A New Day in Crest Hill

The voters of Crest Hill have spoken today and have made it clear that the era of unethical and scandalous government is over.  Mayor Churnovic was defeated in his bid for re-election and the City Council candidates he supported and funded were defeated as well.  This is a good day for Crest Hill.  Four years ago many people were happy to see change, but few realized that change was not always for the better.  Today though we have seen real change and that change is for the better.

Our city will be led by a Ray Soliman, a man who has spent years pushing for open government and calling on the city to follow the proper procedures.  I feel strongly that Mayor Soliman will lead the city with a strong sense of ethics and care for citizens.  I am sure I will disagree with some of his decisions and positions, but I look forward to having a Mayor who will treat all citizens with fairness.

Aldermen Dyke, Lelis, and Convery were re-elected.  Lelis and Convery have been very outspoken on pushing for city government to be more responsive and for the Council and Mayor to work together to improve Crest Hill.  They have also both been very strong advocates for the interests of their wards.  Alderman Dyke is a very level-headed and practical member of the Council.  He did not take on the corruption of the past four years head on, but he has always conducted himself independently of the disputes among other members of the Council.  These three aldermen will serve the city well for the next four years.

The third ward, where I live, elected a new alderman, Neal Sternisha.  I have had the chance to get to know Neal and talk with him on many occasions and look forward to having him as my alderman and also look forward to what he will bring to the Council as a whole.  In particular his professional background in the water and wastewater fields is of particular value to a city facing massive capital outlays to improve our own systems in those areas.  In addition, he is someone who has spoken out for the need for more ethical government in Crest Hill and stood up to a brutal campaign financed by Nick Churnovic.

This is truly a bright new day in Crest Hill.  I hope that all of those who won election tonight remember that it was the desire of the people of Crest Hill for a more ethical and open government that got them elected.  I will be looking forward to seeing a better government, but also will be looking to see Crest Hill move forward and continue to develop to its full potential.

City Awards Garbage Contract Without Bids

Last night the City Council voted to award a five year contract to Allied Waste for garbage, recycling and yard waste collection.  Bids from other companies were not sought before this contract for in excess of $5,000,000 was awarded.  I have written previously regarding why bidding makes good fiscal sense and is the financially responsible thing to do (http://cresthill-illinois.blogspot.com/2008/12/trashing-principles-of-good-government.html).  I have also written about the Committee to Re-Elect the Mayor accepting a large donation from Allied Waste and the ethical issues that poses (http://cresthill-illinois.blogspot.com/2008/12/mayoral-ethics-part-ii.html).  

Not only did Alderpersons Vershay, Oberlin, Brandolino, Dyke, and Inman vote as if they believed that bidding had no sound purpose and that there was nothing wrong with those seeking city contracts giving political contributions; they actually voiced such opinions.  It was shocking to hear such statements expressed by those who have been entrusted by the public to act in the best interest of the city and its citizens.  

Alderwoman Oberlin stated that to go out to bid would be like gambling that we have no way of knowing that we would get a better price by doing so.  She also stated that it would be irresponsible to gamble like that.  In fact, we would not be gambling as we know the outcomes so long as we can assume that Allied Waste is run by rational people seeking to make a profit.  We would get a price at least as good if not better by going out to bid because the addition of competition would drive prices down.  My previous post goes into this in greater detail.  The truth though is that there is nothing irresponsible about going out to bid, there is in fact something very irresponsible about not seeking the lowest cost for the citizens of Crest Hill.

Alderman Inman commented that there was no connection between the Mayor, the contributions by Allied Waste to his campaign, and this contract.  Well, the connection between the Mayor and the contributions is clear and direct.  It is also apparent that the Mayor spoke in work sessions supporting awarding the contract without bidding.  He also worked to negotiate this contract.  Alderman Inman may think that because the fuel surcharge was negotiated out, the Mayor did a good job and the city got a great deal.  Well, the truth is that in any negotiation the terms are on the table and to have negotiated out of new language that few other cities have ever agreed to is not a huge victory.  And even if t had been an amazing negotiation, considering only one company to the exclusion of all others is irresponsible.

Two of the men running for Mayor spoke up in opposition to awarding this large contract without going out for bid and should be commended for their efforts.  Alderman Soliman spoke to the point that I believe is central which is that any price given in these negotiations should be able to have submitted as a bid, if not an even lower price.  Mr. Semplinski brought up the very insightful point that if Allied Waste can afford to hold the price for the next year the same as it was this year, they must have been able to make a pretty good profit this year and probably had more room to offer a lower price.  I wish the incumbent Mayor had the wisdom to put forth such good thoughts and to encourage those who follow his lead to have done the right thing.

