Wednesday, October 8, 2008

A Different Way of Doing Things

While, I am a resident of Crest Hill and have taken an intense interest in the operations of our city government, I also a resident of a number of other political entities.  One of which is Plainfield Township, due to my living west of Gaylord Rd, unlike most of the rest of the city which is in Lockport Township to the east.  I have long meant to attend the meetings of the township as well as other entities in the area.

My experience at the township meeting stood in stark contrast to the many Crest Hill City Council meetings I have attended.  This was most evident in how public comment was handled.  Public comments were taken at the beginning and at the end of the meeting.  Taking comments at the beginning allowed citizens to speak on issues prior to action being taken and allowed residents not to have to stay until the end of the meeting just to be heard.  Of even greater note though was how the comments were responded to by the Township Supervisor and Board members.  The residents were treated with respect, their issues were discussed in detail, there was a dialogue between the residents and the elected officials, and the residents were told exactly what actions would be taken in response to their comments.  The board spent half an hour dealing with the two residents comments regarding the recent flooding in the township.  

Contrast this with how the Crest Hill City Council treats its residents when they make public comment.  The only response to many comments is a cursory "thank you."  Others are met with derision and dismissal by Mayor Churnovic.  The best one can hope for is a statement that the Mayor will look into it and that the resident should talk to the Mayor later.  The Mayor and Council refuse to ever discuss a matter with a concerned citizen publicly, even though many times an issue affecting one person affects a number of others in the City.  Crest Hill views public comments as something that has to be endured, should be completed as quickly as possible, and do not need to be followed up on.  I think this makes a strong statement about how the City and some of its officials view the citizens and their concerns.

This is jut one more reason why change is needed in the City of Crest Hill.  A change of attitudes.  A change of priorities.  And a change of elected officials.

Monday, October 6, 2008

City Communication

At tonight's City Council meeting a contract with a technology consultant was approved to create and maintain a website for the city.  I had a chance a couple months ago to hear a representative of the technology consulting firm present to the Council.  I was impressed with what he had to say and feel he will be able to serve the city well.  Crest Hill has a website currently, but has done an extremely poor job of keeping it updated and relevant.  I wish it had been possible for the city staff to have kept the existing site in the condition that the citizens deserved.  However that will now be taken care and the first year's cost is being covered by a State grant, thankfully.

I am a strong proponent of people knowing what the City is doing and being able to participate in government.  An open and accessible government is the best way to force our elected officials to do their jobs, work for our best interest, and root out corruption and inefficiency.  A website that provides information on meeting dates, agendas, minutes, local ordinances, and the ability to interact with city government on-line is a large step towards more open and accessible government.  Once it is on-line, the whole world knows what is going on and the actions of out city will no longer be hidden away.  And a citizen that can contact the city and get what he or she needs with a few clicks of a mouse, is more involved than may otherwise have been possible.

During the meeting, I was also reminded a number of times of one of the great communication failings of this city.  Numerous agenda items are voted one with little discussion or explanation.  Most of those in the audience and watching on television have little idea of the issues being decided.  If one really wants to know what is going on, one would need to attend the work sessions where the issues are discussed in depth and questioned fully.  While these work sessions are open to the public, they are poorly attended for a number of reasons and also they are not televised.  The work sessions are not held on a consistent basis or always on the same day of the week.  This makes it difficult to know when all work sessions are.  I find myself often having to stop by city hall and check the posted agendas to keep track of when they are.  And the varying evenings are not conducive to those with busy schedules who need to plan ahead if they wish to attend city meetings.  The real failure though is that the City does not broadcast the work sessions.

The City controls the public access channel that the council meetings and other community events are broadcast on.  The City has given control of the channel to a group of volunteers and has contributed thousands of dollars towards the equipment used to run the channel.  While, I recognize that any broadcasts require the time and efforts of this group of volunteers, I feel that it is the responsibility of the City to work with them to broadcast the work sessions.  I do not think it is too much to ask this of those who run the station in consideration of what the City provides to them in terms of funding and the opportunity to broadcast other content.  I do not see the need for the work sessions to be done in the same quality as the council meetings if that would allow the use of fewer people to record the meeting.  

Communication is about more than the City merely keeping the residents informed, it is about allowing the citizens to be involved in government.  This cannot be a government of the people, by the people, and for the people, if the people are kept in the dark and unable to know what the government is doing.  I applaud the City for taking a step in the right direction with the website and urge them to keep working to improve communication in other ways so as to better serve this city.

Thursday, October 2, 2008

Why Must We Feud?

I have lived in Crest Hill for 3 years now and am still unable to figure out why everyone seems to be so defensive of their city and so opposed to any other city. Every political entity that covers multiple cities seems to have their oppinions divided by those municipal boundries. This is not something I have really seen as much elsewhere.

District 205 (Lockport Township HS) seems forever divided by Lockport vs. Homer Glen. People in Lockport do not feel that a school in their district is theirs if it is in Homer Glen. And Homer Glen residents seem to have a chip on their shoulder that the district and the current schools bear the Lockport name.

The Des Plaines Valley Library District serves 70,000 people, but feels it needs 3 libraries to do so. Or more accurately feels that it needs to build a library in each city served if they are going to be able to get a building referendum passed. One library could serve the entire district, as long as the State sees fit to leave the bridges open and to even possibly build an addtional one someday. That would of course mean the library would be in one city and not the other two. The residents of the other two cities could not stand for that. They would scream that they were paying for another city's library. Of course they ignore the fact that they would still use it regardless of city boundries.

I can imagine if we all functioned the way that residents of this area do. We would insist that if the federal government wants to build an office building, they had better build one in every city becuase we will not support Washington DC's buildings with our tax dollars. And we should stop building highways that are driven on by people from other parts of the country. Sure we are all one country, but why should Arizona get a new "elite" highway that we have to pay for? They should break off and form a new nation and build their own highway!

I do not know why this attitude is so strong here. Why are we so protective of our cities and so opposed to our neighbors? Especially since so many of our local governments cross city borders. Our school districts, park districts, fire protection districts, library districts and townships cross municipal boundries. These entities provide us far more services than our cities do and should tie us together. And then we must ask the question of why can we go just a little west and see a different attitude? The four high schools with Plainfield in their names serve kids from a number of surrounding communities and there has been no outcry about their names and no one complains that Plainfield taxpayers built a school that is attended by kids from Joliet.