauzen is hardly a saint and voters don’t look to politicians for their moral compass. He’s stumbled plenty of time and he has served long enough. We need term limits and new blood – not career politicians.