Mayoral Ethics, Part II

A few months ago it was revealed that the Committee to Re-Elect Mayor Nick Churnovic had accepted donations from two engineering firms that were actively seeking to do business with the City at that time.  A portion of the City Council at that time spoke out against his actions and publicly stated that they did not want to see pay-to-play politics become the way Crest Hill is run.  

Well, the Mayor has now reaffirmed his belief that pay-to-play is the means by which he is governing the City of Crest Hill.  His re-election committee has accepted money from Allied Waste.  This is the same company that is looking to get a five year garbage services contract from the City without bidding.  Mayor Churnovic expressed his strong support that the Council not go out for bid but instead consider only proposals from Allied Waste.  The reason for this is now very clear.

Apparently, there is no need to bid for contracts with the City if you contribute to the Mayor's re-election campaign.  This is a clear abuse of his office as Mayor and a betrayal of the public trust.  How many other instances are there of the Mayor accepting donations from those either doing business with or seeking to do business with the City?  After seeing how the State has been hurt by this type of corruption, do we really want this for Crest Hill?  

The time has come to demand better from our politicians.  We do not need a Mayor who trades city contracts for campaign contributions any more than we need a Governor who sells a Senate seat for campaign contributions.  Why would we want the shame of pay-to-play politics on a local level?  The Mayor has shown repeatedly that he desires to run the city in this manner though.  The voters need to send a clear message come April by voting to replace the Mayor and any other official that supports his way of running this city.

Mayoral Ethics

Two weeks ago, it was revealed that the committee to reelect Mayor Churnovic had accepted donations from two engineering firms seeking to do business with the City of Crest Hill. It was certainly disappointing to find out that the unethical way of doing business that is so common in Springfield and Chicago as is how things work in Crest Hill. It is not clear if the committee solicited the donations knowing that the firms were looking to get city contracts worth hundreds of thousands of dollars. And it is not clear how much direct control the Mayor had over the actions of the committee.

Since that time, Mayor Churnovic has made donations to three local charities in the amount that the engineering firms had given to the committee to re-elect him. He seems to think that this solves the problem and relieves him of all ethical questions. That is simply not true. This is merely the first step that needs to be taken.

Next, he needs to publicly state if the committee solicited the donations or if the engineering firms gave them without being solicited in any way. And he needs to state what his involvement and knowledge of the committee's actions were. Then based upon those facts he needs to take further action.

If the donations were completely unsolicited, Mayor Churnovic should make it clear to his committee that no donations are to be accepted from any company or individual seeking to do business with the city. No further action would be needed beyond that as long as the committee acts ethically from that point forward.

If the donations were solicited, the Mayor needs to disavow himself of the committee and all those involved with it in any way. That means not accepting any of the funds they have raised, not including the members of the committee on his re-election campaign, and definitely not giving them appointments within city government.

And of course if the Mayor had prior knowledge that the committee was going to engage in pay-to-play politics and approved of their absolutely unethical activities, there is no reason why he should continue to lead the city. I have no reason to believe that is the case and definitely hope that it isn't. I would hope that Crest Hill and our Mayor is above such activities.

While accepting money from those seeking to do business with the city is not illegal, it is unquestionably unethical. Pay-to-play politics has greatly hurt the state government and local governments throughout the state. I do not want to see it introduced to Crest Hill. Especially at a time when the State is currently looking to outlaw such practices at the state level.

A New Tax and Lack of Citizen Involvement

At the July 7th, 2008 City Council meeting several citizens addressed the Council to ask about the proposed Utility Tax and specifically why more public participation was not sought. The Mayor and Council answered these questions with resounding silence. The Mayor is not one to let any comment go without a response even if his only response is to be dismissive to the citizens of Crest Hill. This time he and the other members of the Council sat silent because the only response that could have been given was that they did not want citizens to participate in the consideration of this new tax. Their hope is that the tax is silently implemented and no one notices.

This is simply the wrong attitude for our elected officials to have. The public deserves to be included in the making of all decisions, especially the enactment of a new tax. Regardless of how badly the city needs the revenue or how much better this new tax might be than the alternatives, the public still deserves to be engaged. Tell us why this tax is needed, tell us what other options are out there, listen to our opinions, solicit our ideas for alternatives, and then make an informed decision and do what you believe is best for Crest Hill and its residents. That is all I and many of my fellow citizens ask of our Mayor and City Council.

