Trashing the Principles of Good Government

Public bodies typically put contracts for goods and services out to bid for a number of reasons.  The primary reason is to obtain the best price possible through competition.  Additional reasons relate to fairness to all businesses, eliminating discrimination, and reducing corruption.

The best price for a good or service can be obtained through competition, which is the basis of the bidding process.  As an example lets pretend that I am going to buy your car.  In one case, I ask you to tell me how much you will sell your car to me for and tell you that I want your car and will not buy a car from anyone else or even find out the price of a similar car from anyone else.  In the second case, I ask you how much you will sell your car to be for ad tell you that I will be getting prices from 5 other people with nearly identical cars and will buy the one with the lowest price.  In which case will you give me the lowest price?  I think the clear answer is that the lowest price will be given in the second case where there is competition.  Of course, some people may ask for the same amount in both cases, but it would seem pretty illogical for anyone to offer a lower price in the first case.

Well, most of the City Council has decided that Allied Waste is illogical and will offer the city the best price on garbage service if they are allowed to propose a 5 year contract without having to bid against other companies.  Instead of finding out what other companies would charge to provide service they have decided to seek a proposal from one company only.  Ray Soliman was that only Council member to speak up against this plan.  The rest of the Council and the Mayor decided that financial responsibility and good government are not of importance.

It is possible that Allied Waste will provide the best service at the lowest price.  However, we will never know if that is the case unless we allow all companies interested in providing garbage service to bid for the contract.  What is the Council's reason to oppose bidding?  Their publicly stated reason is that they believe that Allied Waste will bid a higher price if faced with competition than they would offer if only their proposal in considered.  That seems to run counter to logic, but we all know that there are members of this Council who would never let logic stop them from violating every principle of good government that they can violate.  As for the members who normally support the principles of good government and fiscal responsibility, I can only hope that they will realize their error before approving a contract without bids.  Ray Soliman was the lone voice on the right side of the issue at the work session on November 21, but I will be looking for others to join him when the issue comes up in a Council meeting.

Another item to be aware of besides the decision not to put the contract out to bid, is that the Council is looking for Allied Waste to hold rates flat for the first two years and defer the increases until the third, fourth, and fifth year of the contract.  I can assure you that the increases in the last three years of the contract will be considerable in order to make up for the lower rates the first two years.  On top of this they are looking to allow Allied Waste to add a fuel surcharge if fuel prices go above a set price.  The residents will be forced to help Allied Waste cover their fuel costs if diesel prices go up again, but we will not have our garbage rates go down if diesel prices fall.  The City Council sees no problem with this one sided proposal. 

The only possible positive is that they are looking to provide wheeled containers with lids to all the homes for trash and recyclables.  There some definite benefits to this idea and I know a number of people have been asking for this.  Of course there is no reason why this could not have been included in a request for bids from other companies.

Job Well Done

The City has been working with Canadian National Railroad to reach an agreement to have the railroad make needed improvements within Crest Hill, if they are approved to purchase the EJ&E tracks.  This agreement was approved by the City at tonight's meeting after a number of work sessions and a great deal of communication between the City Attorney and CN.  The City Administrator also spent a great deal of time working out this agreement.

The city will be getting quiet zones, sound barriers along the tracks near a residential neighborhood, a berm near another neighborhood, a fence and grubbing where the tracks pass near Richland school, and a commitment to reduce the idling of trains in the city.  All of this is being paid for by the CN at a cost of potentially over $1 million.  They are of course not doing this merely out of the goodness of their hearts, but to try to win support for their purchase of the tracks.  The city though did work hard to get all that they could.  

I commend the hard work of city staff on this effort and congratulate the Council on approving an agreement with a company that many in Crest Hill and many other suburbs would rather not see come here at all.  They realized that we do not have the power to stop the deal, but we did have the power to create a number of benefits for ourselves.  This willingness to work with CN has not been present in many other communities.  Crest Hill definitely stands out as a shining example in this case.  Too often I wish we would follow the example of other cities that are doing the right thing, but in this case we have chosen to set the example.  

I will be hoping that our professional city staff continues to help the Council take advantage of opportunities such as this to put aside politics and do what is best for the city and its citizens.  And of course that the Council continues to have the wisdom and dedication to take such actions.

Still Waiting for a Plan

The City has begun some improvements to the water and sewer systems.  Smoke testing of the sewers has been done and further analysis is scheduled.  Cora Street is under construction and other improvements have been begun.  What has not happened however is a plan has not been presented.  Over a year after our water and sewer rates were increased, there is still no detailed Capital Improvements Plan for the water and sewer system improvements.

This plan should include lists of projects to be completed each year for the next 10 to 20 years, both new infrastructure as well as major improvements to existing infrastructure.  Also the source of funding for these projects should be identified for each year.  This type of plan allows the city to balance its expected revenue against its expected needs and then plan the work over a longer time frame.  Major maintenance items are budgeted for so that they are not surprise costs when things break down from age and potential shortfalls are known about years in advance.   

Most cities have these types of plans for all capital spending, such as roads, buildings, water systems, storm and sanitary sewers, and even vehicles. They are valuable tools for ensuring the long term financial health of a city and the most efficient use of city funds through planning.  I do not expect that Crest Hill implement Capital Improvement Plans for all aspects of the city immediately, although it would be a good thing and should have been in place already.  I do feel though that after putting in place steep rate increases on top of automatic annual increases, that exceed inflation, they should have such a plan for the water and sewer systems.  Continuing to use pay-as-you-go does not serve the best interests of the citizens of Crest Hill.  

We deserve better, we deserve well planned improvements to bring our water and sewer systems, we deserve to have our money used wisely and efficiently.  I just want to know when we will get what we deserve.  I want a plan that is more than just raising our rates.  I want a plan that is fixing our problems and letting everyone know what our money is being used for.  

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.

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.

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.

Upcoming Spring Election

I am looking forward to the 2009 Spring Municipal Election here in Crest Hill. It could be a chance to see real change come to this city and with it the idea that government should be responsible to the people. This will require good candidates to come out and stand for election. I can understand why many people would not want to subject themselves to being part of a City Council that has seen members yell at each other, the Mayor yell at members and cut them off short, the Treasurer refuse to provide requested information in a timely manner, and citizens treated as if their opinions and problems were trivial. This is not an ideal environment, but it is all the more reason why we need as many citizens as possible to step up and put themselves forward to serve this city. We need people to step up and run for all the offices that will be open. These offices will be Mayor, Treasurer, Clerk, and one council member in each of the four wards. There will be some good people who will hopefully chose to run for re-election, however I would still encourage everyone to get involved. Democracy is made healthier by having choices. If you have any interest in serving and making this a better city, please put yourself out there, talk to others in this city, and take the time to learn the steps necessary to run.

As some of you know, I made an effort to run for office in 2007 and was removed from the ballot for technical reasons due to an effort to limit the voters choice. I learned from that experience and would be happy to share my knowledge with others and to give my support and encouragement to anyone wishing to run.