A Mayor or a Dictator

At one point during the May 5th City Council meeting, I found myself thinking that maybe I had been too harsh on Mayor Churnovic in the past and that perhaps he did deserve some praise. This came after he had spoken on the successful efforts to keep Statesville open, his trip to the Philippines, and his upcoming trip to Las Vegas. These all seemed to show him to be an active and dedicated mayor. It took only moments though for those thoughts to quickly be shattered.

Mayor Churnovic explained his plan to circumvent the City Council and begin the process of hiring a new Police Chief. He then proceeded to scream at Alderperson Convery when questioned about this matter. It is just shameful that a mayor would not only ignore the desires of the City Council and the advice of the just retired Police Chief, but would then throw a fit when questioned.

This show was not enough for Mayor Churnovic though. He next was asked why he had held several events in different wards and not given the alderpersons for those wards a courtesy notice. Meeting with residents is definitely a positive thing to do, but the Mayor should show some courtesy and invite the alderpersons as well, especially if he is inviting other city officials. Instead of taking this constructive suggestion from 3 alderpersons, Mayor Churnovic defended his lack of consideration by being condescending and rude.

Crest Hill deserves a city government that can work together for the betterment of this city. That will not happen as long as we have a Mayor that yells at Council members and treats them with contempt. No matter how hard Mayor Churnovic works to develop Crest Hill, it is all for nothing if he allows his bad attitude and lack of self-control tear the City Council apart and make citizens afraid to question him.

Newest Threat to Cottonwood Farm

The Crest Hill city council tonight held a work session to look at ways in which to raise more revenue. They discussed many item at length including higher fines, fees, and utility taxes. One of the taxes they are looking at is expanding the amusement tax to cover Cottonwood Farm's Halooween celebration.

For the past several years, Crest Hill has been after Cottonwood Farm for a variety of issues. I do not know when or why they decided that they had it out for this long time local business. No other Crest Hill business advertises as widely as they do and makes an effort to bring people from as large an area to Crest Hill as they do. From billboards in Chicago to crop images that are seen by passing airplanes. This business does more to bring attention to Crest Hill than any other business. Yet, the Mayor and his allies target this business more so than any other in the city.

How is it that the business they want to drive away is a farm that provides entertainment, greenspace, advertising, and tax revenues to the city while being a good neighbor and citizen; while thet happily allow preditory payday loan stores proliferate?

I think it is time to demand some answers and to recoginize that this is not an attempt to raise revenue, but is just the lastest assault on this particular business.

Response to an Anonymous Critic, Part II

Here is part two of my response to Anonymous.

Anonymous stated:
P.S. one of the problems with the city is all the residents that have lived here less than 5 years that think the know the city. Maybe you need to go back and see how things were run in this city prior to Churnovic. All of the aldermen/alderwomen under Randich were "yes" people. Nothing got done and if Randich didn't want it it didn't get passed. No matter how good it was for the city.

My response:
In a city in which the majority of its residents have lived here for less than five years this type of comment has no place. I will admit that I do not know how the city was run under Randich. However, the most important thing is not if I know about the Crest Hill of yesteryear, but if I know what good government is. I do know what good government is and I do know what I should expect from a well run local government. That is what I want. If Randich did not deliver good government then, I wish to thank all of you who voted him out of office. However, that does not mean that we should stop demanding better government.

As for my opinions about Mr. Churnovic.... I honestly think that he dominates Crest Hill government in a way that is not healthy for the city and that he is often very dismissive of residents who questions him. However, I think that this comes from the fact that he faced a lot of opposition when first elected and that he feels that he can overcome opposition by using his powers as Mayor. That being said, he is an intelligent man who truly believes that he is doing his best for Crest Hill. I do not think he has ever done anything that he did not fully believe was right and in the public interest. I admire his dedication and determination. I do disagree with some of the things that he has done. However, I have never called for him to be ousted from office, I would prefer to see him focus on making city government more inclusive and open. And I would like to see more moves towards good government in Crest Hill. I do not see any reason why the current Mayor and most of the City Council cannot be the ones to move in that direction. I am neither for or against changing the faces at the head table, I am for changing some of their actions though.

Response to an Anonymous Critic, Part I

I have previously responded to some comments by posting comments myself and I have corresponded with some readers by e-mail. However, there have been some recent comments that I feel should be addressed in their own postings. This first one is being split in half because then last shot that the writer took at me and others deserves to be a subject on its own and in fact is of greater importance than this first item I will respond to. It would be interesting to know who the anonymous commenter was, however he/she did not feel confident enough to leave a name or e-mail address.

Anonymous stated:
You are partially right in regards to the opens meeting act, however, I believe you need a hearning aid because they do say why they are going into a closed session. They may not list each item prior to adjourning to closed session but during the course of the meeting it is mentioned that a executive session is needed. Second - if your truly read the law then you know it is permissable to have an executive session for personnel. Would you like your employer to discuss you in front of everyone, whether it was your evaluation, medical condition for a medical leave or a discpline problem. I think not so get off it. I don't think you mentioned that by "law" you can hold an executive, or closed, session for personnel, litigation, and/or land acquisition. I also belive that by law the minutes from said closed session are available for review after 6 months by filing a freedom of information act. So file away!

My response:
The intent of the law is that the reasons for the closed session are to be part of the motion for the closed session. Off-hand comments during the meeting as to issues on which a closed session is needed are not sufficient.

I never said that it was not permissible to hold a closed session for personnel reasons. I simply stated that not every issue that can be connected to personnel has to be in closed session. I do not think it would be appropriate to discuss an employees medical condition in open session, in fact that may run afoul of medical privacy laws. And I would strongly recommend that discipline and evaluations be done in closed session. However, pay and hours should be in open session. And that does mean that the question of why Employee X is not getting a raise could come up and the answer could be poor performance. And performance issues that are not related to a specific disciplinary action usually should be subject to open discussion.

I certainly do not think that closed sessions are without merit or proper usefulness. I just believe that they should be used sparingly and only when necessary for reasons of protecting key privacy of employees, protecting the city in ongoing legal and financial negotiations and where required by law.

Closed Session = Secret Government

Anyone who watches Crest Hill city council meetings has certainly noticed that there seems to be a closed session at every meeting and that when some council members ask questions the response is that it is a matter for closed session. Well, I am very uncomfortable with closed sessions and feel that government should be as open and transparent as possible. So I decided to read the actual law and to read legal opinions interpreting it. As should be expected the first thing I learned was that Crest Hill does not follow the law.

The motion for a closed session MUST state which of the specific exclusions in the Open Meetings law covers the matter that will be discussed in closed session. If they are meeting to discuss employee contracts, they must say that. If they are meeting to discuss a pending lawsuit, then they must say that. They cannot simply state that a closed session is needed without any further information.

A closed session is never required. The city council can discuss any matter they wish to in open session. If Alderman Vershay wants to know who worked overtime, when they worked, and for how many hours, the City Treasurer can and should answer that question instead of deferring it to closed session. The Open Meetings law states a limited number of topics than MAY be discussed in closed session, but does not limit what can be discussed in open session. In addition, there is no obligation of city council members to keep secret what happens in closed session. The law does not prohibit anyone in a closed session from disclosing any matter discussed and specifically states that there is no penalty or retribution for disclosure.

It is time for our city government to comply with the letter and the spirit of the law. I call upon the Mayor and the City Clerk to ensure that all future closed sessions are properly held and to inform the Council and the public that any subject may be discussed in open session if so desired. I also call upon the City Clerk to release full transcripts of all illegally held closed sessions. And finally, in order to fulfill the spirit of the law, I ask any City Council member who believes in open government to speak publicly about anything that occurs in closed session that should not be secret.

Citizen Action

The situation with water rates has motivated local residents to get active and be heard. Not only are they making their voices heard on the issue of astronomically higher water and sewer rates, but they have also brought the issue of water quality to light. People are posting on the internet, going door-to-door talking to neighbors, compiling surveys, and packing city council work sessions. This is democracy in action and I hope to see it continue until these issues are resolved and beyond that until Crest Hill once again is run for and by the citizens. This city is not going to get better overnight, but it can get much better.

I am curious though as to how Mayor Churnovic next plans to stifle citizen involvement. I am looking forward to seeing quite a crowd at the next City Council meeting. Of course, I am willing to bet that they will not even consider moving it to a location with adequate parking and seating. That would allow the citizens to observe and participate in the meeting and we can be sure that Mayor Churnovic and certain others on the council do not want to allow that to happen.

Disappointing Mayoral Achievement

The City of Crest Hill has passed a budget that shows the sad state of affairs in the city. The mayor decided earlier this year that a finance committee was not necessary since a City Administrator had been hired. So the City Administrator brought a budget to the City that was over $1.5 million in the red. After slashing and raising fees and rates, it was passed still over $1 million short. So this is what is accomplished without a finance committee. How very sad. I hope the mayor is proud of his brilliant idea.

Some of the blame rests at the City Administrator's feet as well though. He is the one that brought a budget so out of line to the Council in the first place. When I served as a City Administrator, I would never have even considered bringing the City Council an unbalanced budget. And that certainly was not easy in a city that had seen its finances destroyed by years of poor spending and embezzlement. In fact, my aim was to have a budget that had 3% surplus and then to be able to work during the year to keep spending below budget and revenue above it. Even the most fiscally irresponsible person can put together a budget that is over a million dollars short of balancing. However, I believe that a City Administrator is a professional who should bring with them a set of skills in matters such as finance.

The third person bearing some responsibility here is the City Treasurer. While, I have seen nothing to indicate that he is not fulfilling his duties as specified, I think at this time Crest Hill needs something more. I feel that the City Treasurer needs to stand up and be the voice of moderation and reform. I call on him to watch every cent of the budget and not to release a cent of it that is not specifically budgeted. This type of discipline is the best we can hope for the coming months. He also should publicly release all the financial data of the City. This would allow citizens to know what is really going on and may help to spur a public demand for reform. Finally, the Treasurer needs to take a stand and be a leader pushing for fiscal responsibility even beyond what is role is. He should use his office to pound at the problem and keep it on the front burner. He should lead the call for change.

The City Council should never have approved a budget that sends Crest Hill closer to financial ruin. However, they had to work with a budget proposal that was badly out of balance, they lacked input through a finance committee, and they were threatened that State funding would be lost if a budget was not passed before the end of July. If I were in their place, I would have insisted on passing a bare bones balanced budget and then amended it after August 1st.

In summary, Mayor Churnovic and the City Administrator should have been the leaders of improving Crest Hill, instead the City is facing unprecedented financial difficulties because of the choices and actions of these two officials. It is sad that the time for change has come so soon.

An Horrifying Meeting

I attended a portion of the Monday, May 7th Crest Hill City Council meeting and was simply amazed at how badly citizens are treated by the Mayor and some members of the City Council. I have never seen local leaders be so dismissive of citizens.

The Mayor especially took it to a whole new level. He suggested that residents who have had their homes flooded by human waste because of deficiencies in the city's sewer system should take out home equity loans to pay to install overhead sewers in their homes. As an alternative he also suggested finding a plumber who would arrange a payment plan. The obvious solution is for the city to take responsibility for their deficient sewer system and for the damage caused by its failures. He also suggested to a resident that they park in their neighbor's driveway because the city will not allow them a driveway.

The city seems to have an excuse for everything. They do not have enough money because they do not have riverboats. That was definitely a good one. I hope you do not wish to look at the city's finances to see if that is true because they do their best to hide those facts. After having seen them, I could understand why. Revenues have exceeded the budget and expenses have been below budget. Most governments would publicize such a good financial position, however Crest Hill is afraid that if people knew they would come to expect better city services. Their other excuse is that portions of the city were built before the city was incorporated. Never mind that these existing neighborhoods formed the basis for the creation of Crest Hill or that the city has had over four decades to make improvements. These excuses are outdated, it is time for our city leaders to realize that it is 2007 and not 1967.

The real proof of just how poorly Crest Hill citizens are treated can be seen in the parking lot after any council meeting. There are large groups of people milling about talking about their many problems with the city. Crest Hill would be a nice progressive city with happy residents if not for the council and some of the staff they have hired. It is too bad. Hopefully, the two new faces on council will improve the situation. And maybe the mayor will be reigned in someday.

Citizen Involvement

The City of Crest Hill has few opportunities for citizen involvement in government and has reduced those opportunities in recent months. There once were Road Improvements and Budget committees, but Mayor Churnovic has eliminated those. This is the wrong direction to be moving.

Mayor Churnovic used the excuse that now that there is a City Administrator in place, there is not a need for the committees. I do not understand why citizen involvement is being replaced by the City Administrator. I did not think that Crest Hill was getting rid of democracy, but that is what appears to be happening.

I certainly do not oppose the hiring of a City Administrator and was previously employed by a different city as their City Administrator. The city I worked for actually used the hiring of a City Administrator to facilitate more citizen involvement. Their logic was that a City Administrator could coordinate more meetings of committees and allow committees to be citizen run with far less involvement by City Council members. This increase in citizen involvement was an absolutely positive situation for the city.

City Council members cannot effectively control every aspect of city government, they simply do not have the time. It also is not a good idea to concentrate too much power in just a few people. Committees are an effective way to get more citizens involved in issues that they care about. An individual may not be very concerned about how the police department is run, but may be very concerned about the conditions of our streets; while another person wants to see improvements made in how the city budgets, but has no interest in zoning issues. Committees dealing with specific areas of city government would allow each of these people to be involved and contributing to improving the city.

The alternative to citizen involvement is to concentrate the power in the hands of a few elected officials and entrust the City Administrator to handle all matters that the Mayor or City Council do not have time for or the ability to handle. This seems to be anti-democratic though and a step in the wrong direction. I would like to see more committees, more discussion, and more citizen involvement.